Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
GPA 06-03; Rancho Milagro Part I; General Plan Amendment (GPA)
CITY OF CARLSBAD LAND USE REVIEW APPLICATION 1) APPLICATIONS APPLIED FOR: (CHECK BOXES) (FOR DEPT. USE ONLY) (FOR DEPT. USE ONLY) • Administrative Permit • Planned Development Permit • Administrative Variance • Planned Industrial Permit • Coastal Development Permit • Planning Commission Determination • Conditional Use Pennit • Precise Development Pian • Condominium Permit • Redevelopment Permit El Environmental Impact Assessment • Site Development Plan E! General Plan Amendment El Special Use Permit • Habitat Management Plan Permit HHP 0^-o( • Specific Plan El Hillside Development Pennit KcPofc-oi • Tentative Parcel Map Obtain from Engineering Department • Local Coastal Program Amendment El Tentative Tract Map CTOb-o»f • Master Plan • Variance • Minor Conditional Use Permit Kl Zone Cliange • Non-Residential Planned Development • List other applications not specified 209-060-61 RANCHO MILAGRO 2) ASSESSOR PARCEL NO{S).: 3) PROJECT NAME: 4) BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: SUBDIVISION FOR 21 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS, 4 OPEN SPACE LOTsT AND 1 HOA LOT Applicant Representative: Jack tientbom & Associates, HU. Box 237, Carlsbad, CA 92018 5) OWNER NAME (Print or Type) LYALL ENTERPRISES INC 6) APPLICANT NAME (Print orType) SAME AS OWNER MAILING ADDRESS 15529 HIGHWAY 76 MAILING ADDRESS SAME AS OWNER CITY AND STATE ZIP PAUMA VALLEY CA 92061 EMAIL ADDRESS: tj/// I CERTIFY THAt I Al^ tHE ^ TELEPHONE 760.742.3256 OWMeft A^^b T^^At ALL tHfe ABOVE CITY AND STATE ZIP TELEPHONE SAME AS OWNER EMAIL ADDRESS: I CERTIFY THAT I AM THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE OWNER AND THAT ALL THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. INFORMATION IS TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE, 3 51 DSTE SIGNATURE T3ATr NOTE: A PROPOSED PROJECT REQUIRING MULTIPLE APPUCATIONS BE FILED, MUST BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO 3:30 P.M. A PROPOSED PROJECT REQUIRING ONLY ONE APPLICATION BE FILED. MUST BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO 4:00 P.M. Form 14 Rev, 03/08 PAGE 1 OF 4 7) BRIEF LEGAL DESCRIPTION 8) LOCATION OF PROJECT: ON THE BETWEEN REMAINDER PARCEL A OF CARLSBAD TRACT 96-02 PER MAP 14060 RECORDED OCTOBER 27, 2000 SUNNY CREEK RD. (no address number) STREET ADDRESS NORTH (mmH. SOUTH, eASt, west) COLLEGE BLVD. SIDE OF AND SUNNY CREEK RD. (NAME OF STREET) COUGAR DR. (NAME OF STREET) (NAME OF STREET! 9) IN THE PROCESS OF REVIEWINGTHIS APPLICATION IT MAY BE NECESSARY FOR MEMBERS OF CITY STAFF, PLANNING COMMISSIONERS, DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEMBERS OR CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS TO INSPECT AND ENTER THE PROPERTY THAT IS THE SUBJECT OF THIS APPLICATION. I/WE CONSENT TO ENTRY FORTHIS PURPOSE. 10) NOTICE OF RESTRICTION: PROPERTY OWNER ACKNOWLEDGES AND CONSENTS TO A NOTICE OF RESTRICTION BEING RECORDED ON THE TITLE TO HIS PROPERTY IF CONDITIONED FORTHE APPLICANT NOTICE OF RESTRICTIONS RUN WITH THE LAND AND BIND ANY SUCCESSORS IN INTEREST PROPERTY OWNER/SIGNATURE FOR CITY USE ONLY APR 1 1 CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DEPT DATE STAMP APPLICATION RECEIVED RECEIVED BY: Form 14 Rev, 03/08 PAGE 2 OF 4 Citv of Carlsbad Planning Department DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Applicanfs statement or disclosure of certain ownership interests on all applications which wili require discretionary action on the part ofthe City Council or any appointed Board, Commission or Committee. The foilowing information MUST be disclosed at the time of application submittal. Your project cannot be reviewed until this information is compieted. Ptease print. Pereonjsjif^ ccHTpratl^ •oth#pblitfcsiliu63 vlsi^ A y.^-:L~h i^ehb maiti^i^ iiii^dddliment;: howe^eiV Iti^Hlgaiappiicant arid property owner must be prbVldetflilpv^ . 1. APPLICANT (Not the applicant's agent) S^^ ATr*\c.tfM&fJT' Provide the COMPLETE. LEGAL names and addresses of ALL persons having a financial interest in the appiication. If the applicant inctudes a corporation or partnership, inciude the names, title, addresses of ali individuals owning more than 10% of the shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% OF THE SHARES, PLEASE INDICATE NON-APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW. If a pubticiv-owned corporation, inciude the names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if necessary.) Person VJA(^A} C Ly/j-i^^ Corp/Pert B/ur^^Hisa.^^ IA)C. THie /i/L£- e(ta<>tt>^\T Title Address iS'T^^'i }ik>i 7^ Address 2. OWNER (Not the owner's agent) Provide the COMPLETE. LEGAL names and addresses of ALL persons having any ownership= interest in fhe property involved. Also, provide the nature of the legal ownership (i.e, partnership, tenants in common, non-profit, corporation, etc.). If the ownership includes a corporation or partnership, include the names, title, addresses of aii individuals owning more than 10% of the shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% OF THE SHARES. PLEASE INDICATE NON-APPUCABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW. If a publiclv-owned corporation, inciude the names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if necessary.) Person ^ E,£- Title Title Address Address 1635 f^day Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • wvmci.carlsbad.ca.us ^ NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION OR TRUST ^i^^ A-r^m^Mt^f^-r If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above Is a nonprofit organization or a trust list the names and addresses of ANY person serving as an ofHcer or director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary of the. Non Profit/T rust Non Profit/Trust Title Title Address Address Have you had more than $500 worth of business transacted with any member of City staff, Boands, Commissions, Committees and/or Council within the past twelve (12) months? I \ Yes No If yes, please indicate person(s): NOTE: Attach additional sheets if necessary. i certify that all the above infomiation is true and coirect to the best of my knowiedge. signature of owner/date Signature of applicant/date WA&J2^ e- L^AruL- \^)ASL\^fJ d. L</A<-i- Print or type name of owner Print or type name of applicant Signature of owner/applicant's agent if applicable/date Print or type name of owner/applicant's agent H:A0MIN\COUNTER\0)SCLOSURE STATEMENT 12/06 Page 2 of 2 RECEIVED APR 1 1 S H^Tyt"' CITY OF CARLSBAD Pauma Valley, CA 92061 PLANNING DEPT Attachment to: City ofCarlsbad Disclosure Statement Persons holding more than ten percent ownership of Lyall Enterprises, Inc. Warren C. and Janice R. Lyall 15524 Hwy76 Pauma Valley, CA 92061 Charles A. and G. Kathleen Lyall Trustees of the Lyall Family Trust 15529 Hwy 75 Pauma Valley, CA 92061 William F. and Brenda K. Eisemann Co-trustees of the Eisemaim Family Revocable Trust 41810 Calle Cerro Temecula, CA 92592 end RESOLUTIONS ADOPTED BY THE DIRECTORS OF LYALL ENTERPRISES, INC AT THE DECEMBER 24, 2007 ANNUAL MEETING Resolved, to elect as Corporate Officers: Charles A. Lyall, President Warren C. Lyall, Vice President & General Manager G. Kathleen Lyall, Secretary Brenda K. Eisemann, Treasurer Oficer compensation will be unchanged from previous year. Resolved, all actions taken by the Officers of the Corporation since the December 28, 2006 meeting of the Directors are hereby approved and ratified in all respects. Dated: December 24, 2007 Li%-i y Charles A. Lyall, Dire/tor President /y I,'M( Warren C. Lyall, Dfrector Vice President, General Manager G/Kathjeen Lyall, Directo Secretary y^y^— William F. Eisemarm, Director /aomi R. Lyall, director Timothy P. Lyall, Director Holly J. Coo^, pirector Brenda K. Eisemarm, Director Treasurer » - — . J^ice R. L^^all, Directo^ Amy Yi. Caudill, Director Katie K. Eisemaim, Director RECEIVED PROJECT DESCRIPTION/EXPLANATION NOV 1 9 2008 CITYOFCARLSBAD PLANNING DEPT PROJECT NAME: Rancho Milagro APPLICANT NAME: Lvall Enterprises. Inc Please describe fuiiy the proposed project, inciude any details necessary to adequately explain the scope and/or operation of the proposed project. You may aiso inciude any baclcground information and supporting statements regarding the reasons for, or appropriateness of, the application. Use an addendum sheet if necessary. Description/Explanation: This project consists of subdividing the subject parcel into nineteen (19) single-family residential lots and five (5) open space preserve lots. The proposal is for a large-lot rural estate subdivision for custom homes. The subject parcel totals 43.58 acres. It is currently undeveloped agricultural land which is planned for residential development by the City. It is located approximately !4 mile northeast of the intersection of College Boulevard and El Camino Real, and is currently accessed by a dirt road off of Sunny Creek Road. The site is in Local Facilities Management Zone 15 and the Sunny Creek Specific Plan area. The Specific Plan establishes standards for the residential development of the area intended to promote a rural estate atmosphere. The proposed development area is on the previously disturbed northern portion of the site which has been used for agriculture. This area has a General Plan designation of Residential Low-Medium Density (RLM), and a Zoning designation of One-Family Residential (R-1-20,000). The development area consists of nineteen (19) residential lots, a public street, and a cul-de- sac. The development area totals 14.24 acres, or 32.7% of the site. The residential lots range in size from 21,780 square feet to 32,017 square feet. The proposed density and type of development are consistent with the General Plan and Zoning designations, and the development standards of the Sunny Creek Specific Plan. There are no architectural plans proposed at this time. Access to the project will be provided by a proposed public street that will connect to the proposed extension of College Boulevard through Streets "K" and "A" of the approved Cantarini subdivision, adjacent to the north. There are a total of five (5) open spaces lots proposed with the attached tentative map. Open Space Lot 22 includes the proposed bio filtration and detention basing for the project. This lot is approximately 29,229 square feet and will be maintained by the future homeowner's association. The remaining open space lots will be preserved as undisturbed natural open space. These four (4) open space preserve lots, Lots 20, 21, 23 & 24, total approximately 28.5 acres, or 65.5% of the site. Lot 20, as identified in the attached tentative map, is encumbered Rev. 4/91 ProjDesc.frm by an existing conservation easement. This easement was established as mitigation for the development of The Terraces at Sunny Creek, adjacent to the south. The responsibility for endowment and perpetual management of the existing conservation easement remains with the easement holder, which is listed as The Terraces at Sunny Creek Homeowners Association. The attached submittal consists of applications for a Tentative Tract Map, General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Hillside Development Permit, and Floodplain Special Use Permit. The General Plan Amendment is intended to re-configure the existing RLM designation to tie it to the proposed development area, and to designate the proposed open space as Open Space. It is also intended to correct two small remnant RH/C/O designations on the south part of the site. These will be designated as Open Space. The Zone Change is intended to re-configure the existing R-1-20,000 designation to tie it to the proposed development area, and to designate the proposed open space as Open Space. The project is consistent with the minimum lot size requirement of the R-1-20,000 zone. It is also consistent with the V2 acre minimum lot size requirement of the Sunny Creek Specific Plan. Therefore, no further change to the existing zoning designation or minimum lot size is necessary. The proposed density of the project is well below the allowable density. At 16.6 net developable acres, the allowable density is 48 dwelling units. In sum, the project has been designed consistent with the City's land use, zoning, and environmental regulations. Rev. 4/91 ProjDesc.fnn GRAPHIC SCALE 1" = \*\MesvrlI)i'\LanclProjec-|;s5^5lI)65-1^74VCxlnibi-l;s\1674_WaU Exhibit03.clW9 3/12/2007 3>2€>'l5 AM PDT GRAPHIC SCALE 1 = MANITOU ENGINEERING COMPANY PLANNING • CONSULTING ENGINEERING • SURVEYING w) WEST NMIH Ave sum V. ESCONOOO. CA. noa iajo>H0Nc (7«) 74t-n2i \'\Hesvr6i'\LanclProjec-ts3^2665-1^74'\Cxhllolts\1674_WaU Exhibit04,dW9 3/12/2007 9i25il6 AM PDT PROJECT DESIGN WITH WALLS 5.8' HIGH AREA OF INCREASED GRADING IMPACT = 1.259 S.F. 30 60 GRAPHIC SCALE 1" = 30* MANITOU ENGINEERING COMPANY PUNNING • CONSULTING ENGINEERING • SURVEYING 390 WEST NINTH AVE.. SUITE "B", ESCONOlOO, CA. 92025 TELEPHONE (760) 741-9921 \\Mesvr01\LanolProjects3\a002-1674\Exhibits\1674_WaU ExhibitOl.dwg 9/6/2006 2^32:41 PM PDT \\Mesvr01\LandProjects3\2002-1674\Exhibits\1674_WaU Exhibi-t02.olw9 9/6/2006 2:17i52 PM PDT \\Mesvr01\LandProjects3\2002-1674\Exhibits\1674_yaU ExhibitOl.dwg 9/6/2006 2:32i41 PM PDT \\Mesvr01\LandProjec-ts3\2002-1674\Exhibits\1674_WaU Exhibit02.dwg 9/6/2006 209^7 PM PDT Califomia Land Title Association Owner's Policy Your Ref: E72240 SCHEDULE A Amount of Insurance: $4,800,000.00 Date of PoUcy: February 28, 2008 at 8:00 A.M. 1. Name of Insured: LYALL ENTERPRISES INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION PolicyNo. 78004987 POI Premium: $6,058.00 3. The estate or interest in the land which is covered by this policy is: A FEE AS TO PARCEL 1; AN EASEIWENT MORE FULLY DESCRIBED BELOW AS TO PARCEL 2 Title to the estate or interest in the land is vested in: LYALL ENTERPRISES INC., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION 4. The land referred to in this policy is described as follows: PARCEL 1 : REMAINDER PARCEL A OF CARLSBAD TRACT NO. 96-02 (THE TERRACES AT SUNNY CREEK I), IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 14060, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, OCTOBER 27, 2000. PARCEL 2: A NON-EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT AND RIGHT OF WAY FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS, OVER, UNDER, ALONG AND ACROSS THOSE PORTIONS OF LOTS 177 THROUGH 181 KNOWN AS BADGER LANE, FOXTAIL LOOP, COYOTE COURT, WOLVERINE TERRACE AND LYNX WAY. This PoUcy vaUd only if Schedule B is attached. CLTAOA88 -10/13/95 AA CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY Califomia Land Tide Association Owner's PoUcy Your Ref: E72240 SCHEDULE B PoUcy No. 78004987 POI EXCEPTIONS FROM COVERAGE This poUcy does not insure against loss or damage (and the Company will not pay costs, attorneys' fees or expenses) which arise by reason of: PART I 1. 2. 3. 4. Taxes or assessments which are not shown as existing Uens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the public records. Proceedings by a pubUc agency which may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whetheror not shown by the records of such agency or by the public records. Any facts, rights, interests or claims which are not shown by the pubUc records but which could be ascertained by an inspection of the land or which may be asserted by persons in possession thereof. Easements, liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof, which are not shown by the public records. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary Unes, shortage in area, encroachments, or any other facts which a correct survey would disclose, and which are not shown by the pubUc records. (a) Unpatented mining claims; (b) reservations or exceptions in patents or in Acts authorizing the issuance thereof; (c) water rights, claims or title to water, whether or not the matters excepted under (a), (b), or (c) are shown by the public records. PART II AK 1. PROPERTY TAXES, INCLUDING ANY ASSESSMENTS COLLECTED WITH TAXES, TO BE LEVIED FOR THE FISCAL YEAR 2008-2009 THAT ARE A LIEN NOT YET DUE. 2. THE LIEN OF SUPPLEMENTAL OR ESCAPED ASSESSMENTS OF PROPERTY TAXES, IF ANY, MADE PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF PART 0.5, CHAPTER 3.5 OR PART 2, CHAPTER 3, ARTICLES 3 AND 4 RESPECTIVELY (COMMENCING WITH SECTION 75) OF THE REVENUE AND TAXATION CODE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA AS A RESULT OF THE TRANSFER OF TITLE TO THE VESTEE NAMED IN SCHEDULE A; OR AS A RESULT OF CHANGES IN OWNERSHIP OR NEW CONSTRUCTION OCCURRING PRIOR TO DATE OF POLICY. 3. A NOTICE OF SPECIAL TAX LIEN PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 3114.5 OF THE STREETS AND HIGHWAY CODE AND SECTION 53328.3 OF THE GOVERNMENT CODE IMPOSING A CONTINUING LIEN. EXECUTED BY: AMOUNT: DATED: PURPOSE: RECORDED: CITY OF CARLSBAD NO AMOUNT IS SHOWN IN SAID NOTICE MAY 17, 1991 COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 1 MAY 20, 1991 AS FILE NO. 1991-0236959, OFFICIAL RECORDS 4. THE PROPERTY INCLUDED WITHIN THIS SUBDIVISION IS SUBJECT TO ANNUAL ASSESSMENTS (COMMONLY REFERRED TO AS MELLO-ROOS ASSESSMENTS) TO PAY THE INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE COST OF IMPROVEMENTS AND ARE CURRENTLY BEING COLLECTED WITH THE PROPERTY TAXES. CLTAOB88- 10/13/95 AA CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY Pol icy No. 78004987 - POI Page 1 SCHEDULE B (CONT.) Part I I EASEMENTS FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS, PIPELINES, DRAINAGE AND/OR PUBLIC UTILITIES AND INCIDENTAL PURPOSES THERETO OVER, UNDER, ALONG AND ACROSS THE EASEMENT PARCEL(S) HEREIN DESCRIBED AS GRANTED AND/OR RESERVED IN VARIOUS DEEDS OF RECORD. AFFECTS: PARCEL 2 F 6. AN EASEMENT FOR THE PURPOSE SHOWN BELOW AND RIGHTS INCIDENTAL THERETO AS SET FORTH IN A DOCUMENT GRANTED TO: PURPOSE: RECORDED: AFFECTS: EDWARD KELLY, JAMES KELLEY, ROBERT S. KELLY, ELLEN K. HALL, ALICE KELLY MORRISON, LILLIE KELLY ORTEGA ROADS AND RIGHTS OF WAY, PUBLIC UTILITIES JULY 29, 1936 IN BOOK 541, PAGE 244, OFFICIAL RECORDS THE EXACT LOCATION AND EXTENT OF SAID EASEMENT IS NOT DISCLOSED OF RECORD. 7. AN EASEMENT FOR THE PURPOSE SHOWN BELOW AND RIGHTS INCIDENTAL THERETO AS SET FORTH IN A DOCUMENT GRANTED TO: PURPOSE: RECORDED: AFFECTS: SAN DIEGO GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY PUBLIC UTILITIES, INGRESS AND EGRESS OCTOBER 20, 1948 IN BOOK 2988, PAGE 452, OFFiCIAL RECORDS AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP 8. AN EASEMENT FOR THE PURPOSE SHOWN BELOW AND RIGHTS INCIDENTAL THERETO AS SET FORTH IN A DOCUMENT GRANTED TO: PURPOSE: RECORDED: AFFECTS: SAN DIEGO GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY PUBLIC UTILITIES, INGRESS AND EGRESS APRIL 19, 1951 IN BOOK 4063, PAGE 117, OFFICIAL RECORDS AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP 9. A DOCUMENT ENTITLED "A HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENT REGARDING DRAINAGE", EXECUTED BY H AND D PARTNERS, A GENERAL PARTNERSHIP, SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, PROVISIONS AND CONDITIONS THEREIN CONTAINED, RECORDED JUNE 13, 1985 AS FILE NO. 85-210265, OFFICIAL RECORDS. 10. AN EASEMENT FOR THE PURPOSE SHOWN BELOW AND RIGHTS INCIDENTAL THERETO AS SET FORTH IN A DOCUMENT GRANTED TO: PURPOSE: RECORDED: MANDANA CAL CO., A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION ROADWAY AUGUST 8, 1989 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 89-423788, OFFICIAL CLTA88C - 12/16/88 Poli cy No. Page 2 78004987 -POI SCHEDULE B (CONT.) Part I I 11 12. 13, 14. 15. 16. AFFECTS: RECORDS THE ROUTE THEREOF AFFECTS A PORTION OF SAID LAND AND IS MORE FULLY DESCRIBED IN SAID DOCUMENT. THE TERMS AND PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN THE DOCUMENT ENTITLED "A NOTICE AND WAIVER CONCERNING PROXIMITY OF THE PLANNED OR EXISTING EL CAMINO REAL AND COLLEGE BOULEVARD TRANSPORTATION CORRIDORS, CASE NO. CT 96-02" RECORDED NOVEMBER 4, 1999 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 1999-0737784 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. THE TERMS AND PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN THE DOCUMENT ENTITLED "A NOTICE CONCERNING AIRCRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS CASE NO. CT 96-02" RECORDED NOVEMBER 4, 1999 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 1999-0737789 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. A DOCUMENT ENTITLED "A MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT", EXECUTED BY CANAM PROPERTIES LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY AND RANCHO CARLSBAD PARTNERS, A CALIFORNIA GENERAL PARTNERSHIP, SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, PROVISIONS AND CONDITIONS THEREIN CONTAINED, RECORDED NOVEMBER 5, 1999 AS FILE NO. 1999-0739485, OFFICIAL RECORDS. A DOCUMENT ENTITLED "A HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENT GEOLOGICAL FAILURE", EXECUTED BY THE TERRACES AT SUNNY CREEK, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY AND THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, PROVISIONS AND CONDITIONS THEREIN CONTAINED, RECORDED APRIL 5, 2000 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2000-0173368, OFFICIAL RECORDS. A DOCUMENT ENTITLED "A HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENT DRAINAGE", EXECUTED BY THE TERRACES AT SUNNY CREEK, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY AND THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, PROVISIONS AND CONDITIONS THEREIN CONTAINED, RECORDED APRIL 5, 2000 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2000-0173369, OFFICIAL RECORDS. AN EASEMENT FOR THE PURPOSE SHOWN BELOW AND RIGHTS INCIDENTAL THERETO AS SHOWN OR AS OFFERED FOR DEDICATION ON THE RECORDED MAP SHOWN BELOW. MAP OF: EASEMENT PURPOSE: AFFECTS: NO. 14060 PUBLIC UTILITY AND ACCESS AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP TO MAINTAIN UTILITIES 17. AN EASEMENT FOR THE PURPOSE SHOWN BELOW AND RIGHTS INCIDENTAL THERETO AS SET FORTH IN A DOCUMENT GRANTED TO: PURPOSE: RECORDED: AFFECTS: SAN DIEGO GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY PUBLIC UTILITIES, INGRESS AND EGRESS DECEMBER 7, 2000 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2000-0665575, OFFICIAL RECORDS THE ROUTE THEREOF AFFECTS A PORTION OF SAID LAND AND IS MORE FULLY DESCRIBED IN SAID DOCUMENT. CLTA88C - 12/16/88 Policy No. 78004987 -POI Page 3 SCHEDULE B (CONT.) Part I I THE EXACT LOCATION AND EXTENT OF SAID EASEMENT IS NOT DISCLOSED OF RECORD. 18. THE TERMS AND PROVISIONS CONTAINED IN THE DOCUMENT ENTITLED "COVENANT FOR EASEMENT" RECORDED MARCH 27, 2001 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2001-0176774, OFFICIAL RECORDS. 19. A DOCUMENT ENTITLED "CABLE TELEVISION CONSTRUCTION WIRING AGREEMENT AND EASEMENT", EXECUTED BY DANIELS CABLEVISION, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION AND TERRACES AT SUNNY CREEK, LLC, SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, PROVISIONS AND CONDITIONS THEREIN CONTAINED, RECORDED MAY 1, 2001 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2001-0271288, OFFICIAL RECORDS. THE EXACT LOCATION AND EXTENT OF SAID EASEMENT IS NOT DISCLOSED OF RECORD. 20. A DOCUMENT ENTITLED "AFFORDABLE HOUSING AGREEMENT IMPOSING RESTRICTIONS ON REAL PROPERTY", EXECUTED BY CITY OF CARLSBAD, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION AND THE TERRACES AT SUNNY CREEK LLC, A LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY, SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, PROVISIONS AND CONDITIONS THEREIN CONTAINED, RECORDED MAY 10, 2001 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2001-0294965, OFFICIAL RECORDS. 21. A DOCUMENT ENTITLED "CONSERVATION EASEMENT DEED", EXECUTED BY CANAM PROPERTIES, LLC, A CALIFORNIA LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY AND THE TERRACES AT SUNNY CREEK HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, A CALIFORNIA NON-PROFIT MUTUAL BENEFIT CORPORATION, SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, PROVISIONS AND CONDITIONS THEREIN CONTAINED, RECORDED JULY 19, 2001 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2001-0500163, OFFICIAL RECORDS. 22. AN EASEMENT FOR THE PURPOSE SHOWN BELOW AND RIGHTS INCIDENTAL THERETO AS SET FORTH IN A DOCUMENT GRANTED TO: THE TERRACES AT SUNNY CREEK HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, A CALIFORNIA NON-PROFIT MUTUAL BENEFIT CORPORATION PURPOSE: OPEN SPACE RECORDED: JULY 19, 2001 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2001-0500163, OFFICIAL RECORDS AFFECTS: THE ROUTE THEREOF AFFECTS A PORTION OF SAID LAND AND IS MORE FULLY DESCRIBED IN SAID DOCUMENT. 23. AN EASEMENT FOR THE PURPOSE SHOWN BELOW AND RIGHTS INCIDENTAL THERETO AS SET FORTH IN A DOCUMENT GRANTED TO: SAN DIEGO GAS AND ELECTRIC COMPANY PURPOSE: PUBLIC UTILITIES, INGRESS AND EGRESS RECORDED: OCTOBER 12, 2001 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2001-0739274, OFFICIAL RECORDS AFFECTS: THE ROUTE THEREOF AFFECTS A PORTION OF SAID LAND AND IS MORE FULLY DESCRIBED IN SAID DOCUMENT. CLTA88C - 12/16/88 Pol icy No. 78004987 -POI Page 4 SCHEDULE B (CONT.) Part I I THE EXACT LOCATION AND EXTENT OF SAID EASEMENT IS NOT DISCLOSED OF RECORD. AL END OF SCHEDULE B AM CM CLTA88C - 12/18/88 City of Carlsbad Faraday Center Faraday Cashiering 001 1201201-2 01/12/2012 98 Thu, Jan 12, 2012 04:01 PM Receipt Ref Nbr; R1201201-2/0039 PERMITS - PERMITS Tran Ref Nbr: 120120102 0039 0044 Trans/Rcpt#: R0087954 SET #: CT060004 Amount: 1 § $171.60 Item Subtotal: $171.60 Item Total: $171.60 1 ITEM(S) TOTAL; $171.60 Check (Chk# 004725) $171.60 Total Received: $171,60 Have a nice day! **************CUSTOMER COPY************* city of Carlsbad 163 5 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 lllllllllllllll Applicant: JACK HENTHORN & ASSOCIATES Description Amount CT060004 171.60 Receipt Number: R0087954 Transaction ID: R0Q87954 Transaction Date: 01/12/2012 Pay Type Method Description Amount Payment Check 171.60 Transaction Amount: 171.60 City of Carlsbad Faraday Center Faraday Cashiering 001 1120801-3 07/27/2011 98 Wed, Jul 27, 2011 02:21 PM Receipt Ref Nbr: Rn20801-3/0024 PERMITS - PERMITS Tran Ref Nbr: 112080103 0024 0026 Trans/Rcpt#: R0085592 SET #: GPA06003 Amount: 1 § $1,604,00 Item Subtotal: $1,604,00 Item Total: $1,604.00 1 ITEM(S) TOTAL; $1,604,00 Check (Chk# 003047) $1,604.00 Total Received: $1,604.00 Have a nice day! *******+*4;****C(jST0MER COPY************* City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad CA llllllllllllllll 92008 Applicant: RANCHO MILAGRO LLC Description GPA06003 Amount 1,604.00 Receipt Number: R0085592 Transaction Date: 07/27/2011 Transaction ID: R0085592 Pay Type Method Description Amount Payment Check 1,604.00 Transaction Amount: 1,604.00 City of Carlsbad Faraday Center Farada; Cashiering 001 090160"-1 01/16/2009 75 Fri, Jn 16, 2009 12:25 PM F:eceipt Ref Nbr; R0901601-1/0033 PERMITS • PERMITS Tran Ref Nbr: 090160101 0033 0036 Trans/Rcp'^#: R0073296 SET #; HMP09001 Amount: 1 g $2,721,00 Item Subto-al; $2,721.00 Item Total: $2,721.00 PERMITS - PERMITS Iran Ref Nbr; 090160101 0033 0037 •'rans/Rcpt#: R0073292 SET #: CT060004 Amount; 1 LS $362,14 Item Subtotal; $362.14 Item Total: $362.14 2 ITEM(S) TOTA;.: $3,083.14 Check (Chk# 0034713) $3,083,14 Total Received; $3,083,14 Have a nice day! :!;*************CUSTO^ER COPY************* City of Garlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad CA II 92008 Applicant: LYALL ENTERPRISES INC Description HMP09001 Amount 2,721.00 Receipt Number: R0073296 Transaction Date: 01/16/2009 Transaction ID: R0073296 Pay Type Method Description Amount Payment Check 2,721.00 Transaction Amount: 2,721.00 City of Carlsbad 163 5 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad CA •llllllllllllll 92008 Applicant: LYALL ENTERPRISES INC Description CT060004 Amount 362.14 Receipt Number: R0073292 Transaction Date: 01/16/2009 Transaction ID: R0073292 Pay Type Method Description Amount Payment Check 3478 362.14 Transaction Amount: 362.14 w/ City of Carlsbad Planning Department DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Applicant's statement or disclosure of certain ownership interests on all applications which will require discretionary action on the part ofthe City Council or any appointed Board, Comnnission or Committee. The following information MUST be disclosed at the time of application submittal. Your project cannot be reviewed until this information is completed. Please print. Note: Person is defined as "Any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, in this and an other county, city and county, city municipality, district or other political subdivision or any other group or combination acting as a unit." Agents may sign this document; however, the legal name and entity of the applicant and property owner must be provided below. 1. APPLICANT (Not the applicant's agent) Provide the COMPLETE. LEGAL names and addresses of ALL persons having a financial interest in the application. If the applicant includes a corporation or partnership, include the names, title, addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% ofthe shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% OF THE SHARES, PLEASE INDICATE NON-APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW. If a publiclv-owned corporation, include the names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if necessary.) Person )(ft,Vl\S^^STAATf^ Corp/Part Ij^^MCto \Ul LAC^ ULQ. Title U^^ip^(iu^4^.y^%M<SM^^ Title Address CP*^^^ Address LA-3bLCA,dA^Z^l? " 2. OWNER (Not the owner's agent) Provide the COMPLETE. LEGAL names and addresses of ALL persons having any ownership interest in the property involved. Also, provide the nature of the legal ownership (i.e, partnership, tenants in common, non-profit, corporation, etc.). If the ownership includes a corporation or partnership, include the names, titles, addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% OF THE SHARES, PLEASE INDICATE NON-APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW. If a publiclv-owned corporation, include the names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if necessary.) Person)0!Sjls*~SjL?Srr/>g7A Corp/Part ^ifc>KiCVk?lUuj^rotio LLC!. TitleiiU*^^6.