HomeMy WebLinkAbout2021-01-20; Planning Commission; Resolution 7395PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 7395
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION, MITIGATION MONITORING AND
REPORTING PROGRAM AND ADDENDUM FOR THE APPROVAL OF A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, ZONE
CHANGE, AND LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT TO MODIFY THE LAND USE ON A 12.53-ACRE
SITE FROM PLANNED INDUSTRIAL (Pl) LAND USE DESIGNATION AND PLANNED, INDUSTRIAL (P-M)
ZONING TO RESIDENTIAL (R-30) LAND USE DESIGNATION AND RESIDENTIAL DENSITY-MULTIPLE (RD-M)
ZONING, AND RECONFIGURE THE OPEN SPACE (OS) LAND USE DESIGNATION AND (OS) ZONING
BOUNDARIES ON THE SITE TO ACCOMMODATE REQUIRED EMERGENCY ACCESS AND PRESERVE ON-SITE
HABITAT AND HABITAT BUFFER AREAS; AND THE APPROVAL OF A SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN, COASTAL
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT, HABITAT MANAGEMENT PLAN PERMIT, AND MINOR SUBDIVISION FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF 192 MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS LOCATED SOUTHWEST OF THE INTERSECTION
OF PALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD AND PALOMAR OAKS WAY WITHIN THE MELLO II SEGMENT OF THE LOCAL
COASTAL PROGRAM AND LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 5.
CASE NAME: WEST OAKS
CASE NO.: GPA 16-04/ZC 16-03/LCPA 16-04/ SOP 16-20/CDP 16-
31/HMP 16-04/MS 2018-0005 (DEV 13018)
WHEREAS, The Carlsbad West Oaks Project Owner, LLC, "Owner/Developer," has
filed a verified application with the City of Carlsbad regarding property described as
Lots 1 through 7 of Carlsbad Tract No. 82-04 Palomar Oaks. In the City
of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according to map
thereof No. 11358, filed in the Office of the County Recorder of San
Diego County, October 23, 1985.
In addition, that portion of that certain parcel of land shown and
designated as "Description No. 3, 78.07 acres" on Record of Survey Map
No. 5715, filed in the Office of the county of Recorder of San Diego
County, December 19, 1960, being a portion of Lot "G" of the Rancho
Agua Hedionda, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of
California, according to Map No. 823, filed in the Office of the County
Recorder of San Diego County, November 16, 1896
("the Property"); and
WHEREAS, a Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program and Addendum were prepared in conjunction with said project; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did on January 20, 2021, hold a duly noticed public
hearing as prescribed by law to consider said request; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and
arguments, examining the initial study, analyzing the information submitted by staff, and considering any
written comments received, the Planning Commission considered all factors relating to the Mitigated
Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and Addendum.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of
Carlsbad as follows:
A) That the foregoing recitations are true and correct.
B) That based on the evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning Commission
hereby RECOMMENDS ADOPTION of the Mitigated Negative Declaration, and Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program, Exhibit "MND," according to Exhibits "Notice of
Intent (NOi)," and "Environmental Impact Assessment Form -Initial Study (EIA)," and
Addendum, Exhibit "ADDM" attached hereto and made a part hereof, based on the
following findings:
Findings:
1. The Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad does hereby find:
a. it has reviewed, analyzed, and considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation
Monitoring and Report Program and Addendum for GPA 16-04/ZC 16-03/LCPA 16-04/
SDP 16-20/CDP 16-31/HMP 16-04/MS 2018-0005 -WEST OAKS, the environmental
impacts therein identified for this project and any comments thereon prior to
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of the project; and
b. the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring and Report Program and
Addendum has been prepared in accordance with requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act, the State Guidelines and the Environmental Protection
Procedures of the City of Carlsbad; and
c. it reflects the independent judgment of the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad;
and
d. based on the EIA and comments thereon, there is no substantial evidence the project will
have a significant effect on the environment.
2. The Planning Commission has reviewed each of the exactions imposed on the Developer
contained in this resolution, and hereby finds, in this case, that the exactions are imposed to
mitigate impacts caused by or reasonably related to the project, and the extent and the degree
of the exaction is in rough proportionality to the impact caused by the project.
Conditions:
1. Developer shall implement, or cause the implementation of, the GPA 16-04/ZC 16-03/LCPA 16-
04/ SOP 16-20/CDP 16-31/HMP 16-04/MS 2018-0005 -WEST OAKS Project Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program.
PC RESO NO. 7395 -2-
..
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of
the City of Carlsbad, California, held on January 20, 2021, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Chair Meenes, Commissioners Anderson, Lafferty, Luna, Merz, and Stine
NOES:
ABSENT: Commissioner Geidner
ABSTAIN:
ROY MEENES, Chairperson
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISSION
ATTEST:
DON NEU
City Planner
PC RESO NO. 7395 -3-
Community Development
Planning Division
1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 760-602-4600 760-602-8560 fax
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PROJECT NAME: West Oaks
PROJECT NO: GPA 16-04/ZC 16-03/LCPA 16-04/LFMP 87-05(F)/SDP 16-20/CDP 16-31/
HMP 16-04/MS 2018-0005 (DEV13018)
PROJECT LOCATION: The West Oaks Project is located on an approximately 12.53-acre site
(Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 212-110-01, -02, -03, -04, -05, -06, -07, -08,
212-040-26) in the City of Carlsbad. The project site is located to the
south of Palomar Airport Road and to the west of Palomar Oaks Way.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed project consists of 192 multifamily residential units—72 one-
bedroom units, 57 two-bedroom units, and 21 three-bedroom units at regular market value and 42
affordable units (24 one-bedroom units, 12 two-bedroom units, and six three-bedroom units), which are
included in the total 192 units. The proposed project would also include 373 parking spaces and a leasing
and recreation building, recreation areas, and a community pool. Bicycle parking amenities are also
proposed. On-site pedestrian circulation to connect with the existing pedestrian sidewalks on the western
side of West Oaks Way and on Palomar Airport Road at the western end of the site is also proposed. The
project would have a density of approximately 24.6 dwelling units per acre (DU/AC), not including the
proposed open space easement. With the open space easement area included, the density of the project
would be approximately 15.3 DU/AC. The proposed structures would be three stories and consist mostly
of stucco exteriors, brick veneer, and wood or metal railings and decorative awnings. The project includes
a General Plan Amendment, a Zoning Amendment, and approval of a Tentative Tract Map. The project is
designated for Planned Industrial (PI) and Open Space (OS) in the General Plan and zoned as Planned
Industrial (P-M) and Open Space (OS). The proposed General Plan Amendment would change the
underlying land use designation to Residential (R-30) and the proposed Zoning Amendment would change
the underlying zoning to Residential Density-Multiple (RD-M).
DETERMINATION: The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described
project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act and
the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, the Initial Study
identified potentially significant effects on the environment, and the City of Carlsbad finds as follows:
Although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not
be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on the attached
sheet have been added to the project.
The proposed project MAY have “potentially significant impact(s)” on the environment, but at
least one potentially significant impact 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document
pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based
on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. (Mitigated Negative Declaration applies
only to the effects that remained to be addressed).
Although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there WILL
NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been
□
□
( City of
Carlsbad
analyzed adequately in an earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION
pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation
measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. Therefore, nothing further is required.
A copy of the Initial Study documenting reasons to support the Mitigated Negative Declaration is attached,
on file in the Planning Division, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008, and is available online
at: http://www.carlsbadca.gov/services/depts/planning/agendas.asp.
ADOPTED:
ATTEST:
Teri Delcamp
Principal Planner
EXHIBIT “ADDM”
ADDENDUM TO THE
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
GPA 16-04/ZC 16-03/LCPA 16-04/LFMP 87-05(F)/SDP 16-20/CDP 16-31/HMP 16-04/MS 2018-
0005 (DEV13018) - WEST OAKS
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the Environmental Protection
Ordinance (Title 19) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, staff conducted an environmental impact
assessment to determine if the project could have any potentially significant impact on the
environment. The environmental impact assessment identified potentially significant impacts to
Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Geology/Soils, Noise, and Tribal Cultural Resources.
Mitigation measures were incorporated into the design of the project or were included in the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program such that all potentially significant impacts would
be mitigated to below a level of significance.
A Notice of Intent to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) and Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program (MMRP) was published in the newspaper for public review. The requisite
30-day public review period for the MND occurred from July 7 to August 6, 2020. At the end of
the 30-day public review period, staff received six comment letters. Of these comment letters,
one was provided from the Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians (Rincon) on July 15, 2020 requesting
minor revisions to the cultural resources mitigation measures. Staff opened a discussion with
Rincon regarding the proposed changes. The consultation has been concluded and the cultural
resources mitigation measures have been updated as discussed herein. Additionally, one letter
was provided by the County of San Diego on July 28, 2020 regarding the project’s proximity to
McClellan-Palomar Airport. In response to this comment letter, updates to the noise mitigation
measures include minor revisions as shown herein.
This addendum has been prepared in accordance with Section 15164 of CEQA to address those
minor changes. The purpose of the Addendum is to describe minor revisions to the Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) associated with the West Oaks project resulting from
comments provided during public review of the MND and subsequent related discussions. In
summary, minor revisions have been made to Mitigation Measures CUL-2, CUL-7, CUl-11, and
CUL-12, to further specify appropriate tribes with whom the project applicant can select for
monitoring onsite excavation. Mitigation Measure NOI-2 has been revised to further clarify the
elevated noise environmental disclaimer. These revisions have no new significant environmental
effects not analyzed in the previously circulated MND, and none of the circumstances requiring
recirculation or a subsequent MND under CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 exist.
Mitigation Measures CUL-1 through CUL-12 as follows shows the minor revisions in
strikeout/underline as included in the MND and MMRP:
CUL-1 An archaeological monitor shall be present for initial ground-disturbing activities
associated with the proposed project in the event unanticipated discoveries are made. If
human remains are discovered, California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, states
that further disturbances and activities shall stop in any area or nearby area suspected to
overlie remains, and the County coroner shall be contacted. At this time, the person who
discovered the remains will contact the City of Carlsbad so that they may work with the
most likely descendent on the respectful treatment and disposition of the remains.
EXHIBIT “ADDM”
CUL-2 Prior to the commencement of any ground disturbing activities, the project developer
shall enter into a Pre-Excavation Agreement, otherwise known as a Tribal Cultural
Resources Treatment and Tribal Monitoring Agreement, with the San Luis Rey Band of
Mission Indians or other Traditionally and Culturally Affiliated Luiseño tribe (TCA Tribe).
This agreement will contain provisions to address the proper treatment of any tribal
cultural resources and/or Luiseño Native American human remains inadvertently
discovered during the course of the project. The agreement will outline the roles and
powers of the Luiseño Native American monitors and the archaeologist. A copy of said
archaeological contract and Pre-Excavation Agreement shall be provided to the City of
Carlsbad prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
CUL-3 A Luiseño Native American monitor shall be present during all ground disturbing activities.
Ground disturbing activities may include, but are not limited to, archaeological studies,
geotechnical investigations, clearing, grubbing, trenching, excavation, preparation for
utilities and other infrastructure, and grading activities.
CUL-4 Any and all uncovered artifacts of Luiseño Native American cultural importance shall be
treated with dignity and respect and be reburied on-site within an appropriate location
protected by open space or easement, etc., where the cultural items will not be disturbed
in the future, or shall be returned to the Most Likely Descendant, whichever is most
applicable, and shall not be curated, unless ordered to do so by a federal agency or a court
of competent jurisdiction.
CUL-5 The Luiseño Native American monitor shall be present at the project’s on-site
preconstruction meeting to consult with grading and excavation contractors concerning
excavation schedules and safety issues, as well as consult with the principal archaeologist
concerning the proposed archaeologist techniques and/or strategies for the project.
CUL-6 Luiseño Native American monitors and archaeological monitors shall have joint authority
to temporarily divert and/or halt construction activities. If tribal cultural resources are
discovered during construction, all earth moving activity within and around the
immediate discovery area must be diverted until the Luiseño Native American monitor
and the archaeologist can assess the nature and significance of the find.
CUL-7 If a significant tribal cultural resource(s) and/or unique archaeological resource(s) are
discovered during ground disturbing activities for this project, the San Luis Rey Band of
Mission Indians (in accordance with TCPRG 8.2.2.4) and any TCA Tribes that consulted
with the city under AB 52 for this project shall be notified and consulted regarding the
respectful and dignified treatment of those resources. Pursuant to California Public
Resources Code Section 21083.2(b) avoidance is the preferred method of preservation
for archaeological and tribal cultural resources. If however, the Applicant is able to
demonstrate that avoidance of a significant and/or unique cultural resource is infeasible
and a data recovery plan, is authorized by the City of Carlsbad as the lead agency, the San
Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians (in accordance with TCPRG Section 8.2.2.4) and TCA
Tribes that consulted with the city under AB 52 for this project shall be consulted
regarding the drafting and finalization of any such recovery plan.
EXHIBIT “ADDM”
CUL-8 When tribal cultural resources are discovered during the project, if the archaeologist
collects such resources, a Luiseño Native American monitor must be present during any
testing or cataloging of those resources. If the archaeologist does not collect the tribal
cultural resources that are unearthed during the ground disturbing activities, the Luiseño
Native American monitor shall follow the procedures in CUL-4.
CUL-9 If suspected Native American human remains are encountered, California Health and
Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the San
Diego County Medical Examiner has made the necessary findings as to origin. Further,
pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98(b) remains shall be left in
place and free from disturbance until a final decision as to the treatment and disposition
has been made. Suspected Native American remains shall be examined in the field and
kept in a secure location at the site. A Luiseño Native American monitor shall be present
during the examination of the remains. If the San Diego County Medical Examiner
determines the remains to be Native American, the Native American Heritage
Commission (NAHC) must be contacted by the Medical Examiner within 24 hours. The
NAHC must then immediately notify the “Most Likely Descendant” about the discovery.
The Most Likely Descendant shall then make recommendations within 48 hours, and
engage in consultation concerning treatment of remains as provided in Public Resources
Code 5097.98.
CUL-10 In the event that fill material is imported into the project area, the fill shall be clean of
tribal cultural resources and documented as such. If fill material is to be utilized and/or
exported from areas within the project site, then that fill material shall be analyzed and
confirmed by an archeologist and Luiseño Native American monitor that such fill material
does not contain tribal cultural resources.
CUL-11 No testing, invasive or non-invasive, shall be permitted on any recovered tribal cultural
resources without the written permission of the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians
consulting tribes.
CUL-12 Prior to the release of the grading bond, a monitoring report and/or evaluation report, if
appropriate, which describes the results, analysis and conclusions of the monitoring
program shall be submitted by the archaeologist, along with the Luiseño Native American
monitor’s notes and comments, to the City of Carlsbad for approval. Said report shall be
subject to confidentiality as an exception to the Public Records Act and will not be
available for general public distribution; however, a copy of the final monitoring report
shall be provided to each consulting tribe upon request to the Planning Division., and shall
be submitted to the South Coastal Information Center. Said report shall be subject to
confidentiality as an exception to the Public Records Act and will not be available for
public distribution.
Mitigation Measure NOI-2 as follows shows the minor revisions in strikeout/underline as included
in the MND and MMRP:
NOI-2 Elevated Noise Environment Disclaimer
------------
EXHIBIT “ADDM”
Prior to sale, lease, or rental of any residential structure or portion thereof located in the
Airport Influence Area (AIA), the applicant/owner shall provide prospective buyers and
future occupants the following notice:
This property is currently located in an urban area that periodically and regularly
experiences elevated noise levels. Potential sources of this noise may be automobile
traffic, flying aircraft, industrial/commercial uses, and general human activity in an urban
environment. The property is subject to aircraft overflight, including sight and sound of
aircraft operating from McClellan-Palomar Airport. You may wish to consider what noise
level annoyances, if any, are associated with the property before you complete your
purchase and/or rental agreement, and determine whether they are acceptable to you.
________________________________
Date:
__________________________________________
Teri Delcamp
Principal Planner
Explanation of Headings
Type = Project, ongoing, cumulative.
Monitoring Dept. = Department, or Agency, responsible for monitoring a particular mitigation measure.
Shown on Plans = When mitigation measure is shown on plans, this column will be initialed and dated.
Verified Implementation = When mitigation measure has been implemented, this column will be initialed and dated.
Remarks = Area for describing status of ongoing mitigation measure, or for other information.
Legend
PLN Planning Division
ENG Land Development Engineering Division
BLDG Building Division
Page 1 of 18
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
PROJECT NAME: West Oaks
PROJECT NO: GPA 16-04/ZC 16-03/LCPA 16-04/LFMP 87-05(F)/SDP 16-20/CDP 16-31/HMP 16-04/MS 2018-0005
(DEV13018)
APPROVAL DATE/RESOLUTION NUMBER(S):
The following environmental mitigation measures were incorporated into the Conditions of Approval for this project in order to mitigate identified
environmental impacts to a level of insignificance. A completed and signed checklist for each mitigation measure indicates that this mitigation measure
has been complied with and implemented, and fulfills the City’s monitoring requirements with respect to Assembly Bill 3180 (Public Resources Code
Section 21081.6).
MITIGATION MEASURE Monitoring Type Monitoring Department Shown on Plans Verified Implementation Remarks BIO-1 Clearing and grubbing activities are prohibited on site during the bird-
breeding season (February 15–September 15). The U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS) will be notified at least seven days before clearing and
grubbing begins. During this activity, a qualified biologist will walk the
area ahead of construction equipment to flush birds away from impact
areas to prevent direct impact to individual animals. The qualified
biologist will immediately report to USFWS the number and location of
any federally listed birds disturbed by clearing and grubbing.
On-going PLN
BIO-2 A number of oak trees were originally preserved on site within the
original approval of the project. These trees are currently declining in
condition or are dead. As such, to mitigate for the loss of these trees,
oak trees are included in the landscape plans for the riparian buffer
area. Trees will be provided at a 1:1 ratio.
Prior to final
landscape plans
PLN
BIO-3 Clearing and grubbing activities are generally prohibited during the bird-
breeding season (February 15–September 15); thus, no direct impacts
will occur to nesting birds that may be present within the construction
footprint per Mitigation Measure BIO-3. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife
On-going PLN
{'cityof
Carlsbad
PROJECT NAME: West Oaks
PROJECT NUMBER: GPA 16-04/ZC 16-03/LCPA 16-04/LFMP 87-05(F)/SDP 16-20/CDP 16-31/HMP 16-04/MS 2018-0005 (DEV13018)
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 2 of 18
MITIGATION MEASURE Monitoring Type Monitoring Department Shown on Plans Verified Implementation Remarks Service (USFWS) will be notified at least seven days before clearing and
grubbing begins.
Other construction activities will also be avoided during the breeding
season if feasible. If this cannot be avoided, the following measures will
be taken:
• If coastal California gnatcatchers (Polioptila californica
californica) have the potential to occur on site, a qualified
biologist will conduct a focused species gnatcatcher survey in
appropriate habitat within the preserve areas and 500 feet
surrounding the project site within suitable habitat. The surveys
will consist of three visits one week apart; the last of these will
be conducted no more than three days prior to construction.
• Surveys will be conducted by a qualified biologist in appropriate
habitat for nesting raptors and migratory birds (including but
not limited to the least Bell’s vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus)) and
within a 500-foot survey buffer within three days of
construction.
• The USFWS will be notified immediately of any federally listed
species that are located during pre-construction surveys within
the adjacent areas.
• If nests of listed birds, migratory birds, raptors, or other special-
status species are located, they will be fenced with a protective
buffer of at least 500 feet from active nests of listed species and
300 feet from other special-status bird species. All construction
activity will be prohibited within this area.
• During the breeding season, construction noise will be
measured regularly to maintain a threshold at or below 60 A-
weighted decibels (dBA) hourly equivalent level (Leq) within 500
feet of breeding habitat occupied by listed species. The site is
PROJECT NAME: West Oaks
PROJECT NUMBER: GPA 16-04/ZC 16-03/LCPA 16-04/LFMP 87-05(F)/SDP 16-20/CDP 16-31/HMP 16-04/MS 2018-0005 (DEV13018)
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 3 of 18
MITIGATION MEASURE Monitoring Type Monitoring Department Shown on Plans Verified Implementation Remarks currently affected by roadway noise. If ambient levels are
greater than 60 dBA, a modified threshold should be evaluated
with the City of Carlsbad. If noise levels supersede the
threshold, the construction array will be changed or noise
attenuation measures will be implemented.
BIO-4 Wildlife Construction Measures
a) Construction through sensitive areas shall be scheduled to
minimize potential impacts to biological resources.
Construction adjacent to drainages shall occur during periods of
minimum flow (i.e., summer through the first significant rain of
fall) to avoid excessive sedimentation and erosion and to avoid
impacts to drainage-dependent species. Construction near
riparian areas or other sensitive habitats shall also be scheduled
to avoid the breeding season (January 1 through September 15)
and potential impacts to breeding bird species (refer to
Mitigation Measure BIO-3).
b) Lighting in or adjacent to the preserve shall not be used, except
where essential for roadway, facility use, and safety. If
nighttime construction lights are necessary, all lighting adjacent
to natural habitat shall be shielded and/or directed away from
habitat.
c) If dead or injured listed species are located, initial notification
must be made within three working days, in writing, to the
USFWS Division of Law Enforcement in Torrance, California, and
by telephone and in writing to the applicable jurisdiction,
Carlsbad Field Office of the USFWS, and CDFW.
d) Exotic species that prey on or displace target species of concern
shall be permanently removed from the site.
e) To avoid attracting predators of the target species of concern,
the project site shall be kept as clean of debris as possible. All
food-related trash items shall be enclosed in sealed containers
Prior to approval of
the final map, or
issuance of a
grading or building
permit, whichever
occurs first / On-
going.
PLN
PROJECT NAME: West Oaks
PROJECT NUMBER: GPA 16-04/ZC 16-03/LCPA 16-04/LFMP 87-05(F)/SDP 16-20/CDP 16-31/HMP 16-04/MS 2018-0005 (DEV13018)
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 4 of 18
MITIGATION MEASURE Monitoring Type Monitoring Department Shown on Plans Verified Implementation Remarks and regularly removed from the site. Pets of project personnel
shall not be allowed on site where they may come into contact
with any listed species.
BIO-5 Habitat restoration (i.e., creation and substantial restoration) totaling
0.24 acres of jurisdictional southern willow scrub, 0.03 acres of open
water, and 0.04 acres of coastal sage scrub designed through
preparation of a conceptual habitat restoration plan shall be reviewed
and approved by the city Planner in consultation with the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service (USFWS), California Department of Fish and Wildlife
(CDFW), and the California Coastal Commission (CCC). Based on a
current evaluation, restoration is estimated to include 1.17 acres of
disturbed habitat.
The applicant shall submit a final habitat restoration plan and
specifications to the City of Carlsbad and agencies for review at least 30
days prior to initiating project impacts. The habitat restoration plan shall
be prepared and implemented consistent with the Multiple Habitat
Conservation Program, Volume II, Appendix C (Revegetation
Guidelines), and Volume III; Habitat Management Plan for Natural
Communities in the City of Carlsbad (City of Carlsbad 2004, pp. F-8 to F-
11); and Open Space Management Plan, Section 3.1.5. The habitat
restoration plan shall be reviewed and approved by the city Planner in
consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), California
Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and California Coastal
Commission (CCC). At a minimum, the habitat restoration plan should
include an evaluation of restoration suitability specific to proposed
habitat types, soil and plant material salvage/translocation information,
planting and seeding lists, a discussion of irrigation, a maintenance and
monitoring program, and success criteria. All areas should be monitored
for five years to ensure establishment of intended plant communities.
At least 30 days
prior to initiating
project impacts
PLN
PROJECT NAME: West Oaks
PROJECT NUMBER: GPA 16-04/ZC 16-03/LCPA 16-04/LFMP 87-05(F)/SDP 16-20/CDP 16-31/HMP 16-04/MS 2018-0005 (DEV13018)
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 5 of 18
MITIGATION MEASURE Monitoring Type Monitoring Department Shown on Plans Verified Implementation Remarks An approved habitat restoration specialist shall be designated and
determine the most appropriate method of restoration. Restoration
techniques, as specified in the habitat restoration plan, may include
hydroseeding, hand-seeding, imprinting, and soil and plant salvaging.
The habitat restoration plan shall also include criteria to measure
success and describe how monitoring of revegetation efforts shall be
implemented. At the completion of project construction, all
construction materials shall be removed from the site. Additionally, if
deemed necessary, any topsoil located in areas to be restored shall be
conserved and stockpiled during the excavation process for use in the
restoration process.
BIO-6 Construction Plans Requirements The potential for significant indirect
impacts during construction shall be mitigated through implementation
of the standard measures stated in the city’s Biology Guidelines.
A qualified biologist shall conduct a training session for project
personnel prior to proposed activities. At a minimum, the
training shall include a description of the target species of
concern and its habitats; the general provisions of the federal
and state Endangered Species Acts and the Habitat
Management Plan (HMP); the need to adhere to the provisions
of the act and the HMP; the penalties associated with violating
the provisions of the act; and the general measures that are
being implemented to conserve the target species of concern
as they relate to the project, access routes, and project site
boundaries within which the project activities must be
accomplished.
The footprint of disturbance shall be specified in the
construction plans. Construction limits would be delineated
with orange fencing, and in areas potentially subject to project-
related runoff, silt fencing would be used to delineate the
impact footprint. All fencing would be maintained until the
Prior to issuance of
a grading or
building permit,
whichever occurs
first / On-going.
PLN/ENG
a)
b)
PROJECT NAME: West Oaks
PROJECT NUMBER: GPA 16-04/ZC 16-03/LCPA 16-04/LFMP 87-05(F)/SDP 16-20/CDP 16-31/HMP 16-04/MS 2018-0005 (DEV13018)
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 6 of 18
MITIGATION MEASURE Monitoring Type Monitoring Department Shown on Plans Verified Implementation Remarks completion of all construction activities, at which time all
fencing would be removed. All construction personnel and
associates shall be instructed that their activities, vehicles,
equipment, and construction materials are restricted to the
proposed project footprint, designated staging areas, and
routes of travel. If any impacts shall occur beyond the approved
impact footprint, all work in the immediate vicinity shall cease
until the disturbance limit breach has been addressed to the
satisfaction of the City of Carlsbad and resource agencies.
The upstream and downstream limits of project disturbance
(i.e., the location of the bridge crossing) plus limits of
disturbance on either side of the riparian vegetation on site
shall be clearly defined, marked in the field, and reviewed by
the project biologist prior to initiation of work. The project
should be designed to avoid the placement of equipment within
the riparian vegetation or on adjacent upland habitats used by
target species of concern, unless otherwise part of the
mitigation plan.
A water pollution and erosion control plan shall be developed
that describes sediment and hazardous materials control,
dewatering or diversion structures, fueling and equipment
management practices, and other factors deemed necessary by
reviewing agencies. Erosion control measures shall be
monitored on a regularly scheduled basis, particularly during
times of heavy rainfall. Corrective measures will be
implemented in the event erosion control strategies are
inadequate. Sediment/erosion control measures will be
continued at the project site until such time as the revegetation
efforts are successful at soil stabilization.
The qualified project biologist shall review grading plans (e.g.,
all access routes and staging areas) and monitor construction
c)
d)
e}
PROJECT NAME: West Oaks
PROJECT NUMBER: GPA 16-04/ZC 16-03/LCPA 16-04/LFMP 87-05(F)/SDP 16-20/CDP 16-31/HMP 16-04/MS 2018-0005 (DEV13018)
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 7 of 18
MITIGATION MEASURE Monitoring Type Monitoring Department Shown on Plans Verified Implementation Remarks activities throughout the duration of grading/ground
disturbance associated with the project to ensure that all
practicable measures are being employed to avoid incidental
disturbance of habitat and any target species of concern
outside the project footprint.
Construction monitoring reports shall be completed and
provided to the city summarizing how the project is in
compliance with applicable conditions. The project biologist
should be empowered to halt work activity if necessary and to
confer with City staff to ensure the proper implementation of
species and habitat protection measures.
Any habitat that is impacted that is not in the identified project
footprint shall be disclosed immediately to the city, U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (USFWS), California Department of Fish and
Wildlife (CDFW), and California Coastal Commission (CCC) and
shall be compensated at a minimum ratio of 5:1.
Construction access to and from the site will be located along
existing access routes or disturbed areas to the greatest extent
possible. All access routes outside of existing roads or
construction areas will be clearly marked.
Construction employees will limit their activities, vehicles,
equipment, and construction materials to the fenced project
footprint.
Equipment storage, fueling, and staging areas shall be located
on disturbed upland sites with minimal risk of direct drainage
into riparian areas or other sensitive habitats and at least 100
feet from waters of the United States. These designated areas
shall be located in such a manner as to prevent any runoff from
entering sensitive habitat. All necessary precautions shall be
taken to prevent the release of cement or other toxic
substances into surface waters. All project-related spills of
f)
g}
h)
i)
j)
PROJECT NAME: West Oaks
PROJECT NUMBER: GPA 16-04/ZC 16-03/LCPA 16-04/LFMP 87-05(F)/SDP 16-20/CDP 16-31/HMP 16-04/MS 2018-0005 (DEV13018)
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 8 of 18
MITIGATION MEASURE Monitoring Type Monitoring Department Shown on Plans Verified Implementation Remarks hazardous materials shall be reported to the city and shall be
cleaned up immediately, and contaminated soils shall be moved
to approved disposal areas.
If stream flows must be diverted (unlikely for the bridge
construction), the diversions shall be conducted using sandbags
or other methods requiring minimal instream impacts. Silt
fencing or other sediment trapping materials shall be installed
at the downstream end of construction activity to minimize the
transport of sediments off site. Settling ponds where sediment
is collected shall be cleaned out in a manner that prevents the
sediment from re-entering the stream. Care shall be exercised
when removing silt fences, as feasible, to prevent debris or
sediment from returning to the stream.
Erodible fill material shall not be deposited into water courses.
Brush, loose soils, or other similar debris material shall not be
stockpiled within the stream channel or on its banks.
Fugitive dust will be avoided and minimized through watering
and other appropriate measures.
BIO-7 The City has the right to access and inspect any sites of approved
projects including any restoration/enhancement area for compliance
with project approval conditions, including best management practices
(BMPs). The USFWS and CDFW may accompany City representatives on
this inspection.
On-going PLN/ENG
BIO-8 Impacts to jurisdictional resources are anticipated in order to construct
the emergency access and bridge. Prior to the issuance of permits for
grading or construction activities, the applicant shall obtain the
following permits and agreement:
• A Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement issued by the
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) for
maintenance activities in the streambed
Prior to the
issuance of permits
for grading or
construction
activities
PLN
k)
I)
m)
PROJECT NAME: West Oaks
PROJECT NUMBER: GPA 16-04/ZC 16-03/LCPA 16-04/LFMP 87-05(F)/SDP 16-20/CDP 16-31/HMP 16-04/MS 2018-0005 (DEV13018)
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 9 of 18
MITIGATION MEASURE Monitoring Type Monitoring Department Shown on Plans Verified Implementation Remarks • Any necessary California Coastal Act permits from the California
Coastal Commission (CCC) and/or City of Carlsbad.
BIO-9 Protective habitat buffers consistent with the City of Carlsbad’s Habitat
Management Plan (Carlsbad HMP) and Guidelines for Riparian Buffers
shall be incorporated into project design. Prior to the recordation of the
first final map, the riparian buffers shall be included in the restrictive
covenant that also will provide protection for the riparian habitat. The
upland buffer is not to be included in the restrictive covenant.
Prior to the
recordation of the
first final map
PLN
BIO-10 In order to prevent impacts of the proposed development on the City of
Carlsbad’s Habitat Management Plan (Carlsbad HMP) preserve area off
site and to the west or to the native vegetation in the riparian habitat
proposed to be amended into the Carlsbad HMP preserve, the proposed
project shall comply with the adjacency standards outlined in the
Carlsbad HMP. Prior to the issuance of the first grading permit, the
project plans shall reflect the adjacency standards as follows:
a. Fire Management
Fire management for the proposed project shall be addressed through
the designation of the fuel modification zones (FMZs). All FMZ areas
shall be incorporated within the development boundaries and shall be
addressed with the preparation of a fire protection plan (FPP).
b. Erosion Control
Standard best management practices (BMPs) will be implemented to
slow surface flow and dampen initial precipitation flow in the
development area. In addition, no new surface drainage shall be
directed into the open space areas.
c. Landscaping Restrictions
Prior to the
issuance of the first
grading permit
PLN/ENG
/BLDG
PROJECT NAME: West Oaks
PROJECT NUMBER: GPA 16-04/ZC 16-03/LCPA 16-04/LFMP 87-05(F)/SDP 16-20/CDP 16-31/HMP 16-04/MS 2018-0005 (DEV13018)
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 10 of 18
MITIGATION MEASURE Monitoring Type Monitoring Department Shown on Plans Verified Implementation Remarks
Landscape planting palettes for the proposed project shall not use non-
native, invasive plant species in the areas adjacent to the riparian or
upland habitat or adjacent to the Carlsbad HMP preserve off site to the
west or south. In addition, because the site is within the Coastal Zone,
no invasive plant species shall be used in the landscaping of the
development. These plant species are identified in the Carlsbad HMP
but the list of invasive species that will be avoided is not limited to the
species on the Carlsbad HMP list. Irrigation of the landscaping shall be
designed and scheduled to avoid runoff into the proposed open space.
The riparian and upland buffers shall be restored with native habitat per
the concept plan.
d. Fencing, Signs, and Lighting
To deter entry into the riparian habitat (open space area protected by
the restrictive covenant) by people and pets, the area shall be fenced
with post and cable fencing. Signs shall be attached to the fence at
intermittent intervals to alert the residents of the sensitive nature of
the open space area and that dogs are not allowed. A trail is proposed
to be located within the 15 feet closest to development, and the fencing
shall preclude people from passing beyond the trail into the habitat.
Other than safety lighting, no lighting that shall intrude into the riparian
habitat and will be shielded or directed away from the open space area.
Fencing shall be installed along the southern boundary in supplement
to the existing walls and to prevent people from entering the preserve
area off site. Fencing and walls shall also be installed in any areas
adjacent to the proposed open space to preclude human activity within
the open space.
e. Predator and Exotic Species Control
PROJECT NAME: West Oaks
PROJECT NUMBER: GPA 16-04/ZC 16-03/LCPA 16-04/LFMP 87-05(F)/SDP 16-20/CDP 16-31/HMP 16-04/MS 2018-0005 (DEV13018)
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 11 of 18
MITIGATION MEASURE Monitoring Type Monitoring Department Shown on Plans Verified Implementation Remarks
The homeowners’ association (HOA) for the proposed development
shall alert the residents to the potential effects that domestic animals
may have on the native fauna and flora. The riparian habitat shall be
fenced to discourage the entry of domestic animals into the open space.
BIO-11 The City of Carlsbad’s Habitat Management Plan (Carlsbad HMP)
requires that impacts to disturbed habitat (Group F) required mitigation
with an in-lieu fee. Thus, the project is required to pay an in-lieu
mitigation fee (also known as the HMP mitigation fee) for impacts to
disturbed habitat prior to final map approval, issuance of a grading
permit or clearing of any habitat, whichever occurs first. This is a per-
acre fee charged for impacts to Habitat Groups D, E, and F, totaling 6.26
acres, as an alternative to conserving habitat on site or acquiring habitat
off site to mitigate for such impacts. The cost per acre for this mitigation
fee will be determined by the city.
Prior to final map
approval, issuance
of a grading permit
or clearing of any
habitat, whichever
occurs first
PLN
BIO-12 Prior to final map approval, issuance of a grading permit or clearing of
any habitat, whichever occurs first, the applicant shall perform the
following:
• Record a conservation easement, as defined by California Civil
Code, Section 815.1, or other protective measure for all on-site
mitigation land including 3.97 acres of open space.
• Select a qualified conservation entity to manage the conserved
land.
• Prepare a Property Analysis Record to estimate costs of in
perpetuity management and monitoring or otherwise provide
for an estimate of funding needed.
• Provide a non-wasting endowment or other funding sources
acceptable to the wildlife agencies, California Coastal
Commission (CCC), and City of Carlsbad based on the Property
Prior to final map
approval, issuance
of a grading permit
or clearing of any
habitat, whichever
occurs first
PLN
PROJECT NAME: West Oaks
PROJECT NUMBER: GPA 16-04/ZC 16-03/LCPA 16-04/LFMP 87-05(F)/SDP 16-20/CDP 16-31/HMP 16-04/MS 2018-0005 (DEV13018)
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 12 of 18
MITIGATION MEASURE Monitoring Type Monitoring Department Shown on Plans Verified Implementation Remarks Analysis Record to sufficiently cover the costs of in-perpetuity
management and monitoring.
• Prepare a preserve management plan, which will be approved
by the city and wildlife agencies.
CUL-1 An archaeological monitor shall be present for initial ground-disturbing
activities associated with the proposed project in the event
unanticipated discoveries are made. If human remains are discovered,
California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, states that further
disturbances and activities shall stop in any area or nearby area
suspected to overlie remains, and the County coroner shall be
contacted. At this time, the person who discovered the remains will
contact the City of Carlsbad so that they may work with the most likely
descendent on the respectful treatment and disposition of the remains.
On-going during
initial ground-
disturbing activities
PLN/ENG
CUL-2 Prior to the commencement of any ground disturbing activities, the
project developer shall enter into a Pre-Excavation Agreement,
otherwise known as a Tribal Cultural Resources Treatment and Tribal
Monitoring Agreement, with the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians
or other Traditionally and Culturally Affiliated Luiseño tribe (TCA Tribe).
This agreement will contain provisions to address the proper treatment
of any tribal cultural resources and/or Luiseño Native American human
remains inadvertently discovered during the course of the project. The
agreement will outline the roles and powers of the Luiseño Native
American monitors and the archaeologist. A copy of said archaeological
contract and Pre-Excavation Agreement shall be provided to the City of
Carlsbad prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
Prior to the
commencement of
any ground
disturbing activities
PLN/ENG
CUL-3 A Luiseño Native American monitor shall be present during all ground
disturbing activities. Ground disturbing activities may include, but are
not be limited to, archaeological studies, geotechnical investigations,
clearing, grubbing, trenching, excavation, preparation for utilities and
other infrastructure, and grading activities.
On-going PLN/ENG
PROJECT NAME: West Oaks
PROJECT NUMBER: GPA 16-04/ZC 16-03/LCPA 16-04/LFMP 87-05(F)/SDP 16-20/CDP 16-31/HMP 16-04/MS 2018-0005 (DEV13018)
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 13 of 18
MITIGATION MEASURE Monitoring Type Monitoring Department Shown on Plans Verified Implementation Remarks CUL-4 Any and all uncovered artifacts of Luiseño Native American cultural
importance shall be treated with dignity and respect and be reburied
on-site within an appropriate location protected by open space or
easement, etc., where the cultural items will not be disturbed in the
future, or shall be returned to the Most Likely Descendant, whichever is
most applicable, and shall not be curated, unless ordered to do so by a
federal agency or a court of competent jurisdiction.
On-going PLN/ENG
CUL-5 The Luiseño Native American monitor shall be present at the project’s
on-site preconstruction meeting to consult with grading and excavation
contractors concerning excavation schedules and safety issues, as well
as consult with the principal archaeologist concerning the proposed
archaeologist techniques and/or strategies for the project.
On-going PLN/ENG
CUL-6 Luiseño Native American monitors and archaeological monitors shall
have joint authority to temporarily divert and/or halt construction
activities. If tribal cultural resources are discovered during construction,
all earth moving activity within and around the immediate discovery
area must be diverted until the Luiseño Native American monitor and
the archaeologist can assess the nature and significance of the find.
On-going PLN/ENG
CUL-7 If a significant tribal cultural resource(s) and/or unique archaeological
resource(s) are discovered during ground disturbing activities for this
project, the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians (in accordance with
TCPRG 8.2.2.4) and any TCA Tribes that consulted with the city under
AB 52 for this project shall be notified and consulted regarding the
respectful and dignified treatment of those resources. Pursuant to
California Public Resources Code Section 21083.2(b) avoidance is the
preferred method of preservation for archaeological and tribal cultural
resources. If however, the Applicant is able to demonstrate that
avoidance of a significant and/or unique cultural resource is infeasible
and a data recovery plan, is authorized by the City of Carlsbad as the
lead agency, the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians (in accordance
with TCPRG Section 8.2.2.4) and TCA Tribes that consulted with the city
On-going PLN/ENG
PROJECT NAME: West Oaks
PROJECT NUMBER: GPA 16-04/ZC 16-03/LCPA 16-04/LFMP 87-05(F)/SDP 16-20/CDP 16-31/HMP 16-04/MS 2018-0005 (DEV13018)
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 14 of 18
MITIGATION MEASURE Monitoring Type Monitoring Department Shown on Plans Verified Implementation Remarks under AB 52 for this project shall be consulted regarding the drafting
and finalization of any such recovery plan.
CUL-8 When tribal cultural resources are discovered during the project, if the
archaeologist collects such resources, a Luiseño Native American
monitor must be present during any testing or cataloging of those
resources. If the archaeologist does not collect the tribal cultural
resources that are unearthed during the ground disturbing activities,
the Luiseño Native American monitor shall follow the procedures in
CUL-4.
On-going PLN/ENG
CUL-9 If suspected Native American human remains are encountered,
California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further
disturbance shall occur until the San Diego County Medical Examiner
has made the necessary findings as to origin. Further, pursuant to
California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98(b) remains shall be
left in place and free from disturbance until a final decision as to the
treatment and disposition has been made. Suspected Native American
remains shall be examined in the field and kept in a secure location at
the site. A Luiseño Native American monitor shall be present during the
examination of the remains. If the San Diego County Medical Examiner
determines the remains to be Native American, the Native American
Heritage Commission (NAHC) must be contacted by the Medical
Examiner within 24 hours. The NAHC must then immediately notify the
“Most Likely Descendant” about the discovery. The Most Likely
Descendant shall then make recommendations within 48 hours, and
engage in consultation concerning treatment of remains as provided in
Public Resources Code 5097.98.
On-going PLN/ENG
CUL-10 In the event that fill material is imported into the project area, the fill
shall be clean of tribal cultural resources and documented as such. If fill
material is to be utilized and/or exported from areas within the project
site, then that fill material shall be analyzed and confirmed by an
On-going PLN/ENG
PROJECT NAME: West Oaks
PROJECT NUMBER: GPA 16-04/ZC 16-03/LCPA 16-04/LFMP 87-05(F)/SDP 16-20/CDP 16-31/HMP 16-04/MS 2018-0005 (DEV13018)
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 15 of 18
MITIGATION MEASURE Monitoring Type Monitoring Department Shown on Plans Verified Implementation Remarks archeologist and Luiseño Native American monitor that such fill
material does not contain tribal cultural resources.
CUL-11 No testing, invasive or non-invasive, shall be permitted on any
recovered tribal cultural resources without the written permission of
the consulting tribes.
On-going PLN/ENG
CUL-12 Prior to the release of the grading bond, a monitoring report and/or
evaluation report, if appropriate, which describes the results, analysis
and conclusions of the monitoring program shall be submitted by the
archaeologist, along with the Luiseño Native American monitor’s notes
and comments, to the City of Carlsbad for approval. Said report shall be
subject to confidentiality as an exception to the Public Records Act and
will not be available for general public distribution; however, a copy of
the final monitoring report shall be provided to each consulting tribe
upon request to the Planning Division.
Prior to the release
of the grading
bond, a monitoring
report and/or
evaluation report
PLN/ENG
GEO-1 Prior to initiation of ground-disturbing activities within the project site
that would extend into the Santiago Formation, a qualified
paleontological monitor shall be retained to monitor and recognize
potential paleontological discoveries during construction of the project.
If unexpected, potentially significant paleontological resources are
encountered during construction, the paleontological monitor shall
have the authority to temporarily redirect or suspend construction
activities and evaluate the potential significance of the find and record
or salvage it. Prior to the start of ground-disturbing activities, the City of
Carlsbad shall verify that the requirement for paleontological
monitoring is noted on the appropriate construction documents.
Prior to initiation of
ground-disturbing
activities within the
project site that
would extend into
the Santiago
Formation
PLN/ENG
NOI-1 Interior Noise Study
Prior to the approval of building permits, the applicant shall submit an
interior noise study for approval by the city Building Department. The
interior noise study would ensure compliance with the city and state’s
Prior to the
approval of building
permits
PLN/ENG
/BLDG
PROJECT NAME: West Oaks
PROJECT NUMBER: GPA 16-04/ZC 16-03/LCPA 16-04/LFMP 87-05(F)/SDP 16-20/CDP 16-31/HMP 16-04/MS 2018-0005 (DEV13018)
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 16 of 18
MITIGATION MEASURE Monitoring Type Monitoring Department Shown on Plans Verified Implementation Remarks 45 decibel (dB) Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) noise
standard.
NOI-2 Elevated Noise Environment Disclaimer
Prior to sale, lease, or rental of any residential structure or portion
thereof located in the Airport Influence Area (AIA), the applicant/owner
shall provide prospective buyers and future occupants the following
notice:
This property is currently located in an urban area that periodically and
regularly experiences elevated noise levels. Potential sources of this
noise may be automobile traffic, flying aircraft, industrial/commercial
uses, and general human activity in an urban environment. You may
wish to consider what noise level annoyances, if any, are associated
with the property before you complete your purchase and/or rental
agreement, and determine whether they are acceptable to you.
Prior to sale, lease,
or rental of any
residential
structure or portion
thereof located in
the Airport
Influence Area
PLN/ENG
/BLDG
NOI-3 Limit Construction Work Hours
• Noise-generating construction activities (i.e., operation of
equipment, performing any construction, or the grading or
excavation of land) associated with the project shall not occur
in the period before 7:00 a.m. or after 6:00 p.m. on weekdays
or before 8:00 a.m. or after 6:00 p.m. on Saturday. Noise-
generating construction activities associated with the project
are prohibited on Sundays and federal holidays.
• Construction hours, allowable workdays, and the phone
number of the job superintendent shall be clearly posted at all
construction entrances to allow surrounding property owners
to contact the job superintendent if necessary. In the event the
city and/or construction contractor receives a complaint,
Prior to the start of
construction/On-
going
PLN/ENG
PROJECT NAME: West Oaks
PROJECT NUMBER: GPA 16-04/ZC 16-03/LCPA 16-04/LFMP 87-05(F)/SDP 16-20/CDP 16-31/HMP 16-04/MS 2018-0005 (DEV13018)
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 17 of 18
MITIGATION MEASURE Monitoring Type Monitoring Department Shown on Plans Verified Implementation Remarks appropriate corrective actions shall be implemented, and a
report of the action shall be provided to the reporting party.
NOI-4 Measures to Reduce Construction Nuisance Noise
The following are required measures to help reduce potential nuisance
construction noise for the noise sensitive receptors located near the
site:
a. All construction equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be equipped
with properly operating and maintained mufflers.
b. 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 using electric air compressors and similar
power tools rather than diesel equipment, shall be employed
where feasible.
c. During construction, stationary construction equipment shall be
placed
such that emitted noise is directed away from or shielded from
sensitive
noise receivers.
d. During construction, stockpiling and vehicle staging areas shall be
located as far as practical from noise-sensitive receptors.
e. Electrically powered equipment shall be used instead of
pneumatic or internal combustion powered equipment where
feasible.
f. Construction site and access road speed limits shall be established
and enforced during the construction period.
g. The use of noise-producing signals, including horns, whistles,
alarms, and bells, shall be for safety warning purposes only.
Prior to the start of
construction/On-
going
PLN/ENG
PROJECT NAME: West Oaks
PROJECT NUMBER: GPA 16-04/ZC 16-03/LCPA 16-04/LFMP 87-05(F)/SDP 16-20/CDP 16-31/HMP 16-04/MS 2018-0005 (DEV13018)
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 18 of 18
MITIGATION MEASURE Monitoring Type Monitoring Department Shown on Plans Verified Implementation Remarks h. The on-site construction supervisor and/or “disturbance
coordinator” shall have the responsibility and authority to receive
and resolve noise complaints. A clear appeal process to the owner
shall be established prior to construction commencement that will
allow for resolution of noise problems that cannot be immediately
solved by the site supervisor.
i. Equipment shall not be left idling unless necessary.
j. The project contractor shall to the extent feasible, schedule
construction activities to avoid the simultaneous operation of
construction equipment to minimize noise levels resulting from
operating several pieces of high-noise-level-emitting equipment.
NOI-5 Exterior Noise Barriers at Balconies
Prior to issuance of building permits, construction plans shall show
noise barriers placed on all balconies that are subject to noise levels
greater than 65 decibels (dB) in the Year 2035 + Project model scenario
(refer to Table 7 of the Noise Technical Report). The noise barriers may
be constructed of a material such as tempered glass, acrylic glass, solid
metal (minimum six gage thickness: steel, aluminum, etc.) or any
masonry material with a surface density of at least three pounds per
square foot. The barriers may also be constructed using a combination
of materials, such as a stucco base component topped with glass or
Plexiglas, or a solid metal base topped with glass or Plexiglass. The noise
barriers shall have no openings or cracks.
Prior to issuance of
building permits
PLN/ENG
/BLDG
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-1- Responses to Comments
All comments received on the Draft MND have been coded to facilitate identification and tracking. The City
received 6 comment letters on the Draft MND during the public review period that began on July 7, 2020, and
ending on August 6, 2020. The comment letters on the Draft MND are listed in the table below. Each of the
comment letters were reviewed and divided into individual comments, with each comment containing a single
theme, issue, or concern. Where a letter comments on more than one issue, each individual comment issue is
numbered (A-1, for example) and a specific response is included for each issue.
Comment Letters Received on the Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration
Letter Commenter Date
A Cameron Humphres, Director of Airports, County of San Diego July 28, 2020
B Cheryl Madrigal, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer, Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians July 15, 2020
C Eric Craig, Land Management Representative, San Diego Gas & Electric August 4, 2020
D Howard Krausz, President, North County Advocates August 4, 2020
E Diane Nygaard, Preserve Calavera August 5, 2020
F Steve Linke August 6, 2020
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-2- Responses to Comments
Comment Letter A
JEFFMONEOA
DIRECTOR
VIA E-MAIL
July 28, 2020
Mr. Cliff Jones, Senior Planner
Carlsbad Planning Division
1635 Faraday Avenue
Carlsbad, CA 92008
cliff.jones@carlsbadca.gov
DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC VIORKS
5.~10 OJERLANDAVENUE, SUITE 410
SAN DIEGO.CA 92123-1237
(858)09'-2212
www.sdcoontv.ea.~fe»-:ol
PUBLIC REVIEW COMMENTS FOR THE CITY OF CARLSBAD'S NOTICE OF INTENT
TO ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE PROPOSED WEST
OAKS PROJECT
Deat Mr. Jones.
The County of San Diego Department of Public Works, Airports Division (County
Airports), was notified of a Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative
Declaration.dated July 7, 2020, from the City of Carlsbad for the West Oaks Project, to
be located to the south of Palomar Airport Road and to the west of Palomar Oaks Way
(APN ## 212-110-01, -02, -03, -04, -05, -06, -07, -08, 212-040-26). The public comment
period for the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) is from July 7, 2020through August
6, 2020, and County Airports appreciates the opportunity to comment.
Since 1959 McClellan-Palomar Airport has been owned and operated by County Airports
and is located within the municipal limits of the City of Carlsbad. The airport provides
general aviation, corporate and commercial aviation services, and is an air transportation
hub utilized by businesses and residents. The County, as the owner of the Airport, accepts
federal grant funding from the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and is obligated to
maintain the facility as a "public use airport." In accordance with federal grant assurances,
the County has no authority over the quantity, type, or flight track of an aircraft arriving or
departing from the airport, which are under the jurisdiction of the FAA. In consideration of
the FAA's authority over aircraft in flight, it is important to note that the County's purview
reflects the limits of their authority as ground-facility managers. As a long-standing
transportation asset and economic driver within the community, we are interested in
development projects that would introduce new residential and/or noise-sensitive land
uses in proximity to aviation activities to ensure that those introduced into the Airport
Influence Area (AIA) are compatible and well-informed neighbors.
A-1
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-3- Responses to Comments
Mr. Jones
July 28, 2020
Page 2 of 3
BACKGROUND
Project Location: The proposed project is located approximately 0.40 miles (2,130 ft.)
southwest of McClellan-Palomar Airport's runway.
Project Description: As described in the MND, the project proposes to develop 192
multi-family residential units, located in the southeast quadrant of the City of Carlsbad, to
the south of Palomar Airport Road and to the west of Palomar Oaks Way. The proposed
project includes 373 parking spaces, a leasing and a recreation building, recreation areas,
and a community pool. Bicycle parking amenities are also proposed. The project would
have a density of approximately 24.6 dwelling units per acre and the proposed structures
would be three stories. The project includes a General Plan Amendment and a Zoning
Amendment. The site is currently designated for Planned Industrial and Open Space in
the General Plan and zoned as Planned Industrial and Open Space. The proposed
General Plan Amendment would change the underlying land use designation to
Residential (R-30) and the proposed Zoning Amendment would change the underlying
zoning to Residential Density-Multiple (RD-M)
COUNTY AIRPORTS COMMENTS
The project site is located within McClellan-Palomar Airport's Airport Overilight
Notification Area and Review Area 1 of the AIA, as defined in the Airport Land Use
Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) by the San Diego County Regional Airport Authority.