>tf£t=a^Ktc^ Iress \w ^ Address CP^^^ Address S^UL^ A ^ 0>UCMT— 1635 Faraday Dr. • Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us 3. NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION OR TRUST If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a nonprofit organization or a trust, list the names and addresses of ANY person serving as an officer or director of the non-profit organization or as a trustee or beneficiary of the. Non Profit/Trust Ll A • Non Profit/Trust kl. ^ ' Title Title Address Address 4. Have you had more than $20 worth of business transacted with any member of City staff, Boards, Commissions, Committees and/or Council within the past twelve (12) months? I I Yes ^ No If yes, please indicate person(s): NOTE: Attach additional sheets if necessary. certify,that all the above information is true and correct tp the best of my knowledge. Signature of applicant/date Print or type name of owner Print or type name of applicant ^K*yu, Signature of owner/applicant's agent if applicable/date Print or type name of owner/applicant's agent H:ADMIN\COUNTER\DiSCLOSURE STATEMENT 5/98 Page 2 of 2 Sent By: TRANS-TERRA 858 454 1720; Nov-9-17:48; Page 1/1 J NO.TSe p.1/1 InVMtor RCB Ranch, Inc. Medigua],lQC. Robert W. Doede IRA Rollover Btiu^to Ceballos Efitai Cadeiw/C^ LLC Xavier Sustaeta First National Bank, TYustce Victor A. VOaplana Total j50% 320% \m ijo% ip% ok% Citv of Carlsbad Planning Department DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Applicant's statement or disclosure of certain ownership interests on all applications which will require discretionary action on the part ofthe City Council or any appointed Board, Commission or Committee. The following information MUST be disclosed at the time of application submittal. Your project cannot be reviewed until this information is completed. Please print. Note: Person is defined as "Any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, in this and any other county, city and county, city municipality, district or other political subdivision or any other group or combination acting as a unit" Agents may sign this document; however, the legal name and entity of the applicant and property owner must be provided below. 1. APPLICANT (Not the applicant's agent) Provide the COMPLETE. LEGAL names and addresses of ALL persons having a financial interest in the application. If the applicant includes a corporation or partnership, include the names, title, addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% ofthe shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% OF THE SHARES, PLEASE INDICATE NON-APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW. If a publiclv-owned corporation, include the names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if necessary.) Person V<ai/((gr SixS-tae. t'o. Corp/Part Manc:^0 /^I'/aQrg LLC Title/ltmgt/i^ Vat^ne.r^ 'Rancho Hilcj^ro Title Address BoK 9/77 ^ Address VO E>o>^ 9/77 Jo//c^ CA 9Z03^ 2. OWNER (Not the owner's agent) Provide the COMPLETE. LEGAL names and addresses of ALL persons having any ownership interest in the property involved. Also, provide the nature of the legal ownership (i.e, partnership, tenants in common, non-profit, corporation, etc.). If the ownership includes a corporation or partnership, include the names, title, addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% OF THE SHARES, PLEASE INDICATE NON-APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW. If a publiclv-owned corporation, include the names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if necessary.) Person Af^-'"^ M • Be^f/e^/ CorDlPavt&e/vi-/Q.y-/^ancn'ck Jo'iecf (/enfurg. Title /iana.^ Fat-th e Title Pa t-tn&i-s h i p Address 7/^a^dlaK St- Address 7VV9 /^Q.^^il<tK_ St Cct^lshaA CA 92on Ca^lsh^c2(/ CA 9TOi[ 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • F/0< (760) 602-8559 • www.ci.carlsbad.ca.us NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION OR TRUST If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a nonprofit orqanization or a trust, list the names and addresses of ANY person serving as an officer or director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary of the. Non Profit/Trust Title Non Profit/Trust_ Title Address Address Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City staff. Boards, Commissions, Committees and/or Council within the past twelve (12) months? I I Yes r^No Ifyes, please indicate person(s):, NOTE: Attach additional sheets if necessary. I certify that all the abov^nformation is true and correct knowledge. Signature of owner/date Print or type name of owner ignature of appliOant/date Print or type name of applicant Signature of owner/applicant's agent if applicable/date Print or type name of owner/applicant's agent H:ADMIN\COUNTER\OISCLOSURE STATEMENT 5/98 Page 2 of 2 I': TRANS-TERRA 858 454 1720; Nov-9-04 17:48; y Invwtor RCB Ranch, Inc. Medigual,Inc. Robert W. Doede IRA Rollover Etnestp Ceballos Efien Cadezw/C^ia, LLC Xavier Sustaeta First National Bank, Trustee Victor A. Viiaplana Total ExMtiit '*A" favegtfaent Percentage Xm io% 110% ^% NO. TSS Page 1/1 P. 1/1 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT - Additional Sheet for Bentley-Monarch Joint Venture Names, Titles and Addresses of All Individuals Owning More ttian 10% ofthe Shares ofthe Partnership: David M. Bentley, Property Owner and Managing Partner, 7449 Magellan Street, Carlsbad CA 92011 • Maggie Bentley, Property Owner and Joint Venture Partner, 7449 Magellan Street, Carlsbad CA 92011 Monarch Communities of California, Joint Venture Partner, 15 Gushing Avenue, Irvine CA 92618, Attention Mike Forsum, Vice President STATEMENT OF AGREEMENT TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP CITY OF CARLSBAD The Subdivision Map Act and the Carlsbad Municipal Code sets a fifty (50) day time restriction on Planning Commission processing of Tentative Maps and a thirty (30) day time limit for City Council action. These time limits can only be extended by the mutual concurrence of the applicant and the City. By accepting applications for Tentative Maps concurrently with applications for other approvals which are prerequisites to the map; i.e. Environmental Assessment, Environmental Impact Report, Condominium Plan, Planned Unit Development, etc., the fifty (50) day time limits and the thirty (30) day time limits are often exceeded. If you wish to have your application processed concurrently, this agreement must be signed by the applicant or his agent. If you wish not to sign the statement, the City will not accept your application for the Tentative Map until all prior necessary entitlements have been processed and approved. The undersigned understands that the processing time required by the City may exceed the time limits, therefore the undersigned agrees to extend the time limits for Planning Commission and City Council action and fully concurs with any extensions of time up to one year from the date the application was accepted as complete to properly review all of the applications. gnature Date Name (Print) Relationship to Application /Q{X>).{^LJ\ (Property Owner-Agent) ^ FRM0037 2/96 PLEASE NOTE: Time limits on the processing of discretionary projects established by state law do not start until a project application is deemed complete by the City. The City has 30 calendar days from the date of application submittal to determine whether an application is complete or incomplete, within 30 days of submittal of this application you will receive a letter stating whether this application is complete or incomplete, if it is incomplete, the letter will state what is needed to make this application complete. When the application is complete, the processing period will start ugj^f^the date of the completion letter. Applicant Signature: Staff Signature: Date; To be stapled with receipt to application Copy for file ^^^^ City of Carlsbad Planning Departnnent HAZARDOUS WASTE AND SUBSTANCES STATEMENT Consultation Of Lists of Sites Related To Hazardous Wastes (Certification of Compliance with Govemment Code Section 65962.5) Pursuant to State of Califomia Govemment Code Section 65962.5,1 have consulted the Hazardous Wastes and Substances Sites List compiled by the Califomia Environmental Protection Agency and hereby certify that (check one): J0- The development project and any altematives proposed in this application are not contained on the lists compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the State Govemment Code. r~l The development project and any ahematives proposed in this application are contained on the lists compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the State Govemment Code. APPLICANT Name: Address: Po Sox 9/77 La. Soiled CA 9Zo3g Phone Number; Phone Number PROPERTY OWNER Name: - Same CL^ ^ppllGOKV^- Address;. Address of Site: /V.A Local Agency (City and Countvl; Ctj^ sf CarlshacP . Cm n/y Q-p ^a:h. I)/t^O Assessor's book, page, and parcel number;. Specify list(s) : SfefP. o-P CA Hoij^t-Jous l/Jds-j^ rinJSuhAahces Safes' Regulatory Identification Number:. Date of List; April <99g Property^wner Signature/Date Admin/Counter/HazWasit 1635 Faraday Avenue • Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 • (760) 602-4600 • FAX (760) 602-8559 ^ C D arlsbad Unified School District 6225 El Camino Real, Carlsbad, CA 92009 (760) 331-5000 March 25, 2004 Department of Real Estate 320 West Fourth Street, Suite 350 Los Angeles, CA 90012 Re: Project Name: Developer: Assessor's Parcel Number: Location: Size: Rancho Milagro Rancho Milagro, LLC 209-060-61 Northeast intersection of El Camino Real and College Boulevard 43.2 acres Carlsbad Unified School District has reviewed the above project and its impact on school attendance areas in this District. At this time, the schools of attendance for this project are: Hope Elementary School (K-5) 3010 Tamarack Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 (760) 331-5400 Calavera Hills Middle School (6-8) 1645 Magnolia Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 (760)331-6300 Carlsbad High School (9-12) 3557 Monroe Street Carlsbad, CA 92008 (760) 331-5100 The Goveming Board wishes to advise the Department of Real Estate and residents of Carlsbad that at present the Carlsbad Unified School District elementary schools are operating at fiill capacity. It is possible, therefore, that the students generated from this project may not attend the closest neighborhood school due to overcrowded conditions and, in fact, may attend school across town. You should also be aware that there are no school buses for regular student transportation from home to school. The Governing Board wishes to also inform you that conditions imposed upon new development within the City of Carlsbad require mitigation of school impacts. Sincerely, CARLSBAD UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT GaVlgp^neeman Deputy Superintendent, Business Services cc: Steve Pirato, Assistant Planner, Jack Henthom & Associates C CITY OF CARLSBAD ^ LAND USE REVIEW APPLICATION W 1) APPUCATIONS APPLIED FOR: (CHECK BOXES) (FOR DEPARTMENT USE ONLY) (FOR DEPARTMENT USEONLY) • Administrative Permit - 2nd Dwelling Unit • Planned Industrial Permit • Administrative Variance • Planning Commission Determination • Coastal Development Permit • Precise Development Plan • Conditional Use Permit • Redevopment Permit • Condominium Permit • Site Development Plan Environmental Impact Assessment Specific Use Permit H General Plan Amendment • Specific Plan X Hillside Development Permit WV? o(o'b\ • Tentative Parcel Mop Obtain from Engineering Department • Local Coastal Plan Amendment Tentative Tract Map • Master Plan • Variance • Non-Residential Planned Development Zone Change • Planned Development Permit • List other applications not specified 2) ASSESSOR PARCEL NO(S).; 209-060-61 3) PROJECT NAME; Rancho Milagro 4) BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT; Subdivision for 22 single family residential lots, 4 open space lots and 1 HOA lot. 5) OWNER NAME (Print or Type) Rancho Milagro, LLC 5) APPLICANT NAME (Print of Type) Rancho Milagro, LLC MAILING ADDRESS PO 60x9177 MAILING ADDRESS PO 60x9177 CITY AND STATE La Jolla, CA ZIP 92038 TELEPHONE 858.454.2002 CITY AND STATE La Jolla, CA ZIP 92038 TELEPHONE 858.454.2002 I CERTIFYTHAT I AM THE LEGAL OWNER AND THAT ALL THE ABOVE INFORMATJI^N IS TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLE IllmM ^2 2<xa^ DATE I CERTIFY THAT I AM THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE OWNERi^DTHATALL THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE AND CORR5E?7T/) THE BESfr OF MY KNQ^LEDGE Ami ZooC" DATE 7) 6RIEF LEGAL DESCRIPTION Remainder Parcel A of Carlsbad Tract 96-02, per Map 14060, Recorded 10-27-00 NOTE: A PROPOSED PROJECT REQUIRING MULTIPLE APPLICATIONS BE FILED, MUST BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO 3:30 P.M. A PROPOSED PROJECT REQUIRING ONLY ONE APPLICATION BE FILED, MUST BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO 4:00 RM. Form 16 PAGE 1 OF 2 8) LOCATION OF PROJECT: ON THE BETWEEN Sunny Creek Rd. (f^ddress number) North STREETADDRESS SIDE OF (NORTH. SOUTH, EAST, WEST) College Blvd. AND (NAME OF STREET) 9) LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 10) PROPOSED NUMBER OF LOTS 15 27 13) TYPE OF SUBDIVISION 16) PERCENTAGE OF PROPOSED PROJECT IN OPEN SPACE 19) GROSS SITE ACREAGE 22) EXISTING ZONING Res. 65% 43.58 11) NUMBER OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL UNITS 14) PROPOSED IND OFFICE/ SQUARE FOOTAGE 17) PROPOSED INCREASE IN ADT 20) EXISTING GENERAL PLAN N.A. 220 RLM OS RH/C/0 M-20,ooc| 23) PROPOSED ZONING OS R-1-0.5-Q OS Sunny Creek Rd. (NAME OF STREET) Cougar Dr. (NAME OF STREET) 12) PROPOSED NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS 15) PROPOSED COMM SQUARE FOOTAGE 18) PROPOSED SEWER USAGE IN EDU 21) PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION 22 N.A. 22 RLM OS 24) IN THE PROCESS OF REVIEWING THIS APPLICATION IT MAY BECOME NECESSARY FOR MEMBERS OF CITY STAFF, PLANNING COMMISSIONERS, DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEMBERS OR CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS TO INSPECT AND ENTER THE PROPERTY THAT IS THE SUBJECT OF THIS APPLICATION. I/WE CONSENT TO ENTJR>7F0R THIS PURPOSE FOR CITY USE ONLY FEE COMPUTATION APPLICATION TYPE TOTAL FEE REQUIRED FEE REQUIRED DATE STAMP APPLICATION RECEIVED RECEIVED BY DATE FEE PAID RECEIPT number Form 16 PAGE 1 OF 2 CITY OF CARLSBAD U\ND USE REVIEW APPLICATION 1) APPLICATIONS APPLIED FOR; (CHECKBOXES) I I Administrative Permit r~| Administrative Variance I I Coastal Development Permit I I Conditional Use Permit I I Condominium Permit Environmental Impact Assessment Generai Plan Amendment Hillside Development Permit I I Local Coastal Program Amendment I I Master Plan I I Non-Residential Planned Development I I Planned Development Permit (FOR DEPARTMENT USE ONLY) Gffl OcrOl I I Planned Industrial Permit I I Planning Commission Determination I I Precise Development Plan I I Redevelopment Permit I I Site Development Plan Special Use Permit I I Specific Plan I I Tentative Parcel Map Obtain from Engineering Department Rl Tentative Tract Map I I Variance 1^ Zone Change I I List other applications not specified (FOR DEPARTMENT USE ONLY) sup 0(/J-05 2) 3) 4) ASSESSOR PARCEL NO(S).; 2.01-OIO'0[ PROJECTNAME; Ka^cho /^HcL^ro Lot /^Qrqer ^'i+-LCani~ar\nl BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT; /^r^^_,^ ^/CaAfar 'm\ gg/hQ.nc/gr- Pa^CQ.1^ 5) OWNER NAME (Print or Type) 6) APPLICANT NAME (Print or Type) Karvc^ko /dik^ro LLC MAILING ADDRESS 7W9 /^5e//c7Av S-t. MAILING ADDRESS CITY AND STATE ZIP TELEPHONE CarlsbcLC^, CA 9ZO/I 7(^.^^.957Z CITY AND STATE ZIP TELEPHONE LccJ2/lcL,CA 9Z03K <is?.H5H.Zoo2. EMAILADDRESS; 6e./i te^q/ob ado,!ph ia.. r\e.-t EMAILADDRESS: su^ijx^h&san. tr.Qo^ 1 CERTIFY THAT 1 AM THE LEGAL OWNER AND THAT ALL THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOVVdDGE. / ) 1- (- \y iii-c' 1 CERTIFY AMAT 1 AM THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE OWNER /yJJOAljIAT ALL THE ABOJ/E INFORMATION IS TRUE AND CQRRECfflbjdE BeCI|^ M'lOKNOWLgDGE. / , SIGNATURE ' DATE SIGNATURE DATE 7) BRIEF LEGAL DESCRIPTION fle ^y.Cc\ndo r Fame I n f Carlsbnrfl Trac^ 00~l'^ NOTE: A PROPOSED PROJECT REQUIRING MULTIPLE APPLICATIONS BE FILED, MUST BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO 3:30 P.M. A PROPOSED PROJECT REQUIRING ONLY ONE APPLICATION BE FILED,MUST BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO 4:00 RM. Form 14 Rev. 12/04 PAGE 1 OF 5 8) LOCATION OF PROJECT: ON THE BETWEEN (NORTH. SOUTH, EAST, WEST) STREET ADDRESS SIDE OF (NAME OF STREET) (NAME OF STREET) AND 9) LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 10) PROPOSED NUMBER OF LOTS /5 13) TYPE OF SUBDIVISION 16) PERCENTAGE OF PROPOSED PROJECT IN OPEN SPACE 19) GROSS SITE ACREAGE 22) EXISTING ZONING 1lr \-O.S Hes. O 11) NUMBER OF EXISTING RESIDENTIAL UNITS 14) PROPOSED IND OFFICE/ SQUARE FOOTAGE 17) PROPOSED INCREASE IN ADT 20) EXISTING GENERAL PLAN 23) PROPOSED ZONING o o (NAME OF STREET) 12) PROPOSED NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS 15) PROPOSED COMM SQUARE FOOTAGE 18) PROPOSED SEWER USAGE IN EDU 21) PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION 24) HABITAT IMPACTS IF YES, ASSIGN HMP # o hi A O No 25) IN THE PROCESS OF REVIEWING THIS APPLICATION IT MAY BE NECESSARY FOR MEMBERS OF CITY STAFF, PLANNING COMMISSIONERS, DESIGN REVIEW BOARD MEMBERS OR CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS TO INSP£C-T AND ENTER/THE PROPERTY THAT IS THE SUBJECT OF THIS APPLICATION. I/WE CONSENT TO EN^ FORTHIS PURBOSE SIGNATURE FOR CITY USE ONLY FEE COMPUTATION APPLICATION TYPE TOTAL FEE REQUIRED FEE REQUIRED DATE STAMP APPLICATION RECEIVED RECEIVED BY: Form 14 Rev. 12/04 PAGE 2 OF 5 PROJECT DESCRIPTION/EXPLANATION (Revised) PROJECT NAME: Rancho Milagro APPLICANT NAME: Rancho Milagro LLC Please describe fully the proposed project. Include any details necessary to adequately explain the scope and/or operation of the proposed project. You may also include any background information and supporting statements regarding the reasons for, or appropriateness of, the application. Use an addendum sheet if necessary. Description/Explanation: Revised Project Description: Subdivision for 22 single family residential lots, 4 open space lots and 1 HOA lot. (See previously submitted Project Description and attached re-submittal cover letter for details and explanations.) Rev. 4/91 ProjDesc.fim NOTICE OP ^BLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN to you, because your interest may be affected, that the City Council of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, at 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, March 27, 2012, to consider adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Miti- gation Monitoring and Reporting Program and Addendum and approval of a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and Hillside Development Permit on property generally located approximately one half-mile north- east ofthe intersection of College Boulevard and El Camino Real, in the Sunny Creek Specific Plan Area (SP 191) and Local Facilities Management Zone 15 and more particularly described as; Remainder Parcel "A" of Carlsbad Tract 96-02 according to map thereof No. 11242, filed in the office of the County Recorder of San Diego County on October 27, 2000 all in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, state of California, and"K" Street Remainder Parcels of Carlsbad Tract 00-18 Whereas, on February 15, 2012 the City of Carlsbad Planning Commission voted 7-0 to recommend adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and Addendum; rec- ommend approval of a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and Hillside Development Permit; and to approve a Tentative Tract Map, Floodplain Special Use Permit, and Habitat Management Plan Permit for the subdivision and grading of a 43.58-acre site into 25 lots (19 single-family residential and 6 open space) on property generally located approximately one half-mile northeast of the intersection of College Boulevard and El Camino Real, in the Sunny Creek Specific Plan Area (SP 191) and Local Facilities Management Zone 15. Those persons w/ishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public hearing. Copies ofthe agenda bill will be available on and after March 23, 2012. If you have any questions, please contact Jason Goff in the Planning Division at (760) 602-4643 or iason.Roff(acarlsbadca.ROV. If you challenge the General Plan Amendment, Zone Change and/or Hillside Development Permit In court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad, Attn: City Clerk's Office, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92008, at or prior to the public hearing. CASE FILE: GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/HDP 06-01 CASE NAME: RANCHO MILAGRO PUBLISH; March 17, 2012 CITY OF CARLSBAD/CITY COUNCIL Ranchio Milagro GPA 06-03 / ZC 06-02 / CT 06-04 ™ SUP 06-05 / HDP 06-01 / HMP 09-01 PROOF OF PUBLICATION (2010 & 2011 C.C.P.) This spact for the County Clerl<'s Filing Stamp STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of San Diego I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the County aforesaid: I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to or interested in the above- entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer of North County Times Formerly known as the Blade-Citizen and The Times- Advocate and which newspapers have been adjudicated newspapers of general circulation by the Superior Court of the County of San Diego, State of California, for the City of Oceanside and the City of Escondido, Court Decree number 171349, for the County of San Diego, that the notice of which the annexed is a printed copy (set in type not smaller than nonpariel), has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit: February 03'", 2012 I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Dated at Escondido, California On this 06'^ day Fetjoiafy^OlZ Proof of Publication of Jane Allshouse NORTH COUNTY TIMES Legal Advertising PUNNING COMMISSION Pnmjr HEARjrjg and Addendum; a recommendati^^^^^ "^^Poling Program ment, Zone Change a?^d Se DivpKfn/°i ^ °fP'^" ^mend- approval of a Tentative Tract MlDFImdnrP^^ MI^"' ^ ''^''"est for Management Plan Perm ifor fhe'^suMvlsion .^^^^^ ^"^ ^^^^itat into 25 lots (19 single-famirresfdlnto snTfi n.i ^ ^""'"^ >°' ^ 43.58-acre site ally located approximatel^onSm te nSrtheas^t^n, °" "1°^^'^ 9«"«^- Boulevard and El Camino Real nTo Qnnn ^ , °f College 191) and Local FacHSanagemen'Zone 15 ^"^'"'^ ^^^^ s^gniftaa^nt^^pactea^^^^^^^^^ Yf - Potentially ative Declaration. " "•'s ssued a Nolice of Intent to adopt a Mitigated Neg- '^:l;^!!^:^flS!^^}^^°- -ay be limited issues you or someone else raised at tAe nnhn^h^ '5'''° 'Rising only those or in written correspondence deUve^i^tn^^^ described in this notice public hearing. delivered to the City of Carlsbad at or prior to the pm Monday thro'ugh Thu%t;aV^it^amSpTFriry.'-'° '° a\'endtreTu£L;eaZ'°Co'o!e\\ ^'^ =°^'^'ally invited to Planning Division a? 760^6ol-4600 ^ ^"^ questions, please call the PUBLISH: February 3, 2012 CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DIVISION net 2308819 CITYOFCARLSBAD ocmmutiiiy i* 'dQdi^t.^ a ir n- :3- a • 1=1 • • m ru ru ir • U.S. Postal Servicer,. CERTIFIED MAIL RECEIP"^ (Domestic Mail Only; No Insurance Covera^ rovided) For delivery Information visit our website at vmw.usps.coms O Postage Certified Fee Retum Receipt Fee (Endorsement Required) Restricted Delivery Fee (Endorsement Required) Total Posta Postmark Here ou OS. Ato^»CjL Ofr P^hy><-H^r'>ne/j^ Sent To Streel, Apt. N orPOBoxNi Cify. State, Zi California Coastal Commission Attn: Toni Ross Suite 103 7575 Metropolitan Drive San Diego, CA 92108-4402 PS Form 3800. August 2006 ec Hcvcrse ior insirucnons SENDER: COMPLETE THIS SECTION COMPLETE THIS SECTION ON DEUVERY • Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Mso complete Item 4 If Restricted Delivery Is desired. • Print your name and address on tfie reverse ^ so that we can return the card to you. • Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front if space permits. A. SIgnafnre ^/J N /ii^^ //l^'^A/^ • Addressee • Complete items 1, 2, and 3. Mso complete Item 4 If Restricted Delivery Is desired. • Print your name and address on tfie reverse ^ so that we can return the card to you. • Attach this card to the back of the mailpiece, or on the front if space permits. B. Received by (Print^jName) C. Date of Delivery 1. Article Addressed to: California Coastal Commission Attn, Toni Ross Suite 103 D. Is delivery address different from item 1 ? • Yes If YES, enter delivery address below: • No ; 1 7575 Metropolitan Drive San Diego, CA 92108-4402 3. Service Type ^a<tertlfied Mail • Express Mall 1 • Registered ^SJeturn Receipt for Merchandise • Insured Mail • C.O.D. 7575 Metropolitan Drive San Diego, CA 92108-4402 4. Restricted Delivery? (Brtra Fee) • Yes 2. Article Number _,,„„,-,ni. \ (Transfer from servioe label) ' 700^ 52SD DDDO flHlT fl1D^ \ PS Form 3811, l-wUi udl y SOO'T -...^ DoM8§8» ReturnReceipt 102595-02-M-1540 A o o FILECOPY 4.^^^ CITY OF <P'^-/cD V CARLSBAD Community & Economic Development www.carlsbadca.gov NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN to you that the Planning Connmission of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, at 6:00 p.m. on Wednesday, February 15, 2012, to consider a request for the following: CASE NAME: GPA 06-03/ ZC 06-02/ CT 06-04/ SUP 06-05/ HDP 06-01/ HMP 09-01 - Rancho Milagro PUBLISH DATE: February 3, 2012 DESCRIPTION: Request for a recommendation of adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and Addendum; a recommendation of approval for a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, and Hillside Development Permit; and a request for approval of a Tentative Tract Map, Floodplain Special Use Permit, and Habitat Management Plan Permit for the subdivision and grading of a 43.58-acre site into 25 lots (19 single-family residential and 6 open space) on property generally located approximately one half-mile northeast of the intersection of College Boulevard and El Camino Real, in the Sunny Creek Specific Plan Area (SP 191) and Local Facilities Management Zone 15. Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public hearing and provide the decision makers with any oral or written comments they may have regarding the project. Copies of the staff report will be available online at http://carlsbad.eranicus.com/ViewPublisher.php7view id=6 on or after the Friday prior to the hearing date. If you have any questions, or would like to be notified of the decision, please contact Jason Goff in the Planning Division at (760) 602-4643, Monday through Thursday 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Friday 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. at 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008. APPEALS The time within which you may judicially challenge these projects, if approved, is established by State law and/or city ordinance, and is very short. If you challenge this project in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad at or prior to the public hearing. • Appeals to the Citv Council: Where the decision is appealable to the City Council, appeals must be filed in writing within ten (10) calendar days after a decision by the Planning Commission. CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DIVISION Planning Division 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 T 760-602-4600 F 760-602-8559 © Q SITEMAP NOT TO SCALE Rancho Milagro GPA 06-03 / ZC 06-02 / CT 06-04 SUP 06-05 / HDP 06-01 / HMP 09-01 I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE PROPERTY OWNERS LIST AND LABELS SUBMITTED TO THE CITY OF CARLSBAD ON THIS DATE REPRESENT THE LATEST AVAILABLE INFORMATION FROM THE EQUALIZED ASSESSOR'S ROLES. APPLICATION NAME AND NUMBER P^JCAr^'^EPFiE^NTATIVE DATE: RECEIVED BY DATE: I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE PROPERTY OWNERS LIST AND LABELS SUBMITTED TQ THE CITY OF CARLSBAD ON THIS DATE REPRESENT THE UTEST AVAILABLE INFORMATION FROM THE EQUALIZED ASSESSOR'S ROLES. APPLICATION NAME AND NUMBER APPLICANT OR APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE RECEIVED BY DATE; CERTIFICATION I RONALD COGSWELL/ TITLE PRO INFORMATION SYSTEMS HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE ATTACHED LIST CONTAINES THE NAMES, ADDRESSES AND - PARCEL NUMBERS OF ALL PERSONS TO WHOM ALL PROPERTY IS ASSESSED AS THEY APPEAR ON THE LATEST AVAILABLE ASSESSMENT ROLL OF THE COUNTY WITHIN THE AREA DESCRIBED AND REQUESTED BY YOU THE CLIENT, THE REQUIRED RADIUS MEASURED FROM THE EXTERIOR BOUNDARIES OF THE PROPERTY REQUESTED AND DESCRIBED AS APN: 209-060-61 600 FT. RADIUS DATED 1L/30/11 RONALD COGSWELL / TITLE PRO SYSTEMS SAN :>I50 CO"'NTY ASSESSOR'S MAP 209-04 SHT 1 OF 3 1"=200' / 3/8/2001 SM V Bmr: t29-9S Byt KJO fhm: tOf-O^ 'CHANCRES awi U>N\ vnrvw [ >W cvrvo, 1052 CANC 040| 24 Jfo* ,9/ cvrvo, 1052 CANC 2.4 H A e, • Ifi99 ar op /' , CANC j 34 j; *3« !<»/ liU 39 40-43 99 1297 29<e33 44*45 99 1757 MAP 823 - RANCHO AGUA HEDIONDA ROS 517. 5683, 10421, 10674, 13203, 16445 09 12/8/2007 JGD 0 I CHANGES 3LK OLD NEW CUT Sii9 «3-S4 tl P« 14 f- % 29, Pf. J SZ 7T JS9 58 81 1324 44 KILL 3<c 1703 a& 73 ZS 0*0-/2 8^ 10037 SAue V ST OP 99 4715 3*6 -060- 331(34/ 99 1704 59 01 119 -0^1 82,83, .070-10, 168-OSO. SMSTOP 08 1002 10,11, 14&56 84^, STOP & ACC RTS 06 1003 70-72 08 1049 57 SAME& STOP 08 4661 EL CAMINO TEXL SAN DIEGO COUNTY ASSESSOR'S MAP BOOK 209 PAGE 06 MAP 14060 - CARLSBAD TCT NO 96-02 (THE TERRACES AT SUNNY CREEK 1) MAP 823 - RHO AGUA HEDIONDA - POR LOTS B & E ROS 517,4223.6169,6570,6617,17348 09 o 209-07 I e 1"=800' 08/08/08 DEP ICHANGESj :lLU.:i»li::^Vi oro 74-9 u.poRe 48fr«0. 0-12. -060^ STOP 08 1002 8-12 13 08 1033 4tS mw w 1517 at IS IB 1535 e SAN DIEGO COUNTY ASSESSOR'S MAP BOOK 209 PAGE 07 THIS MAP WAS PREPARED FOR ASSESSMENT PURPOSES ONLY NO LIABILITY IS ASSUMED FOR THE ACCURACY OF THE DATA SHOWN. ASSESSOR'S PARCELS MAY NOT COMPLY WITH LOCAL SUBDIVISION OR BUILDING ORDINANCES. MAP 823-RANCHO AGUA HEDIONDA- ROS 4223.6169,6617,13994,16445,17348 209 - 09 l"=200' e 02/07/01 RAG CHANGES BLK OLD NEW YR CUT a.po /-// 86 73 0?o 12 6(o 10037 f-fMt2 Of m rm ACCESS e SAN DIEGO COUNTY ASSESSORS MAP BOOK.209 PAGE.0^ MAP 11242 - CARLSBAD TCT NO. 83-36, UNIT NQ I (CONDM) MAP 823 - RANCHO AGUA HEDIONDA o ru di di o m 01 u. 11^ snr" 3 SMi OIEGO COUNIY ASSESSOR'S lUP 209-11 SHT 1 OF 3 1" = lOQ* 9 But m mmm Atrjtfw ts a cuim Itf But m ts a cuim Itf 14060-CARLSBAD TCT NO 96-02 (THE TERRACES AT SUNNY CREEK 1) J n SAN OEGO COUNTY ASSESSOR'S UAP 209-11 SHT 2 OF 3 1" = 100* o o OJ ID m in cri o tu at MAP 14060-CARLSBAD TCT NO 96-02 (THE TERRACES AT SONNY CREEK 1) J 09 .ff^REMAlNDEf , ^iv^ @ PAR B 0^ ^0 MATCi wiiOi LINE OPEN SPACE 5 (PRIVATE ST) tit 4/ VjJ'^l A «f/ I 115 O , M/JSinr. •<fe 112 175 \l A. SAN OIEGO COUNTY ASSESSOR'S UAP 209-11 • SHT 3 OF 3 1" = 100' CHA .NOES our 111 mat/fin itwm m arm our 111 mat/fin a mita a m ® V\ ^ 1.03 AC Vi COYOTE CT 7t\ W J04I/ Vd. rn MAP 14060-CARLSBAD TCT NO 96-02 (THE TERRACES AT SUNNY CREEK 1) -iOI i J 3 I 09 SAN OEGO COUNTY ASSESSOR'S UAP 212-02 1" = 200' 9/24/2009 JGD OnmKOr/OTM BxMU Frtm 20-020 KK -m-22 02 mm OS 07* Be curm 07 07 ax mo 1045 MAP 15253-CARLSBAD TCT NO 00-20 FOX-MILLER PROPERTY MAP 823 - RHO AGUA HEDIONDA - POR LOT F ROS 6888, 7938, 8467 J LE COF''' NOTQE OF PUBLIC HEARING-CITY ^CARLSBAD Response must be received by: Februarv 1. 