According the ALUCP, the northeastern portion of the project site is located within Anrport
Safety Zone 3 -Inner Turning Zone, while the remainder of the project site is located
within Safety Zone 6 -Traffic Pattern Zone. According to mapping research, it appears
that a portion of the proposed project site is located within the 60-65 dB CNEL noise
contour of the ALUCP and is subject to intem,ittent single-event noise impacts, sight,
and sound of aircraft operating from McClellan-Palomar Airport. The project is also
located within the, McClellan-Palomar Airport FAR Part 150 Noise Study, June 2, 2006.
As stated in this Noise Study, "[a]II new residential projects located within the FAR Part
150 Noise Study are required to record a notice concerning aircraft environmental
impacts, clarifying that the property is subject to aircraft overflight, sight and sound of
aircraft from [McClellan-Palomar Airport]." County Airports wants to ensure that future
residents of the project are aware they would be moving into dwellings located under the
air traffic pattern of McClellan-Palomar Airport. The project's administrative record and
project proponent should discuss the proximity of the project to the airport and
associated effects to the public The ALUCP requires that all new residential projects
located within the overfli_ght notification area be required to record a notice informing
residents of the potential environmental impacts related to aircraft, and the property is
subject to overflight, sight, and sound of aircraft operating from the McClellan-Palomar
Airport. We recommend that the City of Carlsbad coordinate this project's review with
the San Diego County Regional Airport Authority for consistency with the airport's
ALUCP.
The project site is also located in proximity to a navigation facility and may impact the
assurance of navigation signal reception. Based on the project's proposed structures
A-2
A-3
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-4- Responses to Comments
Mr. Jones
July 28, 2020
Page 3 of 3
and the site's proximity to the Airport, the FAA, in accordance with Title 14 of the Code
of Federal Regulations Part 77.9, would request that the City of Carlsbad and project
applicant file notice (see attachment). The 7460-1 form must be submitted to the FAA at
least 45 days prior to construction or alteration; however, we recommend earlier
submission to avoid unnecessary redesign costs.
Please continue to include County Airports in notifications regarding this development
project For more information about these comments or McClellan-Palomar Airport,
please contact Marc Baskel at (619) 956-4800 or by email at
Marc.Baskel@sdcounty.ca.gov.
Sincerely,
CAMERON HUMPHRES, Director of Airports
Department of Public Works
cc: Olivier Brackett -McClellan-Palomar Airport Manager, Department of Public Works
Marc Baskel -Program Coordinator, Department of Public Works
Cynthia Curtis -Environmental Planning Manager. Department of Public Works
IA-4
Cont.
A-5
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-5- Responses to Comments
NOTICE OF PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OR ALTERATION
§ 77. 7 Form and time of notice.
(a) If you are required to fife noti:e under §77.9,
you mU$t w bmit to the FAA a completed FAA
Form 7460-1, Notice of ProposEd Construction
or Alteration. FAA Form 7460-1 is available at
FAA regonal offices and on the lntemet.
(b) You muot submit 11is form a1 leasl 45 days
before the start date of the proposed construction
or alteration or the date an application for a
construction pGJmit is filed, whichever is earliest.
(c) If you propose construction or alleration that is
also sl.bjGCt to the licsnsirg r9Cp.Jirements of the
Federal Communications Commission (FCC),
you must submit notice to the FAA on or before
the date that the applicatioo is fifed with the FCC.
(d) If you propose constru::tion or alteration to an
existing struct1Je that exce€ds 2,000 ft. in height
abova ground lava! {A.GL), tho FAA prasumes rt
to baa hazard to air navigation that rosults in an
inemcient use of airspace. You must irclude
details explaining both why the proposal would
not constittte a hazard to air navigation and why
it would not cause an in0ffici011t use of airspace.
(e) The 45-day ac!vance notice requirement is
waived if immediate constru::tion or alteration is
reqLired because of an emergency involving
essential public servic-es, publM: heaHh, or public
safety. You may provide notice to the FAA by any
available1 expeditious means. You must file a
completed FAA Form 7460-1 within 5 days of the
inftiaf notice to the FAA. Outside normal business
ho1.1s1 the nearest flig'.tt service station will
aooept emergency notices.
§ 77.9 Construction or alteration requiring
notice.
If requested by the FAA, or if you p,opooe any of
the following types of construction or alteration,
you mU5t file notice with the FAA of:
(a) AAyconstruction <>r alteration that is more
than 200 ft. AGL al its site.
(b) AAyconstruction or alteration that exceeds an
imagjnary surface extending oltward and t.pward
at any of the following slopes:
(1) 100 to 1 for a horizontal distanca of
20,000 ft. from the nearest poirt of the nearest
runway of each airport describad in para,,-aph (d)
of this section l'Ath Its longest runway more than
3,200 ft. in actual length, excluding heliports.
{2) so to 1 for a horizontal distance of
10,000 ft_ from the nearest poirt of the nearest
runway of each airpo<' described in para,,-aph (d)
of this section \\1th its largest runway no more
than 3,200 tt. in actual length, excluding heliports.
Mail Processing Center
Federal Aviation Administration Southwest Rggional Office
Obstru::lion Evaluation Gro~ 10101 Hiflwood Porkwoy
Fort Worth, TX 76177
Fax: (817) 222-5920
WGbsite: https://oeaaa.faa.gov
{3) 25 to 1 for a horizontal d stance of
51000 ft. from the nearest point of the nearest
landing and takeoff area of each heliport
described in paragraph (d) of this section.
{c) Arr,; higlway, railroad, or othtY travsr5e way
for mobile objects, of a heig,t which, if adjusted
upward 17 fsEt for :;in lntsrntat:e Highway that i&
part of the National System of Military and
Interstate f-igtr.vays. \Wlere overcross.ings are
designed for a minimum of 17 fest vertical
distance, 15 feet for any other public roadway, IO
feel or the heigtt of the highest mobifo object that
wolJd normally traverse the road, which0ver is
greater, for a private road, 23 feet for a railroad,
and for a watsrway or any other tra1weroo way not
previously mentioned, an amount eq..ial to the
h•ight of the ligh•ot mobile object that woul:l
normally traver&e it, wot.Ad exceed a stardard of
paragraph (a) or (b) of this section.
(d) Any construction a: alteration on any of the
following airport& ard heliports:
( t ) A public use airport liotm in the
Airport/Facility Directory, Alaska Supplement, or
Pacific Chart Supplement of the U.S.
Governmmt Flight Information PubOC-ations;
(2) A military airport under conslru:tion,
or an airport und..-construction that will be
available for public usej
{3) An airport operated by .:i Fooeral
agency or the DOD.
{4) A.n airport or h•fiport with at leaot
one FAA.approved instrumert approach
procedure.
(e) You do not neoo to file noti:e for construction
or alteration of:
( 1 ) Arrt object that will be shielded by
existing structures of a permanant and
substantial nature or by natural terrain or
topographic features of eQ.Jal or greater height,
and will be located in the congested area of a
c~y, town, or settlement \'/here the shielded
structl.J'e will not adversely affect safety in air
navigation;
(2) Arrt air navigation facility, airport
visual approach or larding aid, aircraft arresting
device, or meteorological device meeting FAA-
approved siting criteria or an appropriate military
service sitirg criteria on military airports, the
location and height of which are fixed by its
functional pcrpose;
(3) Arr/ construction or alteration for
which notice is required by any oths FAA
regulation.
(4) Any arienna structure of 20 feet or less in
height, except one that woud increase the halgtt of aoother ar(enna structure.
A-5
Cont.
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-6- Responses to Comments
INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETING FAA FORM 7460-1
PLEASE TYPE or PRINT
ITEM 11 Pl&SSe ll'lctude 1ne name, address and pr.>ne number of a personal cQl'ltect PQml es wet.I as 1ne company name
ITEM f2. P1&8!-& ll'ltlvde tne name, .8ddres~ a!ld phOne-numberot a i't'ol'$Onat eontaet p<:11nt as: wetl es the cornpany n&me
ITEM #3, New Com,tn.ict1on would bii a stnJduril that has not Yi't bH11 buUI
Alt8'8bOn IS a Ch~ng& lo an e.x,shng Slr'I.JCl.ur'e ~uch llS tM &dd1bM Of ll !1de mount~ d :!tl'te1·1na, a Cfl81'1.ge: to ll"le m,!11k1ng and ilghtu'lg, i!ll
change 10 power .enelfor te<1uency. or a change to the height Tne raature of the en..e<atlon shaill oe 1nduded In ITEM ia:21 ·complete
Oescnotion of ProPOsal'
E'.1.l~tlnD wol.1111 De a oorM<ci1lV'I ro u,~ 1en1uan ano,or 1on~ruao, a GOTTN"Jtlon to tM h,!il~t or 11 nun.g on en o:.1~ng ~tn..tctortl ~IOI 1\8=. nlNN
Mtn $h1Cl~<I Oyrho FM lni,rcioo;on rortno notJC,(11 '!.MIIClo lnGIU13Mtn II LM 11.21 ·Com1>lt!toOe.swpuonor ~r(lpo,;er
ITS.1 ('-'1 If P-effl'lt1n•nt1 ~ lndlGil!A II hmpcrAry, tiuch ,Ir; ti crnr~ or drJllng d,iffleil,,. ;;,nt•r; th• .i;.t1mat&d lilngih of ltne IM tefflpar;vy
l"l:rutl~ ~N l)o uo
lTs,t ,s E"r'ltirlt'IQ det• thAten!l$1ntWnn it ~~~Cl to start and m.i Mt4'-thtill ~ltme.tl(ln$h61Jr't r,;i e001rlrr4M
1rEMt6 Ple~se,oo,cateU1eityp1,ofs~tur111 00 Nnf lEAY!; 0lANK
ITEM #I In 11,. O'efj ~,ot Oll'slruct~ .. m~n~ •11<.1jgl'jUll_l151eouired, DI•~~-Indicate l'/P,, dijSfed II 1>0 lll•l•••"ce, cllO(;I( ·om,r •r>J
tndletle 'no ptef•~rl!m:e-' 00 N01 LEAVE §LANK N01C rhgt1 l11terts•y l1gt1l11,g s:J1all b~ u~ed only lo, 'iltuetutu: 0¥$1 SOO' AGL ~1 th~
tlb~cnoeol lMg!) 1nter1,it.y l1gh1tng lot !.lruttuttJ.!, GVN 500' AGL. fl!'Orl<ll(O ., -'"O r~QUll~d
ITEM n ti I.hi-;; 1~ an ~:iw•tlrn;r towor ~tha, bii'Qn ro_gi~lared with th-1 FCC. on19r lno FCC Mtunna Struc:lure R~lstration numb-or hwi
IT™ ..-.~ tir"' i10 I 1:t11tiJ.dij and l•JnQiltJ•1i;; rnust 1.)1:1 9BO!)fi:fl'lll1¢ CIJl)l'tlin$leS. oOt-...Ote lQ w1U111\ Ullf! ,W;)rasr "";o!Ol)O\.I 1,i l(I !rte' O!l:!9!1il6I
hundredth al~ s,i;i(lOnd 111,;nown Lillihlds end longl1u:d,; OOnved sotely tom fl hand-hwldC.PS lfl'iln.lnenl ~ NOi ac~plabfe P.
f\!lM--t'li:ld GPS IS onl~ ~,C1JN11.;; to w1ftijn too metlll'i 1318 fel'l't) 96 pi,r<::"'4 (.II Ina t1m~ Thi:$ dtll&, ~en fllOtl~d. ~nOYtd m11t(h thlil :;1t¢-
(lo1;1~1,11on sUhmlt911 l.Wld~ ITEM lf10
llEM lil 1 NAO 83 ~ p,-.,letreod, l\f)wev!!t, l..;t~U<le-ar1dlor1!,11luck tney be !ubfrltlled m NAt, JI Abo. in ~ornto 9l>0Qlllphl(. are-.e;s ~el'!" NAO
l13ndNA08l ere 11ot1tt"an.ao1, o!herd&rum m~yMusc<:l It ls tr,,porum! to ~owhtuc:r, ClaDJm s used ["IO NOi I fAYf tn J\NK
1rEM ~ 12, E::nu)rtM,iame(II th~ nt'Brn!;i Cll!/ tm<:l t'[.)te totne3M 1, IM !.UU~u,~m «wlll botn 3C!ty,onU,rlM MfllB GI tl'latClty(5n<:l'!lat&
1TSA 1·13 EntA,.the ft.tu ne(n 9 or tna "'&1,11~ pubik>tJS~ (onl pr111"1i.-11tfl') ,"J1mnrt QI,. lii-11Pllr1 orm111tl'lry =\ll'J)af1 (";f 1'1~1pt,rt lfl thA' ~1tit
ITEM# 14 Eot~rlt,,;a, di-.tant.~ ~ tM c1lrport or hellpOO •-~d In #13 to lhoi 11tr11cl11re.
ITEM lfl5 Fnt<>r lhedlr~1ll'>nlrom 1111• Hlmoil orl,ellPori lf;;;letltfl ffU to lh1:t ~1r11eh11e.
ITEM M.16 En1•rttr• sit• el.weti(ln t.bova r'fliitl'"i.,~ tev~1 Md 9)!rt•s;,~a-dm whola 1..:i-91 ,ouno.d 10 tr.-. n.e-.i~ root (eg 17'$' n,11~ ti) 17',
11·6· rounds to i'S') r hi; d~a should motcn ttio around contour tla.vattoi,; l(lr1t1to doo1dJ(ln tut>mlttod under 111:M .,.,o
lTBt1 #17 Entor thw total itn.(;tl.n' tl!ilQtl aOOl/(.1 gro'-'1d tovil In nholo loot roun\Xl<I to tti~ no:,J hli;tio~t foot (o ,g 17'3' ro\lndi to Ii')
Th$-tole! stn.,ch.Jr9 hOlrJl11 $hall ltlc.fudQ anythl09 mounlQod M 1f'lfl ot tN stn.Jc.-h'.,~. "iW'!h -O"i .iflto-me,:-, Qbr.-ln,1c:IIQn '1gt1t$. ll{tllnlng , .... a.. 10tc.
ITS.t It$ E'oterth&ov...raj! hal'1"Ji 2bo'V~ mlii'l11Sltil l~v" and ewa$$...td 1nwnol,ij f,.er Thti'WIII ~ Iha: tol.l'ltot ITEM ltG+ ITEM A117
ITB-1 ,rn II an FM-e~fOfilltU!Jr1-::tl study was Plf!Vlb1r-:lycond1~1--c1 Elfll9r ltlt, IJ~\IIOU$ Sludy 1'l1t11ue1
llEM ,n.o Ent.or ttte relaltOmtnp or the, s:trucruni to roads, ~rpom, prominimt t~rra1n, ox~t1ng 'JtrudLXo-s, etc Attach an tM/2'-:.: n·
110THV0UCIXI C'OP't' of 1'1~ aoprQP(l;iio ( 5 mtflJit US GoologJoal SUrv11y(US(-.$) tluaar.mglo M3P-M.l'\RKElJ Wit M /\ PRE.CISI: f"lOtCArlON
OF THE SITE LOCATION, To ob~tn meipt. oontect IJSGS .Jt l•SSe.21-s.1747 or 'vl.3 lr19ffil.:{ at ·pttp(C;torsr H'i9i99Y" 1f iMil3blO
-altach SI C:Cf.lV al-a doct,im(lntaj 1.tq '4JIV(lY With, lhq 'it.Jl'\l(iyQr'$ cutlfie11!onit.'.i1n8 lh•l 0mr-unt 11r Vlllt1Ctl1 end 1Y1n4hf'lt(II t'C'CUl'().Cy rn fr,«
lTE'M·'21
• For tren~rrntt.11g stati(i(li, lrv.'(l.l'Jo ma,1mlln tfNct1vo ritd1;Jtod powor (ERP) and :a U lfll'QUC11~fi
• foremonniJS ,rtdudo tru, ty?tl' of llrt111me :arid 00fllor ol radiGtllQr, (~ch ih9 DfltOnrra p.-n.tom. It avatiublet
.. For mlcrowavt<, 1t1Clud., ~:k11ut11 r-eil~TY"' to IM riontf
.. For ovifhoad w1r~ or lta11im1Ss1on lin9s, 1noludo ~izw o111d connoumuon of w1~s ,.,d thc,lr swportmg :;tru"uros (Attach ~~lotion)
• For we<;h pol.ls;upport, lm:;ludi. cOord;oel9$, sii' •l•Vtill0fl1 ?.nd .!ittrur.JHN ha1ghl al;,o1ir9 groun,d lci/.4 or Wcllilf
• Forbu,!Jtngs, 1r.:l.Jde irto Qflentlltton, coon1!natQS of il«h comgr, d1mo~tons. and o:inQn.,ctjonma:.Qfl;Jl~
• fQ,r -.1.1tiinl1'1~. Fl"V'pleln lh~ ~ll"mtiontttoroufllly
.. For ~x~Jigstruclu'1$1 Lhtxm,ll)tilr E!1pLil die ,ef8,n r(l1 no1frtl(J 11w FAA (e.g. c.onecr~rr.'i1no H:!001d ,.x p1PYinussh•lf,!;!k )
f"1•oc;i Ill(» lnrormadon wtU1 ltw FAA doos not ""11ovo lhi' sponso1 ot ltli con,:;tructkm ijr~lhm:nltln trom complying wltti ami othor
loQQm1 r;.t~II"' or k)c;,:,1 nJes or rcgolatlon~. If YQU ~ mt w~ wh,)l ,...lt]i;ir nll9'i o, rom.it11llom; nQply ~ Yol.6" l>NpOWll. o•mtncrt
IQC:el/ .. tef.9 !')1/l"(lh')l'l'"'i-pnd l(lnln.9 aolhorltlA$,
""• ...... IINooolU .. w..~ ..... ,.....,._ ,. .. ~.1 ..... , .... ,---.i, ...... -, .. ~. ---a""' ..... ,. I• ,.,...,,.,Ml ............ h.-•l•!lu ......... ,.,1o .. ,. u--.. u, 111i..1 ... ~ 1w..-.~----Nlh•
,-... -... .i111,,.~-\ft~-~1..t.,, ... 1,illi.e .... '-""'"••~i-clt••lllWIC ..... i11N""~-.fl•ctJIH_l ... ~1fl,11i1111t.,_ ...... u ... i.na-ooo1., .. ,._,_ ......... 11 .... .,.,_ .. . • ..,...,.dt•lnt;i....,_._Olfii_,,•P•--,•l<Yllf191,_,_1•••••--.-•--•11 ... auJl .. <I01•--.. .. ...,,.~_,d,...,._,.,,...,."""--.•~•n••--11t•,_,-.,_...,,;-,1,>,._""'
"-'O-HC~UO)flol'l...,oliri:111M00,,1r,,lfto01ll!O,:,!o••~~C-fu(I.O,,;,t.n ... 0~11111 ........ 1ft•-t!ou-,1, ....... cr.tr1ru-,1:<m,1i,,naco1,t:1.,,o .. -.. 1ho,l!.1lllldl0-CO-..C,,O,,O,
.1 ............... ~10, ,nt"I ...,.C~"'-dtlfltl i.on0,_,..,. ... <Ol'l;llu b<lrl•ft-...... ,v __ , ... ~ .... ~~'-1,;,..•oll<f9"1Wt00, lo,,:1;,jl .. ....__.~-"'°""'1111h•Qnllnto u,,.. ... -(oa.<1.lo,tlt;.tr,~~1; .. ,
r.otr,l,Mri4ftM_,,..,.ll'l<O"-JQl(l1 loll!-,,,_...,-,14"1Wo,1>, 1'.t1'11f•1\:I
NSN OOS2-00.0t2.()(ll).I
A-5
Cont.
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-7- Responses to Comments
~:~~itrit~ir~~=~i:.!]~~~~r:=!=~~:i~::rQ~:=~-~~l~~~~~-rif~~~~,:::' L'Of-.a llolllllll::ajJll~~-J,Q!~ ... ~...,.-,.:411r\,omt111iM\,C--•~i,,.-t-pltnl'UU~41t,Hll\ .... (l'l,.,_t,t<y•(l---lofflnto1~1Wj...,_o,1~-i,l'~lo:,,---
P,w!NTV111,wPn.<OF.1Tf,,J.afew,, ~!,¾'PM'...:f~,6,toZJ'liJ./Joop ~'C\V~IOl'IDat~ D ~aa)29
~ Failure To Provide All Requf!~ted lnformstion May DeJsy Proceuin,a ofYoutNot~ I fOR f AA USE ONLY
I ,l_..,JiU)'-
v1 l)otNttflt__,•oi1 Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration fl!OCl'41••om•~ltwn
1' . .SPOMOr (p&lOO/?. co-rr,~;. 6~ ptop.o,;,ng ftlts t)Ctl:Jrt) . " 9, Lltlh.1C1e~ ~In .of ----------------..
Nam~ 10. Longltl.td.e: ------------
Mdt'IH.S 11. P,lum: O «,i.,,13 O tML171 O o,,,,-
12. Nearest; Otv it&. ---
Ol~ ~hte Lio. --13. Nearest Public-use{~ p,11/n(~,..J Cf M~1h1ryA11nt1Il 'lr Ht!l,pMf
io1opf'lono ,=ax:
14. Distance from 113, ro Srruru,re
2. Sponsor·~ Repre1nntatlve (rf olf~r /h8n #t) 15_ Olrec;Uon from •13. IIISlnl.lU!":
i\nn 01 16. SUei Elevetlon (AMSL); ____ ff
Nt1r11il 17, iotal Stn.ictun Height (AG'-): ___ fl
IWi!J~~li 18, Olfenll Height {f16 + ,,n (AMSL):
___ ft
19. Pre-Vlous FAA Aerooautlc.al study Number ~I lf)nti,:~J: C1tV Elalo z,o --a. T¥1'(lnon~ ?av
3. NDti.11.e: or: 0 N~W'Cofl~rutnon D A..if!!clbOfl 0 _...,
20. Dli!lcripUort or Loeatfoh: (4111111!11 .,(J,..r::NS 7,S1nff4Jft1Qi-'M1r.1r•fk ,ifap~-'tfJit,
prea:e &1"e ffl(l,?,ed :an.1 a,,,y r,;m~ ,!IJ(Vt!',fj
4. Duration: Qt-ie1m,,.,r--•il Q fl't11p,;ir,.,,y( _u.-,ulht _4,,~)
Q. Work Sct,~dUle: Qgrr\n_lr'lg ""
I, Type: D Amann~ JrM'e1
01-a.•11!11U Ov-r11tP.t l~11I. D °'"' OtW~I\!)
□°'•"
0 l'"""rllnc
7, M:u1dng/Palnt!n;i1ind/or Lighting Prererr-t-d: □ Rtd LJ9h1l> .itll! P•m1t 0 ou•-R~ M1ct~at.1N1nl'1Wlltil1'f
□ 'Nlte-Medli.lr'n lnJt!!ru>N D Ouf#-R~rt,vidtt.rl!IUl!!n5.,ty
□ WI!~ I H8'1 trcr.n.rty QOtfll"r
8. FCC Antenna structure Reglstrauon Number (d tlJJp/lCDl>le)
21. Complwt• 0Heriptie>n of Propo11-I; FreQuency/Power ikWl
Nobel!" tS rtquirtd by 14 Co* ofFt-dttal Rl!gulattons, part n pursua,it I049U.S C., Stctton447I8. ~r;ons~ krlowngt)' and wllnofyv1cfalic thic not>eic
rtqUrtmtt1itsof pan 77 att subjiE-ctto a ci.,,...I penalty 0, $1,000 pie, day until tM noti~ is rttt:Ned, pi,suant to 49 USC .• Stt:tl0n46301(a)
I herNw citrti"" thU all or llhe 1-bove suItem•nts m1-01>w m• ar• tru•, com pl&<•. an4 corritet ito ttl• bKt ormy knowl•C19•. In adclltlon, I a9rN to mm a.nclfor llgnt the
structure In ucordance with estilbllsh.cl marking & lighting standards u n•cnurw. .... I TYJvd (11 Pwir11(1-d '4,ttn(t .,. TIUU<Jf Pf!lt(ln Fi~ng Notitlt l"Si9n;tt\11e
FAAforTTI 7400..1 <O'J2(1)SupetSe(f,&, PrtlVIOu, Ed1bon NSN; 0052--00-0 12-0009
A-5
Cont.
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-8- Responses to Comments
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-9- Responses to Comments
Response to Comment Letter A
County of San Diego
Cameron Humphres, Director of Airports
July 28, 2020
A-1 This comment is introductory in nature and provides background information on the McClellan-
Palomar Airport, as well as the County of San Diego’s (County’s) role in its maintenance. This comment
does not raise an environmental issue or address the adequacy of the MND and no further response
is required.
A-2 This comment also provides an accurate summary of the project description. This comment does not
raise an environmental issue or address the adequacy of the MND and no further response is required.
A-3 This comment addresses overflight notification and noise with respect to the McClellan-Palomar
Airport and its relation to the project. The project’s relation to the McClellan-Palomar Airport is
discussed in Sections IX, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, and XII, Noise, of the Draft MND. As
discussed in these sections of the Draft MND, the project site is located approximately 0.58 miles from
the McClellan-Palomar Airport and the northern tip of the site is located within the 65 dBA CNEL
contour (levels within this contour range from 61 to 65 dBA CNEL); no structures are located within
the 65 dBA CNEL contour. The majority of the proposed structures would be located in the 60 dBA
CNEL contour. The southern approximately one-third of the site and structures would be located in
the 55 dBA CNEL contour. The Draft MND includes mitigation measure NOI-2, which has been revised
in response to this comment, as follows:
Elevated Noise Environment Disclaimer
Prior to sale, lease or rental of any residential structure or portion thereof located in the Airport
Influence Area (AIA), the applicant/owner shall provide prospective buyers and future occupants
with the following notice:
This property is currently located in an urban area that periodically and regularly experiences
elevated noise levels. Potential sources of this noise may be automobile traffic, flying aircraft,
industrial/commercial uses, and general human activity in an urban environment. The property
is subject to aircraft overflight, including sight and sound of aircraft operating from McClellan-
Palomar Airport. You may wish to consider what noise level annoyances, if any, are associated
with the property before you complete your purchase and/or rental agreement, and determine
whether they are acceptable to you.
Therefore, the Final MND and administrative record adequately describes the project’s relation to the
McClellan-Palomar Airport, airport noise levels, and requires a formal notice of airport noise to
potential residents in the form of mitigation measure NOI-2. These revisions to the Draft MND are
presented in strikeout/underline format. The City will continue coordination with the San Diego County
Regional Airport Authority as necessary for the development of the project.
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-10- Responses to Comments
A-4 This comment requests the filing of form 7460-1 with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), in
accordance with Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 77.9. The City and project applicant
will complete necessary documentation with respect to FAA requirements. On September 17, 2020,
the FAA issued a series of determinations stating that the temporary use of a crane during
construction and the permanent buildings on site would not result in a hazard to air navigation. This
comment does not raise an environmental issue or address the adequacy of the MND and no further
response is required.
A-5 This comment concludes the letter and also includes form 7460-1 referenced in Comment A-3. This
comment does not raise an environmental issue or address the adequacy of the MND and no further
response is required.
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-11- Responses to Comments
Comment Letter 8
Rincon Band of Luisefi.o Indians
CULTURAL RESOURCES DEPARTMENT
On< Government C~nt<r Lane I Valky ~--.enter CA 9:::08'.:
(76ll) 749-1051 fax-(760)749-119()1 1-n"""'1-n=g<W
July 15. 2020
Sttn1 via email lo: Clift:Joncsftfeurlsbadca.gov
City QfC,irlsbad
Co;nnmnily Dcvelopme111
Cliff Jones
Senior Planner
1635 Faracfay Awnue
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Re: West Oaks; GPAlo-0-t/ZC 16-03/LPA 16-04/LFMP 87-0S(F)/PUD 2018-0004/SDP 16-20/CDP 16-
31/SUP 2017-000SIHMP 16-04/MS 2018-0005 (DEV13018)
Dear Mr. Jones,
TI,is lcucr is written on behalf of tl,c Rincon Band of Luiscno [ndians ("Rincon Band" or "Band'), a fodcrally
recognized Indian Tribe and sovereign government. Tiiank you for providing us with tl1e Notice oflnlent lo Adopt
a l\1itigatcd Negative Declaration (MND) for the above refcrcneed project. The identified location is within the
Tcmtory oft he Luisciio people, and is also within Rincon's spc-cilic area of Historic interest.
l11c B..ind has reviewed the mitigation measures (w{M') provided in the 1vfND. TI1c Iv{ND is currently not inclusive
of the Rincon Band nnd we kindly ask that the longuage will be modified. We concur witl, the lnnguage witl1 the
following revisions (underlines are additions: strikeouts are deletions):
CUL-2 which states that ''Prior to the commencement of any ground disltlrbing acli,1ities, the prq;ect dereloper
shall enter mto a Pre-E.rcaw,tion Agreement. othenvise known /lS a Tribal Cultural Resources Treatment and Tribal
Monitoring Agreement, with the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians. Rincon Band o(L11iseilo Indians. or other
Luiseilo tribe··.
CUL-7 states tliat "If a significant tribal c11lniral resource(s) and/or unique arclweological resource(s) are
discovered during ground disturbing acti1>ilies for this pro;eci. the San Lr,is Rey Band of Mission Indians and
Rincon Band o(Lu;seno Indians shall be notified and consulted regarding tire respectful and dignified treatment of
those resources. Pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 21083.2(b) al'Oidance is the preferred
method of preser1>a/ion for archaeological and tribal ctlilllral resa11rces. If however. the Applicant is able to
demonstrate that amidance of a significant ancUor unique cultural resource is infeasible and a data recowry plan,
is authorized by the City of Carlsbad /lS the lead agency, the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians and Rincon
Band o(Luiseilo Indians shall be consulted regarding the drafting and finali=alion of any such recovery plan".
Bo Mazzetti
O.ainn111
Tislunall Tumer
ViuChaa-
Laurie E. Gonzalez
C()Wlcil!-.-Icmber
Alfonso Kolb, Sr.
Council Monbtr
John Constantino
Council Mcmt,.cr
B-2
8-3
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-12- Responses to Comments
CUL-1,l states that "'No tes.nng, in.wstw vr non-inausiva, sha,1/ be permil!ed on any tecoveri,d tribal cultural
resources wtthozd thq wfttten permission ofth, llil} Luis REy Ea11doflvt!ssion Indians and Rincon Band o(Luiseno
Indians",
The Rincon Band reserves its right to conti,nueto fully participate in the.environment-al n,mewHrooess and to remew
and submit additional in formatton during the public review prnc,~_ss. rf yoµ have additional questions or concerns.
please do not hesitate lP contact our office at yo,ir conveni~ace at F6D) 297-2615 or via electronic ma(! at
cmadrigal@rincon-nsn,gov.
We look forwad to woflcing together to protect and preserve our cultural as,ets,
Sineerely,
I -,\ ~
Cheryl Madrigal
Tribal Historic Preservation Officer
Cultural Resotirces Manager
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-13- Responses to Comments
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-14- Responses to Comments
Response to Comment Letter B
Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians
Cheryl Madrigal, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer
July 15, 2020
B-1 This comment is introductory in nature and provides background information on the Rincon Band of
Luiseño Indians (Rincon Band). This comment does not raise an environmental issue or address the
adequacy of the MND and no further response is required.
B-2 This comment provides a suggested revision to mitigation measure CUL-2. In response to this
comment, mitigation measure CUL-2 has been revised to include other Traditionally and Culturally
Affiliated Luiseño tribes (TCA Tribes). These revisions to the Draft MND are presented in
strikeout/underline format.
B-3 This comment provides a suggested revision to mitigation measure CUL-7. In response to this
comment, mitigation measure CUL-7 has been revised to include other TCA Tribes. These revisions to
the Draft MND are presented in strikeout/underline format.
B-4 This comment provides a suggested revision to mitigation measure CUL-11. In response to this
comment, mitigation measure CUL-11 has been revised to include consulting tribe. These revisions to
the Draft MND are presented in strikeout/underline format.
B-5 This comment concludes the letter. This comment does not raise an environmental issue or address
the adequacy of the MND and no further response is required.
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-15- Responses to Comments
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-16- Responses to Comments
Comment Letter C
SDG,. ....,f
A ~ Sempra Energy utility
August 4, 2020
Eric Craig
Land Management Representative
land Services
8690 Balboa Ave, CPA0l
San Diego, CA 92123
Tel: 619.676.0119
email: ecraig@sdge.com
SUBJECT: SDG&E Comments for West Oaks Project Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration
Mr. Cliff Jones,
The proposed West Oaks residential project would encroach upon and encumber portions of an existing
SDG&E electrical transmission easement. The project would also quitclaim all or portions of an SDG&E
electrical distribution easement. Pursuant to Section 851 of the California Public Utilities Code ICPUC), the
proposed encroachment in the electrical transmission easement, and quitclaim of the existing distribution
easement requires approval from the California Public Utilities Commission (the Commission). In
considering the proposed encroachments and quitclaim, the Commission shall not act as the lead agency.
Therefore, it is important that the project CEQA document describes and analyzes the proposed actions
related to the SDG&E easements, and that it describes the requirement for Commission approval.
The encroachment upon the transmission easement is described on page 3 of the draft MNO. Please
revised the MND to address the quitclaim of the distribution easement as well as the requirement for
Commission approval of both the encroachment and quitclaim. Lastly, the description of existing SDG&E
facilities on page 3 mentions 128-kilovolt transmission lines. This is an error. The line voltage is 138-
kilovolts. Please correct the error.
Respectfully
Land Management Representative
C-1
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-17- Responses to Comments
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-18- Responses to Comments
Response to Comment Letter C
San Diego Gas & Electric
Eric Craig, Land Management Representative
August 4, 2020
C-1 This comment provides information on project actions related San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E)
facilities and associated approvals from the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC). It is
understood that the CPUC is not the lead agency under CEQA for the proposed project, and that CPUC
approvals are outside the scope of this environmental document and proposed project. Further, as
no structures are proposed within the SDG&E easement, it is not anticipated that any quitclaim
associated with the SDG&E easement will be required. Should CPUC approval be required for the
project in the future, the Final MND adequately describes and analyzes the associated actions related
to the SDG&E easement. Page 3 of the Project Description and Section XIX of the Draft MND have
been revised to clarify the proposed actions related to SDG&E facilities, as shown in the following
excerpt from Page 3 of the MND:
Existing overhead utility lines owned and operated by SDG&E and the associated 100-foot-wide
easement traverse a portion of the project site. These include a high voltage 128138-kilovolt (kV)
and a 69 kV overhead electrical transmission lines. SDG&E has access to these facilities via West
Oaks Way, an existing paved roadway. The project would require encroachment into
improvements within the existing SDG&E easement during construction and for various passive
uses including that primarily include project driveways and associated, parking areas, sidewalks
and common areas, landscaping, trash enclosure, fire hydrants, and underground utilities, as
shown on Figure 6. The total area of passive use encroachment would amount to approximately
121,900 feet. The existing street lights (approximately 25 feet in height) within the SDG&E
easement would be removed and replaced with new street lights that would be a maximum of 12
feet in height. These passive uses are similar to what exists today and no structures are proposed
within the SDG&E easement. All proposed landscape plantings would be in compliance with
SDG&E’s acceptable species list. The proposed on site driveways and parking areas would provide
SDG&E additional staging areas for routine maintenance of the transmission facilities.
Construction and operation of the project would not alter or affect the ongoing operations of the
existing overhead transmission lines or SDG&E’s easement through the project site. SDG&E would
maintain full access to their easement during construction and operation of the project.
These revisions have been made in conjunction with Comment C-2, below. These revisions to the Draft
MND are presented in strikeout/underline format.
C-2 This comment provides a series of requested revisions related to the description of SDG&E facilities
in the MND. Revisions regarding the line voltage have been made to the MND as requested, per
Response to Comment C-1. As discussed in Response to Comment C-1 because no structures are
proposed within the SDG&E easement, it is not anticipated that any quitclaim associated with the SDG&E
easement will be required. Please also refer to Response to Comment C-1 regarding CPUC approvals.
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-19- Responses to Comments
Comment Letter D
From: Howard Krausz <hkrauszmd@gma1l.com>
Sent: Tuesday, August 4, 2020 9:50 PM
To: Cliff Jones <CliffJone.s@carlsbadca.gov:>
subject: Subject: Comments on Draft MND for West Oaks ProJect
Dear Mr. Jones:
The following comments are submitted on beha ~ of North County Advocates. Plea.e reply to !hos email to confirm
timely receipt.
The draft MND for the West Oaks project ha, failed to adequately evaluatecomplionce w~h the Growth Managemem
Plan performance standards for park.sand open space.
Changing the land use designation from Planned Industrial to Residential-Medium Density-Multifamily changes the
calculation for these performance standards by increasing the number of residents.
The performance standard for parks is based on 3 acres of parkland per quadrant per 1,000 residents. Please specifically
include this calculation with the proposed land use change,
The open space performance standard also requires 15% open space in each LFMZ not including environmentally
constrained lands. The Annual Open Space Status Report for Fiscal Year 2018/2019 says that LFMZ 5, where the project
is located, has 24.5% open space which would appear to meet the standard. However 483.2 of the acres counted are
identified as 11Preservation of Natural Resources" All or at least most of those acres are therefore environmentalty
constrained and do not qualify toward meeting the open space performance standard. Removing those acres from the
count leaves only 15.6 acres of open space. To calculate the percentage, first subtract the 483.2 acres from the total of
2440 acres in LFMZ S giving 1956.8 unconstrained acres. Then 15.6/1956.8 equals 8% open space. That is far below the
requirement of 15% open space.
The discussion in the draft MNO concludes that because there is no increase in development intensity it is in
compliance. That is not the standard specified in the GMP for open space compliance. Please specifically identify the
acres that are counted toward meeting the performance standard, removing all such acres that are environmentally
constrained.
The MND has faiJed to demonstrate compliance with the GMP performance standar~ resultin2 in a potential adverse
impact that has not been mitigated.
Howard Krausz, President
North County Advocates
CAUT1ON: Do not open attachmenrs or cltck on finks unless you recognize the sender and know the
content ,s safe
I D-1
D-2
D-3
I D-5
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-20- Responses to Comments
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-21- Responses to Comments
Response to Comment Letter D
North County Advocates
Howard Krausz, President
August 4, 2020
D-1 This comment is introductory in nature. This comment does not raise an environmental issue or
address the adequacy of the MND and no further response is required.
D-2 This comment states that the Draft MND did not adequately evaluate compliance with Growth
Management Plan (GMP) performance standards for parks and open space with respect to changing
the land use designation of the project site. This comment is addressed in Response to Comment D-
3.
This comment also requests that the performances standard for parks be calculated for the project.
As stated in Section XIV, Population and Housing, the project would generate approximately 492 new
residents. Using the parks performance standard of 3 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents, the
project would result in a requirement of approximately 1.48 acres of parkland.
Park demand and requirements are addressed in Section XV, Public Services, of the Draft MND. Park
facilities are addressed on a Park District basis. There are four park districts which correspond to the
four quadrants of the city. Zone 5 is located in all four Park Districts. Although the demand for park
facilities within the Southwest Quadrant exceed the inventory of existing park acreage, the quadrant
is not out of compliance with the performance standard because the time frame for the construction
of additional park facilities would be achieved prior to buildout. It is assumed that Veteran’s Memorial
Park (91.5 acres, with 22.9 acres applied to each Quadrant) would be constructed within the
timeframe specified in the performance standard and there would be a surplus of 14.5 acres.
Therefore, the Southwest Quadrant conforms to the adopted Performance Standard through build
out. Additionally, the project is required to appropriate fees for the potential future expansion of park
and recreational facilities. Payment of fees and the completion of Veteran’s Memorial Park would
meet and exceed the park requirements of the project. Refer also to the Fiscal Year 2017-2018 Growth
Management Plan Monitoring Report1.
D-3 This comment states that Local Facility Management Zone (LMFZ) 5, where the project is located, does
not meet the requirement of 15 percent open space. The comment’s reliance on the requirement that
15 percent of “non-environmentally constrained open space” be preserved is misplaced. This is
because, at the time the performance standard to ensure adequate open space was established as
“[f]ifteen percent of the total land area in the zone exclusive of environmentally constrained
nondevelopable land,” LFMZ 5 was recognized as being “already developed or meet[ing] or
exceed[ing] the requirement,” and thus exempt from further detailing in a local plan that adequate
1 City of Carlsbad Fiscal Year 2017-2018 Growth Management Plan Monitoring Report, July 1, 2017 through June 30, 2018.
https://cityadmin.carlsbadca.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=35807.
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-22- Responses to Comments
open space would be provided. Refer to Citywide Facilities Management Plan as amended August
2017, pp. 42-432.
The project does not reduce open space within LFMZ 5. As stated in Section XI, Land Use and Planning,
of the Draft MND, “[t]he portions of the site that are currently zoned and have a land use designation
of Open Space will remain as open space under the proposed project.” Because the project will not
convert open space to another use, the project will have no impact on the existing determination that
open space requirements within LFMZ 5 will be met.
D-4 This comment states that the Draft MND does not rely on the standard specified in the GMP for open
space compliance. Please refer to Response to Comment D-3 regarding the open space performance
for LFMZ 5. No revisions to the Draft MND are necessary.
D-5 This comment states that the Draft MND has not demonstrated compliance with GMP performance
standards and may result in a potential adverse impact. Please refer to Responses to Comments D-2
and D-3. No revisions to the Draft MND are necessary.
2 City of Carlsbad Growth Management Program, Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan.
https://www.carlsbadca.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=24067.
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-23- Responses to Comments
Comment Letter E
From; Diqne Nygaard <dnygaard3@gmail.,om>
Sent: Wednesday, ,August 5, 2020 10:02 PM
To: Cliff Jone> <Cliff.Jones@carlsbadca.ge11>
Subject: Comments □n Drah MND f□r West Oaks Project
Mr.Jones
The followlngcomments are submitted·on behalf of Preserve Calavera.
Biological Resources
-clarify impacts on willdl~e movement
The bridge is proposed to provide for improved wildlife movement through this area. This is already a constrained part
of the wildlife movement corridor. Please provide further details about the potential project impacts on wildlife
movements, particularly discussing the findings of the City of earls bad Wildl~e Movement Analysis Final Report March
31, 2015 and any subsequent studies related to this area,
-Maintenance of upland habitat by the HOA
THe HMP and annual reports continue to identify problems with the maintenance of natural lands by HOAs. These
lands have not been managed to the standards specified in the HMP and therefor their contribution to reeional
conservation is less than what it is assumed to be. Standards for such maintenance by the HOA need to be specrfied-
with a monitoring and enforcement mechanism that ensures this level of management continues in perpetuity.
Green house Gasses
-efficiency metric is not achieved fort he life of the project
The calculations show that at the time of occupancy the project wtll meet the performance metric of MT
CO2/capita. However for most of the life of the project it will exceed those performance standards. for the city of
Carlsbad to meet its community wide GHG emission reductions as required by the CAP and state law emissions will need
to be dramatically reduced in future years. To be consistent with these requirements new development should meet
the efficiency metric fort he mid point of its life-not just during the year it is built. Failure to achieve that performance
standard results in GHG impacts that have not been mitigated.
Land Use
-The MND has not addressed compliance with the GMP performance standard for parks-please add.
-The MNO has not adequately evaluated compliance with the GMP performance standard for open space.
The discussion fails to provide any of the calculations required to demonstrate that LFMZ 5 complies with the
requirement for 15%open space, excluding environmentally constrained lands. Please provide further details that
demonstrate compliance with this requirement.
Transportation
-VMT analysis should be based on what was adopted, not earlier draft
Thank you for property including analysis of VMT as is now required. However we believe this should be updated to
reflect the final ordinance as approved by the City Council rather than the earlier draft.
-TOM plan requirements
There appears to be some inconsistency in the description of GM P performance requirements and what is discussed
under tran.sportation related to the TOM plan. Under the GM P discussion it identifies the roadway segment that fails to
meet periormance standards and proposes several potential responses to that by the City Council which could include
exemption. The future City Council action could include a whole range of potential actions to mitigate for this roadway
failure-which cannot be known at this time and therefor cannot be adequately evaluated for their potential
environmental impacts.
E-1
E-3
E-4
E-6
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-24- Responses to Comments
Furthermore requiring a future TOM plan does not demonstrate that the plan provides mitigation for the potential
impacts. The plan should be included with the MND with the calculat ions for the GHG reduc-tk>n for each proposed
action.
-parking does not comply with General Pl,an policies and TOM
The General Plan has a number of policies related to parking-emphasizing the importance of "right-sizing"
parking. Providing excess parking, particularly when rt is perceived as "free" incentivizes auto use over other fO(ms of
transportation, The project proposes parking in excess of the minimum required, in an area that already has a roadway
failure and needs to be reducing auto travel. Please add further explanation aOOut how providing excess parking is:
"right--sizlng" parking and not lncentovizing more auto use, thereby compromising the future TOM effo11s.
Thank you for considering these comments.
Please reply to confirm timely receipt.
D1sr1e NHaa1d
On behalf of Preserve Cala\/era
CAUnON: Do not opell attachments CJ(" cl/ck 011 links unless you recogmze the sender and /mow the
content 1s safe
E-8
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-25- Responses to Comments
Response to Comment Letter E
Preserve Calavera
Diane Nygaard
August 5, 2020
E-1 The comment requests clarification of impacts on wildlife movement relative to the bridge proposed
by the project.
As background, the Project Description of the Draft MND explains that, at the west end of the
property, the project would include an emergency access road from Palomar Airport Road that would not
be regularly used by vehicles. This emergency access would include a bridge to allow for continued wildlife
movement within Encinas Creek.
The Draft MND, Section XI, Biological Resources, discusses that the project occurs within a potential area
for wildlife movement within Encinas Creek along the north side of the property. The proposed bridge
crossing would not reduce wildlife movement through the area since it will provide for a wide and open
area within which wildlife may move. The total span of the bridge, from the top of each abutment, is 60
feet. The conceptual bridge design provides an openness ratio of approximately 2.0. This calculation is
based on the width of the bridge span (approximately 40 feet (12.2 meters) across natural grade), the
height of the bridge (approximately 10 feet (three meters)), and total length of the bridge span
(approximately 60 feet (18.3 meters)). In order to determine the ability of wildlife species to use the
proposed bridge, the openness ratio for the bridge was calculated. Openness ratio describes the
characteristic of a passage structure such as a bridge related to the ability of an animal to see through
the structure and not feel confined while within the structure and thus a structure with appropriate
openness allows wildlife movement through the area. The openness ratio is based on the width times
the height divided by the length, in meters3. The minimum openness ratio for movement of large mammals
(i.e. species such as deer and elk, per California Department of Fish and Wildlife) is 1.0; the proposed bridge
provides double this ratio, and therefore is more than adequate to ensure wildlife movement and will
provide for the more common coyote and bobcat and even mule deer if they attempt to pass along Encinas
Creek. The MHCP recommends a minimum 1:1 length-to-width ratio, which the proposed design also
meets4. Additionally, the bridge will act as an emergency access point for the project site and would not
be regularly used by vehicles. As such, impacts to wildlife corridors and movement would be less than
significant.
The City of Carlsbad Wildlife Movement Analysis Final Report5 identifies key wildlife corridors and
linkages within the City and assesses their ability to facilitate wildlife movement. The portion of
Encinas Creek north of the project site where the bridge is proposed is not identified as a studied
wildlife corridor within this report. Instead, this area is noted as “Core to Core 2-4” which are
3 U.S. Forest Service. Wildlife Crossings Toolkit: Glossary of Terms.
https://www.fs.fed.us/wildlifecrossings/glossary/glossary-terms.php
4 SANDAG, Multiple Habitat Conservation Plan. Prepared by AMEC Earth and Environmental Inc. Conservation Biology
Institute. March 2003.
5 City of Carlsbad Wildlife Analysis Final Report. March 2015
https://sdmmp.com/upload/SDMMP_Repository/0/cv72xhqwsnrkfb8yzmj940p56d31gt.pdf.
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-26- Responses to Comments
secondary corridors between major habitat areas. It is further noted that the corridor evaluated in
the project’s MND is located at Palomar Airport Road, which is likely a barrier to movement for most
species. The drainage and riparian habitat within Encinas Creek itself also was not included in the
study, but does provide the opportunity for movement. However, as noted above, the proposed
bridge has been analyzed to be a functional bridge for wildlife movement.
In addition, the open space/preserve to the south of the project site is identified as “Core to Core 2c.”
This core area is composed of upland habitat on steep slopes, is located offsite and is not impacted
by the project. The project would implement a buffer to the open space/preserve area to the south.
Therefore, the proposed bridge does not affect the wildlife corridors studied in the referenced report.
Refer to Section XI, Biological Resources, of the Draft MND for further discussion.
E-2 This comment states concerns over homeowner association (HOA) management of preserve areas.
The preserve for the project, which consists of the area inclusive of the riparian habitat of Encinas
Creek plus the wetland buffer adjacent to it (refer to Figure 9 of the project’s Biological Resources
Technical Report), will not be managed by an HOA but rather will be managed by a qualified land
manager. A preserve management plan will be prepared that outlines the requirements of the
management and maintenance, in accordance with the Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan (HMP),
and there will be funding provided by an endowment for management in perpetuity. The plan shall
include the costs for managing and monitoring the areas in perpetuity and shall identify a
conservation entity or land manager, subject to approval by the city planner, to serve as preserve
manager and who possesses the necessary biological qualifications and experience to manage and
monitor the preserve areas in perpetuity. The plan shall commit the land manager to prepare a
permanent preserve management plan and annual work plans and shall give the city the right to
enforce the preparation and execution of the plans. The plan shall be approved by the city planner.
The upland slope buffers that are adjacent to the preserve but not within the preserve will be
managed by the HOA. Management of upland buffers by an HOA is acceptable per the Carlsbad HMP.
E-3 This comment addresses the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions analysis, which is discussed in Section
VIII of the Draft MND and the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Analysis for the West Oaks Project. The Draft
MND explains that, because the project's efficiency metric (2.76 MT CO2e per person per year) was
less than the threshold (4.26 MT CO2e per person per year) at buildout (calendar year 2022), the
project would not impede the City's efforts to meet the GHG reduction trajectory identified within
CARB's Scoping Plan. Furthermore, the project’s efficiency metric would be 2.18 MT CO2e per person
per year in 2030 which would be lower than the efficiency metric threshold of 2.73 MT CO2e per
person per year.
As discussed within the Draft MND, by analyzing the project against the quantitative efficiency metric
threshold specific to the project’s buildout year, this analysis concludes that the project would
demonstrate progress towards, and be on the trajectory towards helping the State comply with the
long-term GHG reduction targets. The project would not exceed the efficiency metric threshold for
2022 and thus would be consistent with the state’s targets within SB 32 for 2030. This is because the
2022 efficiency metric target was interpolated based on the targets the City needs to achieve in 2020
under AB 32 and in 2030 under SB 32. In other words, the 2022 efficiency metric target is keyed to
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-27- Responses to Comments
the operative statewide legislative targets for the reduction of GHG emissions. Developing
community-wide mass reduction goals using this approach also is consistent with CARB
recommendations to determine the targets "based on local emissions sectors" and to "develop
community-wide GHG emissions reduction goals necessary to reach 2030 and 2050 climate goals."6
The City analyzes project operational emissions at buildout since that time generally represents the
most conservative analysis of such emissions (meaning the highest emissions level). The reason
buildout is generally considered conservative is because statewide legislative, regulatory and policy
measures to reduce GHG emissions from the energy and mobile source sectors are anticipated to
further reduce the project’s emissions over time; i.e., project emissions in future calendar years are
anticipated to be reduced compared to emissions estimated for the buildout year. This analysis
approach is consistently applied by jurisdictions and air districts throughout the state, including City
of San Diego, County of San Diego, and San Diego Air Pollution Control District. No revisions to the
Draft MND are necessary.
E-4 This comment addresses GMP performance related to parks and open space. Please refer to the
Responses to Comment Letter D.
E-5 The comment relates to the purported need to update the vehicle miles traveled (VMT) analysis
presented in the Draft MND per adopted guidance. The thresholds of significance and screening
criteria used for the analysis presented in the Draft MND were subsequently approved by the City on
June 16 in substantially the same form as what was used to conduct the analysis presented in the
Draft MND. Additionally, the methodologies used by the project are consistent with those contained
in the final version of the VMT Analysis Guidelines. Accordingly, the analysis presented in the Draft
MND and circulated for public review does not need to be updated.