2012 Public Hearing Date: Februarv 15. 2012 Public Hearing Place: 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive. Carlsbad. Califomia. 92008 Public Hearing Time: 6:00 p.m. Project Title: GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 - Rancho Milagro Lead Agency: City Of Carlsbad - Planning Contact Person: Jason Goff. Associate Planner Street Address: 1635 Faradav Avenue Phone: (760) 602-4643 City: Carlsbad Zip: 92008 County: San Diego PROJECT LOCATION: County: San Diego Cross Streets: College Boulevard & Sunnv Creek Road City/Nearest Community: Carlsbad Total Acres: 43.58 Assessor's Parcel No. 209-060-61 & 209-060-23(portion of) Section: N/A Twp. N/A Range: N/A Base: N/A Within 2 Miles: State Hwy #: N/A Waterways: Agua Hedionda Creek Airports: McClellan/Palomar Railways: NCTD Schools: Future Carlsbad High School ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENT: CEQA: • • • • NOP Early Cons Neg Dec Draft EIR • • Supplement/Subsequent EIR (Prior SCH No.) Other: Mitigated Neeative Declaration LOCAL ACTION TYPE: •General Plan Update • Specific Plan • Rezone 1 1 Annexation ^General Plan Amendment | 1 Master Plan • Use Pennit 1 1 Redevelopment 1 1 General Plan Element Q Planned Unit Development m Land Division (Subdivision, 1 1 Coastal Permit [HjZone Code Amendment O Site Plan Parcel Map, Tract Map, etc.) 1^ Other: ZC/HDP/SUP/HMP DEVELOPMENT TYPE: ^Residential: Units •office: Sq. Ft. •Commercial: Sq. Ft. •industrial; Sq. Ft. I [Recreational: Acres 43.58 Acres Acres Acres PROJECT ISSUES DISCUSSED IN DOCUMENT: ^Aesthetic/Visual ^ ^Agricultural Land • •Air Quality ^ ^Archaeological/Historical I I I I Coastal Zone | I I I Drainage/ Absorption I I I I Economic/Jobs | I •Fiscal • Flood Plain/Flooding Forest Land/Fire Hazard Geological/Seismic Minerals Noise Population/Housing Balance Public Services/Facilities Recreation/Parks I I Schools/Universities I I Septic Systems I I Sewer Capacity I I Soil Erosion/Compaction/Grading • Solid Waste I I Toxic/Hazardous I I Traffic/Circulation ^ Vegetation • • • • Water Quality Water Supply/Ground Water Wetland/Riparian Wildlife Growth Inducing Land Use Cumulative Effect Other: Present Land Use/Zoning/General Plan Use Open space and agricultural land/R-1-20,000, OS, & L-C/RLM, OS, RH, C, & O Project Description: Request for a recommendation of adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and Addendum; a recommendation of approval for a General Plan Amendment (GPA 06-03) and Zone Change (ZC 06-02), and a request for approval of a Tentative Tract Map (CT 06-04), Floodplain Special Use Pemiit (SUP 06-05), Hillside Development Permit (HDP 06-01), and Habitat Management Plan Permit (HMP 09-01) for the subdivision and grading of a 43.58-acre site into 25 lots (19 single-family residential and 6 open space) on property generally located approximately one half-mile northeast of the intersection of College Boulevard and El Camino Real, in the Surmy Creek Specific Plan Area (SP 191) and Local Facilities Management Zone 15. Mail notice to: San Diego County Clerk of the Board of Supervisors, Public Notice Hearings, Mailstop A-45, Room 402, 1600 Pacific Highway, San Diego, CA 92101 Where documents are located for Public Review: Planning Division, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008 April 2011 PROOF OF PUBLICATION (2010 & 2011 C.C.P.) This space is for the County Clerk's Filing Stamp STATE OF CALIFORNIA County of San Dlego I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the County aforesaid: I am over the age of eighteen years and not a party to or interested in the above- entitled matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer of North County Times Formerly known as the Blade-Citizen and The Times- Advocate and which newspapers have been adjudicated newspapers of general circulation by the Superior Court of the County of San Diego, State of California, for the City of Oceanside and the City of Escondido, Court Decree number 171349, for the County of San Diego, that the notice of which the annexed is a printed copy (set in type not smaller than nonpariel), has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit: Proof of Publication of August 25*^ 2011 I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CASE NAME:Rancho Milagro CASE NO: GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 PROJECT LOCATION: The proposed project is located approximately one fialf-mile northeast of the intersection of College Boulevard and El Camino Re- al, within the northeast quadrant of the city of Carlsbad, county of San Diego, state of California, Assessor's Parcel Number 209-060-61 and a portion of 209-060-23. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed project consists of subdividing a 43.58-acre parcel into nineteen (19) minimum half-acre single-family residen- tial lots, four (4) open space conservation lots, and two (2) homeowner's association maintained open space lots. The proposal is a large-lot rural estate subdivision for future deveiopment oi custom single-family residences. The project involves a General Plan Amendment (GPA), Zone Change (ZC), Ten- tative Subdivision Map (CT), Floodplain Special Use Permit (SUP), Hillside Development Permit (HDP), and Habitat Management Plan (HMP) Permit. PROPOSED DETERMINATION: The City of Carlsbad has conducted an en- vironmental review of the above described project pursuant to the Guidelines tor 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 (EIA Part 2) 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 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 be- fore the City that the project "as revised" may have a significant effect on the environment. Therefore, a Mitigated Negative Declaration will be recom- mended for adoption by the City of Carlsbad Planning Commission. A copy of the initial study (EIA Part 2) documenting reasons to support the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration is on file in the Planning Division, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carisbad, California 92008. 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 vyould be significant. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Divi- sion 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 City of Carlsbad Planning Commission. Addi- tional pubiic notices will be issued when those public hearings are scheduled. If you have any questions, please cali Jason Goff in the .Planning Division at 760-602-4643. PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD August 25, 2011 : September 26, 2011 :^UBLISH DATE August 25,2011 net 2298504 Dated at Escondido, California On this 25^ day of Aug>lst^2011 Jane Allshouse NORTH COUNTY TIMES Legal Advertising ATTACHMENT "2" CERTIFICATION OF POSTING I certify that the "Notice of Project Application" has been posted at a conspicuous location on the site on S ' / ^ PRINT NAME: PROJECT NAME: PROJECT NUMBER: C7 - O gr/«^ « LOCATION: ^A^y ^/gggv^ /^d/. RETURN TO: (Planner) CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DEPARTMENT 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 P-21 Page 4 of 6 Revised 11/09 A o 0 RLE COPY CITY OF ^ S.^,./o VXARLSBAD Planning Department www.carlsbadca.gov EARLY PUBLIC NOTICE | PROJECT NAME: Rancho Milagro PROJECT NUMBER: GPA 06-03/ ZC 06-02/ CT 06-04/ HDP 06-01/ SUP 06-05/ HMP 09-01 This early public notice is to let you know that a development application to subdivide a 43.57 acre property within your neighborhood into 25 lots (19 single-family residential lots and 6 open space lots) was submitted to the City of Carlsbad on April 29, 2010. The project application is undergoing review by the City. LOCATION: Within Sunny Creek Specific Plan, as shown and described on the attached location map. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Subdivision of 43.57-acres into 19 single-family lots {'A acre minimum lot sizes), 4 open space/conservation lots, and two (2) HOA maintained open space lots. Project access will be provided from the approved Cantarini Ranch project to the north. Please keep in mind that this is an early public notice and that the project design could change as a result of further staff and public review. A future public hearing notice will be mailed to you when this project is scheduled for public hearing before the Planning Commission. CONTACT INFORMATION: If you have questions or comments regarding this proposed project please contact Jason Goff, Associate Planner at jason.goff(@carlsbadca.gov, 760-602-4643, CityofCarlsbad Planning Department, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008. 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 T (760) 602-4600 F (760) 602-8559 ® Cityof Carlsbad Rancho Milagro GPA 06-03 / ZC 06-02 / CT 06-04 HDP 06-01 / SUP 06-05 / HMP 09-01 A 1,200 HFeet Map created by the City of Carlsbad GIS. Portions of the DERIVED PRODUCT contain geographic information copyrighted by SanGIS. All Rights Reserved RANCHO MILAGRO CT 06-04, HDP 06-01,ZC 06-02, GPA 06-03, SUP 06-05, HMP 09-01 ATTACHMENT "1" I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE PROPERTY OWNERS LIST AND LABELS SUBMITTED TO THE CITY OF CARLSBAD ON THIS DATE REPRESENT THE LATEST AVAILABLE INFORMATION FROM THE EQUALIZED ASSESSOR'S ROLES. APPLICATION NAME AND NUMBER OR APPUCANTS REPRESENTATIVE RECEIVED BY DATE: p-21 Page 3 of 6 Revised 11/09 Ernest J. Dronenburg, Jr. COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ASSESSOR/RECORDER/COUNTY CLERK ASSESSOR'S OFFICE 1600 Pacific Higliway, Suite 103 San Diego, CA 92101-2480 Tel. (619) 236-3771 * Fax (619) 557-4056 www.sdarcc.com RECORDER/COUNTY CLERK'S OFFICE 1600 Pacific Highway, Suite 260 P.O. Box 121750 * SanDiego, CA92112-1750 Tel. (619)237-0502 * Fax (619)557-4155 FEES: Transaction #: 268756720120329 Deputy: HAYUYAO Location: COUNTY ADMINISTRATION BUILDING 29-Mar-2012 15:42 CITY OF CARLSBAD APR 04 2012 PLANNINGDEPARTMENT i i 2,101.50 Qtyofl Fish & Game Neg Dec (1800) for Refi¥ 20120060 50.00 Qty of 1 Fish and Game Filing Fee for RefW 20120266 2,151.50 TOTAL DUE PAYMENTS: 2,151.50 Check 2,151.50 TENDERED SERVICES AVAILABLE AT OFFICE LOCATIONS Tax Bill Address Changes Records and Certified Copies: Birth/ Marriage/ Death/ Real Estate Fictitious Business Names (DBAs) Marriage Licenses and Ceremonies Assessor Parcel Maps Property Ownership Property Records Property Values Document Recordings SERVICES AVAILABLE ON-LINE AT www.sdarcccom Forms and Applications Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) Grantor/ Grantee Index Fictitious Business Names Index (DBAs) Property Sales On-Line Purchases Assessor Parcel Maps Property Characteristics Recorded Documents CIILIFORNIA state of California—The Resources Agency DEPARTMENTOF FISH AND GAME 2012 ENVIRONMENTAL FIUNG FEE CASH RECEIPT SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON REVERSE. TYPE OR PRINT CLEARS RECEIPT# SD2012 0266 STATE CLEARING HOUSE # (if applicable) 2011081091 LEADAGENCY CITY OF CARLSBAD DATE 03/29/2012 COUNTY/STATE AGENCY OF FILING SAN DIEGO DOCUMENTNUMBER *20120060* PROJECTTITLE RANCHO MILAGRO PROJECTAPPLICANT NAME LYALL ENTERPRISES INC PHONENUMBER 760/742-3256 PROJECTAPPLICANTADDRESS 15529 HIGHWAY 76 CITY PAUMA VALLEY STATE CA ZIPCODE 92061 PROJECT APPLICANT (Check appropriate box): Q Local Public Agency Q School District Q Other Special District a State Agency • Private Entity CHECK APPLICABLE FEES: Q Environmental Impact Report • Negative Declaration • Application Fee Water Diversion (State Water Resources Control Board Only) • Projects Subject to Certified Regulatory Programs Q County Administrative Fee Q Project that is exempt from fees Q Notice of Exemption • DFG No Effect Determination (Form Attached) • other PAYMENT METHOD: • Cash • Credit • Check • other 3^85 120 06 0 $2,919.00 $2,101.50 $850.00 $992.50 $50.00 TOTALRECEIVED $2,101.50 $50.00 $2,151.50 SIGNATURE TITLE X H. Ayuyao Deputy lililillliiliiiillll ORIGINAL - PROJECT APPUCANT copy-DFG/ASB COPY-LEADAGENCY COPY-COUNTY CLERK FG 753.5a (Rev. 7/08) state of California—The Resources Agency DEPARTMENTOF FISH AND GAME 2012 ENVIRONMENTAL FILING FEE CASH RECEIPT SEE INSTRUCTIONS ON REVERSE. TYPE OR PRINT CLEARK RECEIPT*! SD2012 0266 STATE CLE/VRING HOUSE # (ll applicable) 2011081091 LEADAGENCY CITY OF CARLSBAD DATE 03/29/2012 COUNTY/STATEAGENCY OF FILING SAN DIEGO DOCUMENTNUMBER *20120060* PROJECTTITLE RANCHO MILAGRO PROJECTAPPLICANT NAME LYALL ENTERPRISES INC PHONENUMBER 760/742-3256 PROJECTAPPLICANTADDRESS 15529 HIGHWAY 76 CITY PAUMA VALLEY STATE CA ZIPCODE 92061 PROJECTAPPLICANT (Check appropriate box): Q Local Public Agency Q School District • Other Special Dislrict • State Agency • Private Entity CHECK APPUCABLE FEES: Q Environmental Impacf Report |7] Negative Declaration • Application Fee Water Diversion (Sfafe H&fer Resources Control Board Only) Q Projects Subject to Certified Regulatory Programs t Q County Administrative Fee 1^0060 Q Project that Is exempt from fees Q Notice of Exemption Q DFG No Effect Determination (Form Attached) • Other PAYMENT METHOD: • Cash • Credit $2,919.00 $2,101.50 $850.00 $992.50 $50.00 $ $ $ $ $ • Check • Other TOTALRECEIVED $ $2,101.50 $50.00 $2,151.50 SIGNATURE TITLE X H. Ayuyao Deputy llllllllllllllllllllllllllllllillllllH ORIGINAL - PROJECT APPLICANT COPY-DFG/ASB COPY-LEAD AGENCY COPY - COUNTY CLERK FG763.Sa{Rev.7«8) Notice of Determination 12 0 0 6 0 To: IEI Office ofPlanning and Research From: CITYOFCARLSBAD P.O. Box 3044 Planning Division Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 IEI SD County Clerk (760)602-4600 IF D IL fl I® Attn: Jennifer Samuela toesij D™nenb„^.jr..R«o«i^coim) a* Mail Stop A-33 1600 Pacific Highway MAR 2 9 2012 San Diego, CA 92101 ^ H. Ayuyao Project No: GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 BIPUTY Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code. Rancho Milagro Project Title 2011081091 City ofCarlsbad, Jason Goff (760) 602- 4643 State Clearinghouse No. Lead Agency, Contact Person Telephone Number Approximately one half-mile northeast ofthe intersection of College Boulevard and El Camino Real in the Sunny Creek Specific Plan; Carlsbad, CA (San Diego Coimty). Project Locations (include County) Name of Applicant: Lyall Enterprises, Inc. Applicant's Address: 15529 Highway 76, Pauma Valley, CA 92061 Applicant's Telephone Number: (760) 742-3256 Project Description: General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Tentative Tract Map, Floodplain Special Use Pennit, Hillside Development Pennit, and Habitat Management Plan Pennit associated with the subdivision and grading of a 43.58-acre site into 25 lots (19 single-family residential and six (6) open space). This is to advise that the City of Carlsbad has approved the above described project on March 27, 2012, and has made the following determination regarding the above described project. 1. The project will not have a significant effect on the environment. 2. n An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. ^ A Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. r~1 This project was reviewed previously and a Negative Declaration was prepared pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. 3. Mitigation measures were made a condition of the approval of the project. 4. A mitigation reporting or monitoring plan was adopted for this project. 5. A statement of Overriding Considerations was not adopted for this project. 6. Findings were made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. This is to certify that the final Mitigated Negative Declaration with comments and responses and reijsrd of project approval is available to the General Public at THE CITY OF CARLSBAD. 3'£ay DON NEU, City Planner Date Date received for filing at OPR: Revised 06/10 «IH) «4 THE OFFICE OF THE COIMY CLERK RjlitWwItBigiiieyflit, ..^ , ,H- Ayuyao <C#^ C'TY OF V CARLSBAD Planning Division MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CASE NAME: RANCHO MILAGRO www.carlsbadca.gov CASE NO: GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 PROJECT LOCATION: Approximatelv one half-mile northeast of the intersection of College Boulevard and El Camino Real, within the northeast quadrant ofthe citv of Carlsbad, countv of San Diego, state of California, Assessor's Parcel Number 209-060-61 and a portion of 209-060-23. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed project consists of subdividing a 43.58-acre parcel into nineteen (19) minimum half-acre single-family residential lots, four (4) open space conservation lots, and two (2) homeowner's association maintained open space lots. The proposal is a large-lot rural estate subdivision for future development of custom single-family residences. The project involves a General Plan Amendment (GPA), Zone Change (ZC), Tentative Subdivision Map (CT), Floodplain Special Use Permit (SUP), Hillside Development Permit (HDP), and Habitat Management Plan (HMP) Permit. DETERMINATION: The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation ofthe California Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, the initial study (EIA Part 2) identified potentially significant effects on the environment, and the City of Carlsbad finds as follows: El 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. I I 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). I I 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. A copy of the initial study (EIA Part 2) documenting reasons to support the Negative Declaration is on file in the Planning Division, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008. ADOPTED: March 27, 2012, pursuant to Citv Council Resolution No. 2012-076. DON NEU City Planner 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 T 760-602-4600 F 760-602-8559 ® Notice of Determination To: m Office ofPlanning and Research P.O. Box 3044 Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 SD County Clerk Attn: Jennifer Samuela Mail Stop A-33 1600 Pacific Highway SanDiego, CA92101 From: CITYOFCARLSBAD Planning Division 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 (76», 602.4600 p „ I g ® tmest J Dronenburg. .lr. Recorder Coum; Clerk MAR 29 2012 BY H. Ayuyao Project No: GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP Uy-UloEPUTY Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code. Rancho Milagro Project Title 2011081091 City of Carlsbad, Jason Goff (760) 602- 4643 State Clearinghouse No. Lead Agency, Contact Person Telephone Number Approximately one half-mile northeast of the intersection of College Boulevard and El Camino Real in the Sunny Creek Specific Plan; Carlsbad, CA (San Diego County). Project Locations (include County) Name of Applicant: Lyall Enterprises, Inc. Applicant's Address: 15529 Highway 76, Pauma Valley, CA 92061 Applicant's Telephone Number: (760) 742-3256 Project Description: General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Tentative Tract Map, Floodplain Special Use Permit, Hillside Development Permit, and Habitat Management Plan Pennit associated with the subdivision and grading of a 43.58-acre site into 25 lots (19 single-family residential and six (6) open space). This is to advise that the City of Carlsbad has approved the above described project on March 27, 2012, and has made the following determination regarding the above described project. 1. The project will not have a significant effect on the environment. 2. []]] An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. IXI A Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. I I This project was reviewed previously and a Negative Declaration was prepared pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. 3. Mitigation measures were made a condition of the approval of the project. 4. A mitigation reporting or monitoring plan was adopted for this project. 5. A statement of Overriding Considerations was not adopted for this project. 6. Findings were made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. This is to certify that the final Mitigated Negative Declaration witli comments and responses and rejesrd of project approval is available to the General Public at THE CITY OF CARLSBAD. DON NEU, City Planner Date received for filing at OPR: Date Revised 06/10 Notice of Determination To: ^ Office ofPlanning and Research P.O. Box 3044 Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 SD County Clerk Attn: Jennifer Samuela Mail Stop A-33 1600 Pacific Highway SanDiego, CA92101 From: CITYOFCARLSBAD Planning Division 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 (760) 602-4600 0 IL [I © tmest J Dronenburg. .lr . Recorder Countv Clerk uyao Project No: GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP^6.01,/HMP Og^g^yp^ Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code. Rancho Milagro Project Title 2011081091 City ofCarlsbad, Jason Goff (760) 602- 4643 State Clearinghouse No. Lead Agency, Contact Person Telephone Number Approximately one half-mile northeast of the intersection of College Boulevard and El Camino Real in the Sunny Creek Specific Plan; Carlsbad, CA (San Diego County). Project Locations (include County) Name of Applicant: Lyall Enterprises, Inc. Applicant's Address: 15529 Highway 76, Pauma Valley, CA 92061 Applicant's Telephone Number: (760) 742-3256 Project Description: General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Tentative Tract Map, Floodplain Special Use Permit, Hillside Development Permit, and Habitat Management Plan Permit associated with the subdivision and grading of a 43.58-acre site into 25 lots (19 single-family residential and six (6) open space). This is to advise that the City of Carlsbad has approved the above described project on March 27, 2012, and has made the following determination regarding the above described project. 1. The project will not have a significant effect on the environment. 2. Q An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. IXI A Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. I I This project was reviewed previously and a Negative Declaration was prepared pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. 3. Mitigation measures were made a condition of the approval of the project. 4. A mitigation reporting or monitoring plan was adopted for this project. 5. A statement of Oveniding Considerations was not adopted for this project. 6. Findings were made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. This is to certify that the final Mitigated Negative Declaration witli comments and responses and Td of project approval is available to the General Public at THE CITY OF CARLSBAD. rei&srd ot project apj DON NEU, City Planner Date received for filing at OPR: Date Revised 06/10 - Notice of Determination To: M Office ofPlanning and Research P.O. Box 3044 Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 SD County Clerk Attn: Jennifer Samuela Mail Stop A-33 1600 Pacific Highway SanDiego, CA 92101 From: CITYOFCARLSBAD Planning Division 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 (760)602-4600 D [L tmest.) Dronenbuis..Ir. RecorderCountj Clerk MAR 29 2012 BY H. Ayuyao Project No: GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-oP^^'^"'^ Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code. Rancho Milagro Project Title 2011081091 City ofCarlsbad, Jason Goff (760) 602- 4643 State Clearinghouse No. Lead Agency, Contact Person Telephone Number Approximately one half-mile northeast of the intersection of College Boulevard and El Camino Real in the Sunny Creek Specific Plan; Carlsbad, CA (San Diego County). Project Locations (include County) Name of Applicant: Lyall Enterprises, Inc. Applicant's Address: 15529 Highway 76, Pauma Valley, CA 92061 Applicant's Telephone Number: (760) 742-3256 Project Description: General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Tentative Tract Map, Floodplain Special Use Permit, Hillside Development Permit, and Habitat Management Plan Permit associated with the subdivision and grading of a 43.58-acre site into 25 lots (19 single-family residential and six (6) open space). This is to advise that the City of Carlsbad has approved the above described project on March 27, 2012, and has made the following determination regarding the above described project. 1. The project will not have a significant effect on the environment. 2. O An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. IX A Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pvirsuant to the provisions of CEQA. I I This project was reviewed previously and a Negative Declaration was prepared pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. 3. Mitigation measures were made a condition of the approval of the project. 4. A mitigation reporting or monitoring plan was adopted for this project. 5. A statement of Oveniding Considerations was not adopted for this project. 6. Findings were made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. This is to certify that the final Mitigated Negative Declaration with coinments and responses and re«®rd of project approval is available to the General Public at THE CITY OF CARLSBAD. DON NEU, City Planner Date received for filing at OPR: Date Revised 06/10 Notice of Denomination nFILE From: CITYOFCARLSBAD Planning Division 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 (760) 602-4600 To: ^ Office of Planning and Research P.O. Box 3044 Sacramento, CA 95812-3044 El SD County Clerk Attn: Jennifer Samuela Mail Stop A-33 1600 Pacific Highway SanDiego, CA 92101 Project No: GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 Filing of Notice of Determination in compliance with Section 21108 or 21152 of the Public Resources Code. Rancho Milagro Project Title 2011081091 City ofCarlsbad, Jason Goff (760) 602- 4643 State Clearinghouse No. Lead Agency, Contact Person Telephone Number Approximately one half-mile northeast of the intersection of College Boulevard and El Camino Real in the Sunny Creek Specific Plan; Carlsbad, CA (San Diego County). Project Locations (include County) Name of Applicant: Lyall Enterprises, Inc. Applicant's Address: 15529 Highway 76, Pauma Valley, CA 92061 Applicant's Telephone Number: (760) 742-3256 Project Description: General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Tentative Tract Map, Floodplain Special Use Permit, Hillside Development Permit, and Habitat Management Plan Permit associated with the subdivision and grading of a 43.58-acre site into 25 lots (19 single-family residential and six (6) open space). This is to advise that the City of Carlsbad has approved the above described project on March 27, 2012, and has made the following determination regarding the above described project. 1. The project will not have a significant effect on the environment. 2. O An Environmental Impact Report was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. IEI A Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared for this project pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. n This project was reviewed previously and a Negative Declaration was prepared pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. 3. Mitigation measures were made a condition of the approval of the project. 4. A mitigation reporting or monitoring plan was adopted for this project. 5. A statement of Overriding Considerations was not adopted for this project. 6. Findings were made pursuant to the provisions of CEQA. This is to certify that the final Mitigated Negative Declaration witli comments and responses and ird of project approval is available to the General Public at THE CITY OF CARLSBAD. DON NEU, City Planner Date received for filing at OPR: Date Revised 06/10 CITY OF V CARLSBAD Planning Division www.carlsbadca.gov MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CASE NAME: RANCHO MILAGRO CASE NO: GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 PROJECT LOCATION: Approximatelv one half-mile northeast of the intersection of College Boulevard and El Camino Real, within the northeast quadrant of the citv of Carlsbad, countv of San Diego, state of California, Assessor's Parcel Number 209-060-61 and a portion of 209-060-23. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed project consists of subdividing a 43.58-acre parcel into nineteen (19) minimum half-acre single-family residential lots, four (4) open space conservation lots, and two (2) homeowner's association maintained open space lots. The proposal is a large-lot rural estate subdivision for future development of custom single-family residences. The project involves a General Plan Amendment (GPA), Zone Change (ZC), Tentative Subdivision Map (CT), Floodplain Special Use Permit (SUP), Hillside Development Permit (HDP), and Habitat Management Plan (HMP) Permit. DETERMINATION: The City ofCarlsbad has conducted an environmental review ofthe 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 (EIA Part 2) identified potentially significant effects on the environment, and the City of Carlsbad finds as follows: |XI 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. I I 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). I I 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. A copy of the initial study (EIA Part 2) documenting reasons to support the Negative Declaration is on file in the Planning Division, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008. ADOPTED: March 27, 2012. pursuant to Citv Council Resolution No. 2012-076. DON NEU City Planner 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 T 760-602-4600 F 760-602-8559 ® C 0 City of Carlsbad SHIPPING REQUEST DATE: iy^P-e^ /oQtl STAFF CONTACT:aa^ Goff /CAoTTbAJ'^^ LOCATION OF ITEM TO BE SHIPPED: (^jCfailrooixi^IT area, etc.) SHIPPING PREFERENCE: Q^-fer-eniLO x',UPS, - -(Fed Ex*, UPS, Eagle Freight, etc) TYPE OF SERVICE: Q\co^ Vtax.. mro (Priority Overnight, Overni ^rnight, 2 day, 3 day, etc) PACKAGING: KJo QvTjigr^ce, (Envelope,'Letter Pak, our packaging, etc.) IF OTHER THAN ENVELOPE OR LETTER PAK PLEASE PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING: WEIGHT: DIMENSIONS: H L W SHIP TO: CONTACT NAME: COMPANY NAME: .