E-6 This comment states that there appears to be inconsistency in the description of the GMP
performance requirements and transportation requirements of the project’s TDM plan with respect
to a roadway segment that fails to meet performance standards in the project’s zone. The comment
addresses the Local Mobility Analysis (LMA) and therefore does not raise an environmental issue
under CEQA. It is therefore not addressed in these responses to comments. Where a non-
environmental inquiry was raised or suggestion made that may appropriately be addressed by staff,
questions and inquiries may be responded to separately.
E-7 This comment states that requiring a TDM plan does not demonstrate that the plan provides
mitigation for the potential impacts and that the plan should be included with the MND. TDM
measures utilized for VMT reduction are quantified in West Oaks TDM Strategies for VMT Reduction
Evaluation prepared by Fehr & Peers, which was made available with the Draft MND and is included
in the administrative record.
The TDM requirements associated with Mobility Element Policy 3-P.11 are evaluated and addressed in the LMA
and therefore do not raise an environmental issue under CEQA. It is therefore not addressed in these
6 The 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan Update. January 20. https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/2030sp_pp_final.pdf.
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-28- Responses to Comments
responses to comments. Where a non-environmental inquiry was raised or suggestion made that may
appropriately be addressed by staff, questions and inquiries may be responded to separately.
E-8 The comment states that the project’s proposed parking supply exceeds the minimum required and
will incentivize vehicle use by residents. The project's parking supply is consistent with the city code
requirements and does not incentivize vehicle use. Moreover, parking demand at the proposed
project would be dampened by the project’s TDM strategy of unbundling parking from rental costs
such that residents will need to pay for parking spots, thus resulting in a substantial disincentive to
vehicle use.
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-29- Responses to Comments
Comment Letter F
August 15, 2020
Cliff Jones
Senior Planner
Carlsbad .Pia nning Diliision
1635 Faraday Avenue
Car}S'bad, CA 92008
Re: West Oaks project Mitig<;1ted Negative Dedaration (MND), July 7, 2020-public comment
Mr. Jones:
Disclaimer: I am a member of the Carlsbad Traffic and Mobility Commission (T&MC). We have been
tasked with reviewing traffic-related guidelines that are used for development applications, but not with
the review of individual applications, so I am commenting here as an individual.
I am neutral on whether the West Oaks project gets built, but I believe several areas need to be
addressed in a revised environmental report, as summarized here and detailed below:
• Inconsistent with the Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines, no Scoping Agreement
was filed for this project, and traffic data older than two years was used.
• Details sufficient to reproduce the vehicle miles traveled (VMT) calculations by the traffic
consultant should be provided, the discordance between their calculations and those by
SAN DAG should be explained, and the statistical relevance of traffic analysis zone (TAZ) level
analysis should be established.
• Under the Local Mobility Analysis (LMA) portion of the project TIA, the Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) plan should be "Tier 3" (18 points minimum) rather than "Tier 2" (9 points
minimum).
• All sidewalks should be ADA compliant from the project to the two bus stops, and high-visibility
crosswalks shoU1ld be installed at the Palomar Airport Road (PAR)/Palomar Oaks Way (POW)
intersection, as conditions of approval, and a pedestrian route on the east side of POW should
be considered.
• Unwarranted level of service (LOS) points were assigned to transit.
• Full bus stop amenities should be provided as a condition of approval, including pads, covers,
lighting, trash cans, and bicycle parking at both bus stops.
• Additional TDM strategies should focus on subsidized ride-sharing and teleworking.
• A TOM monitoring program needs to be in place for any measures that are not included in the
VMT reduction plan monitoring.
• Free or highly subsidized transit passes should be offered to all residents to try to maximize
usage.
• Transportation-related VMT reductions are over-estimated and redundancy is under-estimated
for individual TOM strategies, including those related to affordable housing, pedestrian network
improvements, a bike-share program, and a car-share program,.
1
F-1
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-30- Responses to Comments
• The total transportation-related VMT reduction claimed by the project exceeds the global
maximum.
• The vast majority of the VMT reduction mitigation relies on unbundled parking and reducing
expected ownership by 40 vehicles, yet resident parking is being provided to accommodate
nearly t he full complement of vehicles expected with bundled parking.
• A back-up plan should be in place to address TOM and VMT should the unbundled parking
approach fail.
• Left turn queue length onto PAR is a concern.
No TIA Scoping Agreement or Scope of Work
Carlsbad's published TIA Guidelines' were created in April 2018 to comply with a March 2017
settlement agreement between the City and an environmental group.2 These guidelines indicate,
beginning in Section 3 (TIA Scoping Requirements), that "Prior to initiating a TIA, a scope of work shall be
submitted, reviewed, and approved by the City staff," and that "[a] Scoping Agreement with City of
Carlsbad shall be filed prior to initiating the Transportation Impact Analysis report." The execution of
such Scoping Agreements to guide TIA preparation and reporting is a good public practice used by many
cities.
In a 7/31/2020 response to my public records request for "Scoping agreement and scope of work for the
West Oaks project," the City responded that, "The West Oaks TIA was initiated prior to the release of
the City of Carlsbad Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines; therefore, no scope of work was
prepared."
Although I note that two intersection traffic counts were collected in November 2016, all of the
transportation impact analyses were done after the TIA Guidelines were published in April 2018. In fact,
the Local Mobility Analysis portion of the TIA explicitly states:
The t ransportation analyses for the Project were conducted in accordance with the City of
Carlsbad Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines.
In addition, the VMT portion of the TIA was not conducted until t he last few months, because Carlsbad's
VMT Analysis Guidelines did not go into effect until 7/1/2020 and were only available in draft form a few
months prior to t hat.
1 carlsbad TIA Guidelines (April 2018):
htt ps: //cityadmin .ca rlsba dca.gov /dvlcax/flleba n k /blobdloa d .a spx JB)obl □=22 758
2Carlsbad City Council Resolution No. 2017-044 (North County Advocates Settlement Atlreement, 3/14/2017):
http://edocs.carlsbadca.gov/HPRMWebDrawer/RecordHTMl/467762
2
F-1
(Cont.)
F-2
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-31- Responses to Comments
The requirement in the TIA Guidelines for forfl)al Scoping Agreements is being selectively ignored, and it
is not appropriate to make claims that the guidelines were not in effect as an excuse, when clearly they
were used far this project.
In addition, the 2016 traffic data should be considered "stale," given Section 3.4 of the TIA Guidelines:
The vehicle traffic data used In the TJA should generally not be n,ore than 2 years o)d ... lf recant
traffic data are not available, current counts must be made by the project applicant/consultant.
Please respond to the following:
• The TIA Guidelines were 11ot followed in thut no Scoping Agreement of Scope of Work was filed
and reviewed by the City, and data older than two years is included in the applfcation.
Discordance between SAN DAG and Fehr & Peers VMT calculations
In Section 2 of the ''West Oaks IDM Strategies for VMT Reduction Evaluation" Memorandum, it Is
stated:
Aocordlng to the SANDAG Series 13 model, the proposed Project is located fn an area that
generates 22.05 VMT /capita.
However, itis my understanding that the 22.0SVMT/oapita es!Jmate (for TrafficAnalysfsZone [TAZ]
1161) does not come directly from SANDAG. Rather, both that estimate and the Carlsbad average
VMT/capita to which ft is compared were calculated by the traffic consultant for this project (Fehr &
Peers) using their own post-modeling "scripts.''
SANOAG'ss.cr(pts result fn VMT/capita rates that tend to be nearly 20% lower than those calculated by
Fehr & Peers-even though they both use the same underlying SANDAG"Sertes 13 f2.012) Travel Demand
Model output.' For example, the SANO AG average VMT /capita for the entire City of Carlsbad is 18.90,
while it is 22..52 according to Fehr & Peers.
In addition, the Fehr & PeersVMTscreening maps contain the following disclaimer:
Note that the VMT ... presented here was developed by Fehr & Peers using a script to analyze
SAN DAG model outputs. SAN DAG applies their own script which may produce different results.
Please respo11d to the.following:
• Please explain why the Fehr & Peers VMT c:alculations are different (up to 2096 higher} than
rhe ones published by SANDAG, despire rhe fact thar they ore all allegedly based on rhe Series
13 {2012) Travel Demand Model.
'SAN DAG San Diego Region 5B743 VMT Maps: httos;//tlnyurl.com/y5ppgjgz
3
F-6
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-32- Responses to Comments
• Please provide the Fehr & Peers methods and scripts such that an independent analyst could
reproduce the VMT calculations.
Statistical relevance of TAZ
SANDAG splits Carlsbad up into 23 Census Tracts (CTs) with an average of about 6,600 residents each.
The Census Tracts are then sub-divided into 183 Traffic Analysis Zones TAZs.4 The West Oaks project site
is located in TAZ 884 (1,621 Carlsbad residents), which is located within Census Tract 221 (9,090
Carlsbad residents). However, for statistical reasons, SANDAG does not report mean VMT numbers for
regions smaller than Census Tracts, nor do the Cities of San Diego or Chula Vista.
Please respond to the following:
• Demonstrate the statistical validity of the mean VMT calculated for the project to justify
analysis at the TAZ, rather than CT, level.
TDM plan should be Tier 3
The LMA portion of the TIA suggests that the project is not required to meet the City requirements in its
TDM Program, because that program applies only to non-residential developments. While that may be
true, the LMA also acknowledges that the project is required to apply TDM and TSM measures pursuant
to Mobility Element Policy 3-P.11. While it is very disappointing that the City has not developed TDM
and TSM guidelines for non-residential projects in the five years since Policy 3-P .11 was adopted, or the
6-1/2 years since it was first proposed, the non-residential TDM Program is a logical starting point until
that happens.
The TDM Program applies citYWide, regardless of whether the projects/compariles are located near
streets that have been exempted from the Growth Management Plan (GMP) level of service (LOS)
performance standard. Residential projects like West Oaks, which are required to apply TOM and TSM as
a result of their traffic impacts on exempt streets, should, in fact, be subject to even higher standards
than the TDM Program. Every vehicle the project adds to an exempt facility during peak travel periods is
going to further exacerbate the already heavy congestion, which is a significant impact that the
developer is legally required under the TIAGuidel[nes, GMP, and General Plan to mitigate.
The MND states that the applicant agreed to a ner 2 mM Plan, which conslsts of Implementation of
TDM strategies totaling nine points, as follow s:
Designation of a Transportation Coordinator (2 points)
Promotion of one TDM event per year (1 point)
Distribution ofTDM flyer to new tenants (1 point)
• Bike racks (1 point)
4 SANDAG Transportation Forecast Information Center: https://tfic.sandag.org/
4
F-8
F-9
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-33- Responses to Comments
• Bench and trash ca n (1 point)
• Business center (2 points)
Sidewalks (1 point)
This TOM approach comes from Carlsbad's TOM Handbook. However, Table 2-1 iin the handbook
indicates that new developments that generate >275 ADT must implement a 'Tier 3" IDM plan, which
requires a total of 18 points, so nine additional points should be required through additional
infrastructure improvements and programmatic strategies for this project. Other than the business
center, the set of strategies listed above for the 'Tier 2" plan are unlikely to achieve a meaningful level
ofTDM.
It is unrealistic to believe that many residents will be walking or taking their bikes out on PAR and
adjacent streets as a substitute for regular vehicle trips, given the long distances to destinations,
topography challenges, and high speeds and traffic volumes. In addition, as detailed below, transit
service is almost non-existent in t he area. Therefore, other forms ofTDM should be emphasized, such as
subsidized ride-sharing and teleworking, for example by providing free Internet to all residents. In
addition, the TOM plan needs to include a monitoring program to track the success or failure of the
various strategies with the requirement that strategic changes be made, if necessary.
Please respond to the following:
• Why is the project only subject to a Tier 2, rather than a Tier 3, TDM plan?
• The project should achieve at least 18 TDM points under the LMA portion of the TIA and the
minimum VMT reduction under the VMT portion of the TIA (see below}.
• Additional TDM strategies should focus on subsidized ride-sharing and teleworking.
• A TDM monitoring program needs to be in place for any measures that are not included in the
VMT reduction plan monitoring.
Pedestrian LOS -ADA compliance on west side of POW
The MND indicates that the ramp on the southwest corner of the PAR/POW intersection is not ADA
compliant. In addition, it is unclear whether the width of the sidewalk along the west side of POW is
consistent with ADA and Carlsbad standards due to the bridge-like structure blocking a significant part of
it (see image-below).
5
F-10
(Cont.)
F-11
F-12
F-13
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-34- Responses to Comments
Please respond to the following:
• To achieve the required pedestrian lOS, please ensure that all sidewalks are ADA compliant all
the way from the project to the two bus stops as a condition of c,pproval.
Pedestrian access to transit (TDM/VMT) -high-visibility ,crosswalks
To enhance pedestrian access to the bus stops on PAR to help satisfy TDl\/1 and VMT reduction
requirements, high-visibility crosswalks should be installed at the PAR/POW intersection to promote
safety and comfort. However, none of these features seems to be listed under any sort of conditions of
approval.
Please respond to the following:
• High-visibility crosswalks should be installed at the PAR-POW injtersection as conditions of
approval to encourage use of transit in satisfaction of the requir;ed TDM and VMT reduction
measures.
Transit LOS
There are two bus stops in proximity to the project-one on the westbound side of PAR west of POW,
and the other on the eastbound side of PAR east of POW. The transit LOS worksheet in the project TIA
claims points for, "Headways of 1 hour between 6:30-8:30 am and 4-6 pm on weekdays" for both bus
stops, butthe headways are greater than one hour in both cases, and there are only three eastbound
and four westbound departures per day Monday through Friday, so no points are warranted.
Points are also claimed for, "Bus stop located within a block of commercial services." There is a hotel
and some employers in the general area, but the definitions of "within a block" and "commercial
services" are unclear, and it is unclear how these types of business are relevant to the project's transit
LOS obligations.
6
F-13
(Cont.)
F-14
I F-16
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-35- Responses to Comments
In addition, while the lack of a sidewalk on the east side of POW is not an issue for pedestrian LOS,
because the project does not extend to that side of the street, it must be considered for transit LOS, as
well as for TOM and VMT reduction measures. In defining the facilities to be included in the Study Area,
Section 3.2 of the TIA Guidelines state:
All pedestrian routes linking the project site to a transit line within the¼ mile walking distance
boundary.
It likely would be safer for pedestrians to cross to the east side of POW before reaching the intersection
with PAR en route to the eastbound PAR bus stop, suggesting that a sidewalk should be built on the east
side of POW. If that is not feasible, the high-visibility crosswalks at the PAR-POW intersection are even
more important to increase pedestrian comfort and safety.
Please respond to the following:
• Please review the points assigned for bus service headway and proximity to "commercial
services."
• Please explore the enhanced safety and comfort of a pedestrian route (sidewalk) on the east
side of POW for travel to the eastbound PAR bus stop.
Transit amenities (TDM/VMT)
The most significant barrier to transit ridership is the fact that the North County Transit District (NCTD)
routes that serve the two bus stops run only Monday through Friday, and there are only three
eastbound and four westbound departures per day with 1-1/2 hour headways. Ridership is currently
extremely low. The two bus stops in the project area average just one rider per day, and ridership is
similar throughout the PAR corridor-all of the bus stops average only zero to four riders per day.5 And
neither the City nor the project has any authority over the schedule.
Neither of the two bus stops in the project area is very inviting (see images below from Google Street
View, 2/2020). Both are on sidewalks with no setback pads or buffers from the high-volume, high-speed
street PAR, and the stop on the eastbound side is at the bottom of a slope. It should be obvious that the
proposed installation of benches at both stops, and a trash can at the eastbound stop, will not
meaningfully incentivize transit ridership, let alone contribute to a decision to forego vehicle ownership.
Outside of the ability to increase the frequency and downstream connectivity of the bus service, it
would seem reasonable to ensure that amenities at both bus stops should be maximized, including
wider pads, covers, benches, lighting, and bicycle racks to help satisfy the TOM and VMT reduction
requirements. In addition, free or highly subsidized transit passes should be provided.
5 Data obtained through Public Records Act Request to NCTD (2020-1410 PRR) for the pewiod 7/1/2018 through
6/30/2019).
7
F-17
F-19
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-36- Responses to Comments
8
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-37- Responses to Comments
Westbound PAR bus stop:
Eastbound PAR bus stop: F-21
9
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-38- Responses to Comments
Please respond to the following:
• Given the current transit ridership along PAR, is the addition of benches and a single trash can
at the two bus stops expected to meaningfully increase usage? How many of the daily trips by
residents of West Oaks are expected to be by bus?
• The project should fund full transit amenities as conditions of approval to satisfy its
requirements for TDM and VMT reduction, including pads, covers, lighting, trash cans, and
bicycle parking at both bus stops.
• Free or highly subsidized transit passes should be offered to all residents to try to maximize
usage.
TDM Strategy Effectiveness -Land Use/Location: Affordable Housing (LUT-6)
The affordable housing in the project should only reduce the project VMT/capita to the extent that it is
proportionally higher than the current affordable housing proportion in TAZ 1161. In other words, if the
TAZ currently has 10% affordable housing, which is already built into the 22.05 VMT/capita baseline
efficiency metric, and the project includes 22% affordable housing, then the reduction should be based
only on the 12% improvement-not the full 22%. Applying the CAPCOA factor of 4% would result in a
VMT reduction of 0.5% rather than 0.9%, in this example.
Further, as detailed above, transit quality is very poor in this area, so it is highly unlikely that even
residents in the affordable units will be compelled/able to use it asa substitute for driving.
Please respond to the following:
• If the current affordable housing proportion in TAZ 1161 is 0%, then the current VMT reduction
of o. 9% may be acceptable. otherwise, it should adjusted as described above.
• The affordable housing VMT reduction should be further reduced based on poor access to
quality transit.
TDM Strategy Effectiveness -Neighborhood/Site Enhancement: Pedestrian
Network Improvements (SDT-1)
The rest of TAZ 1161 presumably contains sidewalks on which people can walk, and that meet city
specifications. The creation of sidewalks in and around the project site that meet those same
specifications should not make it any more likely that project residents will walk relative to the current
residents of the TAZ that account for the current 22.05 VMT/capita.
10
F-22
F-23
IF-24
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-39- Responses to Comments
Please respond to the following:
• Unless the sidewalks in the remainder of TAZ 1161 are significantly deficient relative to those
to be built for the project, this reduction should not be used.
TDM Strategy Effectiveness -Neighborhood/Site Enhancement: Electric Bike-
Share Program (TRT-12/SDT-3)
This approach cites the CAPCOA Report's Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) strategy (SDT-3), which
assumes individual ownership of the vehicles (or a networked fleet of vehicles), such that t hey are
nearly always available for certain types of trips. However, the eight proposed shared electric bikes are
not NEVs, nor are they individually owned or networked. Scattering eight shared electric bikes around
the project at different charging sites does not seem like a reliable alternative mode of travel. How will
the residents know whether one of the bikes will be available at the time they need it? Given the
uncertainty of availability, residents certainly would not be able to forego a vehicle/parking space.
The CAPCOA Bike-Sharing strategy is also cited (TRT-12). However, this is not a bike-share program
either, where there are bike-sharing kiosks all over the area, from which bikes can be continuously
picked up and dropped off. If a resident wanted to take one of the bikes to work, it would have to stay at
t heir work location all day and not be available for anybody else to use.
The intent of this strategy in its current form appears to be more of a token measure that can be cited in
a list, as opposed to a meaningful attempt to reduce VMT.
Please respond to the following:
• The logistics of how the electronic bike sharing would work needs to be detailed, or this
reduction strategy should be eliminated, given the nearly meaningless effect it will have on
VMT.
• Perhaps a better program would be to provide free or subsidized electronic bikes with free
battery charging for exclusive use of individual residents who agree not own a first/second
vehicle or rent a first/second parking space.
TDM Strategy Effectiveness -Neighborhood/Site Enhancement: Car-Share
Program (TRT-9)
As stated in the MND and the CAPCOA Report, a car-share program is based on having a "fleet" of
vehicles to serve a membership. However, the project is proposing just one shared vehicle. It is very
unclear how that is going to effectively reduce VMT. If that one vehicle is available to any resident, it will
not be a reliable substitute for owning a car for any of them, and it will still generate the same VMT.
11
lF-24
(Cont.)
F-25
IF-26
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-40- Responses to Comments
And if the car-share is reserved for a carpool, it is unclear how that would be any different from a
carpool of an individually owned vehicle or the separate carpool strategy that is included as a separate
VMT reduction measure. And there is only one vehicle in this car-share program "fleet." This seems to
be another token measure that can be cited in a list, as opposed to a meaningful attempt to reduce
VMT.
Please respond to the following:
• The logistics of how the car-sharing would work needs to be detailed, or this reduction
strategy should be eliminated, given the nearly meaningless effect it will have on VMT.
• Is the shared car going to be available for any resident to use, or is someone going to be paid
to oner residents rides all day long? Perhaps a better program would be to provide an annual
budget for subsidized ride-sharing through external commercial services that actually have a
fleet of vehicles.
TOM Strategy Effectiveness -Commute Trip Reduction: Carpool and Vanpool
Support (TRT-3, TRT-11)
It is unclear how this program would work. It should also be noted that there is no guarantee that the
City of Carlsbad will ever provide carpool or vanpool resources through its TDM Plan.
Please respond to the following:
• The logistics of how the pooling would work needs to be detailed, or this VMT reduction
strategy should be eliminated. For example, will it rely on cars/vans privately owned by
residents or on commercial services? How will the Transportation Coordinator be involved?
• Perhaps a better program would be to provide on annual budget for subsidized ride-sharing
through external commercial services.
TOM Strategy Effectiveness -Parking Policy/Pricing: Unbundled Parking (POT-2)
Unbundled parking accounts for t he vast majority of the VMT reduction being proposed for this project
to make the traffic-related environmental impact less than significant. In addition, the claimed VMT
reduction of 10.2% is at the very high end of the 2.6% to 13.0% range suggested in the CAPCOA Report.
Therefore, this measure deserves the highest level of scrutiny and enforcement.
The "Car Ow nership by Unit Type" tables predict that the project's unbundling of parking at a rate of
$100 per space will reduce resident ownership from 315 cars down to 275 cars (a net reduction of 40
cars). However, the Parking Management Plan describes a total of 384 parking spaces with 306 spaces
designated for residents and 78 guest spaces.
I am skeptical that unbundled parking will be an effective VMT reduction strategy in this location. That
strategy relies heavily on access to viable alternatives. While some employment opportunities are
12
F-26
(Cont.)
F-27
F-28
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-41- Responses to Comments
relatively close, the project is a great distance from grocery stores, retail, entertainment, etc., which all
require travel on PAR and other arterials with challenging topology, so bicycle and pedestrian modes are
unlikely to be viable alternative, and bus service is also nearly non-existent.
That said, if the project is going to rely on this strategy, the only way to test t he effectiveness is to take it
seriously and not allow cumulative resident ownership above the 275 vehicle cap. Therefore, the
parking plan should be amended as follows:
Parking spaces designated for residents should be limited to the 275 claimed in the strategy, and
purchases of such spaces should be capped at 275. That is a net reductio11 of 31 resident spaces.
• Guest parking spaces should be reduced from 78 to 70 to match the resident space reduction to
encourage alternative modes of travel by visitors, such as transit, bicycle, or walking,
If the project finds that the rate of ownership is exceeding the predicted 1.4 cars per household
as leases are signed, the parking fee should be increased and/or other strategies should be
triggered to reduce car ownership.
• The 39 parking spaces eliminated from the plan should be converted to open space.
• A reduced fee for the first parking space for affordable units should be considered.
If the strategies fail to reduce car ownership and VMT as predicted by CAPCOA, or if the level of the
unbundled parking fee necessary to achieve the car ownership reduction makes the units too difficult to
lease, t here should be a back-up plan to achieve the necessary VMT reduction with other strategies.
On a side note, the 384 total parking spaces reported in the Parking Management Plan does not match
the 373 total parking spaces reported at various ot her points in the MND.
Please respond to the following:
• The parking plan should be changed to help ensure the success of the unbundled parking VMT
reduction measure, as detailed above: 275 resident space cap, 70 guest spaces, open space in
place of the extra 39 spaces, and explore a reduced fee for the first space for affordable units.
waivers should be obtained from any agencies that have higher parking space minimums to
conduct this VMT reduction experiment.
• The Transportation Coordinator should annually report the status of thfs measure (i.e.,
number and type of units rented and corresponding spdces purchased, as well as tomp/iante
with-not using guest or off-site spaces).
• A backup VMT reduction plan should be in place, if this experiment does not work.
• The number of parking spaces should be consistent throughout the MND and its appendices.
TDM Strategy Effectiveness -Redundancy calculation
A 10.2% VMT reduction is claimed for unbundled parking, and all of the other strategies collectively
provide a 4.8% VMT reduction, resulting in a total 15.0% VMT reduction. That 15.0% was reduced by
12.5% down to 14.4% using a "multiplicative formula" that allegedly accounts for the
13
tF-28
(Cont.)
F-29
F-30
! F-31
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-42- Responses to Comments
overlap/redundancy between the strategies. However, the reduced car ownership desired from
unbundled parking is already directly linked to affordable housing, and it is only enabled by the
availability of pedestrian facilities and shared and pooled modes of transportation (all of the other
strategies). Therefore, there is significantly more than 12.5% redundancy, and it is not evident that the
formula used to calculate the amount of redundancy is appropriate in this case.
Please respond to the following:
• The 12.5% adjustment does not fully account for the level of redundancy between the VMT
reduction measures.
TDM Strategy Effectiveness -Global Maximum Reduction
Chart 6-2 of the CAPCOA Report provides maximum transportation-based VMT reductions that can be
taken based on the type of development and the categories of the specific strategies. West Oaks is a
strictly residential, suburban project. It is not mixed-use, because it provides only residential
apartments. And it is not a "suburban center." It is in a low-density area that is a great distance from the
nearest grocery stores, retail, entertainment, etc., which all require t ravel on PAR and other arterials
with challenging topology. And, as stated above, bus service runs only Monday through Friday, and
there are only three eastbound and four westbound departures per day with 1-1/2 headways. And there
is no NEV network.
In this suburban setting, the cross-category maximum VMT reduction for the Land Use/Location,
Neighborhood/Site Enhancement, and Parking Policy/Pricing strategies is 10%. However, the project is
claiming a total VMT reduction of 13.0% for those categories (prior to the redundancy calculation). And
Chart 6-2 indicates that the Commute Trip Reduction (CTR) strategies assume a mixed use development,
and the project is not mixed use.
Therefore, the total VMT reduction that should be claimed for the proposed transportation-based
strategies is 10.0%--and only if the unbundled parking program is strictly enforced and successful. That is
consistent w ith many of the above critiques of the individual strategies and the redundancy calculation.
Please respond to the following:
• Given the above discussion, the maximum VMT reduction for transportation-based strategies
should be 10.0%.
• tf CTR strategies can be applied to this non-mixed-use project, then more aggressive CTR
projects may be necessary to achieve the additional 3.2% VMT reduction required under CEQA,
perhaps in the form of ongoing direct monetary subsidies for external ride-share programs,
transit passes, etc., as suggested above.
14
F-31
(Cont.)
F-32
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-43- Responses to Comments
Queue length in POW northbound left turn lane to PAR (LMA Section 7.4)
LMA Tables 7-1 through 7-3 show that the peak period vehicle queue length for northbound left turns
from POW onto PAR is predicted to exceed the maximum described in the TIA Guidelines immediately
upon project completion, and that it will exceed that maximum by 73% in the horizon year (2035).
It seems to be suggested that the vehicles can queue around the roundabout south of that intersection
without consequence. However, that could seemingly block progression of vehicles behind the left turn
queue or seeking to go around the roundabout in the other direction.
Perhaps more importantly, there is concern about the amount of time it will take for the vehicles
queued around the roundabout to make their leftturns onto PAR-potentially·causing longer delays on
that major roadway, which has already been exempted from the vehicle LOS standard due to its
presumed failure to meet the GMP congestion performance standard. In fact, Table 8-1 in the LMA
indicates that the project will induce an average additional delay of 2.5 seconds at the PAR/POW
intersection, and the extent to which that is a result of left turns from POW to PAR should be addressed.
Please respond to the following:
• Please address concerns about queuing around the roundabout (blocking progression of other
traffic) and potent1al delay of the PAR/POW intersect1on due to left turns.
Sincerely,
Steve Linke
Carlsbad, CA
15
F-33
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-44- Responses to Comments
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-45- Responses to Comments
Response to Comment Letter F
Steve Linke
August 6, 2020
F-1 This comment is introductory in nature and summarizes the comments found later in the letter. Refer
to Responses to Comments F-2 through F-33 below for detailed responses to each of the summarized
points raised in this comment.
F-2 This comment states that a Scoping Agreement should have been prepared as required in the City’s
current Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines. The comment addresses the LMA and
therefore does not raise an environmental issue under CEQA. It is therefore not addressed in these
responses to comments. Where a non-environmental inquiry was raised or suggestion made that may
appropriately be addressed by staff, questions and inquiries may be responded to separately.
F-3 This comment states that the requirement in the City’s TIA Guidelines for a formal Scoping Agreement
has been ignored. The comment addresses the LMA and therefore does not raise an environmental
issue under CEQA. It is therefore not addressed in these responses to comments. Where a non-
environmental inquiry was raised or suggestion made that may appropriately be addressed by staff,
questions and inquiries may be responded to separately.
F-4 This comment states that the traffic data used are considered “stale” per the City’s TIA Guidelines.
The comment addresses the LMA and therefore does not raise an environmental issue under CEQA.
It is therefore not addressed in these responses to comments. Where a non-environmental inquiry
was raised or suggestion made that may appropriately be addressed by staff, questions and inquiries
may be responded to separately.
F-5 This comment restates prior comments in this letter. Refer to Responses to Comments F-2 through F-
4.
F-6 The comment relates to observed differences between City of Carlsbad VMT screening maps prepared
by Fehr & Peers and SANDAG data and states that the SANDAG average for the City of Carlsbad is 18.9
VMT/Capita. The City is unaware of the data source/model data that produced the 18.9 value because
SANDAG has not published VMT/Capita city averages for its ABM model. However, SANDAG’s
VMT/Resident and VMT/Employee regional average data were provided as preliminary concept maps
and not as information for use in the preparation of CEQA documents. Based on conversations with
SANDAG and comparisons to the city’s results, SANDAG’s post processing does not appear to include
the internal to external and return trips. Since these trips were not included, SANDAG’s reported
regional VMT averages were lower than the city’s VMT averages, the latter of which were specifically
intended for use in the CEQA context.
F-7 The comment requests that the Fehr & Peers methods and scripts used to conduct the VMT
calculations be provided. The project analysis provided in the Draft MND and VMT Analysis was
performed using the City of Carlsbad maps developed as part of the City’s guidelines. Those maps are
based on the travel demand model maintained by SANDAG and the VMT methodology described in
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-46- Responses to Comments
the OPR Technical Advisory. For projects that generate less than 2,400 daily trips, as is the case for
the West Oaks project, the guidelines state that the VMT maps should be used to determine the
project VMT. The maps and the averages used as the basis of the significance threshold use the same
model output and post processing to develop VMT/capita; therefore, providing an appropriate
"apples to apples" comparison. The post-processed model output used to create the city VMT maps
is included in the project record. This comment does not raise an environmental issue regarding the
adequacy of the MND and no further response is required.
F-8 The comment relates to the statistical validity of the VMT/Capita for the project TAZ. The project’s
VMT analysis contained in the Draft MND was performed using the City of Carlsbad maps developed
as part of the City’s guidelines, which provide VMT/Capita data at the TAZ level.
SANDAG, in comparison, provides data at the Census Tract level (a geographic area different from and
generally larger than TAZs), although they do not provide documentation explaining their reasoning
behind this approach, and furthermore do not indicate that data at the TAZ level is not reliable. The
use of TAZ’s is a common geometry to report modeling outputs including traffic volumes, VMT, and
land use information, and SANDAG does commonly provide data at the TAZ level through their Service
Bureau work. SANDAG also publishes data at the master geographical reference area (MGRA)-level,
which is even smaller than the TAZs, through their Traffic Forecast Information Center.
Related to VMT calculations, the OPR Technical Advisory provides a specific example of a VMT map
for the City of San Jose, which uses both parcel-level geographies substantially smaller than TAZs and
Census Tracts. In preparing the City’s VMT analysis guidelines, City of Carlsbad staff explained that 23
Census Tracts did not provide enough granularity (i.e., detail) within the City to appropriately evaluate
project VMT. Therefore, the City, with Fehr & Peers’ concurrence, chose to use results at the TAZ level,
consistent with the OPR Technical Advisory and common modeling practices. It is further noted that
for TAZs that contained only a small amount of either residential development or employees, census
tract averages were used instead.
F-9 This comment provides the commenter’s opinion regarding the project’s TDM plan and the City’s
policy requirements. The comment addresses the LMA and therefore does not raise an environmental
issue under CEQA. It is therefore not addressed in these responses to comments. Where a non-
environmental inquiry was raised or suggestion made that may appropriately be addressed by staff,
questions and inquiries may be responded to separately.
F-10 This comment states that the project is required to implement a Tier 3 TDM plan, as opposed to the
Tier 2 TDM plan. =The comment addresses the LMA and therefore does not raise an environmental
issue under CEQA. It is therefore not addressed in these responses to comments. Where a non-
environmental inquiry was raised or suggestion made that may appropriately be addressed by staff,
questions and inquiries may be responded to separately.
F-11 This comment states that other forms of TDM measures should be included in the project’s TDM plan
and that such a plan should including a monitoring program. The comment addresses the LMA and
therefore does not raise an environmental issue under CEQA. It is therefore not addressed in these
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-47- Responses to Comments
responses to comments. Where a non-environmental inquiry was raised or suggestion made that may
appropriately be addressed by staff, questions and inquiries may be responded to separately.
F-12 This comment restates prior comments in this letter. Refer to Responses to Comments F-9 through F-
11.
F-13 This comment states that it is unclear if the ramp on the southwest corner of the intersection of
Palomar Airport Road and Palomar Oaks Way is compliant with the American with Disabilities Act
(ADA). This comment also contains an image of decorative railing on the sidewalk, which is in the City
right-of-way. There is a condition of approval that will require the project to improve the section of
Palomar Oaks Way between Palomar Airport Road and West Oaks Way to meet ADA standards.
However, this comment addresses the LMA and does not raise an environmental issue under CEQA.
F-14 This comment states that high-visibility crosswalks should be installed at the intersection of Palomar
Airport Road and Palomar Oaks Way to aid in satisfaction of the TDM and VMT reduction
requirements. The comment addresses the LMA and therefore does not raise an environmental issue
under CEQA. It is therefore not addressed in these responses to comments. Where a non-
environmental inquiry was raised or suggestion made that may appropriately be addressed by staff,
questions and inquiries may be responded to separately.
F-15 This comment states that points claimed for Transit LOS related to bus stop headways are not
warranted. The comment addresses the LMA and therefore does not raise an environmental issue
under CEQA. It is therefore not addressed in these responses to comments. Where a non-
environmental inquiry was raised or suggestion made that may appropriately be addressed by staff,
questions and inquiries may be responded to separately.
F-16 The comment states that it is unclear how nearby hotel and commercial uses within proximity of the
bus stop are relevant to the project. The comment addresses the LMA and therefore does not raise
an environmental issue under CEQA. It is therefore not addressed in these responses to comments.
Where a non-environmental inquiry was raised or suggestion made that may appropriately be
addressed by staff, questions and inquiries may be responded to separately.
F-17 This comment states that the project should construct a sidewalk on the east side of Palomar Oaks
Way for safety reasons due to its connection to the nearby bus stops on Palomar Airport Road. The
comment addresses the LMA and therefore does not raise an environmental issue under CEQA. It is
therefore not addressed in these responses to comments. Where a non-environmental inquiry was
raised or suggestion made that may appropriately be addressed by staff, questions and inquiries may
be responded to separately.
F-18 This comment restates prior comments in this letter. Refer to Responses to Comments F-15 through
F-17.
F-19 This comment provides background information and expresses the opinion of the commenter
regarding the nearby transit amenities. The comment addresses the LMA and therefore does not raise
an environmental issue under CEQA. It is therefore not addressed in these responses to comments.
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-48- Responses to Comments
Where a non-environmental inquiry was raised or suggestion made that may appropriately be
addressed by staff, questions and inquiries may be responded to separately.
F-20 This comment expresses the opinion of the commenter regarding the nearby transit amenities. The
comment addresses the LMA and therefore does not raise an environmental issue under CEQA. It is
therefore not addressed in these responses to comments. Where a non-environmental inquiry was
raised or suggestion made that may appropriately be addressed by staff, questions and inquiries may
be responded to separately.
F-21 This comment contains street view images of the bus stops on Palomar Airport Road near its
intersection with Palomar Oaks Way. The comment addresses the LMA and therefore does not raise
an environmental issue under CEQA. It is therefore not addressed in these responses to comments.
Where a non-environmental inquiry was raised or suggestion made that may appropriately be
addressed by staff, questions and inquiries may be responded to separately.
F-22 This comment restates prior comments in this letter. Refer to Responses to Comments F-19 through
F-21.
F-23 The comment states the VMT reduction attributable to affordable housing is overstated, and requests
that if the current affordable housing proportion in TAZ 1161 is 0%, then the Draft MND’s VMT
reduction of 0.9% is acceptable; otherwise it should be adjusted.
The SANDAG model does not have a separate land use category for affordable housing and assumes
that all multi-family units generate trips at the same rate. Accordingly, there is no specific affordable
housing category built into the TAZ's VMT/capita, such that the proportion of affordable housing is
0%. Therefore, the Draft MND’s VMT reduction of 0.9% is appropriate.
The comment further states that the affordable housing VMT reduction should be reduced based on
poor access to quality transit. However, the affordable housing reduction is based only in part on the
assumption that affordable housing residents take transit. Statistically, affordable housing residents
have lower levels of auto ownership, and, as a result, such residents generally make fewer
discretionary trips and use various alternative means of travel that includes not only transit, but also
carpooling and ride-share services, to meet their travel needs. Furthermore, the average VMT/vehicle
among affordable housing residents is less than among market rate housing residents, meaning
affordable housing residents make fewer trips and/or shorter trips on average. Therefore the
affordable housing VMT reduction does not rely on available transit use, and the Draft MND’s VMT
reduction attributed to affordable housing is appropriate.
F-24 The comment states that the pedestrian network enhancements VMT reduction should not be used
unless the sidewalks in the remainder of the project TAZ are significantly deficient relative to those to
be built for the project.
The pedestrian network improvements to be implemented as part of the proposed project would
provide accommodations on site, as well as convenient pedestrian access to Palomar Airport Road on
both the east and west sides of the Project. These improvements would encourage people to walk
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-49- Responses to Comments
instead of drive by minimizing barriers to pedestrian access and interconnectivity. The VMT reduction
applied to the proposed project relative to these improvements is based on methodology widely used
and developed by the California Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). Further information
regarding calculation of the reduction is provided in the project’s TDM Analysis prepared by Fehr &
Peers in May 2020.
Additionally, the SANDAG model does not include detailed pedestrian facility information and
assumes mode choices based on general, regional statistics and the distance to a given destination.
Accordingly, the VMT calculations for TAZ 1161 do not reflect the presence or quality of the
surrounding pedestrian facilities. This reduction applied in the Draft MND’s VMT calculation is based
on detailed knowledge of facilities proposed by the project that are of higher quality than the generic
model assumption. Therefore, it is appropriate to apply the reduction to the model output.
F-25 The comment raises a concern regarding various logistics associated with implementation of the
electric bike-share program, implying that the VMT reduction attributable to the strategy is
overstated. As stated in the VMT Analysis, CAPCOA does not attribute VMT reductions to bike-sharing
programs specifically (CAPCOA TRT-12). However, an electric bike-share program allows residents to
travel longer distances and on steeper inclines than a standard bicycle would comfortably allow.
Accordingly, the electric bikes are a “light” vehicle similar to NEVs, to which CAPCOA does attribute
VMT reductions (SDT-3).CAPCOA describes NEVs as low-speed, “light” vehicles that are electric
powered. According to CAPCOA, they are ideal for trips up to 40 miles in length. They have top speeds
of 20 to 25 mph. Typical NEVs sit two (2) or four (4) people, and may provide a storage rack. NEV
infrastructure includes parking, charging facilities, special roadway striping/signage, and educational
tools, including an NEV transportation plan.
Electric bikes have top speeds of 20 to 28 mph and have electric batteries. They generally have a range
of 20 to 25 miles. While shorter than NEV ranges, this range would adequately cover the two-way trip
from the project site to the major Carlsbad destinations, including Carlsbad Village and The Shoppes
at Carlsbad. Electric bikes generally sit one (1) person, and may provide a basket, rear rack, or other
storage feature. Electric bikes do not require special infrastructure, besides access to a standard outlet
for re-charging the battery. Electric bikes otherwise use bicycle facilities on the road and for parking.
While electric bikes do not sit as many people as NEVs, each individual who can ride an adult-sized
bike would be able to use their own electric bike. The potential need for additional bikes would be
tracked by the Transportation Coordinator, a position that would be established as part of the TDM
program, who would collect bi-annual data and adjust the TDM strategies as necessary to respond to
user demand.
As a condition of approval, the VMT reduction measure is required to be included in the project’s TDM
plan and will be monitored and managed according to the City’s TDM Handbook. To best ensure the
TDM Program strategies, including the electric bike-share program, are implemented and effective, a
Transportation Coordinator will be established to monitor the program and address implementation-
related issues such as those raised by the comment. See page 7 of the project’s TDM Analysis for
additional information regarding the Transportation Coordinator. As the program is implemented, the
details of the operation will be tailored to meet the specific demands of the residents and users, which
are unknown at this time. As to the uncertainty of availability, this factor is accounted for in the VMT
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-50- Responses to Comments
reduction calculations, and the potential impact on residents' mode choice is the opinion of the
commenter.
F-26 The comment raises concern regarding the fact that the car-share program would include one car
only, questions the effectiveness of such program, and requests that the logistics of the program be
detailed. The car-share program that would be implemented as part of the project is intended to
complement the project’s unbundled parking TDM strategy by providing residents with an option for
independent travel that does not require owning a car. Based on appropriate car-share program sizing
provided in CAPCOA, one car is appropriate to serve the residents of this project, and the reduction
that was taken is consistent with the CAPCOA research and methodology. See page 12 the project’s
TDM Analysis for additional information regarding the car-share program. As the program is
implemented, the details of the operation will be tailored to the residents and users through the
Transportation Coordinator. As a condition of approval, the VMT reduction measure is required to be
included in the project’s TDM plan and will be monitored and managed according to the City’s TDM
Handbook. Please refer to Response to Comment F-25 for additional information regarding the
Transportation Coordinator.
F-27 The comment asks for details of how the carpool and vanpool VMT reduction measure would be
implemented. Carpool and vanpool resources are currently available to all residents in the SANDAG
region through the iCommute program operated by SANDAG that utilizes both privately owned
vehicles and privately leased vehicles from designated vendors. If carpool and/or vanpool resources
become available through the City TDM Programs, those resources will also be available to project
residents. Refer to pages 12 through 16 of the project’s TDM Analysis for additional information
regarding commute trip reduction strategies, including carpool and vanpools. As a condition of
approval, the VMT reduction measure is required to be included in the project’s TDM plan and will be
monitored and managed according to the City’s TDM Handbook.
The Transportation Coordinator will provide details of the iCommute and, when available, City TDM
Plan programs to project residents. Refer to Response to Comment F-25 and the project’s TDM
Analysis for additional information regarding the Transportation Coordinator.
F-28 The comment raises concern regarding the effectiveness of the unbundled parking TDM strategy. The
evaluation of unbundled parking's effectiveness at reducing VMT is based on procedures/research
contained in the CAPCOA Report entitled Quantifying Greenhouse Gas Mitigation Measures.
Unbundled parking reduces parking demand through financial incentives and leads to lower levels of
auto ownership. Households with less access to a private automobile then, in turn, use various
alternative travel strategies such as carpooling, walking/bicycling, transit, less discretionary trip
making, etc. to meet their travel needs.
As the comment notes, potential VMT reductions associated with unbundling parking range from 2.6
to 13% depending on the project context and the monthly cost for parking; the greater the additional
cost or price differential, the greater the forecast participation and corresponding VMT reduction. The
project proposes to charge residents an additional $100 per month per parking space, which has been
shown to be a substantial financial incentive to reducing vehicle ownership. Based on research
contained in the CAPCOA Report, unbundled parking programs generally charge between $25 and
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-51- Responses to Comments
$125 per month; by charging at the higher end of this range, the City and its consultants anticipate a
commensurately higher reduction in vehicle ownership.
The calculation of VMT reduction attributable to unbundled parking in this case was calculated based
on the mathematical equation provided by CAPCOA for determining such reduction and considers
numerous factors, including vehicle costs and ownership rates. With implementation of the
unbundled parking strategy, CAPCOA data show that the car ownership rate at the West Oaks
apartments would be lower as compared to the overall region. Based on the CAPCOA calculations and
supported by iCommute, the City’s TDM Plan, and employer programs for access to worksites, as well
as the mobility alternatives provided by the electric bike-share and car-share strategies, 40 additional
project households are expected to share one privately-owned car with implementation of the
unbundled parking strategy as compared to a bundled parking scenario. As such, the successful
implementation of the program requires only a reduction in overall car ownership by project
households rather than any individual household entirely foregoing such ownership. Refer to pages
16 through 19 of the project’s TDM Analysis for additional information regarding the unbundled
parking program.
F-29 The comment states that the project parking supply should be reduced with the space converted to
open space and tries to connect the number of spaces provided to the effectiveness of the unbundled
parking strategy. The amount of parking that would be provided on-site by the project meets the
minimum requirements of the city code. Because the effectiveness of the unbundled parking program
is dependent primarily on the cost of car ownership, the parking supply is not relevant to the VMT
reduction calculations.
The comment also notes an inconsistency in described parking spaces within the Draft MND and
associated studies. 384 parking space is the correct number of spaces and pages 1 and 63 of Final
MND has be revised to correct this error.
F-30 The comment states that the project parking supply should be reduced to aid in the effectiveness of
the unbundled parking program, that the Transportation Coordinator should report annually on this
measure, and that a backup VMT reduction measure be identified. As explained in Response to
Comment F-29, the number of spaces that would be provided on the project site is consistent with
the minimum requirements of the city code and does not adversely affect the VMT reduction
calculations associated with the unbundled parking TDM strategy. As part of the TDM monitoring, the
Transportation Coordinator would collect biannual data for TDM strategies contained in the project’s
TDM plan, including the unbundled parking program. As the evidence indicates that implementation
of the program would achieve the desired results, there is no need at this time to add a “backup” VMT
reduction strategy. As a condition of approval, the VMT reduction measure is required to be included
in the project’s TDM plan and will be monitored and managed according to the City’s TDM Handbook.
F-31 The comment questions the methodology utilized by Fehr & Peers for accounting for redundancy
between TDM strategies. The multiplicative formula applied by Fehr & Peers is documented in
CAPCOA and is the industry standard practice for estimating redundancy. Refer to pages 19 and 20 of
the project’s TDM Analysis for additional information regarding the VMT reduction calculations,
including accounting for redundancies.
PROJECT NAME: WEST OAKS
December 2020 -RTC-52- Responses to Comments
F-32 The comment states that the incorrect global maximum VMT reduction was applied. While there is a
global maximum for VMT reductions due to TDM measures, the VMT reduction calculations for the
proposed project do not exceed the relevant maximum. Because the proposed project would include
an electric bike share program equivalent to a Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) program, the
appropriate category for the proposed project is "suburban with NEV," which has a global maximum
VMT reduction of 15%. Refer also to Response to Comment F-25 regarding the applicability of an
electric bike share program and VMT reductions.
The comment questions whether the commute trip reduction (CTR) strategies to be implemented as
part of the project are appropriate for a residential project as this. CTR strategies include TDM
program marketing, carpool and vanpool support, and school pool support, all of which are intended
to increase awareness and encourage residents to shift their travel mode from driving alone. These
strategies and the corresponding VMT reductions are discussed in detail on pages 12 through 16 of
the project’s TDM Analysis. Nearly all of the CTR strategies included as part of the analysis (TRT-3,
TRT-7, TRT-9, TRT-10) are considered appropriate for residential projects per CAPCOA's "Measure
Applicability" designation of each measure. The only exception to this is TRT-11, which is intended for
employer-sponsored vanpool programs, although it is applicable to the proposed project residents
through the iCommute program, as detailed in the project’s TDM Analysis.
F-33 The comment raises concern about queuing around the roundabout and potential delay at the
intersection of Palomar Airport Road and Palomar Oaks Way due to left turns. The comment
addresses the LMA and therefore does not raise an environmental issue under CEQA. It is therefore
not addressed in these responses to comments. Where a non-environmental inquiry was raised or
suggestion made that may appropriately be addressed by staff, questions and inquiries may be
responded to separately.
Community Development Department
Planning Division
1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 760-602-4600 760-602-8560 fax
NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PROJECT NAME: West Oaks
PROJECT NO: GPA 16-04/ZC 16-03/LCPA 16-04/LFMP 87-05(F)/PUD 2018-0004/SDP 16-
20/CDP 16-31/SUP 2017-0005/HMP 16-04/MS 2018-0005 (DEV13018)
PROJECT LOCATION: The West Oaks Project is located on an approximately 12.53-acre site
(Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 212-110-01, -02, -03, -04, -05, -06, -07, -08, 212-
040-26) in the City of Carlsbad. The project site is located to the south of
Palomar Airport Road and to the west of Palomar Oaks Way. Refer to the
attached location map.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed project consists of 192 multifamily residential units—72 one-
bedroom units, 57 two-bedroom units, and 21 three-bedroom units at regular market value and 42
affordable units (24 one-bedroom units, 12 two-bedroom units, and six three-bedroom units), which are
included in the total 192 units. The proposed project would also include 373 parking spaces and a
leasing and recreation building, recreation areas, and a community pool. Bicycle parking amenities are
also proposed. On-site pedestrian circulation to connect with the existing pedestrian sidewalks on the
western side of West Oaks Way and on Palomar Airport Road at the western end of the site is also
proposed. The project would have a density of approximately 24.6 dwelling units per acre (DU/AC), not
including the proposed open space easement. With the open space easement area included, the density
of the project would be approximately 15.3 DU/AC. The proposed structures would be three stories and
consist mostly of stucco exteriors, brick veneer, and wood or metal railings and decorative awnings. The
project includes a General Plan Amendment, a Zoning Amendment, and approval of a Tentative Tract
Map. The project is designated for Planned Industrial (PI) and Open Space (OS) in the General Plan and
zoned as Planned Industrial (P-M) and Open Space (OS). The proposed General Plan Amendment would
change the underlying land use designation to Residential (R-30) and the proposed Zoning Amendment
would change the underlying zoning to Residential Density-Multiple (RD-M).
PROPOSED DETERMINATION: The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the
above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of
said review, the Initial study identified potentially significant effects on the environment, but (1)
revisions in the project plans or proposals made by, or agreed to by, the applicant before the proposed
Mitigated Negative Declaration and Initial Study are released for public review would avoid the effects
or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effect on the environment would occur,
and (2) there is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record before the City that the project “as
revised” may have a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration
will be recommended for adoption by the City of Carlsbad City Council.
AVAILABILITY: A copy of the Initial Study documenting reasons to support the proposed Mitigated
Negative Declaration is on file in the Planning Division, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008
and is available online at: http://www.carlsbadca.gov/services/depts/planning/agendas.asp.
{'city of
Carlsbad
COMMENTS: Comments from the public are invited. Pursuant to Section 15204 of the CEQA
Guidelines, in reviewing Mitigated Negative Declarations, persons and public agencies should focus on
the proposed finding that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment. If persons
and public agencies believe that the project may have a significant effect, they should: (1) identify the
specific effect; (2) explain why they believe the effect would occur; and (3) explain why they believe the
effect would be significant. Written comments regarding the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration
should be directed to Cliff Jones, Senior Planner at the address listed below or via email to
Cliff.Jones@carlsbadca.gov. Comments must be received within 30 days of the date of this notice.
The proposed project and Mitigated Negative Declaration are subject to review and approval/adoption
by the Planning Commission and City Council. Additional public notices will be issued when those public
hearings are scheduled. If you have any questions, please call Cliff Jones in the Planning Division at (760)
602-4613.
PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD July 7, 2020 to August 6, 2020
PUBLISH DATE July 7, 2020
PALOMARAIRPORTRD
SAPPHIREDR
WESTOAKS
WY
PA L OMAROAKSWY
RUBYWYTURQUOISEDRWI
L
L
OWPLWRIGH
T
P
L
PRIVATE
D
Y
COBBLESTONEDRGPA 16-04 / ZC 16-03 / LCPA 16-04
LFMP 87-05(F) / CT 16-06 / SDP 16-20
CDP 16-31 / HMP 16-04
West OaksSITE MAP
J
SITE
E
L
C
AMINO
RE
ALLA COSTA AV
A L G A R DCARLSBAD BL
Initial Study
December 2020 -1- Mitigated Negative Declaration
1. PROJECT NAME: West Oaks
2. PROJECT NO: GPA 16-04/ZC 16-03/LCPA 16-04/LFMP 87-05(F)/PUD 2018-0004/SDP 16-20/CDP 16-
31/SUP 2017-0005/HMP 16-04/MS 2018-0005 (DEV13018)
3. LEAD AGENCY:
City of Carlsbad
1635 Faraday Avenue
Carlsbad, California 92008
4. PROJECT APPLICANT:
The Carlsbad West Oaks Project Owner,
LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company
Greg Waite
2235 Encinitas Boulevard, Suite 216
Encinitas, California 92024
5. LEAD AGENCY CONTACT PERSON: Cliff Jones, Senior Planner
Office Phone: 760.602.4613
Email: Cliff.Jones@carlsbadca.gov
6. PROJECT LOCATION: The West Oaks Project (project or proposed project) is located on an
approximately 12.53-acre site (Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 212-110-01, -02, -03, -04, -05, -06, -07, -08,
212-040-26) in the City of Carlsbad (city) (Figure 1, Regional Map, and Figure 2, Vicinity Map). The project
site is located to the south of Palomar Airport Road and to the west of Palomar Oaks Way (Figure 2). The
project is bounded by Palomar Airport Road to the northeast, undeveloped land to the south and
southwest, and the Palomar Oaks commercial development to the east. The project site is generally flat
and has been previously graded. Several easements exist within the project site, including: County of
San Diego (public highway and utilities), City of Carlsbad (storm drainage, public highway, and
roadways), San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E) (public utilities), Buena Vista Sanitation District (sewer
utilities), Vallecitos Water District (sewer utilities), and Carlsbad Municipal Water District.
7. GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DESIGNATION: Planned Industrial (PI), Open Space (OS)
8. ZONING: Planned Industrial (P-M), Open Space (OS)
9. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed project consists of 192 multifamily residential units—72 one-
bedroom units, 57 two-bedroom units, and 21 three-bedroom units at regular market value and 42
affordable units (24 one-bedroom units, 12 two-bedroom units, and six three-bedroom units),
which are included in the total 192 units. The proposed project would also include 373 384 parking
spaces and a leasing and recreation building, recreation areas, and a community pool. Bicycle
parking amenities are also proposed. On-site pedestrian circulation to connect with the existing
pedestrian sidewalks on the western side of West Oaks Way and on Palomar Airport Road at the
western end of the site is also proposed. The project would have a density of approximately 24.6
dwelling units per acre (DU/AC), not including the proposed open space easement. With the open
space easement area included, the density of the project would be approximately 15.3 DU/AC
(Figure 3, Project Site Plan). The proposed structures would be three stories and consist mostly of
stucco exteriors, brick veneer, and wood or metal railings and decorative awnings (Figures 4a–4f).
The color schemes are shown on Figures 5a, Color Scheme A, and 5b, Color Scheme B.
C_cicyof
Carlsbad
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -2- Mitigated Negative Declaration
The project includes a General Plan Amendment, a Zoning Amendment, and approval of a Tentative
Tract Map. The proposed General Plan Amendment would change the underlying land use designation
to Residential (R-30) and the proposed Zoning Amendment would change the underlying zoning to
Residential Density-Multiple (RD-M).
The project includes two options for sewer service:
Option 1, Relocate/Connect to Buena Interceptor: An existing 18-inch Buena Sanitation District
Interceptor runs through the easterly portion of the project site, crosses under Encinas Creek in
the central portion of the site, and then enters Palomar Airport Road. The project would relocate
the easterly portion of the interceptor through the project’s northerly drive aisle (formerly West
Oaks Way), reconnecting to the existing interceptor prior to crossing under the creek. The
proposed buildings would connect to a new on-site private sewer system in the southerly drive
aisle which would connect to an existing eight-inch sewer stub that crosses under the creek to
Palomar Airport Road. The Buena Interceptor is currently at capacity, and does not have available
capacity for the project’s sewer flows. Buena Sanitation District has a separately planned
improvement project to remove their flows from the interceptor and relocate them to a new force
main in Palomar Airport Road. This improvement project is currently under construction by Buena
Sanitation District and has an expected completion date of June 2020. The existing 18-inch line
would then have sufficient capacity to accommodate the project’s flows.
Since the ability to exercise Option 1 is dependent on the construction of Buena Sanitation District’s
force main in Palomar Airport Road, the project has identified another design option that would
provide adequate sewer service to the project.
Option 2, Gravity Flow to Vallecitos Water District Interceptor in Palomar Airport Road: Vallecitos
Water District (VWD) has an existing 30-inch interceptor in Palomar Airport Road which has
sufficient capacity to provide sewer service to the site. In order to connect to this VWD interceptor
via gravity flow, the project would construct an on-site private sewer system flowing to the west
end of the site. Near the westerly end of the site, the on-site sewer line would cross under the creek
and connect to the existing 30-inch VWD interceptor in Palomar Airport Road. In order to avoid
environmental impacts to the creek, this crossing would be constructed using trenchless
construction methods, such as “jack and bore” or directional drilling. In this option, the 18-inch
Buena Interceptor would remain in-place and undisturbed.
Variations or changes to these options may occur pending discussions and approval by the
respective sewer agency, timing of project development, and timing of sewer district
improvements separate from the proposed project.
The project proposes stormwater facilities on site and a flood-control structure. The project would also
include a 40-foot-wide easement dedicated to the city for public utilities, ingress and egress, and incidental
purposes; a 10-foot-wide easement to the city’s Municipal Water District for all water utility purposes; a
20-foot-wide to 40-foot-wide easement to Buena Sanitation District for sewer pipelines and incidental
purposes; and a conservation easement to the city for open space purposes. The project would include
primary access to the site from Palomar Airport Road through Palomar Oaks Way, where a roundabout is
proposed to facilitate traffic movements at the project entry. The project would also include an emergency
access road to the west of the property from Palomar Airport Road. This emergency access would include
a bridge that would allow for continued wildlife movement within Encinas Creek.
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -3- Mitigated Negative Declaration
An oOpen space lots (4.263.97 acres) that will include the existing riparian habitat, Encinas Creek,
coastal sage scrub, and the riparian buffer areas is are proposed. The open space lots, including the
riparian habitat and the riparian buffer, will be protected in perpetuity by a restrictive covenant,
managed by a city-approved long-term habitat manager, and incorporated into the Carlsbad HMP
preserve (Dudek 20192020e). There is an existing easement held by the Buena Sanitation District and
the Vallecitos Water District that bisects the open space lot and this existing easement will be
excluded from the conservation easement. The upland buffer areas will be managed by the
homeowners’ association (HOA).The proposed project would include the removal of 23 deteriorating
oak trees and the planting of 35 oak trees.
Existing overhead utility lines owned and operated by SDG&E and the associated 100-foot-wide
easement traverse a portion of the project site. These include a high voltage 128138-kilovolt (kV) and
a 69 kV overhead electrical transmission lines. SDG&E has access to these facilities via West Oaks Way,
an existing paved roadway. The project would require encroachment intoimprovements within the
existing SDG&E easement during construction and for various passive uses including that primarily
include project driveways and associated, parking areas, sidewalks and common areas, landscaping,
trash enclosure. fire hydrants, and underground utilities, as shown on Figure 6. The total area of
passive use encroachment would amount to approximately 121,900 feet. The existing street lights
(approximately 25 feet in height) within the SDG&E easement would be removed and replaced with
new street lights that would be a maximum of 12 feet in height. These passive uses are similar to what
exists today and no structures are proposed within the SDG&E easement. All proposed landscape
plantings would be in compliance with SDG&E’s acceptable species list. The proposed on site
driveways and parking areas would provide SDG&E additional staging areas for routine maintenance
of the transmission facilities. Construction and operation of the project would not alter or affect the
ongoing operations of the existing overhead transmission lines or SDG&E’s easement through the
project site. SDG&E would maintain full access to their easement during construction and operation
of the project.
The project is required to implement Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures. As part
of the project, a TDM Plan would be prepared consistent with the city’s Transportation Demand
Management Handbook and the project features identified through the Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT)
evaluation. The Tier 2 TDM Plan, as amended from time to time with city review and approval, would
be implemented throughout the life of the project. A Tier 2 plan consists of implementation of TDM
strategies totaling nine points. Specific to the proposed project, four points would be achieved
through three required measures (designation of a transportation coordinator, promotion of one
citywide TDM event/year, and distribution of a citywide TDM Plan flyer to new tenants). The other
five points would be achieved through site-specific measures, with a minimum of four points required
through infrastructure strategies.
The project’s TDM program would include the following project features to reduce VMT: incorporate
affordable housing on-site; develop a pedestrian network and improvements; implement an electric
bike-share program; implement a car-share program; promote transit options to residents; promote
carpool/vanpool networks for residents and students; and unbundle parking from units. A
Transportation Coordinator would be established to monitor the TDM program. Monitoring and
reporting of all TDM measures would be completed by the project according to the requirements of
the City’s TDM Handbook. Refer to West Oaks TDM Strategies for VMT Reduction Evaluation for
additional information (Fehr & Peers 2020b).
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -4- Mitigated Negative Declaration
With implementation of the project’s TDM program, the project would meet and exceed all City
requirements relative to TDM and related VMT reduction.
The project includes the following project design features, inclusive of the TDM program described
above:
The project would improve the amenities (benches and trash cans) provided at two bus stops
on Palomar Airport Road.
The project would provide an ADA compliant concrete walkway along its frontage, connecting
the gap in existing walkway. Curb ramps and crosswalks would be provided on the west and
south sides of the proposed roundabout.
The project would not include natural-gas burning fireplaces or woodstoves.
The project would use electric-based water heating, HVAC equipment, and swimming pool
heating.
The project would include a solar water heating system onsite to heat the swimming pool.
The project would include 39 electric vehicle capable parking spaces and 20 electric vehicle
charging stations in accordance with the City’s Ordinance CS-349.
The project would include Energy Star appliances.
The project would include use of LED lighting or other efficient lighting for at least 75% of the
total luminaires.
The project would include low-flow or high-efficiency water fixtures (toilet, showerhead,
clothes washer, etc.).
For the purposes of analysis, construction of the proposed project was estimated to begin in January
2021 and last approximately 12 months, ending in January 2022. Construction would generally follow
the phasing below:
Site preparation – 10 days (January 2021)
Grading – 30 days (January 2021-February 2021)
Trenching – 10 days (February 2021)
Building construction – 200 days (February 2021–January 2022)
Paving – 20 days (January 2022)
Application of architectural coatings – 20 days (January 2022)
10. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING/SURROUNDING LAND USES: The 12.53-acre project site is currently
vacant. Site access is restricted to vehicular traffic by a locked gate. A portion of the site (Assessor’s
Parcel Numbers 212-10-08 and 212-040-26) is undeveloped. The remaining parcels have been graded
for development but remain vacant. Some improvements are present on site, including underground
utilities, a road and a retaining wall. West Oaks Way, the existing paved roadway, bisects the property
in a northwest–southeast direction. A power line easement traverses the southeastern portion of the
project site in a northwest–southeast direction. Encinas Creek, which was channelized and rerouted
in 1985, runs throughout the project site and is present along the northern boundary of the site. The
site consists of relatively flat areas (less than 20 percent slopes) as a result of the grading on site that
gently slope to the west, with on-site elevations ranging from approximately 114 to 150 feet above
mean sea level.
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -5- Mitigated Negative Declaration
The surrounding area is largely characterized by a mix of development, including industrial,
commercial, and residential. Palomar Airport Road is immediately north of the site, a commercial
complex is located approximately 350 feet to the west, a residential housing tract is located
approximately 425 feet to the south, and another commercial complex is located approximately 300
feet to the east. Natural rolling hillsides are present immediately south of the site and abut existing
residential neighborhoods. The project site is approximately 150 vertical feet below the residential
homes to the south.
11. OTHER REQUIRED AGENCY APPROVALS (i.e., permits, financing approval or participation agreements):
California Department of Fish and Wildlife; California Coastal Commission; SDG&E.
12. CALIFORNIA NATIVE AMERICAN TRIBES CONSULTATION.
a. Have California Native American Tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project
area requested consultation pursuant to public resources code section 21080.3.1?
☒ Yes ☐ No
b. If so, is there a plan for consultation that includes, for example, the determination of significance
of impacts to tribal cultural resources, procedures regarding confidentiality, etc.?
☒ Yes ☐ No
13. PREVIOUS ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION: None.
Project Name: West Oaks
-6- Mitigated Negative Declaration
14. SUMMARY OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The summary of environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project,
involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact” or “Less than Significant with
Mitigation Incorporated” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
☐ Aesthetics ☐ Greenhouse Gas Emissions ☐ Public Services
☐ Agriculture Forestry Resources ☐ Hazards and Hazardous
Materials
☐ Recreation
☐ Air Quality ☐ Hydrology and Water Quality ☐ Transportation
☒ Biological Resources ☐ Land Use & Planning ☒ Tribal Cultural Resources
☒ Cultural ☐ Mineral Resources ☐ Utilities/Service Systems
☐ Energy ☒ Noise ☐ Wildfire
☒ Geology/Soils ☐ Population & Housing ☐ Mandatory Findings of Significance
15. PREPARATION: The Mitigated Negative Declaration for the subject project was prepared by:
CLIFF JONES, Senior Planner Date
7/1/2020
December 2020
DocuSign Envelope ID: 98884B86-22C9-4E7B-8D4E-86C523D67A68
16. DETERMINATION: (to be completed by Lead Agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
Project Name: West Oaks
□ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and
a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
12.?l I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there
will n,ot be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described herein have
been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
D I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
□ I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact(s)" on the
environment, but at least one potentially significant impact 1) has been adequately analyzed in
an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by
mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described herein. A Negative Declaration
is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
□ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a)
have been analyzed adequately in an earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE
DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated
pursuant to that earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION,
including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project.
Therefore, nothing further is required.
17. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The MND for this project has been reviewed and the
environmental determination, indicated above, is hereby approved.
le_ ~J
Teri Delcamp, Principal Planner Date
18. APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATION MEASURES: This is to certify that I have reviewed
the mitigation measures in the MND and concur with the addition of these measures to the project. rz•:by: WI lv ,_ 6/26/2020
~r~~C4Fs,.. Date
Lance Waite
Print Name
July 2020 -7-Mitigated Negative Declaration
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -8- Mitigated Negative Declaration
EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by
the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact"
answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not
apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact"
answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g.,
the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis).
2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, cumulative
as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts.
3. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur, then the checklist
answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation,
or less than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that
an effect may be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the
determination is made, an environmental impact report (EIR) is required.
4. "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the
incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a
"Less-than-Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly
explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from "Earlier
Analyses," as described in (5) below, may be cross-referenced).
5. Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) process, an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or
negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this case, a brief discussion should identify the following:
a. Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review.
b. Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the
scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and
state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis.
c. Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures
Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the
earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.
6. Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for
potential impacts (e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or
outside document should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the
statement is substantiated.
7. Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or
individuals contacted should be cited in the discussion.
8. The explanation of each issue should identify:
a. The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and
b. The mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significant.
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -9- Mitigated Negative Declaration
9. Tribal consultation, if requested as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1, must begin
prior to release of a negative declaration, mitigated negative declaration, or environmental impact
report for a project. Information provided through tribal consultation may inform the lead agency’s
assessment as to whether tribal cultural resources are present, and the significance of any potential
impacts to such resources. Prior to beginning consultation, lead agencies may request information
from the Native American Heritage Commission regarding its Sacred Lands File, per Public Resources
Code sections 5097.9 and 5097.94, as well as the California Historical Resources Information System
administered by the California Office of Historic Preservation.
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -10- Mitigated Negative Declaration
I. AESTHETICS
Except as provided in Public Resources Code Section 21099, would
the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mit. Incorporated Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited
to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State
scenic highway?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c) In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual
character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings?
(Public views are those that are experiences from a publicly
accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area,
would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d) Create a new source of substantial light and glare, which would
adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21099(d)(1) states “[a]esthetic and parking impacts of a residential,
mixed-use residential, or employment center project on an infill site within a transit priority area shall not
be considered significant impact on the environment.”
PRC Section 21099 provided the additional definitions:
Infill site: “a lot located within an urban area that has been previously developed, or on a vacant
site where at least 75 percent of the perimeter of the site adjoins, or is separated only by an
improved public right-of-way from, parcels that are developed with qualified urban uses.”
Transit priority area: “an area within one-half mile of a major transit stop that is existing or
planned, if the planned stop is scheduled to be completed within the planning horizon included
in a Transportation Improvement Program adopted pursuant to Section 450.216 or 450.322 of
Title 23 of the Code of Federal Regulations.”
Section 15191(i) of the CEQA Guidelines (see also PRC Section 21064.3) defines a major transit stop as a
site containing an existing rail transit station, a ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail transit service,
or the intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service interval of 15 minutes or
less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods.
Based on the information provided in PRC Section 21099 and Section 15191 of the CEQA Guidelines), the
project site would not meet the definitions of an infill site within a transit priority area. Therefore,
potential impacts to aesthetics are discussed below.
a) No Impact: The proposed project site is located within an already developed area of the city and is
generally surrounded mostly by commercial development. The proposed project would develop a vacant
site with residential uses. The city’s General Plan Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation Element does
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -11- Mitigated Negative Declaration
not identify any scenic resources in the vicinity of the project site (City of Carlsbad 2015a). Therefore, no
impact to scenic vistas would occur.
b) No Impact: The project site is not located in the vicinity of a state scenic highway (Caltrans 2011).
Additionally, the city’s General Plan Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation Element does not identify
any local scenic roadways (City of Carlsbad 2015a). Therefore, no impact would occur.
c) Less-than-Significant Impact: Section 15387 of the CEQA Guidelines states that an urbanized area
means a central city or a group of contiguous cities with a population of 50,000 or more, together with
adjacent densely populated areas having a population density of at least 1,000 persons per square mile.
Therefore, the project is located within an urbanized area and the second question of this threshold
applies. The project site is zoned Planned Industrial (P-M) and Open Space (OS). The OS zone is intended
to provide for open space and recreational uses which have been deemed necessary for the aesthetically
attractive and orderly growth of the community. The portions of the site that are currently zoned and
have a land use designation of OS will remain as open space under the proposed project. Therefore, the
proposed project would not conflict with applicable zoning governing scenic quality and impacts would
be less than significant. Additionally, for the purposes of analysis, a discussion of visual character and
quality is provided below.
The developable portion of the project site is currently undeveloped and has previously been graded. A few
shrubs are present throughout the site. Overall, the site lacks maintenance and visual quality. The project
would enhance the visual quality of the project site by introducing an aesthetically cohesive development with
associated landscaping. The proposed project consists of structures with stucco exteriors of white, beige, and
gray colors.. Brick and bronze accents enhance the project design (see Figures 4a–4f and 5a–5b). The project
involves three-story residential lofts with a maximum height of 35 feet. The project is designed to implement
visual cohesiveness on the site. Associated landscaping on 23 percent of the site adds to the visual quality of
the development. Further, the conservation easement located between Palomar Airport Road and the
proposed structures provides a setback for the structures from the road of approximately 60 to 90 feet (refer
to Figure 3, Proposed Site Plan). This setback aims to reduce the bulk and scale of the proposed buildings as
seen by motorists from Palomar Airport Road. Refer to Figure 76, Project Visual Simulation Renderings, for a
conceptual rendering of the proposed project as viewed from Palomar Airport Road. As shown on Figure 76,
the relative lower elevation and setback of the site from the road reduces the overall bulk and scale of the
proposed project.
The surrounding commercial and industrial structures present to the north and east of the site are mostly
three-story, rectangular structures finished with glass materials or light-color exterior paint. The commercial
structure directly to the north of the site is a three-story airport center that is rectangular in shape and
consists of glass exteriors. The structures to the east of the site are also approximately three stories in height
and rectangular in shape. These structures consist of light tan exterior colors and brick accents. Further to
the east, there is a three-story medical office building with glass exteriors and a large surface parking lot. A
golf course exists to the northeast of the site. The city’s General Plan Land Use and Community Planning
Element seeks to ensure that the city’s small-town feel will be maintained through the scale of development,
and promotes planning practices that foster greater connections between neighborhoods and uses (City of
Carlsbad 2015a). The General Plan describes the surrounding land uses as urban clusters, such as the airport
and the adjacent employment core at the geographic center of the community, surrounded by residential
neighborhoods, shopping centers, hotels, and other uses. The project would be consistent with the overall
city image, form, and structure outlined by the General Plan (City of Carlsbad 2015a). As such, impacts would
be less than significant.
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -12- Mitigated Negative Declaration
d) Less-than-Significant Impact: As shown on Figures 4a–4f, the project does not include large expanses
of glass or other highly reflective materials. Outdoor lighting will be used as required by California Building
Standards Code for parking areas, sidewalks, and security within the project site. Outdoor lighting is required
to comply with Section 21.31.080(F) of the city’s Municipal Code, which requires that light sources are
designed to avoid direct or indirect glare to any off-site properties or public rights-of-way. Through
compliance with the Municipal Code and California Building Standards Code, proposed outdoor lighting
would not substantially affect day or nighttime views. Impacts would be less than significant.
II. AGRICULTURAL AND FOREST RESOURCES*
Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mit. Incorporated Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of
Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared
pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the
California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson
Act contract? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land
(as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), or
timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or
timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by
Government Code section 51104(g))?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-
forest use? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
e) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to
their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to
non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
* In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to
the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model 1997 prepared by the California Department of
Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts
to forest resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California
Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state’s inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range
Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment Project, and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in
Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board.
a) No Impact: As indicated on the map of San Diego County Important Farmland developed by the
California Department of Conservation for the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, the project
site is located on and surrounded by “Urban Built-Up Land” and “Other Land” (CDC 2016). Urban and Built-
Up Land generally includes land uses such as residential, commercial, industrial, institutional facilities, and
other urban land uses. Other Land generally includes land uses such as low-density rural developments,
wetlands, and riparian areas not suitable for livestock grazing. Land surrounded on all sides by urban
development and greater than 40 acres is mapped as other land. As such, the proposed project would not
convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to non-agricultural use,
and no impact would occur.
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -13- Mitigated Negative Declaration
b) No Impact: According to the Department of Conservation’s map of San Diego County Williamson Act
lands, the project site is not located on Williamson Act contract land (CDC 2013). The project site is zoned
Planned Industrial (P-M) and Open Space (OS) (City of Carlsbad 2017a). Therefore, the proposed project
would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract, and no impact
would occur.
c) No Impact: The project site and its immediate surroundings are within the Planned Industrial (P-M)
and Open Space (OS) zones and located within a largely developed area in the city. The project site is not
currently designated or used for forestry resources. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict
with existing zoning for forest land or timberland, and no impact would occur.
d) No Impact: The project site and its immediate surroundings are within the Planned Industrial (P-M)
and Open Space (OS) zones and located within a largely developed area in the city. The project site is not
currently designated or used for forestry resources. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in
the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use.
e) No Impact: The project site and its immediate surroundings are within the Planned Industrial (P-M)
and Open Space (OS) zones and located within a largely developed area in the city. The proposed project
would not result in the conversion of agricultural or forest land. None of the surrounding lands in the
vicinity of the project site are used for agriculture or are forest lands. Therefore, the proposed project
would not result in the direct or indirect conversion of agricultural uses or forest land, and no impact
would occur.
III. AIR QUALITY*
Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable
air quality management district or air pollution control district may be
relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mit. Incorporated Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air
quality plan? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria
pollutant for which the project region is in non-attainment under
an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d) Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely
affecting a substantial number of people? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
* Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district
may be relied upon to make the following determinations.
This section is based upon the Air Quality Report prepared for the project by Dudek in OctoberJune 2020
(Dudek 2020a), which includes background and methodologies regarding the air quality analysis. These
technical memoranda and reports are hereby incorporated by reference.
Local Air Quality: An area is designated in attainment when it is in compliance with the National Ambient
Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) (federal) and/or California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) (state).
These standards are set by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency or the California Air Resources Board
for the maximum level of a given air pollutant that can exist in the outdoor air without unacceptable effects
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -14- Mitigated Negative Declaration
on human health or the public welfare. The criteria pollutants of primary concern that are considered in an
air quality assessment include ozone (O3), nitrogen dioxide (NO2), carbon monoxide (CO), sulfur dioxide
(SO2), particulate matter (PM10, and PM2.5), lead, and toxic air contaminants (TACs). Volatile organic
compounds (VOCs) and oxides of nitrogen (NOx) are precursors to the formation of ground-level O3. Table 1
shows the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB) designations for criteria pollutants.
Table 1
San Diego Air Basin Attainment Designation
Pollutant Federal Designationa State Designationb
O3 (1-hour) Attainment (maintenance)a Nonattainment
O3 (8-hour – 1997)
(8-hour – 2008)
Attainment (maintenance)
Nonattainment (moderate)
Nonattainment
CO Unclassifiable/attainmentb Attainment
PM10 Unclassifiable/attainment Nonattainment
PM2.5 Unclassifiable/attainment Nonattainment
NO2 Unclassifiable/attainment Attainment
SO2 Not designatedc Attainment
Lead Attainment Attainment
Sulfates (No federal standard) Attainment
Hydrogen sulfide (No federal standard) Unclassified
Visibility-reducing particles (No federal standard) Unclassified
Vinyl chloride No federal standard No designation
Sources: aEPA 2017b; bCARB 2016.
Definitions: CO = carbon monoxide; NO2 = nitrogen dioxide; O3 = ozone; PM10 = particulate matter less than or equal to 10 microns
in diameter; PM2.5 = particulate matter less than or equal to 2.5 microns in diameter; SO2 = sulfur dioxide
attainment = meets the standards; attainment/maintenance = achieve the standards after a nonattainment designation;
nonattainment = does not meet the standards; unclassified or unclassifiable = insufficient data to classify;
unclassifiable/attainment = meets the standard or is expected to be meet the standard despite a lack of monitoring data.
a The federal 1-hour standard of 0.12 parts per million (ppm) was in effect from 1979 through June 15, 2005. The revoked standard
is referenced here because it was employed for such a long period and because this benchmark is addressed in state
implementation plans.
b The western and central portions of the SDAB are designated attainment, while the eastern portion is designated
unclassifiable/attainment.
c Federal designations for SO2 are on hold by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA 2016).
In San Diego County, O3 and particulate matter are the pollutants of main concern since exceedances of CAAQS
for those pollutants are experienced here in most years. For this reason, the SDAB has been designated as a
nonattainment area for the state PM10, PM2.5, and O3 standards. The SDAB is also a federal O3 attainment
(maintenance) area for 1997 8-hour O3 standard, O3 nonattainment area for the 2008 8-hour O3 standard, and
CO maintenance area (western and central parts of the SDAB only). The project site is in the CO maintenance
area (western and central parts of the SDAB only).
a) Less-than-Significant Impact: The project site is located in the SDAB. The periodic violations of NAAQS
in the SDAB, particularly for O3 in inland foothill areas, require that a plan outlining the pollution controls
that will be undertaken to improve air quality be developed. In San Diego County, this attainment planning
process is embodied in the Regional Air Quality Strategies (RAQS) developed by the San Diego Air Pollution
Control District (SDAPCD) with regional growth projections provided by San Diego Association of
Governments (SANDAG). The RAQS outlines the SDAPCD’s plans and regulatory control measures
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -15- Mitigated Negative Declaration
designed to attain state air quality standards for O3. The RAQS, which was adopted by the San Diego
County Air Pollution Control Board in 1992, is updated on a triennial basis, with the most recent revision
prepared in December 2016 (SDAPCD 2016).
The SDAPCD has also developed the SDAB’s input into the State Implementation Plan (SIP), which is required
under the federal Clean Air Act (CAA) for pollutants that are designated as being in nonattainment of national air
quality standards for the air basin. The SIP relies on the same information from SANDAG to develop emission
inventories and emission-control strategies that are included in the attainment plan for the air basin.
The proposed project relates to the SIP and/or RAQS through the land use and growth assumptions that are
incorporated into the SIP and/or RAQS. These growth assumptions are based on the city’s and the San Diego
County’s General Plans. The project is inconsistent with the existing zoning and General Plan land use
designations for the project site. The developable portion of the project site is zoned Planned Industrial (P-
M), which includes light industrial, manufacturing, corporate business and office uses not catering directly
to the public. The project involves General Plan land use and zoning changes with the development of 192
multifamily residential units. This would be within the SANDAG’s growth projection for housing for that year
for the city. The most recent Regional Housing Needs Assessment from SANDAG stated that Carlsbad needs
to build 430 units per year from 2021 through 2029 (SANDAG 2019). Furthermore, the City projected a
deficit of 1,062 very-low and low income units and 238 moderate and above moderate income units (City of
Carlsbad 2019). Operation of the project would result in emissions that were considered as a part of the
RAQS growth projections. As such, the proposed project is not anticipated to conflict with the RAQS or the
SIP. Additionally, the operational emissions from the project are estimated to be below the screening levels,
and subsequently, would not violate ambient air quality standards. The project is in compliance with the
implementation of the RAQS and SIP because the proposed land uses and associated vehicle trips are
anticipated in these plans (Dudek 2020a). Thus, impacts would be less than significant.
b) Less-than-Significant Impact: The SDAPCD operates a network of ambient air monitoring stations
throughout San Diego County. Due to its proximity to the city with similar geographic and climatic
characteristics, the Camp Pendleton monitoring station concentrations for O3, NO2, and PM2.5 are
considered most representative of the emissions in the city. The Escondido–East Valley Parkway
monitoring station is the nearest location where CO concentrations are monitored. The El Cajon–Redwood
Avenue monitoring station is the nearest location where SO2 concentrations are monitored. The San
Diego-Kearny Villa Road monitoring station was the closest station monitoring PM10 to the city. Data
available for these monitoring sites from 2015 through 2017 indicate the most recent air quality violations
recorded and are shown in Table 2.
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -16- Mitigated Negative Declaration
Table 2
Local Ambient Air Quality Data
Monitoring Station Unit Averaging Time Agency/ Method
Ambient Air Quality Standard
Measured Concentration by Year Exceedances by Year
2016 2017 2018 2016 2017 2018
Ozone (O3)
Camp Pendleton ppm Maximum 1-hour concentration
State 0.09 0.083 0.094 0.084 0 0 0
ppm Maximum 8-
hour
concentration
State 0.070 0.073 0.082 0.069 5 5 0
Federal 0.070 0.073 0.081 0.068 4 4 0
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)
Camp
Pendleton
ppm Maximum 1-
hour
concentration
State 0.18 0.072 0.063 0.048 0 0 0
Federal 0.100 0.072 0.063 0.048 0 0 0
ppm Annual concentration State 0.030 0.006 0.006 0.006 0 0 0
Federal 0.053 0.006 0.006 0.006 0 0 0
Carbon Monoxide (CO)
Escondidoa ppm Maximum 1-
hour
concentration
State 20 3.1 2.0 1.9 0 0 0
Federal 35 3.1 2.0 1.9 0 0 0
ppm Maximum 8-hour concentration
State 9.0 2.0 1.5 1.4 0 0 0
Federal 9 2.0 1.5 1.4 0 0 0
Sulfur Dioxide (SO2)
El Cajon ppm Maximum 1-hour concentration
Federal 0.075 0.018 0.011 0.004 0 0 0
ppm Maximum 24-
hour
concentration
State 0.04 0.0005 0.0004 0.0004 0 0 0
Federal 0.140 0.0005 0.0004 0.0004 0 0 0
ppm Annual
concentration
Federal 0.030 0.0001 0.0001
0.0001 — — —
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -17- Mitigated Negative Declaration
Table 2
Local Ambient Air Quality Data
Monitoring Station Unit Averaging Time Agency/ Method
Ambient Air Quality Standard
Measured Concentration by Year Exceedances by Year
2016 2017 2018 2016 2017 2018
Coarse Particulate Matter (PM10)
San Diego-Kearny Villa Road
g/m3 Maximum 24-hour concentration
State 50 35 47 38 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0)
Federal 150 36 46 38 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0)
g/m3 Annual
concentration
State 20 ND 17.6 18.4 — — —
Fine Particulate Matter (PM2.5)
Camp
Pendleton
g/m3 Maximum 24-
hour
concentration
Federal 35 34.4 26.0 30.5 0 (0) 0 (0) 0 (0)
g/m3 Annual concentration State 12 9.7 — — — — —
Federal 12.0 9.7 — — — — —
Sources: CARB 2019; EPA 2019.
Notes: – = not available or applicable; g/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter; ND = insufficient data available to determine the value; ppm = parts per million
Data taken from CARB iADAM (http://www.arb.ca.gov/adam) and EPA AirData (http://www.epa.gov/airdata/) represent the highest concentrations experienced over a given year.
Exceedances of federal and state standards are only shown for O3 and particulate matter. Daily exceedances for particulate matter are estimated days because PM10 and PM2.5 are
not monitored daily. All other criteria pollutants did not exceed federal or state standards during the years shown. There is no federal standard for 1-hour ozone, annual PM10, or
24-hour SO2, nor is there a state 24-hour standard for PM2.5.
The Camp Pendleton Facility monitoring station is located at 21441-W B Street Oceanside, California.
The Escondido monitoring station is located at 600 E. Valley Pkwy, Escondido, California.
The El Cajon monitoring station is located at 10537 Floyd Smith Drive, El Cajon, California.
The San Diego-Kearny Villa station is located at 6123A Kearny Villa Road, San Diego, California.
The San Diego – Rancho Carmel Drive monitoring station is located at 11403 Rancho Carmel Drive, San Diego, California.
The 2016 and 2017 monitoring values are from the Escondido monitoring station and the 2018 monitoring values are from the Rancho Carmel Drive monitoring station.
Measurements of PM10 and PM2.5 are usually collected every six days and every one to three days, respectively. Number of days exceeding the standards is a mathematical estimate
of the number of days concentrations would have been greater than the level of the standard had each day been monitored. The numbers in parentheses are the measured
number of samples that exceeded the standard.
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -18- Mitigated Negative Declaration
Air quality within the region was in compliance with CAAQS and NAAQS for NO2, CO, and SO2 during the
monitoring period outlined in Table 2 (2016-2018).
Grading and Construction
The project involves the construction of 192 multifamily residential units, which includes emissions
associated with grading and construction. As described in the project’s Air Quality Report (Dudek 2020a),
emissions from the construction phase of the project components were estimated using the California
Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod), Version 2016.3.2,1 available online (www.caleemod.com). For the
purposes of modeling, it was assumed that construction of project components would commence in January
2021 and last approximately 12 months. The project is assumed to be constructed with low-VOC coatings,
which would be five grams per liter for interior applications and 50 grams per liter for exterior
applications. It was assumed that the parking lot would comply with SDAPCD Rule 67.0.1 for
architectural coatings and would have a coating not exceeding 100 grams per liter. The construction
schedule has been developed based on available information provided by the applicant, typical
construction practices, and best engineering judgment. The project’s Air Quality Report contains
specific air quality modeling assumptions (Dudek 2020a).
Construction of project components would be subject to SDAPCD Rule 55, Fugitive Dust Control. This
rule requires that construction of project components includes steps to restrict visible emissions of
fugitive dust beyond the property line (SDAPCD 2009). Compliance with Rule 55 would limit fugitive
dust (PM10 and PM2.5) that may be generated during grading and construction activities. Construction
of project components would also be subject to SDAPCD Rule 67.0.1, Architectural Coatings. This rule
requires manufacturers, distributors, and end users of architectural and industrial maintenance
coatings to reduce VOC emissions from the use of these coatings, primarily by placing limits on the VOC
content of various coating categories (SDAPCD 2015).
Unmitigated estimated maximum daily construction criteria air pollutant emissions are represented in Table
3 and show the estimated maximum unmitigated daily construction emissions associated with the
conceptual construction phases of the project. Complete details of the emissions calculations are provided
in Appendix A of the Air Quality Report (Dudek 2020a).
Table 3
Estimated Maximum Daily Construction Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions – Unmitigated
Year
VOC NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5
Pounds per Day
2021 28.23 50.05 55.14 0.11 10.32 6.39
SDAPCD Threshold 137 250 550 250 100 55
Threshold Exceeded? No No No No No No
Notes: CO = carbon monoxide; NOx = oxides of nitrogen; PM10 = coarse particulate matter; PM2.5 = fine particulate matter; SDAPCD
= San Diego Air Pollution Control District; SOx = sulfur oxides; VOC = volatile organic compound.
1 CalEEMod is a statewide land use emissions computer model designed to provide a uniform platform to calculate
construction and operational emissions from land use development projects. The model was developed for the California
Air Pollution Control Officers Association in collaboration with multiple air districts across the state. Numerous lead agencies
in the state, including the SDAPCD, use CalEEMod to estimate greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in accordance with CEQA
Guidelines, Section 15064.4(a)(1).
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -19- Mitigated Negative Declaration
The values shown are the maximum summer or winter daily emissions results from CalEEMod.
As shown in Table 3, daily construction emissions for the project would not exceed SDAPCD’s significance
thresholds for VOC, NOx, CO, SOx, PM10, or PM2.5. As such, the project would result in a less-than-significant
impact related to construction emissions.
Further, emissions would be minimized through standard construction measures, stormwater pollution
prevention plan requirements, best management practices (BMPs), and when applicable, the California
Green Building Standards Code, as required by the city, that would reduce fugitive dust debris, emissions,
and other criteria pollutant emissions during grading and construction. Therefore emissions from the
construction phase would be minimal, temporary, and localized, resulting in pollutant emissions that are not
anticipated to significantly contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation.
Operations
Area
CalEEMod was also used to estimate emissions from the project’s area sources, which include consumer
product use, architectural coatings, and landscape maintenance equipment. The project was designed to
include natural gas fireplaces only; therefore, there will be no wood-burning units installed. There are also
no woodstoves included in the project design. CalEEMod defaults were used for operational hours and
number of days per year.
Energy
In addition to area sources, CalEEMod was also used to estimate emissions from the project’s energy use,
which includes emissions associated with building electricity and natural gas usage (non-hearth). In
accordance with Carlsbad City Council Ordinance No. CS-348, the project would use electric-based
water heating. Therefore, the energy use associated with water heating was applied to the electric
load for the project. Natural gas would only be used for cooking onsite. Electricity use would contribute
indirectly to criteria air pollutant emissions; however, the emissions from electricity use are only
quantified for greenhouse gases (GHGs) in CalEEMod since criteria pollutant emissions occur at the
site of the power plant, which is typically off site. CalEEMod default values for energy consumption
for each land use were applied for the project analysis.
The proposed project would be designed to include a solar photovoltaic (PV) rooftop system. The
project will include use of light-emitting diode (LED) lighting or other efficient lighting for at least 75
percent of the total luminaires. The project would also include a solar water-heating system on site
to heat the swimming pool.
Mobile Sources (Motor Vehicles)
Based on the project’s traffic impact analysis, vehicle trip emissions associated with travel to and from the
project would result in 1,152 average daily trips (ADTs) (refer to Section XVI, Transportation/Traffic; LLG 2020).
CalEEMod was used to estimate daily emissions from proposed vehicular sources. CalEEMod, Version
2016.3.2, default data, including temperature, trip characteristics, variable start information, emissions
factors, and trip distances, were conservatively used for the model inputs. Project-related traffic was
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -20- Mitigated Negative Declaration
assumed to include a mixture of vehicles in accordance with the model outputs for traffic. Refer to the
project’s Air Quality Report for specific vehicular traffic modelling assumptions (Dudek 2020a).
Vehicle trip emissions associated with the project are minimal and not anticipated to significantly
contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation.
Maximum daily emissions associated with the operation of the project after all phases of construction have
been completed are in Table 4. Refer to the project’s Air Quality Report for complete details of the emissions
calculations (Dudek 2020a).
Table 4
Estimated Maximum Daily Operational Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions
Source
VOC NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5
Pounds per Day
Area 4.87 0.18 15.90 0.00 0.09 0.09
Energy 0.01 0.08 0.03 0.00 0.01 0.01
Mobile 1.67 6.67 17.15 0.06 4.99 1.37
Total 6.55 6.93 33.08 0.06 5.09 1.47
SDAPCD Threshold 137 250 550 250 100 55
Threshold Exceeded? No No No No No No
Notes: CO = carbon monoxide; NOx = oxides of nitrogen; PM10 = coarse particulate matter; PM2.5 = fine particulate matter; SDAPCD
= San Diego Air Pollution Control District; SOx = sulfur oxides; VOC = volatile organic compound
The values shown are the maximum summer or winter daily emissions results from CalEEMod.
As shown above, the maximum daily operational emissions would not exceed the SDAPCD’s thresholds
for VOC, CO, NOx, SOx, PM10, or PM2.5 during the operation of the project.
Annual operations emissions estimated for the project are shown in Table 5.
Table 5
Estimated Annual Operational Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions
Source
VOC NOx CO SOx PM10 PM2.5
Tons per Year
Area 0.84 0.02 1.43 0.00 0.01 0.01
Energy 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00
Mobile 0.29 1.22 3.07 0.01 0.89 0.24
Total 1.13 1.25 4.51 0.01 0.90 0.25
SDAPCD Threshold 13.7 40 100 40 15 10
Threshold Exceeded? No No No No No No
Notes: CO = carbon monoxide; NOx = oxides of nitrogen; PM10 = coarse particulate matter; PM2.5 = fine particulate matter; SDAPCD
= San Diego Air Pollution Control District; SOx = sulfur oxides; VOC = volatile organic compound
As shown above, the annual operations emissions for the project do not exceed the SDAPCD’s significance
thresholds for VOC, CO, NOx, SOx, PM10, or PM2.5. Because the project would not exceed the daily or annual
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -21- Mitigated Negative Declaration
SDAPCD significance thresholds, the project would have a less-than-significant impact on an air quality
standard violation.
In analyzing cumulative impacts from the project, the analysis must specifically evaluate a project’s
contribution to the cumulative increase in pollutants for which the SDAB is designated as nonattainment for
the CAAQS and NAAQS. If the project does not exceed thresholds and is determined to have less than
significant project-specific impacts, it may still contribute to a significant cumulative impact on air quality if
the emissions from the project components, in combination with the emissions from other proposed or
reasonably foreseeable future projects, are in excess of established thresholds. However, the project would
only be considered to have a significant cumulative impact if its contribution accounts for a significant
proportion of the cumulative total emissions (i.e., it represents a “cumulatively considerable contribution”
to the cumulative air quality impact).
Additionally, for the SDAB, the RAQS serves as the long-term regional air quality planning document for the
purpose of assessing cumulative operational emissions within the basin to ensure the SDAB continues to
make progress toward NAAQS and CAAQS attainment status. As such, cumulative projects located in the San
Diego region would have the potential to result in a cumulative impact to air quality if, in combination, they
would conflict with or obstruct implementation of the RAQS. Similarly, individual projects that are
inconsistent with the regional planning documents on which the RAQS is based would have the potential to
result in cumulative impacts if they represent development beyond regional projections.
The SDAB has been designated as a federal nonattainment area for O3 and a state nonattainment area for
O3, PM10, and PM2.5. PM10 and PM2.5 emissions associated with construction generally result in near-field
impacts. As discussed previously, the emissions of all criteria pollutants would be below the significance
levels. Construction would be short term and temporary in nature. Additionally, construction activities
required for the implementation of project components would be considered typical of a residential project
and would not require atypical construction practices that would include high-emitting activities. Grading
and construction operations associated with the project would minimize emissions through standard
construction measures, stormwater pollution prevention plan measures and BMPs, and the California Green
Building Code, as noted in response (b)). Once construction is completed, construction-related emissions
would cease. Operational emissions generated by the project would not result in a significant impact. As
such, the project would result in less-than-significant impacts to air quality relative to operational emissions.
Regarding long-term cumulative operational emissions in relation to consistency with local air quality plans,
the SIP and RAQS serve as the primary air quality planning documents for the state and SDAB, respectively.
The SIP and RAQS rely on SANDAG growth projections based on population, vehicle trends, and land use plans
developed by the cities and by the San Diego County as part of the development of their general plans.
Therefore, projects that propose development that is consistent with the growth anticipated by local plans
would be consistent with the SIP and RAQS and would not be considered to result in cumulatively considerable
impacts from operational emissions. As discussed in response (a), the project is consistent with the existing
zoning and land use designations and is within the SANDAG growth projections. Thus, it would be consistent
at a regional level with the underlying growth forecasts in the SIP and RAQS.
As a result, the project would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to regional O3
concentrations or other criteria pollutant emissions. Cumulative air quality impacts for construction and
operation would be less than significant for the project.
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -22- Mitigated Negative Declaration
c) No Impact: Sensitive receptors include schools, hospitals, playgrounds, childcare centers, athletic
facilities, long-term healthcare facilities, rehabilitation centers, convalescent centers, retirement homes,
or other facilities that house individuals with health conditions that would be adversely impacted by
changes in air quality. For purposes of this analysis, residents are also considered sensitive receptors. The
closest sensitive receptor to the proposed project is the residences located approximately 410 feet
southwest of the site. Receptors also include future tenants of the proposed project.
Carbon Monoxide Hotspots
Projects contributing to adverse traffic impacts may result in the formation of CO hotspots. To verify that
the proposed project would not cause or contribute to a violation of the CO standard, a screening
evaluation of the potential for CO hotspots was conducted. The Local Mobility Analysis performed for the
project evaluated the level of service (LOS) impacts at intersections affected by the project (LLG 2020).
The potential for CO hotspots was evaluated based on the results of the traffic report. The project would
not exceed the County’s screening criteria for performing a quantitative CO hotspots analysis. Therefore,
impacts would be less than significant.
Health Effects of Toxic Air Contaminants
In addition to impacts from criteria pollutants, project impacts may include emissions of pollutants identified
by the state and federal government as TACs or hazardous air pollutants. The greatest potential for TAC
emissions during construction would be diesel particulate emissions from heavy equipment operations and
heavy-duty trucks and the associated health impacts to sensitive receptors. The closest sensitive receptors
would be any receptor located directly adjacent to the proposed alignments and associated facilities.
Construction of project components would not require the extensive use of heavy-duty construction
equipment, which is subject to a California Air Resources Board Airborne Toxics Control Measure for in-use
diesel construction equipment to reduce diesel particulate emissions, and would not involve extensive use
of diesel trucks, which are also subject to an Airborne Toxics Control Measure. Construction of the project
would occur over a period of 12 months and would be periodic and short term within each phase. Following
completion of construction activities, project-related TAC emissions would cease. Additionally, there is no
diesel-powered equipment that would operate during project operation.
Health Effects of Criteria Air Pollutants
Construction and operation of the project would not result in emissions that exceed the SDAPCD’s emission
thresholds for any criteria air pollutants. The SDAPCD thresholds are based on the SDAB complying with the
NAAQS and CAAQS which are protective of public health; therefore, no adverse effects to human health would
result from the project. The following provides a general discussion of criteria air pollutants and their health
effects. The VOC and NOx emissions would minimally contribute to regional O3 concentrations and the
associated health effects. In addition to O3, NOx emissions would not contribute to potential exceedances
of the NAAQS and CAAQS for NO2. As shown in response (b), the existing NO2 concentrations in the area
are well below the NAAQS and CAAQS standards. Thus, it is not expected that the project’s operational
NOx emissions would result in exceedances of the NO2 standards or contribute to the associated health
effects. CO tends to be a localized impact associated with congested intersections. The associated CO
“hotspots” were discussed previously as a less-than-significant impact. Thus, the project’s CO emissions
would not contribute to significant health effects associated with this pollutant. PM10 and PM2.5 would not
contribute to potential exceedances of the NAAQS and CAAQS for particulate matter, obstruct the SDAB
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -23- Mitigated Negative Declaration
from coming into attainment for these pollutants, or contribute to significant health effects associated
with particulates. Therefore, health impacts associated with criteria air pollutants would be considered
less than significant.
d) Less-than-Significant Impact: The proposed project could generate objectionable odors from
construction, vehicles and/or equipment exhaust from construction of the project. Odors produced during
construction would be attributable to concentrations of unburned hydrocarbons from tailpipes of
construction equipment and architectural coatings. Such odors are temporary, and for the types of
construction activities anticipated for project components, would generally occur at magnitudes that
would not affect substantial numbers of people. Therefore, impacts associated with odors during
construction would be considered less than significant.
Examples of land uses and industrial operations that are commonly associated with odor complaints include
agricultural uses, wastewater treatment plants, food-processing facilities, chemical plants, composting,
refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding. In addition to the odor source, the distance between the
sensitive receptor) and the odor source, as well as the local meteorological conditions, are considerations in
the potential for a project to frequently expose the public to objectionable odors. The project would include
a residential development with a pool and recreational room, which is not expected to produce any
nuisance odors or other such emissions; therefore, impacts related to odor caused by the project would
be less than significant.
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mit. Incorporated Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat
modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or
special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by California Department of Fish and Game or U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian, aquatic or
wetland habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in
local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by California
Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected
wetlands (including but not limited to marsh, vernal pool, coastal,
etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or
other means?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or
migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident
or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife
nursery sites?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological
resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -24- Mitigated Negative Declaration
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mit. Incorporated Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation
Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved
local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
a) Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated: A Biological Technical Report (BTR) was prepared
by Dudek in August 2019November 2020 that documents the biological surveys of existing conditions,
impact analysis, and jurisdictional wetland delineation performed by Dudek. The following section is
based on the findings within the BTR (Dudek 20192020e). Technical memoranda and reports are hereby
incorporated by reference.
The proposed project would include open space in the northern and western areas and adjacent to the
preserve to the south. Therefore, edge effects generally could occur along the development-preservation
interface to the north, south, and west. The preserve edge is provided protection by walls and fencing. All
landscaping adjacent to the preserve is proposed to be native. There will be no lighting within the
preserve. Fuel modification is designed to be within the proposed impact area.
Special-Status Plants
Direct Impacts
Special-status plant species were not detected during surveys. No impacts would occur to the coastal sage
scrub within the San Diego Gas & Electric easement, and no impacts to special-status plants would occur.
Indirect Impacts
Most of the indirect impacts to vegetation communities described in the BTR can also affect special-status
plants. It should be noted that no special-status plants were detected on site, and none are anticipated;
however, if there are plants that occur off site within adjacent areas, standard measures addressed in the
Carlsbad HMP provide protection. During construction of the proposed project, indirect effects may
include dust that could disrupt plant vitality in the short term and/or construction-related soil erosion and
drainage runoff. However, it is assumed that typical construction practices, including dust and erosion
control and water quality BMPs, will be implemented and will reduce these effects. Implementation of
the adjacency standards addressed in the Carlsbad HMP as discussed in response (f) are expected to
reduce indirect impacts to special-status plants to a level below significant.
Special-Status Wildlife
Direct Impacts
The project site contains two special-status wildlife species that were observed during surveys: Blainville’s
horned lizard (Phrynosoma blainvillii) and Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter cooperii). If initial habitat clearing
occurs during the breeding season for avian species, reproduction for species within this area may
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -25- Mitigated Negative Declaration
significantly impact those populations. Even if clearing activities occur outside the breeding season, the
carrying capacity of the regionally available suitable habitat will have been reduced and may significantly
adversely impact special-status species populations. Impacts to special-status wildlife are potentially
significant. However, Mitigation Measure BIO-1 would reduce potential direct impacts on special-status
wildlife to less-than-significant levels.
Indirect Impacts
There is potential for indirect impacts due to noise during the breeding season since it may affect nesting
birds, and due to lighting adjacent to the open space following occupancy of the development.
Indirect impacts include potential disruption of breeding birds, including potentially occurring special-
status species and other wildlife species that may use the riparian habitat for nesting. Indirect impacts
from construction-related noise may occur to special-status wildlife if construction occurs during the
breeding season (February 15 through August 31 for most species and January 1 through August 31 for
raptors). During the breeding season, there is high potential for the special-status coastal California
gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica) to nest in the slope to the south of the site and for the
yellow warbler (Setophaga petechia) to nest within the riparian habitat adjacent to the proposed
development. Additionally, there is moderate potential for special-status raptors (i.e., Cooper’s hawk and
loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus)) to nest within the eucalyptus and oak trees adjacent to the
proposed development. With implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-2 and BIO-3 to protect from
indirect impacts on nesting birds, impacts would be less than significant.
Most of the indirect impacts to vegetation communities can also affect special-status wildlife in on-site
open space or off-site preserve areas. Also, adverse indirect impacts to vegetation communities, such as
trampling of vegetation, can cause degradation of habitat quality. Implementation of the adjacency
standards addressed in the Carlsbad HMP as discussed in response (f), and well as wildlife construction
measures included in Mitigation Measure BIO-4, are expected to reduce indirect impacts to special-status
wildlife to a level below significant.
Long-term adverse impacts to wildlife, such as predation by urban pest species (e.g., American crows
(Corvus brachyrhynchos), raccoons (Procyon lotor), and striped skunks (Mephitis mephitis)), lighting and
noise, and human presence, would likely occur despite the design of a consolidated preserve.