^r^ d:^^ pc^f.r,^! tOocfcr-T^ua.l;-iy rc^rrh^l goot^ ADDRESS: 97 7^ ^Ky PorlT, roL>^-h^ fSrfr ../OO PHONE: PAYMENT INFORMATION: M PlQnn\na • VENDOR (Department Account No.) ACCOUNT #: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: (^n j^>nu p)^Pi^ ^BCJ^ mJL -j^-ystcL'tn^ i/i-j^? y-/T<sr/k. youiJji^'c'ta iL F:VShippingRequestForm.doc Rev, 08/23/20) 1 1635 FARADAY AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 Inquiry Transactions Found CITY OF CARLSBAD 8/24/2011 MCM G2 Licensed to: CITY OF CARLSBAD Page: 1 Package ID: 64 Trk#: 1Z76Y36Y0300003388 Pickup Rec#: 4523882086 Address: Attn: CA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BD 9174 SKY PARK COURT SUITE 100 SAN DIEGOCA 92123 US-UNITED STATES a Accounttt: 15 Name: Planning Date/Time Operator /24/2011 1:56:25 PM Marie Addressit: 069 Machineit Canier Class ZIP/Zone Lb/Oz Pes 210171 UPS UPS Ground 92123/ 2 5/ 8.3 Base Rt PerPc 5.96 Total Base Rt 5.96 Spc Svc Total PerPc Soc Svc .00 .00 Oth Chas Total Total Chas PerPc Oth Cha 5.96 Total Charges: 5.96 MCMG2 Version 8.36.00 8/24/2011 2:27:55PM City of Carlsbad SHIPPING REQUEST DATE: ^y^.^y,pQ|l STAFF CONTACT: rTcgon 6o?f//cfin a7^</AX LOCATION OF ITEM TO BE SHIPPED: (f(MailroomJlT area, etc.) SHIPPING PREFERENCE: AJo Qn^-fcnenCe. (Fed Ex' UPS, Eagle Freight, etc) TYPE OF SERVICE: P^To^ l-a\x . nrr] ^, K/"TA^rsdy. s/c^/i/ (Priority Overnight, Overnight, z day, 3 day, etc) PACKAGING: A)o prGP:r--PinQP_ Let (Envelope, Letter Pak, our packaging, etc.) IF OTHER THAN ENVELOPE OR LETTER PAK PLEASE PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING: WEIGHT: DIMENSIONS: H L W SHIP TO: CONTACT NAME: State of California Department of Fish and Ganrie COMPANY NAME: 3883 Ruffin Road San Diego, CA 92123 ADDRESS: PHONE: PAYMENT INFORMATION: P/flooin^ • VENDOR y~^ (Department Account No.) ACCOUNT #: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: rbo yn^x p^ftSf^ ^J-A tnjyjAjL. rh^cJcirxA^ F:\ShippingRequcstForm.doc Rev. 08/23/2011 1635 FARADAY AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 Inquiry Transactions Found CITY OF CARLSBAD 8/24/2011 MCM G2 Licensed to: CITY OF CARLSBAD Page: 1 Package ID: 65 Address; Attn: Addressit: 148 Trk#: 1Z76Y36Y0300003397 CA DEPT OF FISH AND GAME Pickup Rec#: 4523882086 3883 RUFFIN ROAD SAN DIEGOCA 92123 US-UNITED STATES Accounttt: 15 Name: Planning Date/Time Operator Machine* Carrier Cf3.<!.<! ZIP/Zone Lb/Oz Pes Base Rf Total Spc Svc Total Oth Chas Total Total Chas ^^/24/2011 1:58:46 PM Marie PerPc Base Rt Per Pc SPC Svc PerPc Oth Cha ^^/24/2011 1:58:46 PM Marie 210171 UPS UPS Ground 92123/ 2 5/ 8.7 1 5.96 5.96 .00 .00 5.96 Total Charges: 5.96 MCMG2 Version 8.36.00 8/24/2011 2:28:02PM City of Carlsbad SHIPPING REQUEST DATE: S-pAj ^a/l STAFF CONTACT: Qb^jOn 6o-ff //t^^Ct'^^^^^j^ LOCATION OF ITEM TO BE SHIPPED: ^^(^feilroom) IT area, etc.) SHIPPING PREFERENCE: /VJ-Q prt^kjmr^c^ (Fed Ex,'UPS, Eagle Freight, etc) TYPE OF SERVICE: p\€0^ W^v/€. Qro lA- K/ ^ur.5c(Qy %J^) l\ (Priority Overnight, Overnight,^2 day, 3 day, die) PACKAGING: Nlo prtJctT-enCg (Envelope, Letter Pak, our packaging, etc.) IF OTHER THAN ENVELOPE OR LETTER PAK PLEASE PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING: WEIGHT: DIMENSIONS: H L W SHIP TO: CONTACT NAME: COMPANY NAME: ATTN: MS. THERESE O'ROURKE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE -6010 HIDDEN VALLEY ROAD ADDRESS: CARLSBAD, CA 92009 PHONE: PAYMENT INFORMATION: (Departme)n~6: Account No.) VENDOR (Departmertt-Bc Account No.) ACCOUNT #: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Can ynix .^S^J^ /KQ_~fW--h-acJci F:\ShlppingRequestl-orm.doc Rev. 08/23/2011 1635 FARADAY AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 Inquiry Transactions Found CITY OF CARLSBAD 8/24/2011 MCM G2 Licensed to: CITY OF CARLSBAD Package ID: 66 Trk#: 1Z76Y36Y0300003404 Pickup Rec#: 4523882086 Address.-Attn: MS. THERESE O ROURKE U.S. FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE 6010 HIDDEN VALLEY ROAD CARLSBAD CA 92009 Addressit: 149 Accounttt: 15 Name: Planning US-UNITED STATES Date/Time Operator Machineit Canier Class ZIP/Zone Lb/Oz Pes Base Rt Total SPC SVC Total Oth Chas Total Total Chas |f/24/2011 2:25:40 PM Marie 210171 UPS UPS Ground 92009/ 2 5/ 8.9 1 PerPc 5.96 Base Rt 5.96 Per Pc Spc Svc .00 .00 PerPc Oth Chq 5.96 Total Charges: 5.96 MCMG2 Version 8.36.00 8/24/2011 2:28:08PM City of SHIPPING REQUEST DATE: '^J^)S^\ \ STAFF CONTACT: Octaon /M^QoTminjO LOCATION OF ITEM TO BE SHIPPED: . . ^^^XMailroom^T area, etc.) SHIPPING PREFERENCE: >^ Inference. (Fed Ei, UPS, Eagle Freight, etc) TYPE OF SERVICE: Plf^ . Qrri (Priority Ovemight, Overnight -night, V. day, 3 day, etc) PACKAGING: pr^^ftr^j^ce^ fX::n1T^^^r^•nc.* T attar. VcV m^r- r\ (Envelope,' Letter Pak, our packaging, etc.) IF OTHER THAN ENVELOPE OR LETTER PAK PLEASE PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING: WEIGHT: SHIP TO: CONTACT NAME:. COMPANY NAME: ADDRESS: DIMENSIONS: H L W STATE CLEARINGHOUSE 1400 TENTH STREET SACRAMENTO, CA 95814 PHONE: PAYMENT INFORMATION: JKI Picr>n'. rax (Departrkent (Department & Account No.) • VENDOR ACCOUNT #: ADDITIONAL INFORMATION: Qlr^ ynxj. ^^-^ K)^ -j^-f^nck.n^ \Y\^F ^yUank yea / /iL:Hc'.a L':^ F:\ShippingRcquestForni.doc Rev. 08/23/2011 1635 FARADAY AVE CARLSBAD CA 92008 Inquiry Transactions Found CITY OF CARLSBAD 8/24/2011 MCM 02 Licensed to: CITY OF CARLSBAD Page: 1 Package ID: 63 Trkit: 1Z76Y36Y0300003379 Pickup Rec#: 4523882086 Accounttt: 15 Name: Planning Date/Time Operator O2 Address: Attn: STATE CLEARINGHOUSE 1400 TENTH STREET SACRAMENTO CA 95814 US-UNITED STATES Addressit: 147 Machineit Carrier Class ZIP/Zone Lb/Oz Pes •24/2011 1:54:34 PM Marie 210171 UPS UPS Ground 95814/4 6/ 3.4 Base Rt PerPc 7.41 Total Base Rt 7.41 Spc SVC Total Oth Chas Total Total Chas PerPc SPC Svc PerPc Oth Cha .00 .00 7.41 Total Charges: 7.41 0 MCMG2 Version 8.36.00 8/24/2011 2:27:49PM Notice of Completion & Enviw*^nental Document Transmittal Mail to: State Clearinghouse, P. O. Box 3WffSacramento, CA 95812 - (916) 445-0613 Project Title: Rancho Milagro Lead Agency: City of Carlsbad Contact Person: Jason Goff See NOTE Below: SCH# Street Address: 1635 Faradav Avenue Phone: (760) 602-4643 City: Carlsbad Zip: 92008 County: San Diego PROJECT LOCATION: County: San Diego City/Nearest Community: Carlsbad Cross Streets: College Boulevard and Sunnv Creek Road Lat. / Long. : 33° 8'41.318" N / 117° 16'36.68" W Total Acres: 43.58 Zip Code: 92010 Assessor's Parcel No. 209-060-61 and portion of 209-060-23 Within 2 Miles: State Hwy #: N/A Waterways: Agua Hedionda Creek Airports: McClellan/Palomar Railways: NCTD Schools: Future Carlsbad High School DOCUMENT TYPE: CEQA: • NOP • Supplement/Subsequent NEPA: • NOI OTHER: • Joint Document 1 1 Early Cons • EIR (Prior SCH No.) • EA • Final Docunient n Neg Dec Other: Mitigated Neg. Dec. • Draft EIS • Other: • Draf^ EIR • FONSI LOCAL ACTION TYPE: 1 1 General Plan Update • Specific Plan Rezone 1 1 Annexation ^ General Plan Amendment • Master Plan • Prezone 1 1 Redevelopment 1 1 General Plan Element • Planned Unit Development • Use Permit 1 1 Coastal Permit 1 1 Community Plan • Site Plan Land Division (Subdivision, Parcel Map, Tract Map, etc.) 1 1 Other: Hillside Development Permit. Special Use Permit. Habitat Management Plan Pennit DEVELOPMENT TYPE: ^ Residential: Units 19 • Office: Sq. Ft. _ I I Commercial: Sq. Ft. • Industrial: Sq. Ft. _ I I Educational: I I Recreational: Acres 43.58 Acres Acres Acres Employees _ Employees. Employees. I I Water Facilities: I I Transportation: I I Mining: I I Power: I I Waste Treatment: I I Hazardous Water: • Other: Tvpe MGD Type Mineral Type Watts, Type_ Type PROJECT ISSUES DISCUSSED IN DOCUMENT: • Aesthetic/Visual • Flood Plain/Flooding • Schools/Universities • Water Quality • Agricultural Land Forest Land/Fire Hazard • Septic Systems • H2O Supply/Ground H2O • Air Quality Geological/Seismic • Sewer Capacity Wetland/Riparian Archaeological/Historical • Minerals • Soil Erosion/Compaction/Grading Wildlife • Coastal Zone • Noise • Solid Waste • Growth Inducing • Drainage/Absorption • Population/Hsg. Balance • Toxic/Hazardous • Land Use • Economic/Jobs • Public Services/Facilities • Traffic/Circulation • Cumulative Effect • Fiscal • Recreation/Parks Vegetation • Other: Present Land Use/Zoning/General Plan Use Agriculture & native habitat/One-Family Residential, minimum 20,000 sq. ft. lots (R-1-20,000), Limited Control (L-C), and Open Space (OS) / Residential Low-Medium, 0-4 du/ac (RLM), Residential High Density, 15-23 du/ac (RH), Commercial (C), Office (O), and Open Space (OS). Project Description: The proposed project consists of subdividing a 43.58-acre parcel into nineteen (19) minimum half-acre single-family residential lots, four (4) open space conservation lots, and two (2) homeowner's association maintained open space lots. The proposal is a large-lot rural estate subdivision for future development of custom single-family residences. The project involves a General Plan Amendment NOTE: Clearinghouse will assign identification numbers for all new projects. Preparation or previous draft document) please fill it in. If a SCH number already exists for a project (e.g. from a Notice of January 2008 (GPA), Zone Change (ZC), Tentativ|C*ijbdivision Map (CT), Floodplain Special Us- *%rmit (SUP), Hillside Development Pennit (HDP), and Habitat Management PlaiW|i*MP) Permit. The project site is located in the northeast quadrant of the city of Carlsbad, approximately one half-mile northeast of the intersection of College Boulevard and El Camino Real, and is currently accessed by a dirt road off of Sunny Creek Road. The site is within the Zone 15 Local Facilities Management Plan and also the Sunny Creek Specific Plan. The Sunny Creek Specific Plan establishes standards for the residential development of the area and is intended to promote a rural estate atmosphere. The existing environment of the subject property can be generally characterized as rural. The specific development area is situated on a previously disturbed portion of the property in the northem boundary, which is presently used for agriculture. Upland and riparian/wetland habitats surround this area within the northem quarter and southem half of the property. Topographically, the property ranges from approximately 80 feet above mean sea level (MSL) in the southwesterly portions of the property to approximately 200 feet above MSL in the northeasterly portions of the property. Agua Hedionda Creek flows from east to west through the southem quarter of the property and an unnamed tributary of Agua Hedionda Creek flows from east to west through the property's northem quarter. The surrounding environment can be generally characterized as rural, interspersed by agricultural fields, native habitat, and scattered residential estate and ranch type properties. To the north is the Cantarini property, which was previously developed in agriculture, but is presently fallow. This property is entitled with an approved residential subdivision known as Cantarini Ranch (CT 00-18), and will eventually be developed with 105 single-family residential lots (half-acre minimum lot sizes), an 80 unit multiple-family residential apartment complex, and several open space lots. To the south is an existing 172 small lot single-family residential development known as the Terraces at Sunny Creek (CT 96-02), a multiple-family apartment complex, and the Madonna Hill assisted living facility. To the east, the subject property is bounded by five large parcels of land, three of which are estate/ranch type properties with single-family residences, one is developed in agriculture (northeast parcel, known as the Mandana property), and the other (southeast parcel) is developed with a landscaping business (Brickman Landscaping) which takes access off of Cougar Drive near its intersection with El Camino Real. To the west is a parcel of land known as the Barlow property, which is developed with a single-family residence, several small outbuildings, horse stables, and an outdoor equesfrian riding facility. The proposed development area has a General Plan Land Use designation of Residential Low-Medium Density (RLM, 0-4 du/ac) and a Zoning designation of One-Family Residential (R-1-20,000). The development area will consist of the nineteen (19) single-family residential lots, a public street and cul-de-sac totaling approximately 14.28 acres, or 33% of the site. Residential Lots 1-19 range in size from 21,780 square feet (0.5 acres) to 27,050 square feet (0.621 acres). The project density (1.14 dwelling units per acre) and type of development (one-family residential on half-acre minimum lot sizes) are consistent with the General Plan and Zoning designations and also the development standards of the Sunny Creek Specific Plan. Vehicle access to the project site will be provided by a proposed public sfreet that will connect via the proposed extension of College Boulevard through Streets "A" and "K" of the approved Cantarini Ranch project, which is adjacent to the north. The project proposal includes a total of six (6) open space lots. Open Space Lot 22 includes a proposed bio-filtration detention basin for the project, is approximately 29,248 square feet in size, and will be maintained by a future homeowner's association. Open Space Lot 25 includes a riparian overlook seating area, is approximately 5,023 square feet in size, and will also be maintained by a future homeowner's association. Open Space Lots 20, 21, 23, and 24 total approximately 29.3 acres, or 67% of the total property area, and will be conserved for natural habitat in conformance with the City's HMP. The General Plan Amendment is intended to re-configure the existing RLM General Plan Land Use designation to clearly distinguish the proposed development area from the open space, and to designate the proposed open space areas as Open Space (OS) on the General Plan Land Use Map. It is also intended to correct two (2) small remnant RH/C/O General Plan Land Use designations along the southem boundary of the property, which will be re-designated as OS. The Zone Change is intended to re-configure the existing R-1-20,000 Zoning designation to clearly distinguish the proposed development area from the open space, and to designate the proposed open space areas as Open Space (OS) on the City of Carlsbad's Zoning Map. To implement the half-acre minimum lot size requirement of the Sunny Creek Specific Plan, the Zone Change includes re-designating the existing R-1-20,000 to R-1-0.5-Q. The Qualified Development Overlay Zone ("Q" Overlay) is intended to be applied to properties with unique circumstances such as those proposed to be developed as hillside development or other physically sensitive areas. The "Q" Overlay supplements the underlying zoning by providing additional regulations for development and will insure that the future development is compatible with the Sunny Creek Specific Plan. Also included in the proposed Zone Change is a remnant L-C Zoning designation along the southem boundary of the property, which will be re-designated as OS. A Floodplain Special Use Permit (SUP) is required to excavate and install a new sewer line on the north side of Agua Hedionda Creek in a portion of a special flood hazard area (i.e., 100 year flood zone). Part of the Rancho Milagro project includes consfructing the extension of a sewer line across Agua Hedionda Creek, in accordance with the approved South Agua Hedionda Interceptor Sewer (SAHT IE Phase II) project (Improvement Plans DWG No. 361-6E). That project has been previously analyzed by EIA 97-05 and approved by City of Carlsbad Resolution No. 2000-106 (April 4, 2000). Impacts attributable to the South Agua Hedionda Interceptor Sewer (SAHT IE Phase II) project have already been assessed and mitigated and therefore are not being re-analyzed as part of the Rancho Milagro project. Reviewing Agencies Checklist^ Resources Agency Boating & Waterways Coastal Commission Coastal Conservancy Colorado River Board Conservation, Dept. of S Fish & Game Forestry & Fire Protection Office of Historic Preservation Parks & Recreation Reclamation Board S.F. Bay Conservation & Development Commission Water Resources (DWR) Business, Transportation & Housing Aeronautics Califomia Highway Patrol CALTRANS Disfrict # _Department of Transportation Planning (headquarters) _Housing & Community Development _Food & Agriculture Health & Welfare Health Services State «& Consumer Services General Services OLA (Schools) Form A, contirtwg^ KEY S = Document sent by lead agency X = Document sent by SCH i= Suggested distribution Environmental Protection Agency Air Resources Board Califomia Waste Management Board _SWRCB _SWRCB _SWRCB SWRCB Clean Water Grants Delta Unit Water Quality Water Rights J Regional WQCB #9 (San Diego) Youth «& Adult Corrections Corrections Independent Commissions & Offices Energy Commission Native American Heritage Commission Public Utilities Commission Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy State Lands Commission Tahoe Regional Planning Agency Other: USFWS /1 SLR Band of Mission Indians Public Review Period (to be filled in by lead agency) Starting Date August 25. 