Mitigation Measures
BIO-1 Clearing and grubbing activities are prohibited on site during the bird-breeding season
(February 15–September 15). The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) will be notified
at least seven days before clearing and grubbing begins. During this activity, a qualified
biologist will walk the area ahead of construction equipment to flush birds away from
impact areas to prevent direct impact to individual animals. The qualified biologist will
immediately report to USFWS the number and location of any federally listed birds
disturbed by clearing and grubbing.
BIO-2 A number of oak trees were originally preserved on site within the original approval of
the project. These trees are currently declining in condition or are dead. As such, to
mitigate for the loss of these trees, oak trees are included in the landscape plans for the
riparian buffer area. Trees will be provided at a 1:1 ratio.
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -26- Mitigated Negative Declaration
BIO-3 Clearing and grubbing activities are generally prohibited during the bird-breeding season
(February 15–September 15); thus, no direct impacts will occur to nesting birds that may
be present within the construction footprint per Mitigation Measure BIO-3. The U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (USFWS) will be notified at least seven days before clearing and
grubbing begins.
Other construction activities will also be avoided during the breeding season if feasible. If
this cannot be avoided, the following measures will be taken:
• If coastal California gnatcatchers (Polioptila californica californica) have the potential to
occur on site, a qualified biologist will conduct a focused species gnatcatcher survey in
appropriate habitat within the preserve areas and 500 feet surrounding the project site
within suitable habitat. The surveys will consist of three visits one week apart; the last
of these will be conducted no more than three days prior to construction.
• Surveys will be conducted by a qualified biologist in appropriate habitat for nesting
raptors and migratory birds (including but not limited to the least Bell’s vireo (Vireo
bellii pusillus)) and within a 500-foot survey buffer within three days of construction.
• The USFWS will be notified immediately of any federally listed species that are located
during pre-construction surveys within the adjacent areas.
• If nests of listed birds, migratory birds, raptors, or other special-status species are
located, they will be fenced with a protective buffer of at least 500 feet from active
nests of listed species and 300 feet from other special-status bird species. All
construction activity will be prohibited within this area.
• During the breeding season, construction noise will be measured regularly to
maintain a threshold at or below 60 A-weighted decibels (dBA) hourly equivalent level
(Leq) within 500 feet of breeding habitat occupied by listed species. The site is
currently affected by roadway noise. If ambient levels are greater than 60 dBA, a
modified threshold should be evaluated with the City of Carlsbad. If noise levels
supersede the threshold, the construction array will be changed or noise attenuation
measures will be implemented.
BIO-4 Wildlife Construction Measures
a) Construction through sensitive areas shall be scheduled to minimize potential
impacts to biological resources. Construction adjacent to drainages shall occur during
periods of minimum flow (i.e., summer through the first significant rain of fall) to
avoid excessive sedimentation and erosion and to avoid impacts to drainage-
dependent species. Construction near riparian areas or other sensitive habitats shall
also be scheduled to avoid the breeding season (January 1 through September 15)
and potential impacts to breeding bird species (refer to Mitigation Measure BIO-3).
b) Lighting in or adjacent to the preserve shall not be used, except where essential for
roadway, facility use, and safety. If nighttime construction lights are necessary, all
lighting adjacent to natural habitat shall be shielded and/or directed away from habitat.
c) If dead or injured listed species are located, initial notification must be made within
three working days, in writing, to the USFWS Division of Law Enforcement in Torrance,
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -27- Mitigated Negative Declaration
California, and by telephone and in writing to the applicable jurisdiction, Carlsbad
Field Office of the USFWS, and CDFW.
d) Exotic species that prey on or displace target species of concern shall be permanently
removed from the site.
e) To avoid attracting predators of the target species of concern, the project site shall
be kept as clean of debris as possible. All food-related trash items shall be enclosed
in sealed containers and regularly removed from the site. Pets of project personnel
shall not be allowed on site where they may come into contact with any listed species.
b) Less than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated:
Vegetation Communities
Direct Impacts
Impacts to special-status vegetation communities identified in Table 7 are considered significant. These
impacts include permanent impacts to 0.08 acres of southern willow scrub, 0.01 acres of open water, and
0.02 acres of coastal sage scrub-coyotebrush scrub. The impacts that potentially result from shading from
the construction of the bridge are included in these acreage numbers. Refer to Figure 87, Biological
Resources Impact Map, for locations of vegetation communities and the location of the bridge impact.
Given the presence of special-status biological resources adjacent to and within the project site that will
be preserved as part of the project or other projects, indirect impacts to vegetation communities are
potentially significant in both the short and long terms. Therefore, mitigation is required for the impact
to coastal sage scrub, open water, and southern willow scrub (see Mitigation Measure BIO-5).
Table 7
Existing Acreage and Proposed Impacts to Vegetation Communities/Land Covers on the Project Site (Acres)
Vegetation Community/
Land Cover Existing
Impact from Grading for
Development and
Emergency Access Road,
Including Bridge and Setback
(Outside of Carlsbad HMP
Preserve)a
Carlsbad HMP
Preserve Open
Space Area
(Restrictive
Covenant area)
HOA Preserve
Area for Upland
Buffer (Does Not
Include Existing
Paved Areas)
Group A
Southern willow scrub 1.20 0.08 1.121.07 —
Open water 0.16 0.01 0.150.14 —
Open water/concrete-
channel
0.04 — 0.04 —
Group C
Coastal sage scrub 1.40 — 1.401.36 —
Coastal sage scrub–coyotebrush dominated 0.11 0.02 0.09 —
Group F
Disturbed land 8.22 6.41 1.201.17 0.61
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -28- Mitigated Negative Declaration
Table 7
Existing Acreage and Proposed Impacts to Vegetation Communities/Land Covers on the Project Site (Acres)
Vegetation Community/ Land Cover Existing
Impact from Grading for Development and Emergency Access Road, Including Bridge and Setback (Outside of Carlsbad HMP Preserve)a
Carlsbad HMP Preserve Open Space Area
(Restrictive Covenant area)
HOA Preserve Area for Upland Buffer (Does Not Include Existing Paved Areas)
Other Lands
Developed 1.31 1.29 0.020.01 —
Developed/concrete-
channel
0.09 — 0.09 —
Total 12.53 7.81 4.113.97 0.61
Note: HMP = habitat management plan; HOA = homeowners’ association
a Also includes 0.10 acres that is within the area approved for development but that is not graded.
Indirect Impacts
Potentially significant indirect impacts include dust, erosion, sedimentation, trash dumping, introduction
of exotics plant and animal species, changes in fire regime, and hydrologic changes and indirect impacts
to nesting birds. Indirect impacts to vegetation communities would primarily result from adverse edge
effects. During construction of the proposed project, edge effects may include dust, which could disrupt
plant vitality in the short term, and/or construction-related soil erosion and runoff. However, typical
construction practices, including dust control, erosion control, and water quality protection measures,
would be implemented to reduce these effects.
Potential long-term indirect impacts on vegetation could include trampling by humans traveling off trail,
invasion by exotic plants and animals, exposure to urban pollutants (fertilizers, pesticides, herbicides, and
other hazardous materials), increase or decrease in natural fire regime, soil erosion, and hydrologic
changes (e.g., surface- and groundwater level and quality). Although the project is designed to minimize
preserve edge effects, long-term indirect impacts could occur. However, the proposed open space would
include all native riparian vegetation and revegetated buffer, as well as the coastal sage scrub. As such,
long-term indirect impacts to vegetation communities are anticipated to be reduced throughout the site.
Except for the area needed for emergency access, vegetation will be preserved.
The proposed open space and existing Carlsbad HMP preserve on site will be protected by a conservation
easement, funding, and a land manager, and the on-site open space would be protected by fencing. For
the existing Carlsbad HMP preserve off site to the south, indirect impacts are proposed to be prevented
by adherence to the adjacency standards and the fencing and walls that exist or are proposed. Finally,
vegetation within the open space riparian buffer will be protected by the planting of native plant species.
Indirect impacts to vegetation shall be reduced to levels below significance with incorporation of
Mitigation Measures BIO-6 and BIO-7).
Riparian Habitat
There is riparian habitat along the northern portion of the site within the Encinas Creek drainage and
within the western parcel that will be included in the Carlsbad HMP preserve. The Carlsbad HMP
includes adjacency standards and buffers to avoid and minimize impacts to sensitive vegetation
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -29- Mitigated Negative Declaration
communities in conservation areas or jurisdictional resources that are adjacent to developed areas.
Adjacency standards addressed in the Carlsbad HMP include fire management, erosion control,
landscaping restrictions, fencing, signs and lighting, and predator and exotic species control.
Implementation of these adjacency standards are expected to reduce indirect impacts to vegetation
communities to a level below significant (Dudek 20192020e).
Impacts from fuel modification are located within the development footprint; no impacts to the riparian
buffer, upland buffer, or native habitat will occur from fuel modification. No impacts will occur to the
riparian buffer or to native habitat except for the required emergency access at the western end (0.03
acres) or to the very narrow sliver (0.01 acres) of riparian buffer, which is replaced by other buffer areas
within the same area. One other riparian buffer area in the more eastern portion of the site is currently
located within the existing road, but no impacts are proposed from the current project, and the proposed
walls and fencing would provide the function of the riparian buffer as protection of the riparian habitat.
The riparian buffer is planned to be restored to native habitat per a conceptual wetland restoration plan.
The Preliminary Drainage Study for the project indicates that, in the proposed project condition, the flow
patterns will largely stay the same (Fuscoe Engineering 2019b). The three north–south storm drain
systems on site will be reused. Biofiltration with partial retention will be used to treat runoff before it
enters the storm drain system. Runoff within the pads will be conveyed to the proposed drainage systems
through surface flow; therefore, separate “clean” and “dirty” systems will not be necessary. No detention
or retention basins are proposed to be constructed within the riparian buffer. Therefore, impacts to
riparian, aquatic, or wetland habitat or other sensitive natural communities will be less than significant
with incorporation of Mitigation Measure BIO-5.
Mitigation Measures
BIO-5 Habitat restoration (i.e., creation and substantial restoration) totaling 0.24 acres of
jurisdictional southern willow scrub, 0.03 acres of open water, and 0.04 acres of coastal
sage scrub designed through preparation of a conceptual habitat restoration plan shall be
reviewed and approved by the city Planner in consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and the California
Coastal Commission (CCC). Based on a current evaluation, restoration is estimated to
include 1.351.17 acres of disturbed habitat.
The applicant shall submit a final habitat restoration plan and specifications to the City of
Carlsbad and agencies for review at least 30 days prior to initiating project impacts. The
habitat restoration plan shall be prepared and implemented consistent with the Multiple
Habitat Conservation Program, Volume II, Appendix C (Revegetation Guidelines), and Volume
III; Habitat Management Plan for Natural Communities in the City of Carlsbad (City of Carlsbad
2004, pp. F-8 to F-11); and Open Space Management Plan, Section 3.1.5. The habitat
restoration plan shall be reviewed and approved by the city Planner in consultation with
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), California Department of Fish and Wildlife
(CDFW), and California Coastal Commission (CCC). At a minimum, the habitat restoration
plan should shall include an evaluation of restoration suitability specific to proposed habitat
types, soil and plant material salvage/translocation information, planting and seeding lists, a
discussion of irrigation, a maintenance and monitoring program, and success criteria. All areas
should shall be monitored for five years to ensure establishment of intended plant
communities.
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -30- Mitigated Negative Declaration
An approved habitat restoration specialist shall be designated and determine the most
appropriate method of restoration. Restoration techniques, as specified in the habitat
restoration plan, may include hydroseeding, hand-seeding, imprinting, and soil and plant
salvaging. The habitat restoration plan shall also include criteria to measure success and
describe how monitoring of revegetation efforts shall be implemented. At the completion
of project construction, all construction materials shall be removed from the site.
Additionally, if deemed necessary, any topsoil located in areas to be restored shall be
conserved and stockpiled during the excavation process for use in the restoration process.
BIO-6 Construction Plans Requirements The potential for significant indirect impacts during
construction shall be mitigated through implementation of the standard measures stated in
the city’s Biology Guidelines.
A qualified biologist shall conduct a training session for project personnel prior to
proposed activities. At a minimum, the training shall include a description of the
target species of concern and its habitats; the general provisions of the federal and
state Endangered Species Acts and the Habitat Management Plan (HMP); the need
to adhere to the provisions of the act and the HMP; the penalties associated with
violating the provisions of the act; and the general measures that are being
implemented to conserve the target species of concern as they relate to the project,
access routes, and project site boundaries within which the project activities must
be accomplished.
The footprint of disturbance shall be specified in the construction plans. Construction
limits would be delineated with orange fencing, and in areas potentially subject to
project-related runoff, silt fencing would be used to delineate the impact footprint.
All fencing would be maintained until the completion of all construction activities, at
which time all fencing would be removed. All construction personnel and associates
shall be instructed that their activities, vehicles, equipment, and construction
materials are restricted to the proposed project footprint, designated staging areas,
and routes of travel. If any impacts shall occur beyond the approved impact footprint,
all work in the immediate vicinity shall cease until the disturbance limit breach has
been addressed to the satisfaction of the City of Carlsbad and resource agencies.
The upstream and downstream limits of project disturbance (i.e., the location of the
bridge crossing) plus limits of disturbance on either side of the riparian vegetation on
site shall be clearly defined, marked in the field, and reviewed by the project biologist
prior to initiation of work. The project should be designed to avoid the placement of
equipment within the riparian vegetation or on adjacent upland habitats used by
target species of concern, unless otherwise part of the mitigation plan.
A water pollution and erosion control plan shall be developed that describes sediment
and hazardous materials control, dewatering or diversion structures, fueling and
equipment management practices, and other factors deemed necessary by reviewing
agencies. Erosion control measures shall be monitored on a regularly scheduled basis,
particularly during times of heavy rainfall. Corrective measures will be implemented
in the event erosion control strategies are inadequate. Sediment/erosion control
measures will be continued at the project site until such time as the revegetation
efforts are successful at soil stabilization.
The qualified project biologist shall review grading plans (e.g., all access routes and
staging areas) and monitor construction activities throughout the duration of
grading/ground disturbance associated with the project to ensure that all practicable
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -31- Mitigated Negative Declaration
measures are being employed to avoid incidental disturbance of habitat and any
target species of concern outside the project footprint.
Construction monitoring reports shall be completed and provided to the city
summarizing how the project is in compliance with applicable conditions. The
project biologist should be empowered to halt work activity if necessary and to
confer with City staff to ensure the proper implementation of species and habitat
protection measures.
Any habitat that is impacted that is not in the identified project footprint shall be
disclosed immediately to the city, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), California
Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and California Coastal Commission (CCC) and
shall be compensated at a minimum ratio of 5:1.
Construction access to and from the site will be located along existing access routes
or disturbed areas to the greatest extent possible. All access routes outside of existing
roads or construction areas will be clearly marked.
Construction employees will limit their activities, vehicles, equipment, and
construction materials to the fenced project footprint.
Equipment storage, fueling, and staging areas shall be located on disturbed upland
sites with minimal risk of direct drainage into riparian areas or other sensitive habitats
and at least 100 feet from waters of the United States. These designated areas shall
be located in such a manner as to prevent any runoff from entering sensitive habitat.
All necessary precautions shall be taken to prevent the release of cement or other
toxic substances into surface waters. All project-related spills of hazardous materials
shall be reported to the city and shall be cleaned up immediately, and contaminated
soils shall be moved to approved disposal areas.
If stream flows must be diverted (unlikely for the bridge construction), the
diversions shall be conducted using sandbags or other methods requiring minimal
instream impacts. Silt fencing or other sediment trapping materials shall be installed
at the downstream end of construction activity to minimize the transport of
sediments off site. Settling ponds where sediment is collected shall be cleaned out
in a manner that prevents the sediment from re-entering the stream. Care shall be
exercised when removing silt fences, as feasible, to prevent debris or sediment from
returning to the stream.
Erodible fill material shall not be deposited into water courses. Brush, loose soils, or
other similar debris material shall not be stockpiled within the stream channel or on
its banks.
Fugitive dust will be avoided and minimized through watering and other
appropriate measures.
BIO-7 The City has the right to access and inspect any sites of approved projects including any
restoration/enhancement area for compliance with project approval conditions, including
best management practices (BMPs). The USFWS and CDFW may accompany City
representatives on this inspection.
c) Less than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated: Results of the jurisdictional delineation
indicate there are two types of potentially jurisdictional wetland resources on site: non-wetland relatively
permanent waters of the United States (RPW) and wetland associated riparian vegetation. The non-
wetland RPWs identified on site are subject to the joint jurisdiction of the ACOE, RWQCB, CDFW, and CCC.
The associated riparian vegetation mapped alongside Encinas Creek in the southern portion of the site is
f)
g)
h)
i)
j)
k)
I)
m)
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -32- Mitigated Negative Declaration
subject to jurisdiction under the CDFW and CCC. The two types of potential jurisdictional resources (i.e., non-
wetland RPW and associated riparian vegetation) that were identified and evaluated during the delineation
included: (1) earthen and concrete-lined portions of a perennial creek channel and (2) riparian vegetation
associated with Encinas Creek, respectively.
The first type of jurisdictional resource on site is a perennial creek channel. This feature represents the
ordinary high water mark (OHWM) of Encinas Creek which flows westward and is located along the
northern boundary of the site to the south of Palomar Airport Road. Within the site, portions of Encinas
Creek are both earthen and concrete-lined; earthen portions are mapped as open water (OW) and the
concrete sections are mapped as open water/concrete-channel (OW-CC). The extent of agency jurisdiction
within the concrete sections of the creek are mapped to the limits of the concrete-lining, whereas the
earthen portions of the creek were mapped according the OHWM. Within the site, there is 345 linear feet
of Encinas Creek that is conveyed underground via culverts (refer to Figure 87).
The second type of jurisdictional feature on site is riparian vegetation associated with the creek, which is
southern willow scrub. The southern willow scrub community on site is strictly associated with Encinas
Creek and occurs along both banks of the creek. The riparian vegetation areas are dominated by
hydrophytic vegetation (i.e., arroyo willow and poison hemlock); however, they do not support hydric soil
conditions2 and lack evidence of hydrology. Therefore, these areas are determined to be jurisdictional
under the CDFW and CCC due to the dominance of hydrophytic vegetation and association with a stream
channel (i.e., Encinas Creek).
Direct Impacts
Based on the analysis of the proposed limits of grading, impacts will occur to jurisdictional waters of the
United States and riparian habitat due to the construction of the bridge/emergency access. Impacts to
jurisdictional resources are considered significant. As shown in Table 8, a total of 0.04 acres of southern
willow scrub under the jurisdiction of CDFW and CCC would be impacted directly by the placement of the
bridge. A total of 0.04 acres of southern willow scrub under the jurisdiction of the CDFW and CCC would not
be directly impacted, but lies underneath the bridge and may be affected by shading. All direct impacts to
ACOE and RWQCB jurisdictional areas would be avoided, but 0.01 acres of open water would be bridged. The
site includes preserve areas that include Encinas Creek and riparian vegetation plus a buffer that would be
restored to native vegetation. The applicant met with CDFW, ACOE, and RWQCB on November 14, 2017. The
ACOE and RWQCB confirmed that they would not require a permit for the project.
Table 8
Proposed Impacts to Jurisdictional Areas on the Project Site
Vegetation Community/
Land Cover Type
Resource Agency Jurisdiction (Acres)
Shading (Bridge)
ACOE/RWQCB/CDFW/CCC
Permanent
CDFW/CCC
Shading
(Bridge)
CDFW/CCC Grand Total
Southern willow scrub — 0.04 0.04 0.08
Developed/concrete-channel — — — 0.00
2 The southern willow scrub mapped along the south side of the westernmost parcel is separated from Encinas Creek by non-
native vegetation; hydric soils were present within this portion of the southern willow scrub; however, there are no
hydrology indicators. Hence, this area is designated as CDFW/CCC jurisdiction.
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -33- Mitigated Negative Declaration
Table 8
Proposed Impacts to Jurisdictional Areas on the Project Site
Vegetation Community/
Land Cover Type
Resource Agency Jurisdiction (Acres)
Shading (Bridge)
ACOE/RWQCB/CDFW/CCC
Permanent
CDFW/CCC
Shading
(Bridge)
CDFW/CCC Grand Total
Open water 0.01 — — 0.01
Open water/concrete-channel — — — 0.00
Grand Total 0.01 0.04 0.04 0.09
Notes: ACOE = U.S. Army Corps of Engineers; CCC = California Coastal Commission; CDFW = California Department of Fish and
Wildlife; RWQCB = Regional Water Quality Control Board
Mitigation is required for the impact to coastal sage scrub, open water, and southern willow scrub. In the
Carlsbad HMP, the CCC has required that there be no net loss of these sensitive vegetation
communities/resources within the Coastal Zone. Thus, substantial restoration or creation must account for
at least 1:1 of the mitigation. In addition, within the Coastal Zone, on-site mitigation by preservation is not
allowed. All mitigation will need to be through purchase of off-site land or through restoration of disturbed
lands as outlined in the Carlsbad HMP. As discussed in Mitigation Measure BIO-5, the proposed project
would include on-site restoration of suitable fully disturbed habitat within the Coastal Zone for all of the
impacts. This area would be restored to functional coastal sage scrub, open water, and southern willow
scrub. Additionally, implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-8 would require attainment of permits and
agreements, further reducing the impacts of jurisdictional resources. Therefore, direct impacts to
jurisdictional areas would be reduced to less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measures
BIO-5, BIO-6, and BIO-8.
Indirect Impacts
Many of the potential short- and long-term indirect impacts to vegetation communities and special-status
plants (described previously) also apply to the jurisdictional waters and riparian habitat. Areas
downstream of the project site may be subject to erosion, sedimentation, and pollution during and
following project construction. Although standard construction BMPs and recommended preserve design
configuration have been incorporated into the proposed project, short- and long-term indirect impacts
could occur. Protection for the riparian and riparian buffers is described in response (b). Additionally,
implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-9 and BIO-10 would incorporate protective habitat buffers
into the project design and compliance with the adjacency standards outlined in the Carlsbad HMP,
preventing impacts adjacent to the riparian areas. Therefore, indirect impacts to jurisdictional areas will
be reduced to less than significant with implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-9 and BIO-10.
Mitigation Measures
BIO-8 Impacts to jurisdictional resources are anticipated in order to construct the emergency
access and bridge. Prior to the issuance of permits for grading or construction activities,
the applicant shall obtain the following permits and agreement:
• A Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement issued by the California Department
of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) for maintenance activities in the streambed
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -34- Mitigated Negative Declaration
• Any necessary California Coastal Act permits from the California Coastal Commission
(CCC) and/or City of Carlsbad.
BIO-9 Protective habitat buffers consistent with the City of Carlsbad’s Habitat Management Plan
(Carlsbad HMP) and Guidelines for Riparian Buffers shall be incorporated into project
design. Prior to the recordation of the first final map, the riparian buffers shall be included in
the restrictive covenant that also will provide protection for the riparian habitat. The upland
buffer is not to be included in the restrictive covenant.
BIO-10 In order to prevent impacts of the proposed development on the City of Carlsbad’s
Habitat Management Plan (Carlsbad HMP) preserve area off site and to the west or to the
native vegetation in the riparian habitat proposed to be amended into the Carlsbad HMP
preserve, the proposed project shall comply with the adjacency standards outlined in the
Carlsbad HMP. Prior to the issuance of the first grading permit, the project plans shall
reflect the adjacency standards as follows:
a. Fire Management
Fire management for the proposed project shall be addressed through the designation of
the fuel modification zones (FMZs). All FMZ areas shall be incorporated within the
development boundaries and shall be addressed with the preparation of a fire protection
plan (FPP).
b. Erosion Control
Standard best management practices (BMPs) will be implemented to slow surface flow
and dampen initial precipitation flow in the development area. In addition, no new
surface drainage shall be directed into the open space areas.
c. Landscaping Restrictions
Landscape planting palettes for the proposed project shall not use non-native, invasive
plant species in the areas adjacent to the riparian or upland habitat or adjacent to the
Carlsbad HMP preserve off site to the west or south. In addition, because the site is within
the Coastal Zone, no invasive plant species shall be used in the landscaping of the
development. These plant species are identified in the Carlsbad HMP but the list of
invasive species that will be avoided is not limited to the species on the Carlsbad HMP list.
Irrigation of the landscaping shall be designed and scheduled to avoid runoff into the
proposed open space. The riparian and upland buffers shall be restored with native
habitat per the concept plan.
d. Fencing, Signs, and Lighting
To deter entry into the riparian habitat (open space area protected by the restrictive
covenant) by people and pets, the area shall be fenced with post and cable fencing. Signs
shall be attached to the fence at intermittent intervals to alert the residents of the
sensitive nature of the open space area and that dogs are not allowed. A trail is proposed
to be located within the 15 feet closest to development, and the fencing shall preclude
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -35- Mitigated Negative Declaration
people from passing beyond the trail into the habitat. Other than safety lighting, no
lighting that shall intrude into the riparian habitat and will be shielded or directed away
from the open space area. Fencing shall be installed along the southern boundary in
supplement to the existing walls and to prevent people from entering the preserve area
off site. Fencing and walls shall also be installed in any areas adjacent to the proposed
open space to preclude human activity within the open space.
e. Predator and Exotic Species Control
The homeowners’ association (HOA) for the proposed development shall alert the residents
to the potential effects that domestic animals may have on the native fauna and flora. The
riparian habitat shall be fenced to discourage the entry of domestic animals into the open
space.
d) Less-than-Significant Impact: The project occurs within a potential area for wildlife movement within
Encinas Creek along the north side of the property. The proposed bridge crossing would not reduce
wildlife movement through the area since it will provide for a wide and open area within which wildlife
may move. The total span of the bridge, from the top of each abutment, is 60 feet. The conceptual bridge
design provides an openness ratio of approximately 2.0. This calculation is based on the width of the span
(approximately 40 feet (12.2 meters) across natural grade), the height of the bridge (approximately 10 feet
(three meters)), and total length of the span (approximately 60 feet (18.3 meters)). The openness ratio is based
on the width times the height divided by the length, in meters (Arizona Game and Fish Department 2008). The
MHCP recommends a minimum 1:1 length-to-width ratio, which the proposed design also meets (SANDAG
2003). Minimum openness ratios for movement of large mammals is 1.0; the proposed bridge provides double
times this ratio and therefore is more than adequate to ensure wildlife movement.
Direct impacts to the habitat linkages within Encinas Creek is less than significant since the crossing is
proposed to be a bridge span that is placed outside of jurisdictional limits. With the fencing and
management, indirect impacts are also considered less than significant.
e) Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated: The city has no formal tree protection ordinance
that pertains to trees located on private property. The city’s Tree Ordinance pertains to protection of trees
within the public right-of-way (City of Carlsbad 2000). However, as a condition of Resolution No. 1995 CT
82-4/PUD-38, “whenever possible, the existing live oaks onsite shall be preserved” (City of Carlsbad 1985).
Tree removal or encroachment within the tree-protected zone (canopy dripline plus five feet or 15 feet
from trunk, whichever is greater) is anticipated with implementation of the proposed project (Dudek
20192020e). Tree removal is expected to be required when the trunk is located inside or within two feet
of the proposed limits of grading. See Figure 98, Tree Impacts, for locations of trees to be removed and
preserved and encroachment locations.
Dudek prepared an Arborist Report (Dudek 20192020e), which inventoried and evaluated 110 trees on
and adjacent to the project site. In total, 23 trees are anticipated to be directly impacted by the current
proposed project and are not recommended for preservation. Additionally, Appendix D of the Biological
Technical Report provides tree protection measures prior, during, and after construction (Dudek
20192020e). These measures will act as general guidelines for tree protection from construction impacts.
The measure shall be monitored by arborists and enforced by contractors. In compliance with the tree
protection measures outlined in the Biological Technical Report, the project would not conflict with any
local policies or ordinances protection biological resources. With implementation of Mitigation Measure
BIO-2, impacts to oak trees would be less than significant.
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -36- Mitigated Negative Declaration
The City adopted the Habitat Management Plan for Natural Communities in the City of Carlsbad (City of
Carlsbad 2004) with the purpose to identify how the city, in cooperation with federal and state wildlife
agencies, can preserve the diversity of habitat and protect sensitive species in conjunction with private
development projects, public projects, and other activities, which are consistent with the Carlsbad HMP
(Dudek 20192020e). Refer to Threshold F below for a discussion regarding the Carlsbad HMP.
f) Less than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated: The proposed project is located in the Carlsbad HMP
area and the Coastal Zone. The City of Carlsbad HMP is a comprehensive, citywide conservation program
whose purpose is to identify and preserve sensitive biological resources within the city while allowing for
additional development consistent with the city’s General Plan and Growth Management Plan. Specific
biological objectives of the HMP are to conserve the full range of vegetation types remaining in the city, with
a focus on protecting rare and special-status habitats and species. The HMP acts as a Subarea Plan to the
overall MHCP that was approved and finalized in 2003 (SANDAG 2003).
This biological resources technical report has been prepared in consultation with the Guidelines for
Biological Studies (City of Carlsbad 2008) and the Carlsbad HMP (City of Carlsbad 2004). The proposed
project is located within Local Facilities Management Zone 5, and is not located in any existing or proposed
hardline preserve areas except for the western additional parcel which is designated Link F which connects
Cores 4, 6, and 8. The proposed project adheres to the guidelines established for Facilities Management
Zone 5, including restoration activities as appropriate for the location.
The Guidelines for Biological Studies require buffers and avoidance of sensitive habitats, including
wetlands, riparian, and native upland habitats (City of Carlsbad 2008). Buffer widths of 50 feet for
riparian habitat and 20 feet for other native upland habitats have been designated for the site. The
measurement of the riparian buffer is taken from the top of the bank or from the outer edge of the
riparian dripline, whichever is greater. The measurement of the 20-foot upland buffer is taken from the
boundary of the HMP preserve or from the edge of the mapped upland habitat, whichever is greater.
This will ensure that consistency with the Carlsbad HMP is met, which includes no impacts to special-
status species that may potentially occupy these habitats and no net loss of special-status habitats as a
result of the proposed project. Other applicable conditions of the Carlsbad HMP include focused surveys
for target species and application of specific mitigation standards for temporary and permanent impacts
to vegetation communities.
The Carlsbad HMP was approved by the CCC after the insertion of an addendum that outlines certain
additional conservation measures for properties within the Coastal Zone. These measures were
incorporated into the Local Coastal Program (LCP) by the city and was also incorporated into the Carlsbad
HMP. The entire proposed project area is located within the Coastal Zone and adheres to the policies of
the CCC except where noted and discussed below.
Under the Carlsbad HMP, the project site does not have designation of existing or proposed hardline or
standards areas except for the western parcel. The proposed project continues to have designated as HMP
hardline preserve on the western parcel. There is no proposed impact to the HMP preserve other than
that area required for the emergency access. This impact to the HMP hardline preserve is compensated
by the designation of the riparian and riparian buffer on site as HMP preserve. There is also HMP hardline
preserve off site along the southern property line as part of the Cobblestone property. Finally, the project
will designate the riparian habitat and buffers per the proposed open space and as HMP preserve.
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -37- Mitigated Negative Declaration
The Carlsbad HMP identifies the need for buffers to protect sensitive biological resources. The Carlsbad
HMP stipulates that a 20-foot buffer is required between development and upland native vegetation, such
as coastal sage scrub. Where there is an existing paved road currently present within the upland buffer,
the buffer function is supported by a combination of fencing and wall. Other than the required emergency
access road, there is no impact within the 20-foot upland buffer and upland buffer is provided for the
emergency access road and analyzed as an impact.
The Carlsbad HMP also identifies that a 50-foot riparian buffer is required between development and
riparian vegetation such as southern willow scrub. That buffer has been provided as shown on Figure 87.
For areas that have an existing paved road within the buffer, the buffer is provided by fencing and wall.
This buffer will be restored to native habitat as required, a revegetation plan has been prepared (Dudek
20192020e) and the buffer and riparian habitat will be incorporated into the Carlsbad HMP. There is an
existing easement held by the Buena Sanitation District and the Vallecitos Water District that bisects the
the riparian buffer and this existing easement will be excluded from the riparian buffer and will not be
revegetated. The buffer and riparian habitat will be protected by a restrictive covenant, will be managed
by a qualified land manager and will have funding in perpetuity.
The development of the proposed project conforms to all of the identified goals and standards outlined
in the Carlsbad HMP. Impacts to coastal sage scrub are only related to the requirements of the emergency
access. This impact has been reduced to the maximum feasible by narrowing, fencing, using a span bridge
and has been placed in the best acceptable location for the project. However, the emergency access is a
required feature to provide fire protection for the project. Development impacts are limited to the areas
previous graded and approved for development.
Impacts are proposed to occur to the riparian buffer in the western part of the site. There is also an impact
to the riparian buffer adjacent to the proposed residential development with a narrow sliver of 0.01 acre
that is made up by addition of a larger block. The buffer will be revegetated to native habitat in accordance
with the Carlsbad HMP and per the concept plan (Dudek 2019a2020e).
Due to the adjacency of the project to the Carlsbad HMP hardline preserve and the proposed area to be
added to the HMP preserve, the project is subject to the adjacency standards which are included below
in the mitigation section. In addition, the project will comply with the conservation standards within the
Coastal Zone, including no net loss of upland or riparian habitat.
The development of the site is consistent with the Carlsbad HMP with respect to the covered species of
the Carlsbad HMP.
The entire site is outside of the HMP preserve except for the 0.60-acre western-most parcel. Within the
Carlsbad HMP, this parcel is designated as 100 percent HMP preserve.
The proposed project is adjacent to the Carlsbad HMP preserve along the western and southern edges of
the site. The Carlsbad HMP includes adjacency standards and proposes buffers to avoid and minimize
impacts to sensitive vegetation communities in conservation areas or jurisdictional resources that are
adjacent to developed areas. Adjacency standards addressed in the Carlsbad HMP include fire
management, erosion control, landscaping restrictions, fencing, signs and lighting, and predator and
exotic species control (Dudek 20192020e). With implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-9 through
BIO-12, impacts related to the Carlsbad HMP will be reduced to a level below significant.
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -38- Mitigated Negative Declaration
Mitigation Measures
BIO-11 The City of Carlsbad’s Habitat Management Plan (Carlsbad HMP) requires that impacts to
disturbed habitat (Group F) required mitigation with an in-lieu fee. Thus, the project is
required to pay an in-lieu mitigation fee (also known as the HMP mitigation fee) for
impacts to disturbed habitat prior to final map approval, issuance of a grading permit or
clearing of any habitat, whichever occurs first. This is a per-acre fee charged for impacts
to Habitat Groups D, E, and F, totaling 6.26 acres, as an alternative to conserving habitat
on site or acquiring habitat off site to mitigate for such impacts. The cost per acre for this
mitigation fee will be determined by the city.
BIO-12 Prior to final map approval, issuance of a grading permit or clearing of any habitat,
whichever occurs first, the applicant shall perform the following:
• Record a conservation easement, as defined by California Civil Code, Section 815.1,
or other protective measure for all on-site mitigation land including 4.113.97 acres of
open space.
• Select a qualified conservation entity to manage the conserved land.
• Prepare a Property Analysis Record to estimate costs of in perpetuity management
and monitoring or otherwise provide for an estimate of funding needed.
• Provide a non-wasting endowment or other funding sources acceptable to the wildlife
agencies, California Coastal Commission (CCC), and City of Carlsbad based on the
Property Analysis Record to sufficiently cover the costs of in-perpetuity management
and monitoring.
• Prepare a preserve management plan, which will be approved by the city and
wildlife agencies.
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mit. Incorporated Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical
resource pursuant to §15064.5? ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an
archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of
dedicated cemeteries? ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
a, b, c) Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated: A Cultural Resources Technical Report was
prepared by Dudek in March of 2017, which includes a cultural resources records search and literature
review, Native American coordination, and a cultural resources survey. Technical memoranda and reports
are hereby incorporated by reference. The Cultural Resources Technical Report indicates that 43 cultural
resources have been previously recorded within the vicinity of the project site, one of which (P-37-
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -39- Mitigated Negative Declaration
010876/CA-SDI-10876) is located within the project site (Dudek 2017). However, P-37-010876/CA-SDI-
10876 was determined in 1988 and confirmed in 2014 to be entirely composed of imported fill material.
The entire project site is composed of imported fill material that has been terraced from the southeastern
corner of the project site to the northwest. No historical built environmental resources are located on the
project site. Given the highly disturbed nature of the site, the potential for encountering resources would
be low. Intact cultural materials may be present within the original surface elevations; therefore,
Mitigation Measures CUL-1 through CUL-12 will be implemented to minimize impacts to cultural resources
to levels less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
CUL-1 An archaeological monitor shall be present for initial ground-disturbing activities
associated with the proposed project in the event unanticipated discoveries are made. If
human remains are discovered, California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, states
that further disturbances and activities shall stop in any area or nearby area suspected to
overlie remains, and the County coroner shall be contacted. At this time, the person who
discovered the remains will contact the City of Carlsbad so that they may work with the
most likely descendent on the respectful treatment and disposition of the remains.
CUL-2 Prior to the commencement of any ground disturbing activities, the project developer
shall enter into a Pre-Excavation Agreement, otherwise known as a Tribal Cultural
Resources Treatment and Tribal Monitoring Agreement, with the San Luis Rey Band of
Mission Indians or other Traditionally and Culturally Affiliated Luiseño tribe (TCA Tribe).
This agreement will contain provisions to address the proper treatment of any tribal
cultural resources and/or Luiseño Native American human remains inadvertently
discovered during the course of the project. The agreement will outline the roles and
powers of the Luiseño Native American monitors and the archaeologist. A copy of said
archaeological contract and Pre-Excavation Agreement shall be provided to the City of
Carlsbad prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
CUL-3 A Luiseño Native American monitor shall be present during all ground disturbing activities.
Ground disturbing activities may include, but are not limited to, archaeological studies,
geotechnical investigations, clearing, grubbing, trenching, excavation, preparation for
utilities and other infrastructure, and grading activities.
CUL-4 Any and all uncovered artifacts of Luiseño Native American cultural importance shall be
treated with dignity and respect and be reburied on-site within an appropriate location
protected by open space or easement, etc., where the cultural items will not be disturbed
in the future, or shall be returned to the Most Likely Descendant, whichever is most
applicable, and shall not be curated, unless ordered to do so by a federal agency or a court
of competent jurisdiction.
CUL-5 The Luiseño Native American monitor shall be present at the project’s on-site
preconstruction meeting to consult with grading and excavation contractors concerning
excavation schedules and safety issues, as well as consult with the principal archaeologist
concerning the proposed archaeologist techniques and/or strategies for the project.
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -40- Mitigated Negative Declaration
CUL-6 Luiseño Native American monitors and archaeological monitors shall have joint authority
to temporarily divert and/or halt construction activities. If tribal cultural resources are
discovered during construction, all earth moving activity within and around the
immediate discovery area must be diverted until the Luiseño Native American monitor
and the archaeologist can assess the nature and significance of the find.
CUL-7 If a significant tribal cultural resource(s) and/or unique archaeological resource(s) are
discovered during ground disturbing activities for this project, the San Luis Rey Band of
Mission Indians (in accordance with TCPRG 8.2.2.4) and any TCA Tribes that consulted
with the city under AB 52 for this project shall be notified and consulted regarding the
respectful and dignified treatment of those resources. Pursuant to California Public
Resources Code Section 21083.2(b) avoidance is the preferred method of preservation
for archaeological and tribal cultural resources. If however, the Applicant is able to
demonstrate that avoidance of a significant and/or unique cultural resource is infeasible
and a data recovery plan, is authorized by the City of Carlsbad as the lead agency, the
San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians (in accordance with TCPRG Section 8.2.2.4) and
TCA Tribes that consulted with the city under AB 52 for this project shall be consulted
regarding the drafting and finalization of any such recovery plan.
CUL-8 When tribal cultural resources are discovered during the project, if the archaeologist
collects such resources, a Luiseño Native American monitor must be present during any
testing or cataloging of those resources. If the archaeologist does not collect the tribal
cultural resources that are unearthed during the ground disturbing activities, the Luiseño
Native American monitor shall follow the procedures in CUL-4.
CUL-9 If suspected Native American human remains are encountered, California Health and
Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the San
Diego County Medical Examiner has made the necessary findings as to origin. Further,
pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98(b) remains shall be left in
place and free from disturbance until a final decision as to the treatment and disposition
has been made. Suspected Native American remains shall be examined in the field and
kept in a secure location at the site. A Luiseño Native American monitor shall be present
during the examination of the remains. If the San Diego County Medical Examiner
determines the remains to be Native American, the Native American Heritage
Commission (NAHC) must be contacted by the Medical Examiner within 24 hours. The
NAHC must then immediately notify the “Most Likely Descendant” about the discovery.
The Most Likely Descendant shall then make recommendations within 48 hours, and
engage in consultation concerning treatment of remains as provided in Public Resources
Code 5097.98.
CUL-10 In the event that fill material is imported into the project area, the fill shall be clean of
tribal cultural resources and documented as such. If fill material is to be utilized and/or
exported from areas within the project site, then that fill material shall be analyzed and
confirmed by an archeologist and Luiseño Native American monitor that such fill material
does not contain tribal cultural resources.
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -41- Mitigated Negative Declaration
CUL-11 No testing, invasive or non-invasive, shall be permitted on any recovered tribal cultural
resources without the written permission of the San Luis Rey Band of Mission
Indiansconsulting tribes.
CUL-12 Prior to the release of the grading bond, a monitoring report and/or evaluation report, if
appropriate, which describes the results, analysis and conclusions of the monitoring
program shall be submitted by the archaeologist, along with the Luiseño Native American
monitor’s notes and comments, to the City of Carlsbad for approval. Said report shall be
subject to confidentiality as an exception to the Public Records Act and will not be
available for general public distribution; however, a copy of the final monitoring report
shall be provided to each consulting tribe upon request to the Planning Division., and shall
be submitted to the South Coastal Information Center. Said report shall be subject to
confidentiality as an exception to the Public Records Act and will not be available for
public distribution.
VI. Energy
Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mit. Incorporated Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to
wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy
resources, during project construction or operation? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy
or energy efficiency? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
a) Less-than-Significant Impact: The electricity and natural gas used for construction of the proposed
project would be temporary, would be substantially less than that required for project operation, and
would have a negligible contribution to the project’s overall energy consumption. Additionally, although
natural gas and electricity usage would increase due to the implementation of the project, the project’s
energy efficiency would meet the current Title 24 standards. Although the project would see an increase
in petroleum use during construction and operation, vehicles would use less petroleum due to advances
in fuel economy and potential reduction in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) over time.
Construction
Electricity
Temporary electric power for as-necessary lighting and electronic equipment such as computers inside
temporary construction trailers would be provided by Southern California Edison (SCE). The electricity used
for such activities would be temporary, would be substantially less than that required for project
operation, and would have a negligible contribution to the project’s overall energy consumption.
Natural Gas
Natural gas is not anticipated to be required during construction of the proposed project. Fuels used
for construction would primarily consist of diesel and gasoline, which are discussed below under the
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -42- Mitigated Negative Declaration
Petroleum subsection. Any minor amounts of natural gas that may be consumed as a result of project
construction would be substantially less than that required for project operation and would have a
negligible contribution to the project’s overall energy consumption.
Petroleum
Heavy-duty construction equipment associated with demolition and construction activities for
construction would rely on diesel fuel, as would vendor trucks involved in delivery of materials to the
project site. Construction workers would travel to and from the project site throughout the duration
of construction. It is assumed in this analysis that construction workers would travel to and from the
site in gasoline-powered light-duty vehicles.
Heavy-duty construction equipment of various types would be used during each phase of project
construction. The project’s Air Quality report (Dudek 2020a) lists the assumed equipment usage for
each phase of construction. The project’s construction equipment is estimated to operate a total
combined 18,720 hours.
Fuel consumption from construction equipment was estimated by converting the total carbon dioxide
(CO2) emissions from each construction phase to gallons using the conversion factors for CO2 to gallons of
gasoline or diesel. Construction is estimated to occur in 2018 and 2019 based on the construction phasing
schedule. The conversion factor for gasoline is 8.78 kilograms per metric ton CO2 per gallon, and the
conversion factor for diesel is 10.21 kilograms per metric ton CO2 per gallon (The Climate Registry 2018).
The estimated diesel fuel usage from construction equipment is shown in Table 9.
Table 9
Construction Equipment Diesel Demand
Phase
Pieces of
Equipment Equipment
CO2 (MT) kg/CO2/Gallon Gallons
Site Preparation 7 17.52 10.21 1,715.49
Grading 8 85.63 10.21 8,387.27
Trenching 3 5.36 10.21 524.71
Building Construction 9 254.49 10.21 24,925.20
Paving 12 35.94 10.21 3,520.27
Architectural Coating 1 3.41 10.21 334.13
Total 39,407.08
Sources: Pieces of equipment and equipment CO2 (Dudek 2020a); kg/CO2/Gallon (The Climate Registry 2018).
Notes: CO2 = carbon dioxide; MT = metric ton; kg = kilogram.
Fuel consumption from worker- and vendor-truck trips are estimated by converting the total CO2
emissions from each construction phase to gallons using the conversion factors for CO2 to gallons of
gasoline or diesel. Haul truck trips would not be required for the proposed project. Worker vehicles
are assumed to be gasoline and vendor vehicles are assumed to be diesel. Calculations for total
worker- and vendor-truck fuel consumption are provided in Tables 10 and 11.
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -43- Mitigated Negative Declaration
Table 10
Construction Worker Gasoline Demand
Phase Trips
Vehicle
MT CO2
kg/CO2/
Gallon Gallons
Site Preparation 180 0.70 8.78 79.18
Grading 600 2.32 8.78 263.93
Trenching 80 0.31 8.78 35.19
Building Construction 40,800 154.22 8.78 17,565.01
Paving 320 1.20 8.78 136.51
Architectural Coating 840 3.15 8.78 358.34
Total 18,438.17
Sources: Trips and vehicle CO2 (Dudek 2020a); kg/CO2/Gallon (The Climate Registry 2018).
Notes: MT = metric ton; CO2 = carbon dioxide; kg = kilogram.
Table 11
Construction Vendor Diesel Demand
Phase Trips
Vehicle
MT CO2 kg/CO2/Gallon Gallons
Site Preparation 0 0.00 10.21 0.00
Grading 0 0.00 10.21 0.00
Trenching 0 0.00 10.21 0.00
Building Construction 9,200 122.73 10.21 12,020.40
Paving 80 1.05 10.21 102.43
Architectural Coating 0 0.00 10.21 0.00
Total 12,122.83
Sources: Trips and vehicle CO2 (Dudek 2020a); kg/CO2/Gallon (The Climate Registry 2018). Notes: MT = metric ton; CO2 = carbon dioxide; kg = kilogram.
In summary, construction of the project is conservatively anticipated to consume 18,438 gallons
of gasoline and 51,530 gallons of diesel, which would last approximately 12 months. By
comparison, California’s consumption of petroleum is approximately 74.8 million gallons per day.
Based on these assumptions, approximately 25.1 billion gallons of petroleum would be consumed
in California over the course of the construction period (EIA 2017). Within San Diego County,
approximately 1,440 million gallons of petroleum would be consumed over the course of the
construction period (CARB 2018). Therefore, impacts associated during construction would be less
than significant.
Operation
Electricity
The operation of the project buildout would require electricity for multiple purposes, including
cooling, lighting, water heating, appliances, and various equipment. Additionally, the supply,
conveyance, treatment, and distribution of water would indirectly result in electricity usage.
Electricity consumption associated with project operation is based on the CalEEMod outputs
presented in the project’s Air Quality Report (Dudek 2020a).
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -44- Mitigated Negative Declaration
CalEEMod default values for energy consumption for each land use were applied for the project
analysis. The energy use from residential land uses is calculated in CalEEMod based on the Residential
Appliance Saturation Survey (CAPCOA 2016). Energy use in buildings (both natural gas and electricity)
is divided by the program into end-use categories subject to Title 24 requirements (end uses
associated with the building envelope, such as the HVAC system, water heating system, and
integrated lighting) and those not subject to Title 24 requirements (such as appliances, electronics,
and miscellaneous “plug-in” uses).
The project would include a solar photovoltaic (PV) rooftop system. The project would also include
use of light emitting diode (LED) lighting or other efficient lighting for at least 75 percent of the
total luminaires.
Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations serves to enhance and regulate California’s building
standards. The most recent amendments to Title 24, Part 6, referred to as the 2016 standards, became
effective on January 1, 2017. According to these estimations, the proposed project would consume
approximately 1,509,599 kWh per year during operation. For comparison, in 2017 the residential
electricity demand in San Diego County was 6,853,912,925 kWh(CEC 2019).
Natural Gas
The operation would require natural gas for various purposes, including natural gas appliances.
Natural gas consumption associated with operation is based on the CalEEMod outputs presented in
the project’s Air Quality Report (Dudek 2020a).
CalEEMod default values for energy consumption for each land use were applied for the project
analysis. The energy use from residential land uses is calculated in CalEEMod based on the Residential
Appliance Saturation Survey (CAPCOA 2017). Energy use in buildings (both natural gas and electricity)
is divided by the program into end-use categories subject to Title 24 requirements (end uses
associated with the building envelope, such as the HVAC system, water heating system, and
integrated lighting) and those not subject to Title 24 requirements (such as appliances, electronics,
and miscellaneous “plug-in” uses).
The project would include a solar water heating system on site to heat the swimming pool. Title
24 of the California Code of Regulations serves to enhance and regulate California’s building standards.
The most recent amendments to Title 24, Part 6, referred to as the 2016 standards, became effective
on January 1, 2017. According to these estimations, the proposed project would consume approximately
303,553 kilo-British Thermal Units per year. For comparison, in 2017 the residential natural gas use
within San Diego County was 27,279,653,100,000 kilo-British Thermal Units (CEC 2019).
Petroleum
During operations, the majority of fuel consumption resulting from the project would involve the use
of motor vehicles traveling to and from the project site, as well as fuels used for alternative modes of
transportation that may be used by residents and employees.
Based on the traffic impact analysis, the project is expected to generate up to six trips per day per dwelling
unit (LLG 2020). The CalEEMod Version 2016.3.2 model was used to estimate daily emissions from
proposed vehicular sources (Dudek 2020a). CalEEMod Version 2016.3.1 default data, including
temperature, trip characteristics, variable start information, and emissions factors were
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -45- Mitigated Negative Declaration
conservatively used for the model inputs. The project is estimated to generate up to 2,330,010 vehicle
miles travelled per year (LLG 2020). Project-related traffic was assumed to include a mixture of vehicles
in accordance with the model outputs for traffic. Emission factors representing the vehicle mix and
emissions for 2022 were conservatively used to estimate emissions associated with vehicular sources.
The 2022 operational year represents the first full year the project would be operational.
Similar to the construction worker and vendor trips, fuel consumption from resident and employee
trips are estimated by converting the total CO2 emissions from operation of the project to gallons
using the conversion factors for CO2 to gallons of gasoline or diesel.
Calculations for annual mobile source fuel consumption are provided in Tables 12 (gasoline) and 13
(diesel).
Table 12
Annual Mobile Source Gasoline Demand
Vehicle MT CO2 kg/CO2/Gallon Gallons
Operation 879.63 8.78 100,185.84
Sources: Trips and vehicle CO2 (Dudek 2020a); kg/CO2/Gallon (The Climate Registry 2018).
Notes: MT = metric ton; CO2 = carbon dioxide; kg = kilogram
Table 13
Annual Mobile Source Diesel Demand
Vehicle MT CO2 kg/CO2/Gallon Gallons
Operation 56.79 10.21 5,561.94
Sources: Trips and vehicle CO2 (Dudek 2019b); kg/CO2/Gallon (The Climate Registry 2018).
Notes: MT = metric ton; CO2 = carbon dioxide; kg = kilogram
Summary
Statewide emission reduction measures proposed in the CARB-adopted amendments to the Pavley
regulations include measures aimed at reducing GHG emissions associated with transportation. These
amendments are part of California’s commitment to a nationwide program to reduce new passenger-
vehicle GHGs from 2012 through 2016. Pavley regulations reduced GHG emissions from California
passenger vehicles by about 22 percent in 2012. It is expected that Pavley regulations will reduce
GHG emissions from California passenger vehicles by about 30 percent in 2016, while improving fuel
efficiency and reducing motorists’ costs. As such, vehicle trips associated with the project are expected
to use less petroleum due to advances in fuel economy over time.
CARB has adopted a new approach to passenger vehicles—cars and light trucks—by combining the control
of smog-causing pollutants and GHG emissions into a single coordinated package of standards. The new
approach also includes efforts to support and accelerate the numbers of plug-in hybrids and zero-emission
vehicles in California (CARB 2017).
The proposed project would create additional electricity and natural gas demand by adding recreational and
commercial facilities. New facilities associated with the proposed project would be subject to the State
Building Energy Efficiency Standards, embodied in Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations. The
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -46- Mitigated Negative Declaration
efficiency standards apply to new construction of nonresidential buildings and regulate energy consumed
for heating, cooling, ventilation, water heating, and lighting.
In summary, although natural gas and electricity usage would increase due to the implementation of the
project, the project’s energy efficiency would be in accordance with state Title 24 standards. Although the
project would see an increase in petroleum use during construction and operation, vehicles would use less
petroleum due to advances in fuel economy and potential reduction in VMT over time. Therefore, impacts
would be less than significant.
b) Less-than-Significant Impact: The proposed project would be subject to and would comply with, at a
minimum, the 2016 California Building Code Title 24 (24 CCR, Part 6). The proposed project would be consistent
with CARB’s Scoping Plan, AB 32, and SB 32. The proposed project would not conflict with existing energy
standards and regulations; therefore, impacts during construction and operation of the proposed project
would be less than significant.
VII. GEOLOGY AND SOILS
Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mit. Incorporated Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact a) Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects,
including the risk of loss, injury or death involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the
most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued
by the State Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of
Mines and Geology Special Publication 42.
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
iv. Landslides? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would
become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in
on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction,
or collapse?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d) Be located on expansive soils, as defined in Section 1802.3.2 of the
California Building Code (2007), creating substantial direct or
indirect risks to life or property?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic
tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are
not available for the disposal of wastewater?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
f) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or
site or unique geologic feature? ☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -47- Mitigated Negative Declaration
This section is based on the Updated Geotechnical Evaluation (Geotechnical Report) prepared by GeoTek
Inc. in July 2017 (GeoTek 2017) and a revised Geotechnical Report prepared by GeoTek Inc. in August 2016
(GeoTek 2016a). Background and methodologies regarding the geotechnical analysis can be found in
these reports. These technical memoranda and reports are hereby incorporated by reference.
a) i. Less-than-Significant Impact: The project site is located within the seismically active region of
Southern California. The California Geologic Survey does not include the city on its list of cities affected by
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones (City of Carlsbad 2015a). There are no active faults that run directly
through Carlsbad. The nearest fault to the city is the Newport-Inglewood-Rose-Canyon Fault, which runs
offshore of the western edge of the city and is located approximately eight miles west of the project site,
and the Pre-Quaternary Faults, located approximately eight miles to the southeast of the project site (City
of Carlsbad 2015a). Although there are no active faults within the city, the city is located within a
seismically active region, and earthquakes have the potential to cause ground shaking of significant
magnitude. Although located near fault lines, the city lies within a medium-low probabilistic peak ground
acceleration zone during earthquake shaking (City of Carlsbad 2015a). Therefore, due to its distance to
the nearest active fault, the project site would not be substantially affected by fault rupture. Impacts
would be less than significant.
a) ii. Less-than-Significant Impact: The project would be located within the seismically active region of
Southern California. The proximity to nearby fault zones such as the Newport-Inglewood-Rose-Canyon Fault
(approximately eight miles from the project site) and the Pre-Quaternary Faults (eight miles from the project
site) could subject the project site to strong seismic ground shaking. According to the July 2017 geotechnical
report (GeoTek 2017), the project site is in a seismically active region. However, no active or potentially active
fault is known to exist at the site, and the site is not situated within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone.
Further, the project would comply with the most recent California Building Code and applicable grading
ordinances of the City of Carlsbad and the San Diego County. Additionally, a certified geotechnical company
would continue to review site plans as they become available, which includes building design standards
intended to minimize risk to people and structures from potential seismic ground shaking. As such, impacts
would be less than significant. As such, impacts would be less than significant.
a) iii. Less-than-Significant Impact: Liquefaction typically occurs when a site is subjected to strong seismic
shaking, on-site soils are cohesionless, and groundwater is encountered near the surface. The factors known
to influence liquefaction potential include soil type and grain size, relative density, groundwater level,
confining pressures, and intensity and duration of ground shaking. In general, materials that are
susceptible to liquefaction are loose, saturated granular soils that have low fines content under low
confining pressures. Figure 6-6 in the Public Safety Element of the General Plan indicates that the project site
is not within a liquefaction hazard area (City of Carlsbad 2015a). As described in the geotechnical report
(GeoTek 2017), laboratory testing on samples of the fill and soils were performed at the project site. The results
of the analysis indicated that two of the borings showed some liquefaction potential. However, total seismic
settlement is estimated to be 1.5 to 2.5 inches with an estimated differential seismic-induced settlements
of 0.75 to 1.25 inches over a 40-foot span, and surface manifestation is not anticipated should liquefaction
occur. Further, prior to the issuance of the grading permit, the applicant shall verify that the applicable
recommendations of the geotechnical report have been incorporated into the project design and
construction documents to the satisfaction of the city engineer. Recommendations shall be held to
performance standards within the applicable ordinances (including site clearing and preparation, fills, and
excavation regulations) of the City of Carlsbad and San Diego County, as well as the standards provided in
the most recent California Building Code. With implementation of the recommendations outlined in the
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -48- Mitigated Negative Declaration
geotechnical report and performance standards within all applicable ordinances, the risk of loss, injury, or
death involving liquefaction would be less than significant.
a) iv. Less-than-Significant Impact: The project site is generally flat with no steep slopes and does
not contain soils subject to potential landslides. The geotechnical report concluded that the project site
is not located within a State of California Seismic Hazard Zone for earthquake-induced land sliding. Further,
evidence of ancient landslides or slope instabilities at the site was not observed during the site
investigation. Therefore, the potential for landslides is considered negligible, and impacts would be
less than significant.
b) Less-than-Significant Impact: The project site is undeveloped and has been previously graded. Project
construction would involve site preparation, some additional grading, and trenching, which may temporarily
expose soils to increased erosion potential. The project would be required to comply with the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Construction General Permit, which requires the implementation of
a stormwater pollution prevention plan. The stormwater pollution prevention plan would employ various
BMPs intended to minimize soil erosion during construction. BMPs may include measures such as watering
the exposed areas to reduce erosion potential. Upon completion of construction, the project site would be
fully developed with structures, parking, and landscaped areas, which would minimize any long-term
erosions potential. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
c) Less-than-Significant Impact: Excavation of four exploratory hollow-stem auger borings and eight
exploratory trenches were performed within in the project site to test soil characteristics. Boring depths
ranged from approximately 10.5 feet to approximately 46.5 feet below the surface. Relatively undisturbed
and bulk samples of on-site soil materials from the excavations were collected and tested in a laboratory
to confirm the field classification of the soil materials encountered and to evaluate the soils physical
properties for the use in the engineering design and analysis of the project. Tests indicate that the area of
anticipated improvements at the project site is mostly underlain by fill soils, which are in turn locally
underlain by alluvium, and then sedimentary bedrock material. Refer to the geotechnical report (GeoTek
2017) for a full discussion and test results of the underlying soils.
The geotechnical report concluded that, while development of the site appears feasible from a
geotechnical standpoint, the upper two feet of fill soils were found to be relatively loose and soft, most
likely as a result of repeated wetting (expansion) and drying (shrinkage) of these materials since original
placement over 28 years ago. Bioturbation also likely has contributed to this condition. Prior to the
issuance of the grading permit, the applicant is required to verify that the applicable recommendations of
the Geotechnical Evaluation have been incorporated into the project design and construction documents
to the satisfaction of the city engineer. At minimum, the upper two feet of existing fill soils should be
completely removed within structural grading limits. The exposed conditions would be observed and
tested by a representative of GeoTek to confirm suitable existing engineering fill soils are present prior to
the fill placement. Furthermore, structural elements of the proposed building structures should be
underlain by a minimum of six feet of engineered fill or a minimum of eight feet from finish grade
elevations (whichever is deeper). Removal would extend down and away from foundation elements at a
1:1 projection to the recommended removal depth. Recommendations shall be held to performance
standards within the applicable ordinances (including grading, construction, and landscaping regulations)
of the city and the standards provided in the most recent California Building Code that are intended to
reduce risk related to geologic hazards. Therefore, with implementation of these recommendations,
impacts would be less than significant.
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -49- Mitigated Negative Declaration
d) Less-than-Significant Impact: Soils beneath the project site were tested for their expansive
properties. As stated in the geotechnical report (GeoTek 2017), soils beneath the project site represent a
low to medium expansion potential. Prior to the issuance of the grading permit, the applicant shall verify
that the applicable recommendations of the geotechnical report have been incorporated into the project
design and construction documents to the satisfaction of the city engineer. Recommendations shall be
held to performance standards within the applicable ordinances (including concrete flatwork and
keyways, buttress, and stabilization fills) of the City of Carlsbad and San Diego County, as well as the
standards provided in the most recent California Building Code. With implementation of the
recommendations outlined in the geotechnical report and performance standards within all applicable
ordinances, the project would not lead to risks to life or property regarding expansive soils. Impacts would
be less than significant.
e) No Impact: The project does not propose the use of septic tanks; therefore, no impact would occur.
f) Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated: The project site has been highly disturbed by
previous grading activities. As discussed in Section VI, Geology and Soils, the site is underlain by fill soils,
alluvium, and sedimentary bedrock assigned to the Santiago Formation (GeoTek 2017). According to the
city’s General Plan Arts, Cultural, History, and Education Element, the Santiago Formation is part of the La
Jolla Group, which is considered to have a high potential for containing fossils (City of Carlsbad 2015a).
Because of the varying depths of fill soils and alluvium, there is potential for grading activities to encounter
the Santiago Formation and paleontological resources. Therefore, a paleontological monitor would be
present during grading, as required by Mitigation Measure GEO-1, which would reduce potentially
significant impacts to a level below significance.
Mitigation Measures
GEO-1 Prior to initiation of ground-disturbing activities within the project site that would extend
into the Santiago Formation, a qualified paleontological monitor shall be retained to
monitor and recognize potential paleontological discoveries during construction of the
project. If unexpected, potentially significant paleontological resources are encountered
during construction, the paleontological monitor shall have the authority to temporarily
redirect or suspend construction activities and evaluate the potential significance of the
find and record or salvage it. Prior to the start of ground-disturbing activities, the City of
Carlsbad shall verify that the requirement for paleontological monitoring is noted on the
appropriate construction documents.
VIII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mit. Incorporated Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly,
that may have a significant impact on the environment? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for
the purposes of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -50- Mitigated Negative Declaration
Global climate change refers to changes in average climatic conditions on Earth as a whole, including
temperature, wind patterns, precipitation, and storms. Global temperatures are moderated by naturally
occurring atmospheric gases, including water vapor, carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide
(N2O), O3, and certain hydrofluorocarbons. These gases, known as GHGs, allow solar radiation (sunlight)
into the Earth’s atmosphere but prevent radiative heat from escaping, thus warming the Earth’s
atmosphere. GHGs are emitted by both natural processes and human activities. The accumulation of GHGs
in the atmosphere regulates the Earth’s temperature. Emissions of GHGs in excess of natural ambient
concentrations are thought to be responsible for the enhancement of the greenhouse effect and
contribute to what is termed “global warming,” the trend of warming of the Earth’s climate from
anthropogenic activities. Global climate change impacts are by nature cumulative; direct impacts cannot
be evaluated because the impacts themselves are global rather than localized impacts.
California Health and Safety Code, Section 38505(g), defines GHGs to include the following compounds: CO2,
CH4, N2O, O3, chlorofluorocarbons, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride. As
individual GHGs have varying heat-trapping properties and atmospheric lifetimes, GHG emissions are
converted to carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2E) units for comparison. The CO2E is a consistent methodology
for comparing GHG emissions because it normalizes various GHG emissions to a consistent measure. The
most common GHGs related to the project are those primarily related to energy usage—CO2, CH4, and N2O.
The project was evaluated against a City-specific efficiency metric threshold based on the City’s 2012 GHG
inventory (City of Carlsbad 2020). An efficiency metric threshold is calculated by dividing the allowable
GHG emissions inventory in a selected calendar year by the service population (residents plus employees),
which then leads to the identification of a quantity of emissions that can be permitted on a per service
population basis without significantly impacting the environment. This approach focuses on the overall
GHG efficiency of a project relative to regulatory GHG reduction goals.
Under the efficiency metric, the project’s GHG emissions are evaluated relative to the emissions level in the
Project’s build-out year and the build-out year’s associated efficiency metric threshold. To that end, an
efficiency metric threshold was calculated based on the 2022 emissions level (the year of project build-out)
and the project’s service population (sum of number of employees and the number of residents provided by
the project).
The calculated efficiency metric threshold for 2022 based on the City’s 2012 GHG emissions and the statewide
emissions reduction trajectory is 4.26 MT/SP/yr. Again, this 2022 efficiency metric threshold reflects the
trajectory planned for in the State’s Scoping Plan. If the Project achieves the 2022 efficiency metric threshold,
it would not interfere with attainment of the 2030 and 2050 statewide emission reduction targets, and
therefore not interfere with the State’s and the City’s ability to achieve the mid-term and long-term GHG
reduction targets.
Service Population
Based on a residential density of 2.59 persons per household found within the SANDAG Series 13 Growth
Forecast, the project would have a residential population of 497 (2.59 persons per household X 192 units)
(SANDAG 2013). The Project is estimated to have 2 employees, one leasing agent for affordable units and
one leasing agent for market-rate units. Therefore, the project would have a service population of 499
(497 residents + 2 employees).
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -51- Mitigated Negative Declaration
a) Less-than-Significant Impact: A GHG emissions analysis was performed for the proposed project in
June October 2020 by Dudek (Dudek 2020b). Technical memoranda and reports are hereby incorporated
by reference.
Proposed Project GHG Emissions
Construction GHG Emissions
GHG emissions would be associated with the construction phase of the project components through use
of construction equipment and vehicle trips. Emissions of CO2 were estimated using the CalEEMod,
Version 2016.3.2. For the purposes of modeling, it was assumed that construction of project components
would begin in January 20213 and last approximately 12 months. Refer to the GHG emissions analysis for
the construction scenario assumptions (Dudek 2020b).
Table 14 shows the estimated annual GHG construction emissions associated with the project. Complete
details of the emissions calculations are provided in Appendix A of the GHG emissions analysis (Dudek
2020b).
Table 14
Estimated Annual Construction GHG Emissions
Year
CO2 CH4 N2O CO2E
Metric Tons
2021 662.42 0.12 0.00 665.42
Source: CalEEMod, Version 2016.3.1. See the GHG emissions analysis for complete results (Dudek 2020b).
Notes: CH4 = methane; CO2 = carbon dioxide; CO2E = carbon dioxide equivalent; N2O = nitrous oxide
As shown in Table 14, the estimated total GHG emissions from construction of the project would be
665 MT CO2E.
The loss of sequestered carbon from removal of 23 oak trees is estimated based on the carbon content
estimate for each tree over the growth period (MT CO2 per tree). The project would permanently impact
23 oak trees. The loss of sequestered carbon is presented in Table 15.
Table 15
Oak Trees Released Carbon
Tree Species Growing Period (Years)
Sequestration Rate
(MT CO2/ Tree/Year)
Quantity of Oak Trees Removed
(Trees)
Sequestered Carbon
(MT CO2)
Miscellaneous 20 0.0354 23 16.28
Source: CAPCOA 2017.
Notes: CO2 = carbon dioxide; MT CO2 = metric tons carbon dioxide
See the GHG emissions analysis for calculations and sources (Dudek 2020b).
3 See previous footnotes regarding construction schedule in Air Quality.
I I I I
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -52- Mitigated Negative Declaration
As shown in Table 15, the removal of 23 oak trees would result in the release of approximately 16 MT CO2.
Including the construction emissions, the total estimated GHG emissions from the construction of the
project would be 687.94 MT CO2E.
Operational Emissions
Operation of the project would result in direct GHG emissions from area sources, indirect GHG emissions
from use of electricity, vehicular traffic, waste, and water and wastewater. Refer to the GHG emissions
analysis (Dudek 2020b) for operational scenario assumptions.
Table 16 shows total operational GHG emissions for the project after accounting for amortized
construction emissions.
Table 16
Summary of Estimated Annual GHG Emissions
Emissions Source MT CO2 MT CH4 MT N2O MT CO2E
Area 2.34 0.00 0.00 2.39
Energy 323.17 0.01 0.00 324.39
Mobile 936.42 0.05 0.00 937.71
Waste 10.29 0.61 0.00 25.48
Water 55.97 0.34 0.01 67.10
Amortized Construction Emissions 22.72
Total Project Emissions 1,379.79
Source: See the GHG emissions analysis for complete results (Dudek 2020b).
Notes: CH4 = methane; CO2 = carbon dioxide; CO2E = carbon dioxide equivalent; MT = metric ton; N2O = nitrous oxide
Implementation of the project, as analyzed at the project-level of analysis, would conservatively emit
approximately 1,380 MT CO2E per year.
The gain of sequestered carbon resulting from planting and growth of approximately 35 oak trees on site
is estimated based on the carbon sequestration rate for the tree species, the number of new trees, and
the growing period. It is assumed that all 35 trees will grow for a minimum of 20 years. Table 17 presents
the estimated one-time carbon-stock change resulting from proposed planting of new trees.
Table 17
Planted Trees Sequestered Carbon
Tree Species
Growing Period
(Years)
Sequestration Rate
(MT CO2/Tree/Year)
Quantity of New Tree
Plantings (Trees)
Sequestered Carbon
(MT CO2)
Miscellaneous 20 0.0354 35 24.78
Source: CAPCOA 2017.
Notes: CO2 = carbon dioxide; MT = metric ton
See the GHG emissions analysis for calculations and sources (Dudek 2020b).
As presented in Table 17, the gain in sequestered carbon resulting from planting 35 trees would be
approximately 25 MT CO2. Including the sequestered carbon from planted trees, a conservative estimate
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -53- Mitigated Negative Declaration
of annual project-generated GHG emissions would be approximately 1,379 MT CO2E per year as a result
of project operation.
As shown previously, the total operational emissions for the project would be approximately 1,379 MT
CO2e per year, including amortized construction emissions. As presented in Section 4, the efficiency
metric threshold for the project’s buildout year was 4.26 MT CO2e/person/year. Therefore, the project
would have an efficiency metric of 2.76 MT CO2e/person/year (1,379 MT CO2e per year / 499 persons).
Therefore, the project would not exceed the efficiency metric threshold for 2022 and thus would be
consistent with the state’s targets within SB 32 for 2030. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
b) Less-than-Significant Impact: The project would be consistent with applicable plans, policies and
regulations for the reduction of GHG emissions (i.e. CARB’s Scoping Plan and SANDAG’s Regional Plan).
This determination is based on, but not limited to, the following: (i) the project’s various design attributes
maximize the efficiency of the built environment by reducing the consumption of natural gas and
increasing electrification; (ii) the project is located on an infill site along a major transportation
thoroughfare in the City of Carlsbad that provides multi-modal transit opportunities; and, (iii) the project
would provide a needed mix of market-rate and affordable units, helping to improve the jobs/housing
balance in the City of Carlsbad and provide increased residential opportunities within the City’s
jurisdictional boundaries. Therefore, the project’s impacts on GHG emissions would be less than
significant.
IX. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mit. Incorporated Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through
the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or environment through
reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into the environment?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely
hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile
of an existing or proposed school?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous
materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section
65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the
public or environment?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
e) For a project within an airport land use plan, or where such a plan
has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public
use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive
noise for people residing or working in the project area?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
f) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
g) Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a
significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires,? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -54- Mitigated Negative Declaration
This section is based on the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment prepared by GeoTek in July 2016
(GeoTek 2016b), which includes the background and methodologies regarding the Phase I Environmental
Site Assessment. Further, an FPP was prepared by Dudek in July 2019 for the proposed project (Dudek
2019d). These technical memoranda and reports are hereby incorporated by reference.
a) Less-than-Significant Impact: Construction of the proposed project would require the transport of
potentially hazardous materials including but not limited to fuels, lubricants, and various other liquids needed
for operation of construction equipment. Proper BMPs, including those identified in the required
Stormwater Quality Management Plan (SWQMP) (see Section IX, Hydrology and Water Quality) prepared
for the proposed project, and hazardous materials handling protocols would be prepared and
implemented to ensure safe storage, handling, transport, use, and disposal of all hazard materials during
the construction phase of the proposed project. Construction would also adhere to any local standards
set forth by the city, as well as state and federal health and safety requirements that are intended to
minimize hazardous materials risk to the public, such as the California Occupational Safety and Health
requirements, Hazardous Waste Control Act, California Accidental Release Prevention Program, and the
California Health and Safety Code. Furthermore, all construction waste, including trash, litter, garbage,
solid waste, petroleum products, and any other potentially hazardous materials would be removed and
transported to a permitted waste facility for treatment, storage, or disposal. Use of these materials during
construction for their intended purpose would not pose a significant risk to the public or the environment.
Therefore, impacts related to routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials during
construction would be less than significant.
The project would involve development of residential land uses and associated landscaping and facilities.
During operation of the proposed project, use of hazardous materials would primarily involve the private
use of commercially available cleaning products, landscaping chemicals and fertilizers, and various other
commercially available substances. These substances are required to comply with relevant federal, state,
and local health and safety laws, which are intended to minimize health risk to the public associated with
hazardous materials. Therefore, impacts related to routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous
materials during operation would be less than significant.
b) Less-than-Significant Impact: As discussed in response (a), a variety of hazardous substances and
wastes typical to standard construction projects would be stored and used on the project site during
construction of the proposed project. Accidental spills, leaks, fires, explosions, or pressure releases
involving hazardous materials represent a potential threat to human health and the environment. During
both construction and operation of the proposed project, there is potential for release of hazardous
materials related to storage, transport, use, and disposal from construction debris, landscaping, and
commercial products. However, the proposed project would be required to adhere to federal, state, and
local laws, such as the California Occupational Safety and Health requirements, Hazardous Waste Control
Act, California Accidental Release Prevention Program, and the California Health and Safety Code, which
are intended to minimize risk to public health associated with hazardous materials. Additionally, the
project proposes residential development, which is not typically considered a source of substantial
hazardous materials. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
c) No Impact: No schools are located within 0.25 miles of the project site. The nearest school, Poinsettia
KinderCare, is located approximately 0.72 miles from the project site. No impact would occur.
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -55- Mitigated Negative Declaration
d) Less-than-Significant Impact: The project site is not included on any hazardous waste site lists including
the California Department of Toxic Substances Control’s EnviroStor database, the State Water Resources
Control Board’s GeoTracker site, the Cortese list, the Superfund Site list, or other lists compiled pursuant to
Section 65962.5 of the Government Code (CalEPA 2017; DTSC 2017; SWRCB 2017; EPA 2017a, 2017b). There
are two EnviroStor facilities listed within a 0.5-mile distance of the project site: Kindercare Learning Centers
(located approximately 0.72 miles west-southwest of the project site) and Pacific Rim Elementary School
(located approximately 0.96 miles southwest of the project site). These facilities do not represent an
environmental concern. Further, the site does not appear on the California Underground Storage Tanks list
(SWRCB 2017), and no nearby facilities are listed on the list. Therefore, the project would not create a
significant hazard to the public or the environment, and impacts would be less than significant.
e) Less-than-Significant Impact: The project site is located approximately 0.58 miles from the McClellan-
Palomar Airport. The McClellan-Palomar Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) was prepared according
to Federal Aviation Administration requirements and adopted by the San Diego County Regional Airport
Authority acting as the Airport Land Use Commission of San Diego. The ALUCP provides measures to minimize
the public’s exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around the airport and identifies areas
likely to be impacted by noise and flight activity created by aircraft operations at the airport. These impacted
areas include the Airport Influence Area, the Clear Zone, and the Flight Activity Zone (City of Carlsbad 2015a).
The McClellan-Palomar Airport Safety Zones, as described in the San Diego County ALUCP, are shown on Figure
109. According the San Diego County ALUCP, the northeastern portion of the project site is located within Zone
3 – Inner Turning Zone, while the remained of the project site is located within Zone 6 – Traffic Pattern Zone
(San Diego ALUC 2011) (see Figure 1110).
The McClellan-Palomar ALUCP outlines criteria applicable to proposed residential development in the
vicinity of the airport. In Safety Zone 3, new residential development is limited to no more than 16 DU/AC
or 130 people. As shown on Figure 1110, approximately 1.72 acres of the western portion of the site
overlaps with Zone 3. One proposed building, Building D, is in this area. As such, Zone 3 would include
approximately seven DU/AC. According to the ALUCP, new residential development at a density of more
than four DU/AC but no more than 13 DU/AC is conditionally compatible provided that the development
complies with the clustering requirements indicated in Section 3.4.4(c)(4) of the McClellan-Palomar
ALUCP, and outlined below. The proposed project would meet the following conditions, and thus, be
compatible with ALUC’s requirements in Zone 3 (San Diego ALUC 2011):
15 percent of the site meets the “open land” criteria (see Policy 3.4.9).
One of the following exists within 1,650 feet of the geographic center of the site: a four-lane
divided highway, a golf course, or other public land qualifying as “open land” in accordance with
Policy 3.4.9.
Utility lines on and along the perimeter of the site are underground or will be placed underground
in conjunction with the proposed project.
Development is clustered if required in accordance with response (f). The clustering of residential
development must not result in the density within any single 1-acre area exceeding 20 DU per net acre.
As shown on Figure 109, the remainder of the site is in Safety Zone 6 – Traffic Pattern Zone. Within Safety
Zone 6, new residential development is considered compatible, and there is no limit on an acceptable
density (San Diego ALUC 2011). Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -56- Mitigated Negative Declaration
f) Less-than-Significant Impact: The proposed project has been designed to satisfy the emergency
requirements of the fire and police departments. The FPP ensures the proposed project would comply
with the city’s emergency response in relation to fire. Site ingress/egress will comply with the
requirements of the Carlsbad Fire Department (CFD). The primary access to the project site will be through
an existing private street (West Oaks Way) originating at the existing Palomar Oaks Way, approximately
200 feet south of its intersection with Palomar Airport Road. Palomar Oaks Way is a 52 feet wide (curb to
curb) roadway with two lanes demarcated on the northbound side and one southbound lane. Proposed
private street West Oaks Way would be 32 feet unobstructed width. Private street “A” in the southeastern
portion of the project (extension of Palomar Oaks Way) would be 28 feet wide with no parking along the
130 feet south of its intersection with West Oaks Way and would have perpendicular and parallel parking
on both sides beyond that point. The western end of West Oaks Way is the next project ingress/egress
occurring along Palomar Airport Road where a median cut out will be provided to allow travel in both
directions along Palomar Airport Road. These two ingress/egress points occur along Palomar Airport Road
with the eastern ingress/egress point at Palomar Oaks Way being separated from the western
ingress/egress point by approximately 0.32 miles (1,700 feet). No traffic-calming measures (speed bumps,
speed humps, and speed control dips), which may interfere with emergency apparatus, will be installed.
The roadways within the proposed development will comply with the city Public Works roadway standards. To
ensure that the roadways continue to meet requirements, road maintenance within the private portions of the
development will be provided by an HOA or similar funded entity. The entity will assess maintenance dues
monthly, provide reserve funding, and maintain the site’s roads. Impacts would be less than significant.
g) Less-than-Significant Impact: According to Figure 6-10, Structure Fire/Wildfire Threat in the General
Plan (City of Carlsbad 2015a), the northwestern portion of the project site is located in a high threat Fire
Hazard Severity Zone, and the middle of the project site is located in a moderate threat Fire Hazard
Severity Zone. The rest of the project site is located within an urban environment. The project’s FPP was
submitted in compliance with the requirements of the CFD Fire Code. As described in the FPP, the project
site is located within an area that can be considered a wildland urban interface but is not statutorily
designated as a local or state responsibility area “very high fire hazard severity zone.” The
recommendations provided in the FPP have been designed specifically for the proposed project and the
wildland urban interface zone at the project site.
The FPP determined that the wildland fire risk in the vicinity of the project site has been analyzed and it
has been determined that wildfires may occur in wildland areas to the south, west, and north of the
project site but would not be significantly increased in frequency, duration, or size with the construction
of the project. The project would include conversion of existing vegetation to maintained urban
development with designated landscaping and fuel modification areas.
The types of potential ignition sources that currently exist in the area include vehicle and roadway,
electrical transmission line, and machinery associated with various land uses in the vicinity, as well as off-
site residential neighborhoods. The project would introduce potential ignition sources but would also
include conversion of fuels to lower flammability landscape and include better access throughout the site,
managed and maintained landscapes, higher site awareness/monitoring, and generally a reduction in the
receptiveness of the areas landscape to ignition. Fires from off site would not have continuous fuels across
this site, and therefore, would be expected to burn around and/or over the site through spotting. Burning
vegetation embers may land on project structures but are not likely to result in ignition based on ember
decay rates and the types of non-combustible and ignition resistant materials that will be used on site.
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -57- Mitigated Negative Declaration
The project shall comply with ignition resistant fire and building codes. Compliance with these codes will include
a layered fire protection system designed to current codes and inclusive of site-specific measures. This will result
in a project that is less susceptible to wildfire than surrounding landscapes and would facilitate fire fighter and
medical aid response. Further, modern infrastructure will be provided along with implementation for the latest
ignition resistant construction methods and materials. All structures are required to include interior sprinklers
consistent with Carlsbad Fire and Building Codes. Fuel modification areas receive fuel reduction treatments
initially, and then maintenance over time includes removing all dead and dying materials and maintaining
appropriate horizontal and vertical spacing. In addition, plants that establish or are introduced to the FMZ that
are not on the approved plant list will be removed by the HOA and certified by a third-party FMZ inspection.
By implementing the recommendations and project-specific requirements outlined above, the project
would not expose people or structures to a significant risk, injury, or death involving wildland fires. As
such, impacts would be less than significant.
X. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY
Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mit. Incorporated Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground
water quality?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with ground water recharge such that the project may
impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area,
including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river
or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner, which
would:
i. result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site; ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
ii. substantially increase the amount of surface runoff in a
manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site; ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
iii. create or contribute runoff water, which would exceed the
capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage
systems or provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff;
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
iv. Impede or redirect flood flows? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d) In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, rick release of pollutants
due to project inundation? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
e) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control
plan or sustainable groundwater management plan? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
This section is based on the SWQMP prepared by Fuscoe Engineering in October 2018April 2019 (Fuscoe
Engineering 20182019a) and the Drainage Study prepared by Fuscoe Engineering in January April 2019
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -58- Mitigated Negative Declaration
(Fuscoe Engineering 2019b). These technical memoranda and reports are hereby incorporated by
reference.
a) Less-than-Significant Impact: Construction activities associated with the proposed project could result
in wind and water erosion of the disturbed area leading to sediment discharges. Similarly, as described in
Section VIII, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, fuels, oils, lubricants, and other hazardous substances used
during construction could be released and impact water quality. The proposed project is required to comply
with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System State Water Resources Control Board Construction
General Permit Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ for stormwater discharges and general construction activities
and the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) San Diego Region Water Quality Control Board Order
No. R9-2013-0001 for post-construction stormwater discharges. In compliance with the MS4 permit, an
SWQMP was prepared for the proposed project, which specifies BMPs that would be implemented during
construction and operation to minimize impacts to water quality. BMPs included would involve source
control measures, such as prevention of illicit discharges into the MS4 and storm drain stenciling or signage,
runoff collection, and partial retention by biofiltration. Further, the Drainage Study prepared for the
proposed project outlines water quality treatment BMPs, such as biofiltration with partial retention, that
would be implemented as part of the proposed project (Fuscoe Engineering 2019b). With implementation
of these BMPs, impacts to water quality or waste discharge requirements would be less than significant.
b) Less-than-Significant Impact: As described in the geotechnical report, groundwater was encountered
in almost all of the exploratory excavations of the project site, at depths as shallow as seven feet
belowground surface. The groundwater encountered at the site is generally shallowest toward the
western portions of the site. Perched groundwater or localized seepage can occur due to variations in
rainfall, irrigation practices, and other factors that were not evident at the time of this investigation
(GeoTek 2017). However, the proposed project site is not a source of groundwater, and the proposed
project would not use groundwater during construction or operation. The City currently does not depend
on groundwater sources for its water supplies, according to the city’s Urban Water Management Plan
(CMWD 2016). Further, a large portion of the project site would remain undeveloped. This would allow
for groundwater recharge and infiltration. As such, impacts to groundwater supplies would be less than
significant.
c) i. Less-than-Significant Impact: The project site consists of existing undeveloped pads that lie adjacent
to West Oaks Way. The site is bounded to the north by Encinas Creek and to the south by natural slopes
that rise a couple of hundred feet to a residential neighborhood. Due to the site’s location at the base of
a large natural slope, the project receives runoff from off-site areas. This runoff is received by brow ditches
along the base of this slope, and then conveyed through three storm drain systems that run from south
to north and outlet to Encinas Creek. An existing inlet that collects runoff is present at the easternmost
pad of the project site. The rest of the pads sheet flow to West Oaks Way, which has two pairs of curb
inlets that collet runoff and discharge to the creek. Encinas Creek leaves the site from the northwest
corner of the project and continues westerly to the Pacific Ocean, located approximately two miles away.
The majority of that length is through natural channels, although the westernmost portion of the route
goes through a combination of box culverts and concrete lined channels.
With implementation of the proposed project, the flow patterns on site will largely stay the same. The
three existing storm drain systems that run north–south will be reused and/or added to as part of the
proposed project. Although the project would increase the amount of impervious surfaces at the site
compared to existing conditions, this increase would not be substantial. Further, the project would
implement eight biofiltration BMPs, which would each consist of surface ponding, storage within soil
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -59- Mitigated Negative Declaration
media void space, and an underground detention vaults. As such, the project would not substantially alter
the existing drainage pattern such that substantial erosion would occur on or off site. Therefore, impacts
would be less than significant.
c) ii. Less-than-Significant Impact: With implementation of the proposed project, the flow patterns of
the site will largely stay the same. The proposed project would implement eight biofiltration BMPs, which
would each consist of surface ponding, storage within soil media void space, and an underground
detention vaults. Detention basin analysis was conducted for each of the detention vaults. The study
found that the outflows for 100-year storm events will be reduced by 23 cubic feet per second, offsetting
the 22 cubic feet per second increase that would have occurred without detention. The eight biofiltration
BMPs would offset the increase of 22 cubic feet per second. As such, the project would not substantially
alter the existing drainage patterns such that it would increase flooding on or off site. Impacts would be
less than significant.
c) iii. Less-than-Significant Impact: Refer to responses above. An SWQMP was prepared for the
proposed project, which specifies the BMPs that would be implemented during construction to minimize
impacts to water quality. Further, the Drainage Study that was prepared for the proposed project
concluded that, during operation, the flow patterns of the site will largely stay the same with
implementation of the proposed project (Fuscoe Engineering 2019b). Although the project would increase
the amount of impervious surface at the site compared to existing conditions, this increase would not be
significant. Further, additional stormwater facilities and eight BMPs, which would each consist of surface
ponding, storage within soil media void space, and an underground detention vaults, would be
implemented as part of the project to ensure runoff from large storm events would not exceed the
capacity of the stormwater drainage system. Stormwater facilities proposed as part of the project will be
maintained by the project’s HOA. As such, impacts would be less than significant.
c) iv. Less-than-Significant Impact: According to the Federal Emergency Management Agency, the project
site is located within Flood Zone X, which is defined as an area of minimal flood hazards, typically above the
500-year flood level (FEMA 2012). Although this project is not located within a flood zone per FEMA, it is within
a local 100-year flood zone per the project's drainage study (Fuscoe Engineering 2019b). The project's
proposed biofiltration basins and detention vaults accommodate for detention of a 100-year storm event. The
project would not impede or redirect flood flows. As outlined on Figure 6-2 in the General Plan (City of
Carlsbad 2015a), the project site is not located within a dam inundation area. Refer to the responses above
regarding proposed stormwater facilities per the Drainage Study. Impacts would be less than significant.
d) No Impact: Refer to response (c.iv) above. The proposed project would not be located within a 100-
year flood hazard area. The project site is located approximately two miles inland from the Pacific Ocean.
According to the California Department of Conservation, the project site is not located within a mapped
area of tsunami inundation (CDC 2016). Further, the project site is not located near a large standing body
of water. The closest bodies of water are Batiquitos Lagoon, located approximately 2.1 miles to the
southwest, and Agua Hedionda, located approximately 2.1 miles to the northwest. Thus, inundation by
seiche (or standing wave) is considered negligible. As such, no impact would occur.
e) Less-than-Significant Impact: A SWQMP has been prepared for the proposed project and
incorporated into project design, as discussed previously. The SWQMP has been prepared consistent with
the requirements of the city’s BMP Design Manual, consistent with the requirements of the San Diego
Regional Water Quality Control Board Order No. R9-2013-0001 (Regional MS4 Permit). The Carlsbad
Watershed Management Area Water Quality Improvement Plan was prepared by the Cities of Carlsbad,
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -60- Mitigated Negative Declaration
Encinitas, Escondido, Oceanside, San Marcos, Solana Beach, Vista, and the County of San Diego towards
improving water quality per the Regional MS4 Permit (City of Carlsbad, et al. 2016). Provision of a SWQMP,
and the water quality improvements contained therein, per the requirements of the Regional MS4 Permit
would ensure that the project would not conflict of obstruct with the applicable Water Quality
Improvement Plan. Additionally, as described above, the proposed project would not interfere with
groundwater recharge or use. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
XI. LAND USE AND PLANNING
Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mit. Incorporated Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact a) Physically divide an established community? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any
applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the
purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
a) No Impact: The proposed project would be located entirely within the 12.53-acre project site, which
is currently vacant. None of the proposed project components would potentially block or impede
movements between surrounding established communities. No impact would occur.
b) Less-than-Significant Impact: The project site is currently zoned Planned Industrial (P-M) and Open
Space (OS) and designated Planned Industrial (PI) and Open Space (OS) in the General Plan (City of
Carlsbad 2015a). The proposed project requires a zoning change from Planned Industrial (P-M) to
Residential Density-Multiple (RD-M). Further, the proposed project would require a General Plan land use
change from Planned Industrial (PI) to Residential (R-30).
City of Carlsbad
The project site is surrounded by a variety of land uses, including open space and residential to the south,
open space to the northwest, and planned industrial uses to the east. As such, the project’s proposed uses
would be compatible with nearby land uses. The portions of the site that are currently zoned and have a
land use designation of Open Space will remain as open space under the proposed project. The proposed
open space lots consists of 4.263.97 acres and is located on the northwestern portion of the site. To
facilitate implementation of the proposed project, the applicant has filed a request for the General Plan
Amendment, a Zoning Amendment, and approval of a Tentative Tract Map for the project site. The project
would be required to comply with the goals and policies of the General Plan and the city’s zoning codes.
The Growth Management Chapter of the city’s Zoning Ordinance is intended to ensure that
development is consistent with the General Plan and that adequate public facilities are provided
concurrent with growth within the city. Pursuant to the city’s Growth Management Program (GMP)
and Chapter 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, the city is organized into 25 zones; the project is
located in Zone 5. The city’s GMP requires the preparation of Local Facilities Management Plans
(LFMPs) for each of the 25 management zone. The LFMPs implement the provisions of the city’s GMP
by phasing all development and public facility needs in accordance with the GMP performance
standards.
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -61- Mitigated Negative Declaration
The proposed land use change would help accommodate the disproportionality between residential and non-
residential development within the city and provide housing closer to the job centers for the City of Carlsbad,
as well as those jobs specifically in Zone 5. The proposed land use change implements the intentions of the
Growth Management Ordinance in Carlsbad Municipal Code (CMC) Section 21.90.090(a) which states the city-
wide facilities and improvement plan “shall encourage infill development and reduce the growth-inducing
impact” of outlying undeveloped areas. The proposed site is considered infill development with all facilities in
close proximity. CMC Section 21.90.130(b) of the Growth Management Ordinance also goes on to state “The
city-wide facilities and improvements plan and the local facilities management plans are guides to ensure that
no development occurs unless adequate facilities or improvements will be available to meet demands created
by development. The Carlsbad City Council may initiate an amendment to any of the plans at any time if in its
discretion it determines that an amendment is necessary to ensure adequate facilities and improvements.”
Based on these sections of the Ordinance, the clear intent of Growth Management is to ensure that
appropriate public facilities are available to serve development.
When Zone 5 was originally prepared it was estimated that there would be 20,870,878 square feet of
Industrial/Office and 1,325,421 square feet of Commercial and zero residential development. As can
be seen in the latest City of Carlsbad Growth Projections (dated March 23, 2018) for Zone 5, the
projected buildout scenario is significantly less with 7,529,997 square feet of Industrial/Office,
2,498,020 square feet of Commercial and 467 residential units. Therefore, with the proposed project,
there would be no increase in the development intensity within Zone 5 as a part of the proposed land
use change. When reviewing the proposed land use change on a zone-wide basis in association with
the existing and proposed future development, the overall intensity in development within Zone 5
has significantly decreased over time.
Refer to Section XV, Public Services, and Section XIX, Utilities and Service Systems, for additional
discussion on potential impact onto public facilities. As discussed in those sections, the proposed
project would result in less-than-significant impacts due to adequate existing infrastructure, through
payment of development impact fees, and provision of necessary infrastructure to adequately serve
the project consistent with the Zone 5 LFMP.
A road facility has been identified within LFMP Zone 5 that does not meet current GMP performance
standards. If the performance standards are not met and the Carlsbad City Council adopts an
ordinance prohibiting development in LFMP Zone 5, then no development permits or building permits
shall be issued within the zone until the performance standard is met or arrangements satisfactory
to the Carlsbad City Council guaranteeing the facilities and improvements will be made. The Carlsbad
City Council may choose to exempt this road segment, approve a project to improve the segment to
an acceptable performance level, or other alternative. In the event the Carlsbad City Council exempts
the road segment, the project will be required to participate in Transportation Demand Management
(TDM) and Transportation System Management (TSM). In the event the Carlsbad City Council opts for
a road improvement project or other solution, the developer will be required to pay their fair share
of the improvements or otherwise meet the terms of the solution determined by the Carlsbad City
Council.
The General Plan guides the City’s evolution toward an increasingly balanced community with a full
range of land uses, housing for all income groups and lifestyles, and places for businesses large and
small. The General Plan contains an employment strategy for the McClellan-Palomar Airport area that
would result in continued growth as the employment center of the city, with residential uses in
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -62- Mitigated Negative Declaration
appropriate locations, enabling workers to live close to jobs. The proposed project would place
housing near employment centers, allowing workers to live close to the city’s employment core. The
General Plan also seeks to establish a more knitted community, which in turn would foster social
connections, and promotes a greater mix and integration of uses in different parts of the community
to promote walkability and accessibility (City of Carlsbad 2015a). The proposed project would place
residential development in an area with existing commercial and employment land uses. Thus, the
project would contribute to achieving community connectedness and integration of a greater mix of
land uses by placing residential uses in an area with existing commercial and employment centers.
Further, the General Plan states that, if clustering is used to enhance open space conservation and
reduce the need for grading, the city may permit housing types other than those specified, and
therefore, subject to specific review requirements (City of Carlsbad 2015a). The proposed project
would involve conservation of 4.263.97 acres of a site that has already been graded. There is an
existing easement held by the Buena Sanitation District and the Vallecitos Water District that bisects
the open space lot and this existing easement will be excluded from the conservation easement. As
such, the project would be subject to a specific review during the entitlement process.
Lastly, the city’s General Plan Housing Element states that the city’s share of the Regional Housing
Needs Assessment developed by SANDAG is 4,999 units, which is approximately three percent of the
overall regional housing need (City of Carlsbad 2015a). Per the Housing Element, the housing production
from January 2010 through April 2016 has reached a total of 1,927 units completed or under construction.
There are 2,339 units remaining to meeting the Regional Housing Needs Assessment that have not already
been constructed of approved. As stated in Goal 2-P.6 of the Land Use and Community Design Element of
the General Plan, the provision of lower- and moderate-income housing to meet the objectives of the
Housing Element is encouraged (City of Carlsbad 2015a). The project would help meet the city’s housing
need and provide for low-income housing that will accomplish Goal 2-P.6 of the General Plan, by providing
42 affordable housing units on site. Because the project supports the overarching guiding principles of
the General Plan, the project would be consistent with the General Plan. Further, the project site is
subject to compliance with the McClellan-Palomar ALUCP. As discussed in Section VIII, response (e), the
proposed project would comply with the ALUCP. With adoption of all required amendments, impacts
would be less than significant.
California Coastal Commission
The project site is located between a vegetated hillside containing coastal sage scrub (CSS) and a riparian
corridor (Encinas Creek). A 50-foot buffer and protective fencing will prevent adverse impacts from pet
intrusion and human disturbance to adjacent habitat. A portion of the proposed buffer extends into West
Oaks Way. The public road is a pre-existing condition from a previously approved subdivision project. The
road contains regional utilities and cannot be relocated to accommodate the full 50-foot buffer.
Nonetheless, the proposed buffer is deemed adequate to provide to protect the adjacent habitat.
The project involves 0.08 acre of unavoidable impact to riparian habitat and 0.01 acre of impact to open
water to construct a secondary vehicular access. Pursuant to Carlsbad Fire Department requirements, any
new development (regardless of land use or scale) would require a secondary access road. The secondary
access road would only to be used as an Emergency Vehicle Access Road (EVA) and not as a full time
secondary access road. As such, potential impacts to Encinas Creek from daily traffic use would be
minimized.
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -63- Mitigated Negative Declaration
Due to the identified public safety concern and Fire Department requirements, removal of the secondary
access road from the project to avoid wetland impacts is not feasible. Various design alternatives were
considered for the secondary access road during project planning and design. The proposed bridge design
minimizes direct impacts to the extent practicable. The proposed secondary access road alignment is the
least environmentally damaging feasible alternative. All mitigation for impacts to the riparian habitat will
occur on site. A 3:1 mitigation ratio is proposed; refer to Section IV, Biological Resources, for a full
discussion. As such, wetlands impacts resulting from construction of the secondary access road are
allowable as an incidental public service purpose and the project is consistent with Section 30233 of the
Coastal Act.
Section 30250 of the Coastal Act requires new development to be concentrated in existing developed
areas where it can be accommodated without adverse impacts to coastal resources. Section 30253(d)
requires new development to minimize energy consumption and vehicle miles traveled. Concentrating
development in existing developed areas provides more opportunities for people to live near places they
work and recreate, such as the beach, and, thereby, reduces impacts to coastal resources. Impacts to
roads and vehicle miles traveled would be reduced by having a more dense stock of housing located closer
to employment and recreational opportunities within the Carlsbad coastal zone. Also, by having a higher
density residential project in an existing developed area, it places more people in a single location so that
public transit service is facilitated, which then again aids in reducing the number of cars on streets and
thus reduces impacts to coastal resources and public access. Siting dense development in urbanized areas
reduces urban sprawl, and furthermore reduces the pressure to extend development into adjacent
undeveloped areas, which may contain sensitive coastal resources. As such, the project is consistent with
Sections 30250 and 30253(d) of the Coastal Act.
The Coastal Act prioritizes the protection of public access to the coast and, in Section 30252, specifically
identifies adequate parking as an important component of new development. The Coastal Commission
enforces minimum onsite parking standards for new development in order to protect public beach parking
for members of the public who wish to access the coast. The applicant has proposed 373 384 parking
spaces for the proposed 192 unit residential development. Public transportation options are readily
available within the project vicinity. Bus stops for Route 445, serving the Poinsettia COASTER station and
Palomar College, are located at the intersection of Palomar Airport Road / Palomar Oaks Way. The project
would also create connectivity to a bike path along Palomar Airport Road, providing an additional
nonautomotive transportation option. Therefore, the proposed project is consistent with Sections 30210,
30211, and 30252 of the Coastal Act and impacts would be less than significant.
XII. MINERAL RESOURCES
Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mit. Incorporated Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that
would be of future value to the region and the residents of the
State?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral
resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific
plan, or other land use plan?
☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -64- Mitigated Negative Declaration
a, b) No Impact: The City is located in the Western San Diego County Production-Consumption (P-C)
Zone according to the California Mineral Land Classification System. However, the project site is not
located within a Mineral Resource Zone as defined and classified by the Surface Mining and Reclamation
Act. The General Plan does not identity any zones of locally important mineral resources; therefore,
mineral resources are within the project site, and no evidence exists indicating that there could be mineral
resources in the project vicinity (City of Carlsbad 2015a). Additionally, the project site is located within an
urbanized area of the city. Mineral extraction land uses would be incompatible with the existing and
planned land uses within and around the project site. Therefore, no impact to locally important mineral
resources would occur.
XIII. NOISE
Would the project result in: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mit. Incorporated Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact a) Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in
ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the poject in excess of
standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance
or applicable standards of other agencies?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
b) Generation of excessive groundbourne vibration or groundbourne
noise levels? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an
airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the
project expose people residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
a) Less-than-Significant Impact With Mitigation:
Traffic Noise
An Environmental Noise Assessment for the project was prepared by Dudek in June October 2020 (Dudek
2020c). Technical memoranda and reports are hereby incorporated by reference. The assessment estimates
and evaluates the potential noise and vibration impacts associated with implementation of the project relative
to the city significance thresholds for construction and operation (Dudek 2020c). Noise measurements were
conducted at various locations on and off site (Figure 1211, Noise Measurement and Modeling Locations). The
main source of traffic noise is Palomar Airport Road directly north of the project site. The project would
generate a net traffic volume increase over existing volumes. Table 18 shows the calculated Average Daily Trip
(ADT) numbers for Existing, Existing Plus Project, Existing Plus Cumulative, Existing Plus Cumulative Plus Project,
Year 2035, and Year 2035 Plus Project. The average peak-hour traffic was calculated to be 7.4 percent of ADT
in the existing case. This percentage was used to calculate expected ADT values from the peak-hour traffic
numbers contained in the traffic report (LLG 2020).
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -65- Mitigated Negative Declaration
Table 18
Palomar Road Average Daily Traffic Scenarios
Street Existing Existing + Project Existing + Cumulative Existing + Cumulative + Project Year 2035 Year 2035 + Project
Palomar Airport
Road
44,494 45,646 45,941 46,742 50,772 51,573
Source: LLG 2020.
The ADT values discussed previously were used with the calibrated Computer Aided Noise Abatement
(CadnA) traffic noise model to calculate existing and expected noise levels at the proposed building
facades.
A local road default traffic hourly distribution was used for these scenarios. This default hourly percentage
for 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. is approximately 6.4 percent of the ADT. For evening hours between 7:00 p.m.
and 10:00 p.m. hourly traffic is assumed to be 2.9 percent of ADT. For nighttime hour from 10:00 p.m. to
6:00 a.m., one percent of ADT is the assumed hourly traffic. These percentages are rounded. CadnA uses
additional digits of precision (more decimal places) during model simulations/calculations. The
percentage of heavier vehicles (medium trucks, heavy trucks, and buses) is assumed to be 10 percent.
Table 19 shows the results of the model runs for the balcony areas facing the road. Under the “Receiver”
column, the M numbers relate to the positions of the modeled receivers shown on Figure 1211. The “L”
indicates the level with L1 indicating the first floor, L2 indicating the second floor, and L3 indicating the
third floor. The receiver locations were placed approximately three feet above the floor level to model a
seated resident on the balconies, based on elevations derived from the project plan.
Table 19
Traffic Noise Model Results at Representative Receivers
Receiver
Traffic Noise (CNEL dBA)
Existing Existing +
Project
Existing +
Cumulative
Existing +
Cumulative + Project Year 2035 Year 2035 +
Project
M1 L1 66 66 66 67 67 67
M1 L2 67 67 67 67 67 67
M1 L3 67 67 67 67 67 67
M2 L1 67 67 67 67 67 67
M2 L2 67 67 67 67 67 67
M2 L3 67 67 67 67 67 68
M2-Alt L1 66 67 67 67 67 67
M2-Alt L2 67 67 67 67 67 67
M2-Alt L3 67 67 67 67 67 67
M3 L1 66 66 66 66 67 67
M3 L2 66 66 66 67 67 67
M3 L3 66 66 66 66 67 67
M3-Alt L1 66 66 66 66 67 67
M3-Alt L2 66 66 66 66 67 67
M3-Alt L3 66 67 67 67 67 67
M4 L1 66 66 66 66 67 67
I I
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -66- Mitigated Negative Declaration
Table 19
Traffic Noise Model Results at Representative Receivers
Receiver
Traffic Noise (CNEL dBA)
Existing
Existing +
Project
Existing +
Cumulative
Existing +
Cumulative + Project Year 2035
Year 2035 +
Project
M4 L2 66 67 67 67 67 67
M4 L3 66 66 67 67 67 67
M4-Alt L1 66 66 66 66 67 67
M4-Alt L2 66 66 66 67 67 67
M5 L1 64 64 64 64 64 64
M5 L2 64 64 64 64 65 65
M5 L3 64 65 65 65 65 65
M5-Alt L1 63 63 63 63 64 64
M5-Alt L2 64 64 64 64 64 64
M5-Alt L3 64 64 64 64 65 65
M6 L1 64 64 64 64 64 64
M6 L2 64 64 64 64 65 65
M6 L3 64 64 64 64 65 65
M6-Alt L1 64 64 64 64 64 64
M6-Alt L2 64 64 64 64 64 64
M6-Alt L3 63 64 64 64 64 64
M7 L1 62 62 62 62 63 63
M7 L2 63 63 63 63 63 63
M7 L3 63 63 63 63 64 64
M7-Alt L1 63 63 63 63 63 63
M7-Alt L2 63 63 63 63 64 64
M7-Alt L3 63 63 63 64 64 64
M8 L1 63 63 63 63 63 63
M8 L2 63 63 63 63 64 64
M8 L3 63 63 63 63 64 64
M9 L1 63 63 63 63 63 63
M9 L2 63 63 63 63 63 63
M9 L3 63 63 63 63 63 63
M10 L1 63 63 63 63 63 63
M10 L2 63 63 63 63 63 64
M10 L3 63 63 63 63 63 63
Pool/Club
House
65 65 65 65 65 65
Notes: CNEL = Community Noise Equivalent Level; dBA = A-weighted decibel
Existing exterior noise exposure levels due to traffic on Palomar Airport Road exceed 65 dBA CNEL at M1,
M2, M3, M4, and M5 on the first, second, and third floors. All of these receivers have calculated noise
levels below 70 dBA CNEL, and therefore, remain in the “conditionally acceptable” range from the land
use compatibility table. To address the conditional nature of the noise levels, Mitigation Measures NOI-2
and NOI-5 are included to reduce operational noise to a less-than-significant level.
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -67- Mitigated Negative Declaration
Further modeling was conducted to estimate the noise levels on the balconies. This modeling focused on
the added noise reduction due to acoustically solid barriers (i.e., free of holes, gaps, or cracks) at the open
end of the balconies. The modeled balcony receivers were assumed to be seated; thus, the receiver
elevations were modeled at a height of approximately three feet above the first, second, and third floor
levels. Barriers were assumed to extend four feet up from the floors on these levels. A conceptual design
of the noise barriers is shown on Figure 1312.
Applying standard acoustical barrier calculations to the seated receiver, five dBA or more of additional
noise reduction is expected. For the worst case modeled receiver at M2 L3 in the Year 2035 with project
traffic scenario, the calculated CNEL is 68 dBA. With the conservative noise reduction of five dBA applied
due to the balcony barrier, the expected traffic noise level for a seated receiver is about 63 dBA CNEL.
Thus the outdoor seated areas would have noise levels below 65 dBA CNEL and thus are allowable for
residential uses in a mixed-use project as stated in note 4 of Table 5-2 of the General Plan Noise Element
(City of Carlsbad 2015a).
With implementation of Mitigation Measures NOI-2 and NOI-5, the noise impacts from traffic can be
considered less than significant for the planned outdoor use areas reviewed and the balconies of the
residential units.
Another planned outdoor living space is the pool area adjacent to the Club House. At this location, the
noise from Palomar Airport Road are acceptable. Therefore, no exterior traffic noise mitigation is required
in the Pool and Club House area.
Interior spaces are a concern because of the elevated exterior noise levels identified in the traffic noise
modelling. To comply with the City of Carlsbad’s and state’s 45-decibel (dB) Community Noise Equivalent
Level (CNEL) interior noise standard, the residential dwelling units would most likely require mechanical
ventilation system or air conditioning system and possibly sound-rated windows. A review of the
construction plans for the buildings would be required to assure the interior living spaces do not have
noise levels that exceed 45 dBA CNEL, which could result from the elevated exterior noise levels
(Mitigation Measure NOI-1).
Regarding traffic-noise-level-associated roadways to which the project would contribute trips, it is
noteworthy that the noise level increases would not exceed two dBA when the project trips are added to
the analyzed future traffic condition scenarios. This is considered a less-than-significant noise increase due
to the project. Since less than a two-decibel (dB) increase in traffic noise has been calculated on roadways
immediately adjacent to the project site, less than a two-dB increase in traffic noise due to the project would
be expected at other residential receptors located along roads farther from the project site (i.e., roads with
smaller proportionate traffic contributions by the project). Therefore project-related traffic noise level
increase impacts on nearby residential receptors are expected to be less than significant.
McClellan-Palomar Airport Noise
The project site is located on average approximately 2,400 feet from the runway edge of McClellan-
Palomar Airport (Dudek 2020c). The northern tip of the site is located within the 65 dBA CNEL contour
(levels within this contour range from 61 to 65 dBA CNEL); no structures are located within the 65 dBA
CNEL contour. The central two-thirds of the site is located within the 60 dBA CNEL contour (noise levels
here would range from 56 to 60 dBA CNEL). The majority of the proposed structures would be located in
the 60 dBA CNEL contour. The southern approximately one-third of the site and structures would be
located in the 55 dBA CNEL contour. The Noise Technical Report has found that the site is acceptable for
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -68- Mitigated Negative Declaration
the residential development, after reviewing both traffic and airport noise levels for the site. The report
further points out that certain special design considerations, included as Mitigation Measures NOI-1 and
NOI-2, must be made in order to assure the future residential living space noise levels are acceptable.
Impacts would be less than significant (Dudek 2020c).
Construction Noise
Construction noise and vibration are temporary phenomena. Construction noise and vibration levels will
vary from hour to hour and day to day, depending on the equipment in use, the operations being
performed, and the distance between the source and receptor. Construction is expected to include site
preparation, grading, trenching, building construction, paving, and architectural coating. Construction
equipment with substantially higher noise-generation characteristics (e.g., pile drivers, rock drills, and blasting
equipment) would not be necessary.
The construction vehicle assemblage would include standard equipment such as dozers, trackers loaders,
backhoes, excavators, graders, scrapers, trenchers, lifts, paving equipment, rollers, compressors, and
miscellaneous trucks. Specified and measured noise level ranges for various pieces of construction
equipment at a distance of 50 feet are presented in Table 20. The specified noise levels at 50 feet for
typical equipment would range up to 85 dBA for the type of equipment normally used for this type of
project. The construction equipment is expected to be spread out over the entire site, with some
equipment operating along the perimeter of the site while the rest of the equipment may be located
several hundred feet further away from the noise sensitive receptors.
Table 20
Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels
CA/T Noise Emission Reference Levels and Usage Factors
Equipment Description
Impact
Device?
Acoustical
Use Factor
(%)
Spec 721.560
Lmax @ 50 ft
(dBA, slow)
Actual Measured Lmax
@ 50 ft (dBA, slow)
samples averaged
Number of
Actual Data
Samples
(Count)
All other equipment > 5 horsepower No 50 85 N/A 0
Auger drill rig No 20 85 84 36
Backhoe No 40 80 78 372
Compactor (ground) No 20 80 83 57
Compressor (air) No 40 80 78 18
Crane No 16 85 81 405
Dozer No 40 85 82 55
Dump truck No 40 84 76 31
Excavator No 40 85 81 170
Flatbed truck No 40 84 74 4
Front-end loader No 40 80 79 96
Generator No 50 82 81 19
Grader No 40 85 N/A 0
Man lift No 20 85 75 23
Pickup truck No 40 55 75 1
Roller No 20 85 80 16
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -69- Mitigated Negative Declaration
Table 20
Typical Construction Equipment Noise Levels
CA/T Noise Emission Reference Levels and Usage Factors
Equipment Description
Impact
Device?
Acoustical
Use Factor
(%)
Spec 721.560
Lmax @ 50 ft
(dBA, slow)
Actual Measured Lmax
@ 50 ft (dBA, slow)
samples averaged
Number of
Actual Data
Samples
(Count)
Scraper No 40 85 84 12
Tractor No 40 84 N/A 0
Source: FHWA 2006.
Notes: dBA = A-weighted decibel; Lmax = maximum sound level
Construction would occur during the city’s allowable hours of construction activities. The city’s Municipal
Code states that construction can occur Monday through Friday from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. and Saturday
from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. (City of Carlsbad 2017b). Adherence to these construction work hours is
included as Mitigation Measure NOI-3. The noise levels generated by construction equipment would vary
greatly depending on factors such as the type and specific model of the equipment, the operation being
performed, and the condition of the equipment. The average sound level of the construction activity also
depends on the amount of time that the equipment operates and the intensity of the construction during
periods of activity.
The magnitude of the impact would depend on the type of construction activity, equipment, duration of the
construction phase, distance between the noise source and receiver, and any intervening structures. Noise
from construction equipment generally exhibits point source acoustical characteristics. A point source
sound is attenuated (reduced) at a rate of six decibels per doubling of distance from the source for “hard
site” conditions and at 7.5 decibels per doubling of distance for “soft site” conditions. These rules apply
to the propagation of sound waves with no obstacles between source and receivers, such as topography
(ridges or berms) or structures.
Table 21 shows the calculated noise levels at the property line of the closest noise-sensitive receptor
(i.e., the residential property lines to the southwest of the project site along Sapphire Drive) during
construction phases for this project. Construction phase noise levels indicated in Table 21 represent
worst-case conditions.
Table 21
Outdoor Construction Noise Levels by Phase
Construction Phase Lmax (dBA) Leq (dBA)
Nearest Residential Receptor (500 Feet from Project Boundary)
Site preparation 63 67
Grading 64 67
Trenching 64 64
Building construction 63 64
Paving 64 64
Architectural coatings 57 53
Typical Group of Residential Receptors (550 Feet from Project Center)
Site preparation 63 67
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -70- Mitigated Negative Declaration
Table 21
Outdoor Construction Noise Levels by Phase
Construction Phase Lmax (dBA) Leq (dBA)
Grading 64 67
Trenching 64 64
Building construction 63 64
Paving 64 65
Architectural coatings 57 53
Notes: dBA = A-weighted decibel; Leq = equivalent sound level over a given period; Lmax = maximum sound level
As Table 21 shows, the highest noise levels are expected to occur during the site preparation and grading
phases. Construction-related noise levels could reach up to 67 dBA Leq at residential property lines to the
south. The City’s Municipal Code provides hours for construction but does not explicitly exempt
construction from noise regulations. The City’s Municipal Code specifies 65 dBA day-night average sound
level as the maximum allowable exterior noise level (City of Carlsbad 2017b). With the construction
operations limited to the hours between 7:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. during weekdays and 8:00 a.m. to 6:00
p.m. on Saturdays, it is very likely that the construction noise day-night average sound level will remain
below 65 dBA at the residences to the south. Despite not exceeding the city’s Municipal Code maximum
noise level, the construction operations still have a high likelihood of producing annoyance for the nearby
residences. To reduce the likelihood of nuisance noise during construction, Mitigation Measures NOI-3
and NOI-4 are incorporated into project construction. Impacts would be less than significant.
Construction Vibration Impact to Off-Site Residences
The heavier pieces of construction equipment used at this site would include dozers, graders, and pavers.
The anticipated construction equipment would generate a peak particle velocity of approximately 0.09
inches/second or less at a distance of 25 feet (Dudek 2020c). Information from the California Department
of Transportation indicates that continuous vibrations with a peak particle velocity of approximately 0.1
inches/second begin to annoy people. Groundborne vibration is typically attenuated over short distances.
The closest existing residences would be approximately 500 feet or more from the construction area. At
these distances, the peak particle velocity from construction would be well below 0.1 inches/second and
would also be below the threshold of perceptibility. Therefore, impacts related to vibration from
construction activities would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
NOI-1 Interior Noise Study
Prior to the approval of building permits, the applicant shall submit an interior noise study
for approval by the city Building Department. The interior noise study would ensure
compliance with the city and state’s 45 decibel (dB) Community Noise Equivalent Level
(CNEL) noise standard.
NOI-2 Elevated Noise Environment Disclaimer
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -71- Mitigated Negative Declaration
Prior to sale, lease or rental of any residential structure or portion thereof located in the
Airport Influence Area (AIA), the applicant/owner shall provide prospective buyers and
future occupants with the following notice:
This property is currently located in an urban area that periodically and regularly
experiences elevated noise levels. Potential sources of this noise may be automobile
traffic, flying aircraft, industrial/commercial uses, and general human activity in an urban
environment. The property is subject to aircraft overflight, including sight and sound of
aircraft operating from McClellan-Palomar Airport. You may wish to consider what noise
level annoyances, if any, are associated with the property before you complete your
purchase and/or rental agreement, and determine whether they are acceptable to you.
NOI-3 Limit Construction Work Hours
a. Noise-generating construction activities (i.e., operation of equipment, performing
any construction, or the grading or excavation of land) associated with the project
shall not occur in the period before 7:00 a.m. or after 6:00 p.m. on weekdays or before
8:00 a.m. or after 6:00 p.m. on Saturday. Noise-generating construction activities
associated with the project are prohibited on Sundays and federal holidays.
b. Construction hours, allowable workdays, and the phone number of the job
superintendent shall be clearly posted at all construction entrances to allow
surrounding property owners to contact the job superintendent if necessary. In the
event the city and/or construction contractor receives a complaint, appropriate
corrective actions shall be implemented, and a report of the action shall be provided to
the reporting party.
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -72- Mitigated Negative Declaration
NOI-4 Measures to Reduce Construction Nuisance Noise
The following are required measures to help reduce potential nuisance construction noise
for the noise sensitive receptors located near the site:
a. All construction equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be equipped with properly
operating and maintained mufflers.
b. 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 using electric air compressors and similar power tools rather than diesel
equipment, shall be employed where feasible.
c. During construction, stationary construction equipment shall be placed such that
emitted noise is directed away from or shielded from sensitive noise receivers.
d. During construction, stockpiling and vehicle staging areas shall be located as far as
practical from noise-sensitive receptors.
e. Electrically powered equipment shall be used instead of pneumatic or internal
combustion powered equipment where feasible.
f. Construction site and access road speed limits shall be established and enforced
during the construction period.
g. The use of noise-producing signals, including horns, whistles, alarms, and bells, shall
be for safety warning purposes only.
h. The on-site construction supervisor and/or “disturbance coordinator” shall have the
responsibility and authority to receive and resolve noise complaints. A clear appeal
process to the owner shall be established prior to construction commencement that
will allow for resolution of noise problems that cannot be immediately solved by the
site supervisor.
i. Equipment shall not be left idling unless necessary.
j. The project contractor shall, to the extent feasible, schedule construction activities to
avoid the simultaneous operation of construction equipment to minimize noise levels
resulting from operating several pieces of high-noise-level-emitting equipment.
NOI-5 Exterior Noise Barriers at Balconies
Prior to issuance of building permits, construction plans shall show noise barriers placed
on all balconies that are subject to noise levels greater than 65 decibels (dB) in the Year
2035 + Project model scenario (refer to Table 7 of the Noise Technical Report). The noise
barriers may be constructed of a material such as tempered glass, acrylic glass, solid metal
(minimum six gage thickness: steel, aluminum, etc.) or any masonry material with a
surface density of at least three pounds per square foot. The barriers may also be
constructed using a combination of materials, such as a stucco base component topped
with glass or Plexiglas, or a solid metal base topped with glass or Plexiglass. The noise
barriers shall have no openings or cracks.
b) Less-than-Significant Impact: As stated in response (a), impacts resulting from groundborne vibration
or groundborne noise levels would be reduced to less than significant.
c) Less-than-Significant Impact: The project is not within the vicinity of a private airstrip. The project
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -73- Mitigated Negative Declaration
site is located within the McClellan-Palomar ALUCP. The northern tip of the site is located within the 65
dBA CNEL contour (levels within this contour range from 61 to 65 dBA CNEL); no structures are located
within the 65 dBA CNEL contour. The central two-thirds of the site is located within the 60 dBA CNEL
contour (noise levels here would range from 56 to 60 dBA CNEL). The majority of the proposed structures
would be located in the 60 dBA CNEL contour. The southern approximately one-third of the site and
structures would be located in the 55 dBA CNEL contour (Dudek 2020c). Therefore, the project would not
be exposed to excessive airport noise, and impacts would be less than significant.
XIV. POPULATION AND HOUSING
Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mit. Incorporated Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact a) Induce substantial unplanned growth in an area either directly (for
example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly
(for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
a) Less-than-Significant Impact: The proposed project does not include the extension of infrastructure
that would indirectly induce population growth. However, the proposed project would directly introduce a
new population to the area through development of residential land uses. The proposed project consists of
a total of 192 multifamily residential units resulting in approximately 492 new residents (U.S. Census Bureau
2015). SANDAG’s 2050 Regional Growth Forecast uses several factors to forecast population, housing, and
employment growth in San Diego County; one such factor is jurisdictional general plan housing projections
and long-term land use planning. The SANDAG 2050 Regional Growth Forecast states that the city’s
population is projected to grow by 17.8 percent by 2050. The City’s housing stock is projected to grow by 13
percent by 2050, resulting in approximately 50,212 total housing units; multifamily housing units are
expected to account for approximately 82 percent of the new housing stock developed in the San Diego
region by 2050 (SANDAG 2013).
The City’s General Plan Housing Element states that the city’s share of the Regional Housing Needs
Assessment developed by SANDAG is 4,999 units, which is approximately three percent of the overall
regional housing need (City of Carlsbad 2015a). Per the Housing Element, the housing production from
January 2010 through April 2016 has reached a total of 1,927 units completed or under construction.
There are 2,339 units remaining to meeting the Regional Housing Needs Assessment that have not already
been constructed of approved.
Additionally, as discussed in Sections XV, Public Services and XVI, Recreation, the project would implement
various off-site improvements and would be required to pay proportionate development impact fees to
account for the new population introduced by the project. Despite the project proposing a Land Use and
Zoning Amendment to allow for new residential development, some growth would be induced should the
project site be developed under existing Planned Industrial land use and zoning designations. Further, the
project site is located within a developed area off an arterial corridor with ready access to employment
centers and commercial uses. Therefore, the population induced through development of the proposed
project would not be substantial. Impacts would be less than significant.
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -74- Mitigated Negative Declaration
b) No Impact: The project site is currently undeveloped, disturbed land. There are no existing residential
uses on the project site. Therefore, the project would not displace any existing housing or population, and
no impact would occur.
XV. PUBLIC SERVICES
Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mit. Incorporated Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the
provision of new or physically altered government facilities, a need
for new or physically altered government facilities, the construction
of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to
maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other
performance objectives for any of the public services:
i. Fire protection? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
ii. Police protection? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
iii. Schools? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
iv. Parks? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
v. Other public facilities? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
a) i. Less-than-Significant Impact: The project is located off Palomar Airport Road, a heavily used road
with residential and industrial surrounding uses. As discussed in Section XIII, Population and Housing, the
project would introduce 192 multifamily residential units into the area; however, the project would
implement various off-site improvements and would be required to pay proportionate development
impact fees to account for the new population introduced by the project.
The project is located within the jurisdiction of the CFD, which provides initial response to all structural
fire, medical, and associated emergencies within the 38 square miles of the city’s boundaries. CFD has six
fire stations that are fully equipped with the latest firefighting apparatuses and highly trained personnel
to cover the emergency calls generated by the city’s population of approximately 115,000 persons. The
CFD operates three fire stations that would likely be dispatched to an incident at the project site (Stations
5, 4, and 2), although primary response would be from Station 4, with Stations 5 and 2 responding as
necessary to round out the effective firefighting force.
A travel-time response analysis was conducted in the project’s FPP (Dudek 2019d). Based on the project site
location in relation to existing CFD stations, travel time to the site for the first responding engine from Station
4 is five minutes to the farthest portion of the project site, accessing the site via the emergency access road
and reaching the furthest easterly structure. Secondary response is expected to arrive roughly the same timing,
assuming response from Station 5 along the Orion Way path. If the response follows Faraday Road to take
advantage of signaled intersections, the response travel time is calculated to be five minutes and 38
seconds. Based on these calculations, emergencies within the project can be responded to by primary and
secondary responses according to CFD’s established emergency response benchmarks for first unit on scene
within six minutes or less and second unit on scene within nine minutes. In addition, the city has a signed
automatic aid agreement on first alarm or greater with all surrounding communities. The automatic aid
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -75- Mitigated Negative Declaration
agreement uses automatic vehicle locators so the fire dispatch center can determine the closest unit. The
closest unit, regardless of agency, is dispatched first. The City is also part of the San Diego County and State of
California Master Mutual Aid Agreements.
The Zone 5 LFMP performance standard for fire protection services states that no more than 1,500 dwelling
units should be outside of a five-minute response time. As discussed above, the project meets this standard.
The project’s estimated 492 residents may generate up to 40 calls per year, most of which are expected
to be medical-related calls. Service-level requirements for the CFD are not expected to be significantly
impacted with the increase of 40 calls per year, even when considering all the calls per day in its entire
service area or roughly five calls per day per fire station. Therefore, the project is not expected to cause a
decline in the CFD response times (Dudek 2019d). Additionally, the proposed project would be required
to comply with the California 2016 Fire Code, Title 24, Part 9, and the city’s Fire Prevention Code in Chapter
17.04 of the city Municipal Code, which would minimize potential impacts to fire protection. Therefore, the
project would have less-than-significant impacts to fire protection services.
a) ii. Less-than-Significant Impact: The project site is located off Palomar Airport Road, a heavily used
road with residential and industrial surrounding uses. As discussed in Section XIII, the project would
introduce 192 multifamily residential units into the area; however, the project would implement various
off-site improvements and be required to pay proportionate development impact fees to account for the
new population introduced by the project.
The project site is currently served by the city’s Police Department and would not require the expansion
of the service area. The city’s Police Department is the 1.9 mile northeast of the project site. The proposed
project would directly increase the city’s Police Department’s service population resulting in an increase
in demand for police protection services, which may affect the city’s Police Department’s maintenance of
response times and service ratios. However, the city’s Municipal Code requires that all new residential
and commercial development pay a local facilities management fee established to pay for improvements
or facilities identified in a local facilities management plan that are related to new development within
the zone and are not otherwise financed by any other fee, charge, or tax on development or are not
installed by a developer as a condition of a building permit or development permit. The fee may also be
used to pay for that portion of the facilities or improvements identified in the city-wide facilities and
improvement plan attributable to the local zone. The fee would be used by the city to meet the increased
demand for funding the expansion of public facilities, including police facilities, to serve new development
(City of Carlsbad 2017b).
a) iii. Less-than-Significant Impact: The proposed project is located within the service boundaries of
the Carlsbad Unified School District (CUSD) for elementary, middle, and high school students. The proposed
project would directly introduce a new student population within the service boundaries of CUSD. The
applicant has consulted with the CUSD regarding the capacity of the CUSD schools the project would impact.
A letter was received by the CUSD stating that the project would be served by Aviara Oaks Elementary School
(6900 Ambrosia Lane), Aviara Oaks Middle School (6880 Ambrosia Lane), and Carlsbad High School (3557
Monroe Street) or Sage Creek High School (3900 Cannon Road) (CUSD 2016). This letter states that some of
the CUSD elementary schools are operating at full capacity, and that it is possible that students generated
from the proposed project may not attend the closest neighborhood school due to overcrowded conditions
and may have to attend school across town. Other schools in the vicinity have the capacity to account for
the potential future students generated by the proposed project (CUSD 2016). The Zone 5 LFMP identifies
that school capacity to meet projected enrollment within the zone is to be determined by the school district.
Therefore, there is no need for new facilities to accommodate the proposed project.
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -76- Mitigated Negative Declaration
All residential development is required to pay school developer fees to the appropriate district prior
to issuance of building permits. The proposed project would be required to pay such fees that would
provide funds to CUSD. The potential future expansion of school facilities that may result from the
use of such fees is not reasonably foreseeable and beyond the scope of this MND. Additionally, per
California Government Code, Section 65995, the payment of required school fees is considered full
and complete mitigation of impacts to school facilities. Therefore, impacts to schools would be less
than significant.
a) iv. Less-than-Significant Impact: The proposed project would directly introduce a new population to
the area that would increase the demands for parks. The City’s General Plan Recreation Element states, “as
of 2013, the city’s park facilities are consistent with the Growth Management Plan park facilities standard
and City-wide there is a ratio of three acres per 1,000 population” (City of Carlsbad 2015a).
Park facilities are addressed on a Park District basis. There are four park districts which correspond to the
four quadrants of the city. Zone 5 is located in all four Park Districts. Although the demand for park facilities
within the Southwest Quadrant exceed the inventory of existing park acreage, the quadrant is not out of
compliance with the performance standard because the time frame for the construction of additional park
facilities would be achieved prior to buildout. It is assumed that Veteran’s Memorial Park (91.5 acres, with
22.9 acres applied to each Quadrant) would be constructed within the timeframe specified in the
performance standard and there would be a surplus of 14.5 acres. Therefore, the Southwest Quadrant
conforms to the adopted Performance Standard through build out.
The proposed project would be required to pay such fees prior to the issuance of building permits. The
potential future expansion of park and recreational facilities that may result from the use of such fees
is not reasonably foreseeable and is beyond the scope of this MND. The project also includes a
recreation area/building, a pool, multiple outdoor recreation areas, and other open space areas. With
adherence to the city’s Municipal Code and payment of fees, the project would have less-than-
significant impacts on parks.
a) v. Less-than-Significant Impact: The city’s Municipal Code requires that all new residential and
commercial development pay a local facilities management fee established to pay for improvements or
facilities identified in a local facilities management plan that are related to new development within the zone
and are not otherwise financed by any other fee, charge, or tax on development or are not installed by a
developer as a condition of a building permit or development permit. The fee may also be used to pay for
that portion of the facilities or improvements identified in the city-wide facilities and improvement plan
attributable to the local zone. The fee would be used by the city to meet the increased demand for funding
the expansion of public facilities identified by a local facilities management plan, such as libraries and city
Administrative Facilities (City of Carlsbad 2017b).
The Zone 5 LFMP identifies a performance standard for City Administrative Facilities at 1,500 square feet
per 1,000 population and libraries 800 square feet per 1,000 population must be scheduled for construction
within a five-year period or prior to construction of 6,250 dwelling units. Zone 5 is projected to conform with
this standard until buildout with the proposed expansion of the Georgina Cole Library. With adherence to
the city’s Municipal Code and payment of fees, the project would have less-than-significant impacts on other
public facilities.
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -77- Mitigated Negative Declaration
XVI. RECREATION Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mit. Incorporated Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and
regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial
physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the
construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might
have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
a, b) Less-than-Significant Impact: The project would contribute a direct permanent increase to the
population of the city and increase the demand for recreational areas. Therefore, the proposed project
would likely increase the use of existing parks and recreational trails. However, the proposed project
includes the development of usable recreational amenities within the project site, including a pool,
outdoor recreation areas, and a recreation building. Therefore, the project would not need to construct
or expand existing recreational facilities within the area. Additionally, as discussed in Section XIV, the
project would pay a development fee in the form of a local facilities management fee, consistent with the
city’s Municipal Code. A local facilities management fee is established to pay for improvements or facilities
identified in a local facilities management plan that are related to new development within the zone and
are not otherwise financed by any other fee, charge, or tax on development or are not installed by a
developer as a condition of a building permit or development permit. The fee may also be used to pay for
that portion of the facilities or improvements identified in the city-wide facilities and improvements plan
attributed to development within the local zone that are not financed by other means. The fee shall be
fairly apportioned among the new development. The fee would be used by the city to meet the increased
demand for parks and recreational facilities incurred by new development. Therefore, with the provision
of an on-site recreational area and payment of fees, impacts would be less than significant.
XVII. TRANSPORTATION
Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mit. Incorporated Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact a) Conflict with a program, plan, ordinance or policy addressing the
circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle and
pedestrian facilities?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines
sections 15064.3, subdivision (b)? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c) Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g., farm equipment)?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d) Result in inadequate emergency access? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -78- Mitigated Negative Declaration
This section is based on several transportation-related technical reports and memoranda, including the
West Oaks SB 743 Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT) Analysis, West Oaks TDM Strategies for VMT Reduction
Evaluation, and Carlsbad West Oaks Parking Management Plan, each prepared by Fehr & Peers (Fehr &
Peers 2020a, b, and c). The section also is based in part on the Local Mobility Analysis (LMA) prepared by
Linscott, Law & Greenspan (LLG 2020). Each of the referenced technical memoranda and reports are
hereby incorporated by reference.
a) Less than Significant Impact:
Pursuant to SB 743 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3 subdivision (b), VMT is the program for
measuring and addressing vehicular circulation system facilities under CEQA. Analysis of LOS is no longer
the metric for determining transportation environmental impacts. VMT is addressed in 17.b below.
The LMA provides a full GMP analysis as required by the City’s Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines
(2018). Through this analysis, several features were identified to improve the design of the project and
ensure project consistency with the City’s transportation, pedestrian, bicycle, and transit policies. The
applicant will implement these features, which are outlined in the LMA (LLG 2020). Incorporation of these
features into the project ensures that the proposed project is consistent with the city’s Growth
Management Plan, as outlined in the LMA. As the City’s Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines and
the GMP embody the requirements of the City of Carlsbad with regard to the policies addressing the full
range of circulation system requirements and improvements (including transit, roadway, bicycle, and
pedestrian facilities), the project would be consistent with these plans and policies, and the project
impacts would be less than significant.
b) Less-than-Significant Impact : While not required by CEQA prior to July 1, 2020, this section provides
an analysis of the project’s impacts relative to vehicle miles traveled (VMT) consistent with the provisions
of CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subsection b).
In 2013, Senate Bill 743 (SB 743) was signed into law requiring the adoption of new metrics for analyzing
transportation impacts under CEQA as an alternative to LOS. Under SB 743, a project’s effect on automobile
delay will no longer constitute a significant environmental impact. In response to SB 743, the Office of
Planning and Research (OPR) proposed changes to the CEQA Guidelines in the form of new Section 15064.3,
which was approved and became effective in December 2018. Under Section 15064.3, VMT generally is the
most appropriate measure of transportation impacts and a project’s VMT exceeding an applicable threshold
of significance may indicate a significant impact. (Section 15064.3, subd. (b).) Lead agencies may elect to be
governed by Section 15064.3 immediately, although the provisions of the section do not apply statewide
until July 1, 2020. For the limited purpose of this project, the City has elected to allow the project to be
governed by the provisions of Section 15064.3 prior to the required implementation date of July 1, 2020.
As such, an SB 743 VMT analysis was conducted for the project by Fehr & Peers (Fehr & Peers 2020a). The
VMT analysis was conducted consistent with the methodologies proposed for inclusion in the City’s draft
VMT Analysis Guidelines, currently in preparation. The analysis is also consistent with the Technical
Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA prepared by OPR, December 2018 (OPR Technical
Advisory), and is consistent with the Guidelines for Transportation Impact Studies in the San Diego Region
prepared by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE), San Diego, May 2019 (ITE San Diego Region
Guidelines).
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -79- Mitigated Negative Declaration
Preliminarily, as a residential project, the analysis presented here utilizes a significance threshold of 15%
below the City of Carlsbad average VMT per capita, which is consistent with both the OPR Technical
Advisory and ITE Guidelines. Under this threshold, if the project’s VMT per capita is 15% or more below
the City’s average VMT per capita, the project’s impacts would be less than significant; conversely, if the
project’s VMT per capita is less than 15% below the City’s average VMT per capita, the impact would be
considered significant. The City of Carlsbad average VMT per capita is 22.52.
To determine the project’s VMT per capita, if the project would generate fewer than 2,400 average daily
trips (ADT), the City’s draft guidelines provide that the analysis may assume that the project’s VMT per
capita is equal to that of the area surrounding the site of the proposed project, or the traffic analysis zone
(TAZ).
As shown below in Table 23, LLG determined that the proposed project would generate approximately
1,152 ADT. Thus, the project would generate fewer than 2,400 ADT and, accordingly, the project VMT per
capita is assumed to be equal to that of the surrounding TAZ.
Table 23
Project Trip Generation Summary
Land Use Quantity
Daily Driveway
Trips (ADT) AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Rate Volume Rate
In:Out Volume
Rate
In:Out Volume
Split In Out Total Split In Out Total
Apartmenta 192 DU 6/DU 1,152 8% 20:80 18 74 92 9% 70:30 73 31 104
Source: SANDAG 2002.
Notes: ADT = average daily trips; DU = dwelling unit
a Apartment rate applied to “any multifamily units more than 20 units/acre.”
In this case, the project would be located in a TAZ that has an average VMT per capita of 22.05 (Fehr &
Peers 2020a). Thus, for purposes of this analysis, the starting point for determining the project’s VMT per
capita is 22.05. To this number, an adjustment is then made to account for the TDM program to be
implemented by the project (refer to the Project Description above). Based on analysis conducted by Fehr
& Peers, implementation of the project’s TDM program would result in a 14.4% reduction in project-
generated VMT (Fehr & Peers 2020a). Accounting for the 14.4% reduction in VMT attributable to the TDM
program, the project would generate a net 18.87 VMT per capita (22.05 * (1 – 14.4%) = 18.87). This
amount, 18.87, is 16.2% below the citywide average VMT per capita of 22.52 (1 - (18.87 / 22.52) = 16.2%).
Refer to the West Oaks SB 743 VMT Analysis and West Oaks TDM Strategies for VMT Reduction Evaluation
for additional information (Fehr & Peers 2020a and 2020b).
Accordingly, the project’s VMT/Capita would be below the significance threshold and, therefore, the
project would have a less than significant impact relative to VMT.
c) Less-than-Significant Impact: This subsection addresses whether the project would substantially
increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses. Access to the proposed project
would be provided via the existing intersection at Palomar Oaks Way and West Oaks way. An additional
driveway from Palomar Airport Road would be provided for emergency access.
I I I I
I I I I I
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -80- Mitigated Negative Declaration
Access via the Palomar Oaks Way intersection would be via a roundabout intersection at the existing West
Oaks Way and Palomar Oaks Way, which is the existing west leg of Palomar Oaks Way/West Oaks Way
unsignalized T intersection. Currently, this west leg is closed to through traffic by a physical barricade, and
the balance of the intersection functions as a de facto curve. The project proposed roundabout would be a
one-lane roundabout with an approximate inscribed diameter of 100 feet. A primary project access driveway
would form the west leg of the roundabout and second project access driveway would form the south leg
of the roundabout. Each of the four legs of the roundabout would provide a single-lane entry with a design
speed of 25 miles per hour.
A right-in/right-out driveway to Palomar Airport Road is proposed as an emergency access point to the
project site. On-site pedestrian circulation is proposed to connect with the existing pedestrian sidewalk
located on the western side of West Oaks Way and to Palomar Airport Road at the western end of the site.
All project circulation improvements would be designed and constructed to city standards, including
standards for safety in design, and, therefore, the project would not increase hazards due to a design
feature, nor would it increase hazards due to an incompatible use. Therefore, development of the proposed
project would not substantially increase hazards and impacts would be less than significant.
d) Less-than-Significant Impact: This subsection addresses whether the project would result in
inadequate emergency access. Fire apparatus access throughout the development would include roads
that meet the Fire Code requirements for width, grade, clearance, dead-end length, and turnarounds.
Therefore, the project’s access would be considered consistent with City Fire Code requirements (LLG
2020). Additionally, the project’s circulation system would provide adequate access to Palomar Airport
Road, the area’s primary emergency route. Impacts to emergency access would be less than significant.
XVIII. TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources
Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape
that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the
landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California
Native American tribe, and that is: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mit. Incorporated Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical
Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in
Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and
supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to
criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section
5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public
Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the
significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -81- Mitigated Negative Declaration
a) Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated: Section V, Cultural Resources, identified no
California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) eligible tribal cultural resources (TCR), and therefore,
no CRHR eligible TCRs within the project site. However, based on tribal consultation, as described below,
there is a potential for a TCR to be present within the project site. Therefore, with the incorporation of
Mitigation Measures CUL-2 through CUL-12, impacts would be less than significant.
b) Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated: The city received two requests for consultation
pursuant to Assembly Bill (AB) 52 made by the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians and Rincon Band of
Luiseño Indians. AB 52 consultation with both tribes concluded in July 2019 and November 2017,
respectively. Additionally, consultation pursuant to Senate Bill (SB) 18) occurred in May 2017 and has since
concluded. Based on the tribal consultation and the city’s analysis of substantial evidence pursuant to
California Register of Historical Resources criteria while considering potential significance to the tribe, the
city has determined that there is a potential for a TCR to be present within the project site that could be
impacted by the project if encountered during grading activities. The City and San Luis Rey Band of Mission
Indians agreed to incorporate City standard mitigation measures for the protection and preservation of
tribal cultural resources in the event that ground-disturbing activities expose Native American cultural
resources. The city incorporated revisions to the mitigation measures requested by Rincon Band of
Luiseño Indians to require any discovered tribal cultural resources to be re-buried on site. Impacts would
be less than significant with the incorporation of Mitigation Measures CUL-2 through CUL-12.
XIX. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mit. Incorporated Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact a) Require or result in the relocation or construction of new or
expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm water drainage,
electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the
construction or relocation of which would cause significant
environmental effects?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and
reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and
multiple dry years?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider,
which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity
to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the
provider’s existing commitments?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d) Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in
excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair
the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
e) Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction
statutes and regulations related to solid waste? ☐ ☐ ☐ ☒
This section is based on the Sewer System Analysis performed by Dexter Wilson Engineering Inc. in August
2017January 2019 (Dexter Wilson 2017a2019a) and the Water System Analysis prepared by Dexter Wilson
Engineering Inc. in July 2017January 2019 (Dexter Wilson 2017b2019b). These technical memoranda and
reports are hereby incorporated by reference.
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -82- Mitigated Negative Declaration
a, b, c) Less-than-Significant Impact: The proposed project of 192 units on a disturbed 12.53-acre site
would discharge wastewater into the city’s Wastewater Division, which delivers its wastewater to
Encina Wastewater Authority. The Encina Wastewater Authority treats approximately 22 million gallons
per day of wastewater with a capacity of over 40 million gallons per day (EWA 2017). Therefore, Encina
Wastewater Authority has adequate capacity to serve the project’s estimated demand of 33,792 gallons
per day, with a peak flow of 84,480 gallons per day (Dexter Wilson 2017a2019a). The proposed project
would not impede or alter the Encina Wastewater Authority’s ability to treat wastewater and remain in
compliance with the Regional Water Quality Control Board discharge requirements. Therefore, impacts
would be less than significant.
Please refer to the project description for the two proposed sewer service connection options. The Buena
Interceptor does not currently have excess capacity but will have capacity when the City of Vista
completes the Buena Outfall Force Main Project and reroutes 3.75 million gallons per day from this line
to the Vallecitos Interceptor. The Buena Outfall Force Main Project is currently under construction and is
expected to be completed by June 2020. This option is preferred as it all improvements would be located
within existing or planned driveways and would not require crossing Encinas Creek.
Because the Buena Outfall Force Main Project has not been completed, an alternative sewer service
option is included. The project can receive service by constructing a gravity sewer line to convey flows to
the Vallecitos Interceptor. This alternative would require trenchless construction for the section that
crosses Encinas Creek and a connection to an existing manhole in Palomar Airport Road. Therefore, under
either scenario, adequate capacity would be available to serve the proposed development. Thus, impacts
would be less than significant.
The proposed project would increase demand for water and would produce wastewater. The Carlsbad
Municipal Water District (CMWD) would serve the project’s water and wastewater needs. CMWD
purchases water from the San Diego County Water Authority, which gets its water from the Colorado
River, State Water Project Water, and desalinated seawater. The CMWD is a member of the North San
Diego Water Reuse Coalition, which allow CMWD to expand beneficial reuse of local wastewater for non-
drinking water purposes, such as irrigation and industrial uses. CMWD also assumes ongoing conservation
and increased recycled water use, which will reduce potable water demands. The 2015 UWMP demand
analysis demonstrates that, with existing and anticipated conservation efforts, CMWD is on track to meet
its 2020 gallons per capita per day target of 207 gallons per capita per day (CMWD 2016). As stated in the
Water System Analysis for the project (Dexter Wilson 2017b2019b), the projected maximum day demand
for the project is 77,55079,200 gallons per day, while the projected peak-hour demand is 136,300139,200
gallons per day (Dexter Wilson 2017b2019b). Water service can be provided to the project by the CMWD
375 Zone system. Currently, there is a 12-inch line on West Oaks Way that loops to the transmission line
on Palomar Airport Road with connections at Palomar Oaks Way and at the western end of the project
through an easement. Water service is proposed to be provided by connecting to the existing 375 Zone
water line in West Oaks Way. The project would have a higher annual average water use than what was
projected with the existing industrial zoning, but the fire flow requirements are less for multifamily than
industrial. Thus, the existing line in West Oaks Way would adequately serve the proposed project. Further,
construction of the proposed water connections would be improvements that would be limited to the
project site only. As such, the construction of the new gravity sewer line would not result in significant
environmental effects and would not require new water entitlements. Therefore, impacts would be less
than significant.
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -83- Mitigated Negative Declaration
Refer to Section X, Hydrology and Water Quality, for additional discussion regarding hydrology and
drainage. The proposed project would develop 192 units on a disturbed 12.53-acre site. The project would
include connections to the existing City’s stormwater conveyance system, which has the capacity to accept
the project’s stormwater contributions. While the proposed project would alter the amount of impervious
surfaces on the project site compared to the existing condition, a SWQMP was prepared for the project
and specifies BMPs that would be implemented during construction and operations of the project.
Further, additional stormwater facilities and eight BMPs, which would each consist of surface ponding,
storage within soil media void space, and an underground detention vaults, would be implemented as
part of the project to ensure runoff from large storm events would not exceed the capacity of the
stormwater drainage system. The construction of these facilities is already analyzed in this MND and
would not cause significant environmental effects. Stormwater facilities proposed as part of the project
would be maintained by the project’s HOA. Impacts would be less than significant.
The Zone 5 LFMP provides performance standards for wastewater, water, and drainage facilities. For
wastewater, the LFMP identifies a performance standard of providing adequate wastewater treatment
capacity for at least a five-year period. Per the Fiscal Year 2015–16 Growth Management Monitoring
Report (City of Carlsbad n.d.), the Encina Water Pollution Facility provides adequate sewer treatment
capacity to ensure compliance with Growth Management wastewater performance standard through
buildout of the Carlsbad sewer service area. For drainage facilities, the LFMP performance standard states
that such facilities must be provided concurrent with development. A Drainage Study has been prepared
to ensure that project drainage would be adequately served by existing and planned drainage facilities
(Fuscoe Engineering 2019b). For water facilities, the LFMP identifies a performance standard of line
capacity to meet demand concurrent with development. Since CMWD requires development to install
domestic water, which includes fire flow needs, and recycled water as a condition to future development,
conformance with the adopted performance standard will be maintained through ultimate build out of
Zone 5. As indicated above, and with payment of any required development impact fees, the project
would be in compliance with the city’s growth management standards.
The project would connect to existing electric, natural gas, and telecommunication lines and facilities
within and adjacent to the project site. The project does not propose uses that would be expected to
generate an excessive need for these facilities such that construction or relocation would be required. As
described previously, existing overhead utility lines owned and operated by SDG&E and the associated
100-foot-wide easement traverse a portion of the project site. The project would require encroachment
intoimprovements within the existing SDG&E easement during construction and for various passive uses
including project driveways, parking areas, sidewalks and common areas, landscaping, fire hydrants, and
underground utilities. The total area of passive use encroachment would amount to approximately
121,900 feet. The existing street lights (approximately 25 feet in height) within the SDG&E easement
would be removed and replaced with new street lights that would be a maximum of 12 feet in height.
These passive uses are similar to what exists today. All proposed landscape plantings would be in
compliance with SDG&E’s acceptable species list. The proposed on site driveways and parking areas would
provide SDG&E additional staging areas for routine maintenance of the transmission facilities.
Construction and operation of the project would not alter or affect the ongoing operations of the existing
overhead transmission lines or SDG&E’s easement through the project site. SDG&E would maintain full
access to this easement during construction and operation of the project. Therefore, impacts would be
less than significant.
d) Less-than-Significant Impact: The project would produce waste during construction and operation,
typical of that of a normal residential development. The project does not include any uses that would
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -84- Mitigated Negative Declaration
otherwise generate excessive solid waste during either construction or the operational life of the project.
Construction would be a short-term and temporary source of waste. Operation would result in a long-
term source for solid waste. Waste Management of North County provides service for the city. The city’s
solid waste that is not diverted from the city is hauled to two landfills in San Diego County: Otay Landfill
and Sycamore Landfill (City of Carlsbad 2015b). Otay Landfill has a remaining capacity of approximately
21,194,008 cubic yards, and Sycamore Landfill has a remaining capacity of approximately 113,972,637
cubic yards (CalRecycle 2017a, 2017b). Given the estimated remaining capacity and the continued state
and local efforts and regulations to reduce waste streams to landfills, the project would be adequately
served by existing landfills. Impacts would be less than significant.
e) No Impact: During construction and operation, the project would be required to comply with applicable
federal, state, and local regulations regarding the proper disposal of solid waste, including the Carlsbad
Municipal Code as it relates to solid waste and recycling. Therefore, no impact would occur.
XX. WILDFIRE
If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as
very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mit. Incorporated Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan? ☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire
risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant
concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure
(such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines
or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in
temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including
downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of
runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
☐ ☐ ☒ ☐
The project site is not located in or near state responsibility areas (SRA) and near lands classified as very
high fire hazard severity zones (CAL FIRE 2007 and 2009). None of the incorporated City of Carlsbad is
located within a SRA. The nearest lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones are located
approximately 0.8 miles to the north along Faraday Avenue, separated from the project site by existing
development and a golf course. Given this, impacts are considered less than significant for the following
thresholds. However, a brief analysis is provided.
a,b,c,d) Less than Significant: As discussed in Section IX, an FPP was prepared for the project in October
2018July 2019. The proposed project has been designed to satisfy the emergency requirements of the fire
and police departments. The FPP ensures the proposed project would comply with the city’s emergency
response in relation to fire. Site ingress/egress will comply with the requirements of the CFD.
According to Figure 6-10, Structure Fire/Wildfire Threat in the General Plan (City of Carlsbad 2015a), the
northwestern portion of the project site is located in a high threat Fire Hazard Severity Zone, and the
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -85- Mitigated Negative Declaration
middle of the project site is located in a moderate threat Fire Hazard Severity Zone. The rest of the project
site is located within an urban environment. The project’s FPP was submitted in compliance with the
requirements of the CFD Fire Code. As described in the FPP, the project site is located within an area that
can be considered a wildland urban interface but is not statutorily designated as a local or state
responsibility area “very high fire hazard severity zone.” The recommendations provided in the FPP have
been designed specifically for the proposed project and the wildland urban interface zone at the project
site. By implementing the recommendations and project-specific requirements outlined in the FPP, the
project would not exacerbate wildfire risk. As such, impacts would be less than significant.
XXI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact Less than Significant with Mit. Incorporated Less-than-Significant Impact No Impact a) Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the
quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a
fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop
below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range
of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable? (“Cumulatively considerable” means that
the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in
connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other
current projects, and the effects of probable future projects?)
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause the
substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
☐ ☒ ☐ ☐
a) Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated: As discussed in Section IV, the proposed project
would potentially result in significant impacts to vegetation, special-status wildlife, riparian, wetland
habitat and other sensitive natural communities, jurisdictional areas, and the Carlsbad HMP. However,
with incorporation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1 through BIO-11, all potentially significant impacts would
be reduced to a level below significance. The proposed project would not substantially degrade the quality
of the environment, impact fish or wildlife species, or plant communities.
As discussed in Section V, potential impacts regarding inadvertent discovery of cultural resources could
occur during construction of the project. However, implementation of Mitigation Measures CUL-1
through CUL-12 would ensure that impacts would be less than significant. Overall, impacts would be
less than significant with the incorporation of mitigation.
As discussed in Section XVIII, tribal consultation between the city and the San Luis Rey Bank of Mission
Indians, pursuant to AB 52 and SB 18, determined that there was a significant potential for a tribal
cultural resource to be present and impacted by project grading activities. Implementation of Mitigation
Measures CUL-2 through CUL-12 would ensure the protection and preservation of TCRs and therefore
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -86- Mitigated Negative Declaration
would reduce impacts to less than significant. Overall, impacts would be less than significant with the
incorporation of mitigation.
b) Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated: As provided in the analysis in this MND, the
proposed project would not result in significant impacts to aesthetics, agriculture and forestry resources,
air quality, geology and soils, GHG emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water
quality, land use and planning, mineral resources, population and housing, public services, recreation,
transportation and traffic, tribal cultural resources, and utilities and service systems. Mitigation measures
recommended for biological resources, cultural and tribal cultural resources, paleontological resources,
and noise would reduce impacts to below a level of significance. The proposed project would
incrementally contribute to cumulative impacts for projects occurring within the city. With mitigation,
however, implementation of the proposed project would not result in any residually significant impacts
that could contribute to a cumulative impact. In the absence of residually significant impacts, the
incremental accumulation of effects would not be cumulatively considerable and would be less than
significant.
c) Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated: The potential for adverse direct or indirect impacts
to human beings was considered throughout the above analysis in this MND. Based on this evaluation,
there is no substantial evidence that construction or operation of the proposed project with the proposed
mitigation measures incorporated would result in a substantial adverse effect on human beings.
XX. LIST OF MITIGATION MEASURES
BIO-1 Clearing and grubbing activities are prohibited on site during the bird-breeding season
(February 15–September 15). The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) will be notified
at least seven days before clearing and grubbing begins. During this activity, a qualified
biologist will walk the area ahead of construction equipment to flush birds away from
impact areas to prevent direct impact to individual animals. The qualified biologist will
immediately report to USFWS the number and location of any federally listed birds
disturbed by clearing and grubbing.
BIO-2 A number of oak trees were originally preserved on site within the original approval of
the project. These trees are currently declining in condition or are dead. As such, to
mitigate for the loss of these trees, oak trees are included in the landscape plans for the
riparian buffer area. Trees will be provided at a 1:1 ratio.
BIO-3 Clearing and grubbing activities are generally prohibited during the bird-breeding season
(February 15–September 15); thus, no direct impacts will occur to nesting birds that may
be present within the construction footprint per Mitigation Measure BIO-3. The U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service (USFWS) will be notified at least seven days before clearing and
grubbing begins.
Other construction activities will also be avoided during the breeding season if feasible. If
this cannot be avoided, the following measures will be taken:
• If coastal California gnatcatchers (Polioptila californica californica) have the potential to
occur on site, a qualified biologist will conduct a focused species gnatcatcher survey in
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -87- Mitigated Negative Declaration
appropriate habitat within the preserve areas and 500 feet surrounding the project site
within suitable habitat. The surveys will consist of three visits one week apart; the last
of these will be conducted no more than three days prior to construction.
• Surveys will be conducted by a qualified biologist in appropriate habitat for nesting
raptors and migratory birds (including but not limited to the least Bell’s vireo (Vireo
bellii pusillus)) and within a 500-foot survey buffer within three days of construction.
• The USFWS will be notified immediately of any federally listed species that are located
during pre-construction surveys within the adjacent areas.
• If nests of listed birds, migratory birds, raptors, or other special-status species are
located, they will be fenced with a protective buffer of at least 500 feet from active
nests of listed species and 300 feet from other special-status bird species. All
construction activity will be prohibited within this area.
• During the breeding season, construction noise will be measured regularly to
maintain a threshold at or below 60 A-weighted decibels (dBA) hourly equivalent level
(Leq) within 500 feet of breeding habitat occupied by listed species. The site is
currently affected by roadway noise. If ambient levels are greater than 60 dBA, a
modified threshold should be evaluated with the City of Carlsbad. If noise levels
supersede the threshold, the construction array will be changed or noise attenuation
measures will be implemented.
BIO-4 Wildlife Construction Measures
a) Construction through sensitive areas shall be scheduled to minimize potential
impacts to biological resources. Construction adjacent to drainages shall occur during
periods of minimum flow (i.e., summer through the first significant rain of fall) to
avoid excessive sedimentation and erosion and to avoid impacts to drainage-
dependent species. Construction near riparian areas or other sensitive habitats shall
also be scheduled to avoid the breeding season (January 1 through September 15)
and potential impacts to breeding bird species (refer to Mitigation Measure BIO-3).
b) Lighting in or adjacent to the preserve shall not be used, except where essential for
roadway, facility use, and safety. If nighttime construction lights are necessary, all
lighting adjacent to natural habitat shall be shielded and/or directed away from
habitat.
c) If dead or injured listed species are located, initial notification must be made within
three working days, in writing, to the USFWS Division of Law Enforcement in Torrance,
California, and by telephone and in writing to the applicable jurisdiction, Carlsbad
Field Office of the USFWS, and CDFW.
d) Exotic species that prey on or displace target species of concern shall be permanently
removed from the site.
e) To avoid attracting predators of the target species of concern, the project site shall
be kept as clean of debris as possible. All food-related trash items shall be enclosed
in sealed containers and regularly removed from the site. Pets of project personnel
shall not be allowed on site where they may come into contact with any listed species.
BIO-5 Habitat restoration (i.e., creation and substantial restoration) totaling 0.24 acres of
jurisdictional southern willow scrub, 0.03 acres of open water, and 0.04 acres of coastal
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -88- Mitigated Negative Declaration
sage scrub designed through preparation of a conceptual habitat restoration plan shall be
reviewed and approved by the city Planner in consultation with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service (USFWS), California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and the California
Coastal Commission (CCC). Based on a current evaluation, restoration is estimated to
include 1.351.17 acres of disturbed habitat.
The applicant shall submit a final habitat restoration plan and specifications to the City of
Carlsbad and agencies for review at least 30 days prior to initiating project impacts. The
habitat restoration plan shall be prepared and implemented consistent with the Multiple
Habitat Conservation Program, Volume II, Appendix C (Revegetation Guidelines), and Volume
III; Habitat Management Plan for Natural Communities in the City of Carlsbad (City of Carlsbad
2004, pp. F-8 to F-11); and Open Space Management Plan, Section 3.1.5. The habitat
restoration plan shall be reviewed and approved by the city Planner in consultation with
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), California Department of Fish and Wildlife
(CDFW), and California Coastal Commission (CCC). At a minimum, the habitat restoration
plan should shall include an evaluation of restoration suitability specific to proposed habitat
types, soil and plant material salvage/translocation information, planting and seeding lists, a
discussion of irrigation, a maintenance and monitoring program, and success criteria. All areas
should shall be monitored for five years to ensure establishment of intended plant
communities.
An approved habitat restoration specialist shall be designated and determine the most
appropriate method of restoration. Restoration techniques, as specified in the habitat
restoration plan, may include hydroseeding, hand-seeding, imprinting, and soil and plant
salvaging. The habitat restoration plan shall also include criteria to measure success and
describe how monitoring of revegetation efforts shall be implemented. At the completion
of project construction, all construction materials shall be removed from the site.
Additionally, if deemed necessary, any topsoil located in areas to be restored shall be
conserved and stockpiled during the excavation process for use in the restoration process.
BIO-6 Construction Plans Requirements The potential for significant indirect impacts during
construction shall be mitigated through implementation of the standard measures stated in
the city’s Biology Guidelines.
A qualified biologist shall conduct a training session for project personnel prior to
proposed activities. At a minimum, the training shall include a description of the
target species of concern and its habitats; the general provisions of the federal and
state Endangered Species Acts and the Habitat Management Plan (HMP); the need to
adhere to the provisions of the act and the HMP; the penalties associated with
violating the provisions of the act; and the general measures that are being
implemented to conserve the target species of concern as they relate to the project,
access routes, and project site boundaries within which the project activities must be
accomplished.
The footprint of disturbance shall be specified in the construction plans. Construction
limits would be delineated with orange fencing, and in areas potentially subject to
project-related runoff, silt fencing would be used to delineate the impact footprint.
a)
b)
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -89- Mitigated Negative Declaration
All fencing would be maintained until the completion of all construction activities, at
which time all fencing would be removed. All construction personnel and associates
shall be instructed that their activities, vehicles, equipment, and construction
materials are restricted to the proposed project footprint, designated staging areas,
and routes of travel. If any impacts shall occur beyond the approved impact footprint,
all work in the immediate vicinity shall cease until the disturbance limit breach has
been addressed to the satisfaction of the City of Carlsbad and resource agencies.
The upstream and downstream limits of project disturbance (i.e., the location of the
bridge crossing) plus limits of disturbance on either side of the riparian vegetation on
site shall be clearly defined, marked in the field, and reviewed by the project biologist
prior to initiation of work. The project should be designed to avoid the placement of
equipment within the riparian vegetation or on adjacent upland habitats used by
target species of concern, unless otherwise part of the mitigation plan.
A water pollution and erosion control plan shall be developed that describes sediment
and hazardous materials control, dewatering or diversion structures, fueling and
equipment management practices, and other factors deemed necessary by reviewing
agencies. Erosion control measures shall be monitored on a regularly scheduled basis,
particularly during times of heavy rainfall. Corrective measures will be implemented
in the event erosion control strategies are inadequate. Sediment/erosion control
measures will be continued at the project site until such time as the revegetation
efforts are successful at soil stabilization.
The qualified project biologist shall review grading plans (e.g., all access routes and
staging areas) and monitor construction activities throughout the duration of
grading/ground disturbance associated with the project to ensure that all practicable
measures are being employed to avoid incidental disturbance of habitat and any
target species of concern outside the project footprint.
Construction monitoring reports shall be completed and provided to the city
summarizing how the project is in compliance with applicable conditions. The project
biologist should be empowered to halt work activity if necessary and to confer with
City staff to ensure the proper implementation of species and habitat protection
measures.
Any habitat that is impacted that is not in the identified project footprint shall be
disclosed immediately to the city, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), California
Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), and California Coastal Commission (CCC) and
shall be compensated at a minimum ratio of 5:1.
Construction access to and from the site will be located along existing access routes
or disturbed areas to the greatest extent possible. All access routes outside of existing
roads or construction areas will be clearly marked.
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
h)
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -90- Mitigated Negative Declaration
Construction employees will limit their activities, vehicles, equipment, and
construction materials to the fenced project footprint.
Equipment storage, fueling, and staging areas shall be located on disturbed upland
sites with minimal risk of direct drainage into riparian areas or other sensitive habitats
and at least 100 feet from waters of the United States. These designated areas shall
be located in such a manner as to prevent any runoff from entering sensitive habitat.
All necessary precautions shall be taken to prevent the release of cement or other
toxic substances into surface waters. All project-related spills of hazardous materials
shall be reported to the city and shall be cleaned up immediately, and contaminated
soils shall be moved to approved disposal areas.
If stream flows must be diverted (unlikely for the bridge construction), the diversions
shall be conducted using sandbags or other methods requiring minimal instream
impacts. Silt fencing or other sediment trapping materials shall be installed at the
downstream end of construction activity to minimize the transport of sediments off
site. Settling ponds where sediment is collected shall be cleaned out in a manner that
prevents the sediment from re-entering the stream. Care shall be exercised when
removing silt fences, as feasible, to prevent debris or sediment from returning to the
stream.
Erodible fill material shall not be deposited into water courses. Brush, loose soils, or
other similar debris material shall not be stockpiled within the stream channel or on
its banks.
Fugitive dust will be avoided and minimized through watering and other
appropriate measures.
BIO-7 The City has the right to access and inspect any sites of approved projects including any
restoration/enhancement area for compliance with project approval conditions, including
best management practices (BMPs). The USFWS and CDFW may accompany City
representatives on this inspection.
BIO-8 Impacts to jurisdictional resources are anticipated in order to construct the emergency
access and bridge. Prior to the issuance of permits for grading or construction activities,
the applicant shall obtain the following permits and agreement:
• A Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement issued by the California Department
of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) for maintenance activities in the streambed
• Any necessary California Coastal Act permits from the California Coastal Commission
(CCC) and/or City of Carlsbad.
BIO-9 Protective habitat buffers consistent with the City of Carlsbad’s Habitat Management Plan
(Carlsbad HMP) and Guidelines for Riparian Buffers shall be incorporated into project
design. Prior to the recordation of the first final map, the riparian buffers shall be included in
i)
j)
k)
I)
m)
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -91- Mitigated Negative Declaration
the restrictive covenant that also will provide protection for the riparian habitat. The upland
buffer is not to be included in the restrictive covenant.
BIO-10 In order to prevent impacts of the proposed development on the City of Carlsbad’s
Habitat Management Plan (Carlsbad HMP) preserve area off site and to the west or to the
native vegetation in the riparian habitat proposed to be amended into the Carlsbad HMP
preserve, the proposed project shall comply with the adjacency standards outlined in the
Carlsbad HMP. Prior to the issuance of the first grading permit, the project plans shall
reflect the adjacency standards as follows:
a. Fire Management
Fire management for the proposed project shall be addressed through the designation of
the fuel modification zones (FMZs). All FMZ areas shall be incorporated within the
development boundaries and shall be addressed with the preparation of a fire protection
plan (FPP).
b. Erosion Control
Standard best management practices (BMPs) will be implemented to slow surface flow
and dampen initial precipitation flow in the development area. In addition, no new
surface drainage shall be directed into the open space areas.
c. Landscaping Restrictions
Landscape planting palettes for the proposed project shall not use non-native, invasive
plant species in the areas adjacent to the riparian or upland habitat or adjacent to the
Carlsbad HMP preserve off site to the west or south. In addition, because the site is within
the Coastal Zone, no invasive plant species shall be used in the landscaping of the
development. These plant species are identified in the Carlsbad HMP but the list of
invasive species that will be avoided is not limited to the species on the Carlsbad HMP list.
Irrigation of the landscaping shall be designed and scheduled to avoid runoff into the
proposed open space. The riparian and upland buffers shall be restored with native
habitat per the concept plan.
d. Fencing, Signs, and Lighting
To deter entry into the riparian habitat (open space area protected by the restrictive
covenant) by people and pets, the area shall be fenced with post and cable fencing. Signs
shall be attached to the fence at intermittent intervals to alert the residents of the
sensitive nature of the open space area and that dogs are not allowed. A trail is proposed
to be located within the 15 feet closest to development, and the fencing shall preclude
people from passing beyond the trail into the habitat. Other than safety lighting, no
lighting that shall intrude into the riparian habitat and will be shielded or directed away
from the open space area. Fencing shall be installed along the southern boundary in
supplement to the existing walls and to prevent people from entering the preserve area
off site. Fencing and walls shall also be installed in any areas adjacent to the proposed
open space to preclude human activity within the open space.
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -92- Mitigated Negative Declaration
e. Predator and Exotic Species Control
The homeowners’ association (HOA) for the proposed development shall alert the residents
to the potential effects that domestic animals may have on the native fauna and flora. The
riparian habitat shall be fenced to discourage the entry of domestic animals into the open
space.
BIO-11 The City of Carlsbad’s Habitat Management Plan (Carlsbad HMP) requires that impacts to
disturbed habitat (Group F) required mitigation with an in-lieu fee. Thus, the project is
required to pay an in-lieu mitigation fee (also known as the HMP mitigation fee) for
impacts to disturbed habitat prior to final map approval, issuance of a grading permit or
clearing of any habitat, whichever occurs first. This is a per-acre fee charged for impacts
to Habitat Groups D, E, and F, totaling 6.26 acres, as an alternative to conserving habitat
on site or acquiring habitat off site to mitigate for such impacts. The cost per acre for this
mitigation fee will be determined by the city.
BIO-12 Prior to final map approval, issuance of a grading permit or clearing of any habitat,
whichever occurs first, the applicant shall perform the following:
• Record a conservation easement, as defined by California Civil Code, Section 815.1,
or other protective measure for all on-site mitigation land including 4.113.97 acres of
open space.
• Select a qualified conservation entity to manage the conserved land.
• Prepare a Property Analysis Record to estimate costs of in perpetuity management
and monitoring or otherwise provide for an estimate of funding needed.
• Provide a non-wasting endowment or other funding sources acceptable to the wildlife
agencies, California Coastal Commission (CCC), and City of Carlsbad based on the
Property Analysis Record to sufficiently cover the costs of in-perpetuity management
and monitoring.
• Prepare a preserve management plan, which will be approved by the city and
wildlife agencies.
CUL-1 An archaeological monitor shall be present for initial ground-disturbing activities
associated with the proposed project in the event unanticipated discoveries are made. If
human remains are discovered, California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, states
that further disturbances and activities shall stop in any area or nearby area suspected to
overlie remains, and the County coroner shall be contacted. At this time, the person who
discovered the remains will contact the City of Carlsbad so that they may work with the
most likely descendent on the respectful treatment and disposition of the remains.
CUL-2 Prior to the commencement of any ground disturbing activities, the project developer
shall enter into a Pre-Excavation Agreement, otherwise known as a Tribal Cultural
Resources Treatment and Tribal Monitoring Agreement, with the San Luis Rey Band of
Mission Indians or other Traditionally and Culturally Affiliated Luiseño tribe (TCA Tribe).
This agreement will contain provisions to address the proper treatment of any tribal
cultural resources and/or Luiseño Native American human remains inadvertently
discovered during the course of the project. The agreement will outline the roles and
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -93- Mitigated Negative Declaration
powers of the Luiseño Native American monitors and the archaeologist. A copy of said
archaeological contract and Pre-Excavation Agreement shall be provided to the City of
Carlsbad prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
CUL-3 A Luiseño Native American monitor shall be present during all ground disturbing activities.
Ground disturbing activities may include, but are not be limited to, archaeological studies,
geotechnical investigations, clearing, grubbing, trenching, excavation, preparation for
utilities and other infrastructure, and grading activities.
CUL-4 Any and all uncovered artifacts of Luiseño Native American cultural importance shall be
treated with dignity and respect and be reburied on-site within an appropriate location
protected by open space or easement, etc., where the cultural items will not be disturbed
in the future, or shall be returned to the Most Likely Descendant, whichever is most
applicable, and shall not be curated, unless ordered to do so by a federal agency or a court
of competent jurisdiction.
CUL-5 The Luiseño Native American monitor shall be present at the project’s on-site
preconstruction meeting to consult with grading and excavation contractors concerning
excavation schedules and safety issues, as well as consult with the principal archaeologist
concerning the proposed archaeologist techniques and/or strategies for the project.
CUL-6 Luiseño Native American monitors and archaeological monitors shall have joint authority
to temporarily divert and/or halt construction activities. If tribal cultural resources are
discovered during construction, all earth moving activity within and around the
immediate discovery area must be diverted until the Luiseño Native American monitor
and the archaeologist can assess the nature and significance of the find.
CUL-7 If a significant tribal cultural resource(s) and/or unique archaeological resource(s) are
discovered during ground disturbing activities for this project, the San Luis Rey Band of
Mission Indians (in accordance with TCPRG Section 8.2.2.4) and any TCA Tribes that
consulted with the city under AB 52 for this project shall be notified and consulted
regarding the respectful and dignified treatment of those resources. Pursuant to
California Public Resources Code Section 21083.2(b) avoidance is the preferred method
of preservation for archaeological and tribal cultural resources. If however, the Applicant
is able to demonstrate that avoidance of a significant and/or unique cultural resource is
infeasible and a data recovery plan is authorized by the City of Carlsbad as the lead
agency, the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians(in accordance with TCPRG Section
8.2.2.4) and any TCA Tribes that consulted with the city under AB 52 for this project shall
be consulted regarding the drafting and finalization of any such recovery plan.
CUL-8 When tribal cultural resources are discovered during the project, if the archaeologist
collects such resources, a Luiseño Native American monitor must be present during any
testing or cataloging of those resources. If the archaeologist does not collect the tribal
cultural resources that are unearthed during the ground disturbing activities, the Luiseño
Native American monitor shall follow the procedures in CUL-4.
CUL-9 If suspected Native American human remains are encountered, California Health and
Safety Code Section 7050.5 states that no further disturbance shall occur until the San
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -94- Mitigated Negative Declaration
Diego County Medical Examiner has made the necessary findings as to origin. Further,
pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98(b) remains shall be left in
place and free from disturbance until a final decision as to the treatment and disposition
has been made. Suspected Native American remains shall be examined in the field and
kept in a secure location at the site. A Luiseño Native American monitor shall be present
during the examination of the remains. If the San Diego County Medical Examiner
determines the remains to be Native American, the Native American Heritage
Commission (NAHC) must be contacted by the Medical Examiner within 24 hours. The
NAHC must then immediately notify the “Most Likely Descendant” about the discovery.
The Most Likely Descendant shall then make recommendations within 48 hours, and
engage in consultation concerning treatment of remains as provided in Public Resources
Code 5097.98.
CUL-10 In the event that fill material is imported into the project area, the fill shall be clean of
tribal cultural resources and documented as such. If fill material is to be utilized and/or
exported from areas within the project site, then that fill material shall be analyzed and
confirmed by an archeologist and Luiseño Native American monitor that such fill material
does not contain tribal cultural resources.
CUL-11 No testing, invasive or non-invasive, shall be permitted on any recovered tribal cultural
resources without the written permission of the San Luis Rey Band of Mission
Indiansconsulting tribes.
CUL-12 Prior to the release of the grading bond, a monitoring report and/or evaluation report, if
appropriate, which describes the results, analysis and conclusions of the monitoring
program shall be submitted by the archaeologist, along with the Luiseño Native American
monitor’s notes and comments, to the City of Carlsbad for approval. Said report shall be
subject to confidentiality as an exception to the Public Records Act and will not be
available for general public distribution; however, a copy of the final monitoring report
shall be provided to each consulting tribe upon request to the Planning Division., and shall
be submitted to the South Coastal Information Center. Said report shall be subject to
confidentiality as an exception to the Public Records Act and will not be available for
public distribution.
GEO-1 Prior to initiation of ground-disturbing activities within the project site that would extend
into the Santiago Formation, a qualified paleontological monitor shall be retained to
monitor and recognize potential paleontological discoveries during construction of the
project. If unexpected, potentially significant paleontological resources are encountered
during construction, the paleontological monitor shall have the authority to temporarily
redirect or suspend construction activities and evaluate the potential significance of the
find and record or salvage it. Prior to the start of ground-disturbing activities, the City of
Carlsbad shall verify that the requirement for paleontological monitoring is noted on the
appropriate construction documents.
NOI-1 Interior Noise Study
Prior to the approval of building permits, the applicant shall submit an interior noise study
for approval by the city Building Department. The interior noise study would ensure
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -95- Mitigated Negative Declaration
compliance with the city and state’s 45 decibel (dB) Community Noise Equivalent Level
(CNEL) noise standard.
NOI-2 Elevated Noise Environment Disclaimer
Prior to sale, lease, or rental of any residential structure or portion thereof located in the
Airport Influence Area (AIA), the applicant/owner shall provide prospective buyers and
future occupants the following notice:
This property is currently located in an urban area that periodically and regularly
experiences elevated noise levels. Potential sources of this noise may be automobile
traffic, flying aircraft, industrial/commercial uses, and general human activity in an urban
environment. The property is subject to aircraft overflight, including sight and sound of
aircraft operating from McClellan-Palomar Airport. You may wish to consider what noise
level annoyances, if any, are associated with the property before you complete your
purchase and/or rental agreement, and determine whether they are acceptable to you.
NOI-3 Limit Construction Work Hours
Noise-generating construction activities (i.e., operation of equipment, performing
any construction, or the grading or excavation of land) associated with the project
shall not occur in the period before 7:00 a.m. or after 6:00 p.m. on weekdays or before
8:00 a.m. or after 6:00 p.m. on Saturday. Noise-generating construction activities
associated with the project are prohibited on Sundays and federal holidays.
Construction hours, allowable workdays, and the phone number of the job
superintendent shall be clearly posted at all construction entrances to allow
surrounding property owners to contact the job superintendent if necessary. In the
event the city and/or construction contractor receives a complaint, appropriate
corrective actions shall be implemented, and a report of the action shall be provided to
the reporting party.
NOI-4 Measures to Reduce Construction Nuisance Noise
The following are required measures to help reduce potential nuisance construction noise
for the noise sensitive receptors located near the site:
a. All construction equipment, fixed or mobile, shall be equipped with properly
operating and maintained mufflers.
b. 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 using electric air compressors and similar
power tools rather than diesel equipment, shall be employed where feasible.
c. During construction, stationary construction equipment shall be placed
such that emitted noise is directed away from or shielded from sensitive
noise receivers.
d. During construction, stockpiling and vehicle staging areas shall be located as far
as practical from noise-sensitive receptors.
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -96- Mitigated Negative Declaration
e. Electrically powered equipment shall be used instead of pneumatic or internal
combustion powered equipment where feasible.
f. Construction site and access road speed limits shall be established and enforced
during the construction period.
g. The use of noise-producing signals, including horns, whistles, alarms, and bells,
shall be for safety warning purposes only.
h. The on-site construction supervisor and/or “disturbance coordinator” shall have
the responsibility and authority to receive and resolve noise complaints. A clear
appeal process to the owner shall be established prior to construction
commencement that will allow for resolution of noise problems that cannot be
immediately solved by the site supervisor.
i. Equipment shall not be left idling unless necessary.
j. The project contractor shall to the extent feasible, schedule construction
activities to avoid the simultaneous operation of construction equipment to
minimize noise levels resulting from operating several pieces of high-noise-level-
emitting equipment.
NOI-5 Exterior Noise Barriers at Balconies
Prior to issuance of building permits, construction plans shall show noise barriers placed
on all balconies that are subject to noise levels greater than 65 decibels (dB) in the Year
2035 + Project model scenario (refer to Table 7 of the Noise Technical Report). The noise
barriers may be constructed of a material such as tempered glass, acrylic glass, solid metal
(minimum six gage thickness: steel, aluminum, etc.) or any masonry material with a
surface density of at least three pounds per square foot. The barriers may also be
constructed using a combination of materials, such as a stucco base component topped
with glass or Plexiglas, or a solid metal base topped with glass or Plexiglass. The noise
barriers shall have no openings or cracks.
XXI. EARLIER ANALYSES
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or
more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration (Section
15063(c)(3)(D)). In such cases, a discussion should identify the following on attached sheets:
a) Earlier analyses used. Identify earlier analyses and state where they are available for review.
b) Impacts adequately addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the
scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards,
and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier
analysis.
c) Mitigation measures. For effects that are “Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated,”
describe the mitigation measures, which were incorporated or refined from the earlier document
and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project.
EARLIER ANALYSIS USED AND SUPPORTING INFORMATION SOURCES
The following documents were used in the analysis of this project and are on file in the City of Carlsbad
Planning Division located at 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California, 92008.
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -97- Mitigated Negative Declaration
1. Arizona Fish and Game Department. 2008. Guidelines for Bridge Construction or Maintenance to Accommodate Fish & Wildlife Movement and Passage. November 2008. https://www.azgfd.com/PortalImages/files/wildlife/planningFor/wildlifeFriendlyGuidelines/BridgeGuidelines.pdf. 2. CalEPA (California Environmental Protection Agency). 2017. Cortese List Data Resources. Accessed August 2017. http://www.calepa.ca.gov/sitecleanup/corteselist/. 3. CAL FIRE. 2007. Fire Hazard Severity Zones in SRA. November 7, 2007. http://frap.fire.ca.gov/ webdata/maps/san_diego/fhszs_map.37.pdf. 4. CAL FIRE. 2009. Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA. June 12, 2009. http://frap.fire.ca.gov/webdata/maps/san_diego/fhszl_map.37.pdf. 5. Caltrans (California Department of Transportation). 1998. CALINE4 - A Dispersion Model for Predicting Air Pollutant Concentrations Near Roadways. Version 1.32. Petaluma, California: Sonoma Technology, Inc. Sponsored by the University of California, Davis, Institute of Transportation Studies and Caltrans. Accessed August 2017. http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/InfoSvcs/EngApps/. 6. Caltrans. 2010. Transportation Project-Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol. Appendix B, Table B.2. Prepared by the Institute of Transportation Studies, University of California, Davis. Revised December 1997. Re-released 2010. 7. Caltrans. 2011. “California Scenic Highway Mapping System – Scenic Route.” Accessed September 2017. http://www.dot.ca.gov/hq/LandArch/16_livability/scenic_highways/. 8. CAPCOA (California Air Pollution Control Officers Association). 2016. Residential Appliance Saturation Survey. 9. CAPCOA. 2017. California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) User’s Guide Version 2016.3.2. Prepared by BREEZE Software, A Division of Trinity Consultants in collaboration with South Coast Air Quality Management District and the California Air Districts. Accessed May 2018. http://caleemod.com/. 10. CARB (California Air Resources Board). 2016. “Ambient Air Quality Standards.” May 5, 2016. Accessed September 2017. http://www.arb.ca.gov/research/aaqs/aaqs2.pdf. 11. CARB. 2017. The 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan Update. January 20, 2017. Accessed July 2017. https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/2030sp_pp_final.pdf. 12. CARB. 2018. EMFAC2017. Accessed March 2019. https://www.arb.ca.gov/emfac/2017/. 13. CARB. 2019. “iADAM: Air Quality Data Statistics.” Accessed March 2019. http://arb.ca.gov/adam. 14. CDC (Department of Conservation). 2013. San Diego County Williamson Act 2013/2014. 15. CDC. 2016. “San Diego County Important Farmland 2014” [map]. 1:120.000. Sheet 1 of 2. November 2016. Accessed September 2017. ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dlrp/FMMP/pdf/2014/ sdg14_w.pdf. 16. CEC (California Energy Commission). 2019. California Energy Consumption Database. Accessed March 2019. http://www.ecdms.energy.ca.gov/. 17. City of Carlsbad. 1985. Palomar Oaks II: Resolution No. 1995 CT 82-4/PUD-38.
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -98- Mitigated Negative Declaration
18. City of Carlsbad. 2000. Ordinance NS-545: Tree Ordinance. Adopted June 20, 2000. Accessed September 2017. http://www.carlsbadca.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=24684. 19. City of Carlsbad. 2004. Habitat Management Plan for Natural Communities in the City of Carlsbad (HMP). November 2004. 20. City of Carlsbad. 2015a. Carlsbad General Plan. September 22, 2015. Accessed September 2017. http://www.carlsbadca.gov/services/depts/planning/update/default.asp. 21. City of Carlsbad. 2015b. General Plan & Climate Action Plan Environmental Impact Report. SCH #20110110004. June 2015. Accessed September 2017. http://www.carlsbadca.gov/ civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=28464 22. City of Carlsbad. 2015c. Climate Action Plan. September. http://www.carlsbadca.gov/civicax/ filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=29361. 23. City of Carlsbad. 2017a. City of Carlsbad Zoning Map. February 2017. Accessed September 2017. http://www.carlsbadca.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=24153. 24. City of Carlsbad. 2017b. Carlsbad Municipal Code, as amended. Accessed September 2017. http://www.qcode.us/codes/carlsbad/. 25. City of Carlsbad. 2017c. Climate Action Plan Consistency Checklist. February 2017. Accessed September 2017. http://www.carlsbadca.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=32816.
26. City of Carlsbad. 2018a. City of Carlsbad Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines. April 2018.
27. City of Carlsbad. 2018b. City of Carlsbad Transportation Demand Management Handbook. August 2018.
28. City of Carlsbad. 2019. Guidance to Demonstrating Consistency with the Climate Action Plan, Form P-31. April 2019.
29. City of Carlsbad. n.d. City of Carlsbad Fiscal Year 2015–16 Growth Management Plan Monitoring Report: July 1, 2015, through June 30, 2016. Accessed September 2017. http://www.carlsbadca.gov/ civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=24078.
30. CMWD (Carlsbad Municipal Water District). 2016. 2015 Urban Water Management Plan. Final. June 2016. Accessed August 2017. http://www.carlsbadca.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx? BlobID=30785.
31. CUSD (Carlsbad Unified School District). 2016. RE: Project Name: “West Oaks” (letter report). August 30, 2016.
32. Dexter Wilson (Dexter Wilson Engineering Inc.). 2017a2019a. Sewer System Analysis for the West Oaks Project. Carlsbad, California: Dexter Wilson Engineering Inc. August 30, 2017January 18, 2019.
33. Dexter Wilson. 2017b2019b. Water System Analysis for the West Oaks Project. Carlsbad, California: Dexter Wilson Engineering Inc. July 28, 2017January 18, 2019.
34. DTSC (California Department of Toxic Substances Control). 2017. EnviroStor Database. Accessed September 2017. http://www.envirostor.dtsc.ca.gov/public/.
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -99- Mitigated Negative Declaration
35. Dudek. 2017. Cultural Resources Technical Report for the West Oaks Project, City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, California. Prepared for KPMW Integral, LLC. Encinitas, California: Dudek. March 2017. 36. Dudek. 20192020e. Biological Resources Technical Report for the West Oaks Project, City of Carlsbad, California. Prepared for The Carlsbad Westoaks Project Owner, LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company. Encinitas, California: Dudek. July August 2019November 2020. 37. Dudek. 2020a. Air Quality Technical Report for the West Oaks Project, City of Carlsbad, California. Prepared for The Carlsbad Westoaks Project Owner, LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company. Encinitas, California: Dudek. June October 2020. 38. Dudek. 2020b. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Analysis for the West Oaks Project, City of Carlsbad, California. Prepared for The Carlsbad Westoaks Project Owner, LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company. Encinitas, California: Dudek. June October 2020. 39. Dudek. 2020c. Environmental Noise Assessment for the West Oaks Project, City of Carlsbad, California. Carlsbad Report Number 102440327. Prepared for The Carlsbad Westoaks Project Owner, LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company. Encinitas, California: Dudek. June October 2020. 40. Dudek. 2019d. Fire Protection Plan for the West Oaks Project, City of Carlsbad, California. Prepared for the Carlsbad Fire Department and The Carlsbad Westoaks Project Owner, LLC, a Delaware Limited Liability Company. Encinitas, California: Dudek. July 2019. 41. EIA (U.S. Energy Information Administration). 2017. California Profile Data. Updated October 19, 2017. Accessed December 2018. https://www.eia.gov/state/data.php?sid= CA#ConsumptionExpenditures. 42. EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 2016. “Area Designations for the 2010 Primary Sulfur Dioxide National Ambient Air Quality Standard – Round 3.” July 22, 2016. Accessed September 2017. https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2016-07/documents/areadesign.pdf. 43. EPA. 2017a. Superfund Site Search Results (National Priorities List). Last updated June 23, 2017. Accessed September 2017. https://www.epa.gov/superfund/search-superfund-sites- where-you-live. 44. EPA. 2017b. Pacific Southwest Region 9, Site List, Search by County. Accessed September 2017. http://yosemite.epa.gov/r9/sfund/r9sfdocw.nsf/WSOState!OpenView 45. EPA. 2019. “AirData: Access to Air Pollution Data.” Accessed March 2019. http://www.epa.gov/ airdata/ad_rep_mon.html. 46. EWA (Encina Water Authority). 2017. “Water Pollution Control Facility.” Accessed September 2017. https://www.encinajpa.com/protecting-the-pacific/water-pollution-control-facility?highlight=WyJtZ2QiXQ==. 47. Fehr & Peers. 2020a. West Oaks SB 743 Vehicle Miles Traveled Analysis. May 29, 2020. 48. Fehr & Peers. 2020b. West Oaks TDM Strategies for VMT Reduction Evaluation. May 29, 2020. 49. Fehr & Peers. 2020c. Carlsbad West Oaks Parking Management Plan. April 3, 2020. 50. FEMA (Federal Emergency Management Agency). 2012. “Flood Insurance Rate Map” [map]. 1 inch = 1,000 feet. Panel 1035 of 2375. Map number 06073C1035G. Revised May 16, 2012.
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -100- Mitigated Negative Declaration
51. FHWA (Federal Highway Administration). 2006. FHWA Highway Construction Noise Handbook. Final Report. FHWA-HEP-06-015. DOT-VNTSC-FHWA-06-02. Cambridge, Massachusetts: DOT, Research and Innovative Technology Administration. August 2006. 52. Fuscoe Engineering (Fuscoe Engineering Inc.). 20182019a. Storm Water Quality Management Plan West Oaks. Prepared for The Carlsbad Westoaks Project Owner, LLC. October 2018April 2019. 53. Fuscoe Engineering. 2019b. Preliminary Drainage Study, West Oaks. Prepared for The Carlsbad Westoaks Project Owner, LLC. San Diego, California: Fuscoe Engineering. January April 2019. 54. GeoTek (GeoTek Inc.). 2016a. “Revised Geotechnical Update Letter, West Oaks Project – 11.841+ Net-Acre Site. Prepared for Integral Communities. August 23, 2016.
55. GeoTek. 2016b. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment APNs 212-110-01 Through -08 and 212-
040-26 Carlsbad, San Diego County, California 92011. Prepared for Integral Communities.
Corona, California: GeoTek Inc. July 22, 2016.
56. GeoTek. 2017. Updated Geotechnical Evaluation for West Oaks Project – 11.8+ Acre Site. Prepared for Integral Communities. Corona, California: GeoTek Inc. July 28, 2017.
57. LLG (Linscott, Law & Greenspan). 2020. Local Mobility Analysis West Oaks. LLG Ref. 3-16-2672. San Diego, California: LLG. June 12October 27, 2020.
58. NREL. 2017. PVWatts Calculator. Accessed August 22, 2017. http://pvwatts.nrel.gov/pvwatts.php.
59. San Diego ALUC (Airport Land Use Commission of San Diego County). 2011. McClellan-Palomar Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. Approved December 1, 2011. Accessed September 2017. http://www.san.org/Airport-Projects/Land-Use-Compatibility#118076-alucps.
60. SANDAG (San Diego Association of Governments). 2002. (Not So) Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates for the San Diego Region. April 2002. Accessed September 2017. http://sandiegohealth.org/sandag/sandag_pubs_2009-7-25/publicationid_1140_5044.pdf.
61. SANDAG. 2003. Multiple Habitat Conservation Plan. Prepared by AMEC Earth and Environmental Inc. Conservation Biology Institute. March 2003.
62. SANDAG. 2013. 2050 Regional Growth Forecast. Accessed September 2017. http://www.sandag.org/uploads/projectid/projectid_503_19238.pdf.
63. SDAPCD (San Diego Air Pollution Control District). 2009. Regulation IV: Prohibitions; Rule 55: Fugitive Dust. Adopted June 24, 2009; effective December 24, 2009. Accessed September 2017. http://www.sdapcd.org/content/dam/sdc/apcd/PDF/Rules_and_Regulations/Prohibitions/ APCD_R55.pdf.
64. SDAPCD. 2015. Regulation IV: Prohibitions; Rule 67.0.1: Architectural Coatings. Revised June 24, 2015. September 2017. http://www.sdapcd.org/content/dam/sdc/apcd/PDF/Rules_and_Regulations/ Prohibitions/APCD_R67-0-1.pdf.
65. SDAPCD. 2016. 2016 Revision of the Regional Air Quality Strategy for San Diego County. Final. December 2016. Accessed September 2017. http://www.sdapcd.org/content/dam/sdc/apcd/ PDF/Air%20Quality%20Planning/2016%20RAQS.pdf.
Project Name: West Oaks
December 2020 -101- Mitigated Negative Declaration
66. SWRCB (State Water Resources Control Board). 2017. GeoTracker Database. Accessed September 2017. http://geotracker.waterboards.ca.gov/. 67. The Climate Registry. 2018. Default Emission Factors. May 1. Accessed March 2019. https://www.theclimateregistry.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/The-Climate-Registry-2018-Default-Emission-Factor-Document.pdf. 68. U.S. Census Bureau. 2015. “Persons per household, 2011–2015.” In “QuickFacts: Carlsbad City, California.” Accessed September 2017. https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/ carlsbadcitycalifornia/HSD310215#viewtop.
FIGURES
Imperial
h
Chula
Vista
National
City Bonita
Coronado
Lemon
Grove
Poway
Encinitas
San Diego
Carlsbad
San
Marcos Escondido
Vista
Valley
Center
Camp Pendleton
South
Hidden
MeadowsOceanside
Bonsall
Camp
Pendleton
North
Fallbrook
Rainbow
Jamul
Rancho San
Diego
Spring
Valley
AlHarbison
Canyon
Lakeside
El Cajon
Santee
Ramona San Dieg
Country
Estates
San
Clemente
Dana
Point
San Juan
Capistrano
Laguna
Niguel
Laguna
Hills Coto De
Caza
Mission
Viejo
Trabuco
Highlands
El
Toro
Irvine
Temecula
Wildomar
Elsinore
Orange CountySan Diego
County
San Diego County
Riverside C
Pacific
Ocean
M EXICOMEXICO
125
241
274
209
133
163
73
56
75
3711
52
94
67
79
74
78
76
405
215
8
805
5
15
Regional Map
West Oaks Project MND
SOURCE: ESRI 2016
0105Miles
FIGURE 1
Project Site
I I
DUDEK
I,.
r1 • 11
.................. ~
""~~
5
Vicinity Map
West Oaks Project MND
SOURCE: USGS 7.5-Minute Series Encinitas Quadrangle.
0 2,0001,000 Feet
FIGURE 2
Project Site
DUDEK
West Oaks Project MND SOURCE: FUSCOE ENGINEERING AND SUMMA ARCHITECTURE 2019FIGURE 3Proposed Site Plan,,,,.,,. ,,· _,,,,/ _,,,.-,,,-· / _,,.· / _.,,,.-•• ✓ __ ,., _./ / -fa LEGEND BUILDING NUMBER ~ BUILDING TYPE~ SITE PLAN KEYNOTES IT] TYP. PARKING 5TALL(9' X 19' or 8.5' X 20') [TI PARALLEL PARKING STALL(8' X 24') [D PROPERTY LINE [3J SDG&E EASEMENT ~ RIPARIAN BUFFER ~ REC I LEASING BUILDING [II POOL [I) EMERGENCY ACCESS [!] HARDSCAPEPATHWAYS ~ REC AREA DUDEK ITD LOT LINE [ill SETBACK LINE [!II TRASH ENCLOSURE ~ SITE FENCE ~ EXISTING RETAINING WALL ~ PROPOSED RETAINING WALL ~ CARPORTS ~ ACCESSIBLE PARKING ST ALL [!] AIRPORT SAFETY ZONE ~ BIKE RACK ~ 10' WIDE STALL NEXT TO WALLS PROjECT SUMMARY 3 STORY LOFTS RESIDENCES GROSS AREA DEVELOPABLE AREA DENSITY APN EXISTING ZONING PROPOSED ZONING EXISTING LAND USE PROPOSED LAND USE LOCAL COAST AL PROGRAM LOTS PROPOSED UNDEVROPABLE AREA PARKING BLDG COVERAGE LANSCAPE AI\EA STORAGE WATER & SEWER DIS.TRICT SCHOOL DISTRICT DRAINAGE DISCHARGE MASTER DRAINAGE BASIN LEGAL DESCRIPTION: 192HOMES 12.53 ACRES 7.80ACRES l4.6DU/AC 112-11 O-0l,-02.--0l.-04.-05.-06,-07,-0ll 2I2--040-26 P-M (PlANNED INDUSTRIAL) RD-M (RESIDENTIAL DENSITY -MULTIPLE) Pl {Pt.ANNED INDUSTRIAL) R-30 (RESIDENTIAL! MELLO II ~EGMENT 4LOTS 4.73AC 384 SPACES 12.8% 23% I 8.000 CUBIC FEET CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL WATER DISTRICT CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT 73 CFS ENCINAS PARKING REQUIRED MARKET RATE 72 X 1.5 = 108SP 78 X 2.0 = 156SP GUEST 150 X .25 = 37.5 SP SUBTOTAL 301.5 SP AFFORDABLE 24 X 1.5 = 36SP 18 X 2.0-= 36SP GUEST 42 X .25 = 10.5 SP SUBTOTAL 82.5 SP TOTAL REQUIRED 384 SP (192 COVERED) PARKING PROVIDED MAR.KET RATE PERPENDICULAR 285 SP PARALLEL 16 SP LOTS I ™ROUGH 7 Of CARLSBAD TRACT NO. 82-04 PALOMA!\ OAKS. IN THE CITY OF SUBTOTAL CARLSBAD. COUNTY OF SAN DrEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. AFFORDABLE 11 JS&. ALEO IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY. OCTOBER 23, 301 SP 54 SP 29 SP 1985. IN ADDITION, THAT PORTION OF THAT CERTAIN PARCEL OF LAND SHOWN AND DESIGNATED AS 'OESCRIPTION NO. 3, 78.07 ACRES" ON RECORD OF SURVEY MAP NO. 5715. FILED IN THE OFflCE Of THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY. DECEMBER 19. 1960. BEING A PORTION OF LOT "G" OF Tl-IE RANCHO AGUA HEDIONDA. IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO. STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP NO. 823, RLED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, NOVEJ1BER 16 1896. PERPENDICULAR PARALLEL SUBTOTAL 83 SP~ TOTAL 384 SP (203 COVERED) *AFFORDABLE CONCESSION: 42 SP< 150' WALKING DISTANCE 41 SP> 300' WALKING DISTANCE ) UNIT MIX MARKET RATE I I IA IBD/IBA 1789 SF 24 18,936 SF IB IBD/IBA BMSF 48 41,472 SF 2A 2BD/2BA 11918 SF 19 17,442 SF 2B 2BD/2BA 1,047 SF 38 39.786 SF 3A 3BD/2BA 1~138 SF 7 7,966 SF 3B 3BD/2BA l'.243 SF 14 17,<!02 SF SUBTOTAL ISO 143,004 SF AFFORDABLE IBD/IBA 550 SF 24 13,200 SF 2BD/2BA 750 SF 12 9,000 SF 3BD/2BA l,020SF 6 6. 120 SF SUBTOTAL 42 28,320 SF TOTAL 192 171,324 SF BUILDING MIX / COVERAGE AREA GROSS Sf DCC. I CONST. BLDG A 10,235 GSF 10,235 GSF R-2/ VA BLDGB 8,652 GSF 5 43,260 GSF R-2 / VA BLDGC 6,564 GSF I 6,564 GSF R-2 /VA BLDGD 4,291 GSF 13.582 GSF R-2 / VA BLDGE 4,291 GSF 8,582 GSF R-2 / VA LEASING 2.705 GSF 2.705 GSF B/VB TOTAL 11 71,346 GSF TRASH ENCLOSURES I BIN/10 DU= 20 BINS FOR 200 DU 4 BINS PER ENCLOSURE= 5 TOTAL TRASH ENCLOSURES
Building A ElevationsFIGURE 4aWest Oaks Project MNDSOURCE: SUMMA ARCHITECTURE 2019263154735'-0"MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT*26315479'-0"35'-0"9'-0"9'-0"4'-6"35'-0"MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT*631542735'-0"MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT*263154735'-0"MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT*MATERIAL SCHEDULE1 ROOF - BUILT UP & COMPOSITE SHINGLE2 WALL - STUCCO3 WALL - BRICK VENEER4 TRIM - 2X OVER STUCCO5 RAILING - METAL6 DECORATIVE - METAL AWNING7 RAFTER TAILS8 WALL - LAP SIDINGSCALE:FRONTREARLEFTRIGHT0 8 16 24*MAX BUILDING HEIGHT FROM LOWER GRADE PERCARLSBAD BUILDING HEIGHT DEFINITION (SEC. 21.04.065)DUDEK
Building B ElevationsFIGURE 4bWest Oaks Project MNDSOURCE: SUMMA ARCHITECTURE 2019263154735'-0"MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT*8215479'-0"35'-0"9'-0"8'-0"5'-6"35'-0"MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT*831542735'-0"MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT*886315735'-0"MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT*2MATERIAL SCHEDULE1 ROOF - BUILT UP & COMPOSITE SHINGLE2 WALL - STUCCO3 WALL - BRICK VENEER4 TRIM - 2X OVER STUCCO5 RAILING - METAL6 DECORATIVE - METAL AWNING7 RAFTER TAILS8 WALL - LAP SIDINGSCALE:FRONTREARLEFTRIGHT0 8 16 24*MAX BUILDING HEIGHT FROM LOWER GRADE PERCARLSBAD BUILDING HEIGHT DEFINITION (SEC. 21.04.065)DUDEK
Building C ElevationsFIGURE 4cWest Oaks Project MNDSOURCE: SUMMA ARCHITECTURE 2019863154735'-0"MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT*22315479'-0"35'-0"9'-0"8'-0"5'-6"35'-0"MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT*881542735'-0"MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT*863154735'-0"MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT*2MATERIAL SCHEDULE1 ROOF - BUILT UP & COMPOSITE SHINGLE2 WALL - STUCCO3 WALL - BRICK VENEER4 TRIM - 2X OVER STUCCO5 RAILING - METAL6 DECORATIVE - METAL AWNING7 RAFTER TAILS8 WALL - LAP SIDINGSCALE:FRONTREARLEFTRIGHT0 8 16 24*MAX BUILDING HEIGHT FROM LOWER GRADE PERCARLSBAD BUILDING HEIGHT DEFINITION (SEC. 21.04.065)DUDEK
Building D ElevationsFIGURE 4dWest Oaks Project MNDSOURCE: SUMMA ARCHITECTURE 2019863154735'-0"MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT*22315479'-0"35'-0"9'-0"8'-0"5'-6"35'-0"MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT*154835'-0"MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT*22314735'-0"MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT*8MATERIAL SCHEDULE1 ROOF - BUILT UP & COMPOSITE SHINGLE2 WALL - STUCCO3 WALL - BRICK VENEER4 TRIM - 2X OVER STUCCO5 RAILING - METAL6 DECORATIVE - METAL AWNING7 RAFTER TAILS8 WALL - LAP SIDINGSCALE:FRONTREARLEFTRIGHT0 8 16 24*MAX BUILDING HEIGHT FROM LOWER GRADE PERCARLSBAD BUILDING HEIGHT DEFINITION (SEC. 21.04.065)DUDEK
Building E ElevationsFIGURE 4eWest Oaks Project MNDSOURCE: SUMMA ARCHITECTURE 2019263154735'-0"MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT*26315479'-0"35'-0"9'-0"8'-0"5'-6"35'-0"MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT*3152735'-0"MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT*26314735'-0"MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT*MATERIAL SCHEDULE1 ROOF - BUILT UP & COMPOSITE SHINGLE2 WALL - STUCCO3 WALL - BRICK VENEER4 TRIM - 2X OVER STUCCO5 RAILING - METAL6 DECORATIVE - METAL AWNING7 RAFTER TAILS8 WALL - LAP SIDINGSCALE:FRONTREARLEFTRIGHT0 8 16 24*MAX BUILDING HEIGHT FROM LOWER GRADE PERCARLSBAD BUILDING HEIGHT DEFINITION (SEC. 21.04.065)-DUDEK
Leasing/Recreation Building ElevationsFIGURE 4fWest Oaks Project MNDSOURCE: SUMMA ARCHITECTURE 201926314735'-0"MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT*12'-0"30'-0"9'-1"21635'-0"MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT*263135'-0"MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT*25317635'-0"MAXIMUM BUILDING HEIGHT*MATERIAL SCHEDULE1 ROOF - BUILT UP & COMPOSITE SHINGLE2 WALL - STUCCO3 WALL - BRICK VENEER4 TRIM - 2X OVER STUCCO5 RAILING - METAL6 DECORATIVE - METAL AWNING7 RAFTER TAILS8 WALL - LAP SIDINGSCALE:FRONTREARLEFTRIGHT0 8 16 24PERSPECTIVEPERSPECTIVE*MAX BUILDING HEIGHT FROM LOWER ELEVATION PERCARLSBAD BUILDING HEIGHT DEFINITION (SEC. 21.04.065)II DUDEK
Color Scheme ASOURCE: SUMMA ARCHITECTURE 2019FIGURE 5aWest Oaks Project MNDDUDEK COLOR SCHEME A MANUFACTURER; SHERWIN-WILLIAMS CORONADO STONE STUCCO I: I PURE WHITE SW 7005 STUCCO 2: I ACCESSIBLE BEIGE SW 7036 STUCCO 3: GRIZZLE GRAY SW 7068 STUCCO 4: I I I I GOLDEN FLEECE SW 6388 ACCENT: URBANEBRONZESW7048 BRICK: SPECIAL USED BRICK -BEAR CREEK BUILDING B BUILDING E IA-Cll
Color Scheme BFIGURE 5bWest Oaks Project MNDSOURCE: SUMMA ARCHITECTURE 2019DUDEK COLOR SCHEME B MANUFACTURER: SHERWIN-WILLIAMS CORONADO STONE STUCCO I: I PUREWHITE SW 7005 STUCCO 2: I REPOSE GRAY SW 7015 STUCCO 3: ANONYMOUS SW 7046 STUCCO 4: I I I I BREEZY SW 7616 ACCENT: URBANE BRONZE SW 7048 BRICK: SPECIAL USED BRICK -GLACIER BUILDING A 4 BUILDINGC IA-C21
PALOMAR AIRPORT ROADPALOMAR AIRPORT ROAD AT PALOMAR OAKS WAYProject Visual Simulation RenderingsWest Oaks Project MNDSOURCE: SUMMA ARCHITECTURE 2019FIGURE 6DUDEK
West Oaks Project MND
SOURCE: Fuscoe 2018; BING MAPPING SERVICE 2016
Date: 11/19/2019 - Last saved by: agreis - Path: Z:\Projects\j1028701\MAPDOC\MAPS\MND Figs\Figure 8-Biological_Impacts.mxd0 15075Feet
Project Boundary
Development Impact
Bridge Impact
SDG&E Easement
Vegetation Communities/Land Cover Types
CSS - Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub
DEV - Urban/Developed
DEV-cc - Urban/Developed/Concrete-channel
DH - Disturbed Habitat
OW - Open Water
OW-cc - Open Water/Concrete-channel
SMX - Southern Mixed Chaparral
SWS - Southern Willow Scrub
Jurisdictional Delineation
ACOE/RWQCB/CDFW/CCC, Non-wetland Waters of
the U.S.
CDFW/CCC
ACOE/RWQCB/CDFW/CCC, Non-wetland Waters of
the U.S. (Underground Pipe)
Jurisdictional Delineation Buffer
Uplands Vegetation Communities Buffer
FIGURE 7
Biological Resources Impact MapDUDEK
55555555555 555555555555 555 5 5 5 5 555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555 555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555555 55555555555555555555555555555555555555
5555555555555555555555555555555555
5555555555 55555555555555555555555555!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(!(WEST OAKS WYPALOMAR OAKS WYPalomar Airport Road12345678910111213141516171819202122232425262728293031323334353637383940414243444546474849505152535455565758596061626365666768697172737576757879808185868788899091929394 9596979899100101102103105106107109110 Tree ImpactsDRAFT/FINALWest Oaks Project MND SOURCE: AERIAL - SANDAG 1-FT IMAGERY; SITE PLAN -FUSCOE ENGINEERING 2017Path: Z:\Projects\j989701\MAPDOC\MAPS\Trees\Appendix_C_Tree_Impacts.mxd04020FeetIDisposition!(Encroachment!(Preserve!(Remove5555Limit of GradingProject BoundaryFIGURE 8DUDEK
----\'---
' \ "'------I I \0
Canno,
t
\ C:::J ~ ru~~:t:=~~
' .
'
\
Portions of this DERIVED PRODUCT contain g
rnformatron copyrighted by SanGIS. AIIRightsR
\~ 1\
/ \,
' \
\ \ \.,_ ' " \~ \,/:=:J ,,/
\--
/, .~
,
r } ~, r-' \ .' \
SOURCE:SANDIEGOCOUNTYREGIONP.L AIRPORT P.UTHORITY2011
DUDEK
West Oaks Project MND
AIRPORT LANI> VSE COMMISSION
~AN C, EGO C0U,Nl'I'
LEGEND
-Airport Property Boundary
--Parcelline
--Highways
---Mu nicipa I Boundary
18) Existing Heliporl/Helipad
Safety Zones
-Zone 1-Runway Protection Zone
c::J Zone 2-Inner Apprnach/Departure Zone
c::::::J Zone 3-lnnerTurningZone
c::::::J Zone 4 -Outer Approach/Departure Zone
c::::::J Zone 5-Sideline Zone
c::::::J Zone 6-TrafficPatternZone
~ north l/_ _ 3,000 ft, .,_.,...,w_.._ __ ,
Note: See Table 111-2 for criteria applicable within each safetyzone.
Sources: Parcels -San Di · G h. . Sf t z ~o eograp rclnformatronSource(SanGIS) 2008
a e Y ones -Mead & Hunt Inc, 2008. ' ·
Prepared by: Ricondo & Associate;, lnc.,October 2009.
Compatibility Policy Map: Safety
FIGURE 9
Airport Safety Zones
Airport Safety Zones - Project Site Plan
West Oaks Project MND
SOURCE: AERIAL-BING MAPPING SERVICE; SAFETY ZONES-SDCRAA 2010
0 15075Feet
Project Boundary
Airport Safety Zones
Zone1 - Runway Protection Zone
Zone 2 - Inner Approach/Departure Zone
Zone 3 - Inner Turning Zone
Zone 4 - Outer Approach/Departure Zone
Zone 5 - Sideline Zone
Zone 6 - Traffic Pattern Zone
FIGURE 10
DUDEK
D
--CJ -CJ
CJ
P Atol,tAR AIRPOI
:ALO• AR OAKS WAY
SOURCE: Bing Maps (Accessed 2017); Fuscoe Engineering (2017)
0250125Feet
Noise Receiver
Modeled Noise Receiver Position
Measured Short Term Noise Position
Project Boundary
Building Footprint
Date: 3/22/2017 - Last saved by: rstrobridge - Path: Z:\Projects\j1024401\MAPDOC\DOCUMENT\Noise Figs\Figure3-NoiseMap.mxdWest Oaks Project MND
FIGURE 11
Noise Measurement and Modeling LocationsDUDEK
•
0
□ D
I
I I DECK RAILING SECTION
' I
■ ■
WEST OAKS
DECEMBER 19, 2018
0 60 120 180
SCALE: ~
SOURCE: SUMMA ARCHITECTURE 2019
DUDEK
West Oaks Project MND
I
PLEXIGLAS S,
'
I ·-~ •
~ ' l
I
I
I
I
l
I
/
I • •
/i"IETAL RAILING
I • •
DECK RAILING ELEVATION
LEGEND * 48" PLEXIGLASS RAIL
. ,,.·/.•
. "// . . ..
v ,..·
"? -... ,, _;• ,:,.,, ~. , '-...
FIGURE 12
Conceptual Noise Barrier Exhibit