2011 Signature Ending Date September 26. 2011 Date f^^A^c^^^l- -2^7.1 Lead Agency (Complete if applicabie): Consulting Firm: Address: City/State/Zip: Contact: Phone: ( } _ Applicant: Jack Henthom & Associates Address: P.O. Box 237 City/State/Zip: Carlsbad. CA 92018 Phone: (760) 438-4090 For SCH Use Only: Date Received at SCH Date Review Starts: Date to Agencies Date to SCH Clearance Date. Notes: NOTE: Clearinghouse will assign identification numbers for all new projects. If a SCH number already exists for a project (e.g. from a Notice of Preparation or previous draft document) please fill it in. January 2008 SITEMAP NOT TO SCALE Rancho Milagro GPA 06-03 / ZC 06-02 / CT 06-04 SUP 06-05 / HDP 06-01 / HMP 09-01 4^ CITY OF V CARLSBAD Community & Economic Development www.carlsbadca.gov NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CASE NAME: Rancho Milagro CASE NO: GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 PROJECT LOCATION: The proposed project is located approximately one half-mile northeast of the intersection of College Boulevard and El Camino Real, within the northeast quadrant of the city of Carlsbad, county of San Diego, state of California, Assessor's Parcel Number 209-060-61 and a portion of 209-060-23. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed project consists of subdividing a 43.58-acre parcel into nineteen (19) minimum half-acre single-family residential lots, four (4) open space conservation lots, and two (2) homeowner's association maintained open space lots. The proposal is a large-lot rural estate subdivision for future development of custom single-family residences. The project involves a General Plan Amendment (GPA), Zone Change (ZC), Tentative Subdivision Map (CT), Floodplain Special Use Permit (SUP), Hillside Development Permit (HDP), and Habitat Management Plan (HMP) Permit. PROPOSED DETERMINATION: The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation ofthe California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, the initial study (EIA Part 2) 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 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 Planning Commission. A copy of the initial study (EIA Part 2) documenting reasons to support the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration is on file in the Planning Division, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008. Comments from the public are invited. Pursuant to Section 15204 ofthe 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. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Division 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 City of Carlsbad Planning Commission. Additional public notices will be issued when those public hearings are scheduled. If you have any questions, please call Jason Goff in the Planning Division at (760) 602-4643. PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD August 25. 2011 - September 26. 2011 PUBLISH DATE August 25. 2011 3^,.^ Planning Division 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 T 760-602-4600 F 760-602-8559 © MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CASE NAME: RANCHO MILAGRO CASE NO: GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 PROJECT LOCATION: Approximately one half-mile northeast of the intersection of College Boulevard and El Camino Real, within the northeast quadrant ofthe citv ofCarlsbad. countv of San Diego, state of California. Assessor's Parcel Number 209-060-61 and a portion of 209-060-23. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The proposed project consists of subdividing a 43.58-acre parcel into nineteen (19) minimum half-acre single-family residential lots, four (4) open space conservation lots, and two (2) homeowner's association maintained open space lots. The proposal is a large-lot rural estate subdivision for future development of custom single-family residences. The project involves a General Plan Amendment (GPA), Zone Change (ZC), Tentative Subdivision Map (CT), Floodplain Special Use Permit (SUP), Hillside Development Permit (HDP), and Habitat Management Plan (HMP) Permit. 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 (EIA Part 2) 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. I I 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). I I 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. A copy of the initial study (EIA Part 2) documenting reasons to support the Negative Declaration is on file in the Planning Division, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008. ADOPTED: fCLICK HERE datel , pursuant to [CLICK HERE Administrative Approval. PC/CC Resolution No., or CC Ordinance No.l ATTEST: DON NEU City Planner ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - INITIAL STUDY (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DIVISION) CASE NO: GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 DATE: 07/18/2011 BACKGROUND CASENAME: Rancho Milagro 2. LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS: Citv ofCarlsbad 3. CONTACT PERSON AND PHONE NUMBER: Jason Goff, Associate Planner 4. PROJECT LOCATION: The proiect site is located approximately one half-mile northeast of the intersection of College Boulevard and El Camino Real, within the northeast quadrant of the city of Carlsbad, county of San Diego, state of Califomia, Assessor's Parcel Number 209- 060-61 and a portion of 209-060-23. 5. PROJECT SPONSOR'S NAME AND ADDRESS: Jack Henthom & Associates. P.O. Box #237. Carlsbad. CA 92018 6. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: RLM/OS/RH/C/O 7. ZONING: R-1-20.000/OS/L-C 8. OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES WHOSE APPROVAL IS REQUIRED (i.e., permits, financing approval or participation agreements): United States Army Corp of Engineers, San Diego Water Quality Control Board 9. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND SURROUNDING LAND USES: The proposed project consists of subdividing a 43.58-acre parcel into nineteen (19) minimum half-acre single-familv residential lots, four (4) open space conservation lots, and two (2) homeowner's association maintained open space lots. The proposal is a large-lot rural estate subdivision for future development of custom single-familv residences. The project involves a General Plan Amendment (GPA), Zone Change (ZC). Tentative Subdivision Map (CT). Floodplain Special Use Permit (SUP). Hillside Development Permit (HDP), and Habitat Management Plan (HMP) Permit. The project site is located in the northeast quadrant of the city of Carlsbad, approximately one half-mile northeast of the intersection of College Boulevard and El Camino Real, and is currently accessed by a dirt road off of Sunnv Creek Road. The site is within the Zone 15 Local Facilities Management Plan and also the Sunny Creek Specific Plan. The Sunny Creek Specific Plan establishes standards for the residential development of the area and is intended to promote a rural estate atmosphere. The existing environment of the subiect property can be generallv characterized as rural. The specific development area is situated on a previously disturbed portion of the property in the GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO northem boundary, which is presently used for agriculture. Upland and riparian/wetland habitats surround this area within the northem quarter and southem half of the property. Topographically, the property ranges from approximatelv 80 feet above mean sea level (MSL) in the southwesterlv portions of the propertv to approximately 200 feet above MSL in the northeasterly portions of the property. Agua Hedionda Creek flows from east to west through the southem quarter of the propertv and an unnamed tributary of Agua Hedionda Creek flows from east to west through the property's northem quarter. The surrounding environment can be generally characterized as mral. interspersed by agricultural fields, native habitat, and scattered residential estate and ranch type properties. To the north is the Cantarini property, which was previouslv developed in agriculture, but is presently fallow. This propertv is entitled with an approved residential subdivision known as Cantarini Ranch (CT 00-18). and will eventually be developed with 105 single-familv residential lots (half-acre minimum lot sizes), an 80 unit multiple-family residential apartment complex, and several open space lots. To the south is an existing 172 small lot single-family residential development known as the Terraces at Sunnv Creek (CT 96-02). a multiple-family apartment complex, and the Madonna Hill assisted living facility. To the east, the subject property is bounded by five large parcels of land, three of which are estate/ranch type properties with single-family residences, one is developed in agriculture (northeast parcel, known as the Mandana property), and the other (southeast parcel) is developed with a landscaping business (Brickman Landscaping) which takes access off of Cougar Drive near its intersection with El Camino Real. To the west is a parcel of land known as the Barlow property, which is developed with a single-familv residence, several small outbuildings, horse stables, and an outdoor equestrian riding facilitv. The proposed development area has a General Plan Land Use designation of Residential Low- Medium Densitv (RLM. 0-4 du/ac) and a Zoning designation of One-Family Residential (R-I- 20.000). The development area will consist of the nineteen (19) single-family residential lots, a public street and cul-de-sac totaling approximatelv 14.28 acres, or 33% of the site. Residential Lots 1-19 range in size from 21.780 square feet (0.5 acres) to 27.050 square feet (0.621 acres). The project density (1.14 dwelling units per acre) and type of development (one-family residential on half-acre minimum lot sizes) are consistent with the General Plan and Zoning designations and also the development standards of the Sunny Creek Specific Plan. Vehicle access to the project site will be provided by a proposed public street that will connect via the proposed extension of College Boulevard through Streets "A" and "K" of the approved Cantarini Ranch project, which is adjacent to the north. The project proposal includes a total of six (6) open space lots. Open Space Lot 22 includes a proposed bio-filtration detention basin for the project, is approximately 29.248 square feet in size, and will be maintained bv a future homeowner's association. Open Space Lot 25 includes a riparian overlook seating area, is approximately 5.023 square feet in size, and will also be maintained by a future homeowner's association. Open Space Lots 20. 21. 23. and 24 total approximately 29.3 acres, or 67% of the total property area, and will be conserved for natural habitat in conformance with the City's HMP. The General Plan Amendment is intended to re-configure the existing RLM General Plan Land Use designation to clearlv distinguish the proposed development area from the open space, and to designate the proposed open space areas as Open Space (OS) on the General Plan Land Use Map and Official Open Space & Conservation Map. It is also intended to correct two (2) small remnant RH/C/O General Plan Land Use designations along the southem boundarv of the property, which will be re-designated as OS. Rev. 06/29/10 GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-33^UP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO The Zone Change is intended to re-configure the existing R-1-20.000 Zoning designation to clearly distinguish the proposed development area from the open space, and to designate the proposed open space areas as Open Space (OS) on the City of Carlsbad's Zoning Map. To implement the half-acre minimum lot size requirement of the Sunny Creek Specific Plan, the Zone Change includes re-designating the existing R-1-20.000 to R-1-0.5-Q. The Qualified Development Overlay Zone ("0" Overlay) is intended to be applied to properties with unique circumstances such as those proposed to be developed as hillside development or other phvsicallv sensitive areas. The "0" Overlav supplements the underlying zoning by providing additional regulations for development and will insure that the future development is compatible with the Sunny Creek Specific Plan. Also included in the proposed Zone Change is a remnant L-C Zoning designation along the southem boundary of the property, which will be re-designated as OS. A Floodplain Special Use Permit (SUP) is required to excavate and install a new sewer line on the north side of Agua Hedionda Creek in a portion of a special flood hazard area (i.e.. IPG vear flood zone). Part of the Rancho Milagro project includes constmcting the extension of a sewer line across Agua Hedionda Creek, in accordance with the approved South Agua Hedionda Interceptor Sewer (SAHT IE Phase II) project (Improvement Plans DWG No. 361-6E). That project has been previously analyzed bv EIA 97-05 and approved by City of Carlsbad Resolution No. 2000-106 (April 4. 2000). Impacts attributable to the South Agua Hedionda Interceptor Sewer (SAHT IE Phase ID project have already been assessed and mitigated and therefore are not being re- analyzed as part of the Rancho Milagro proiect. Rev. 06/29/10 3-04/S GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-(M/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO 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 "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. I I Aesthetics \ I Agricultural and Forestry Resources I I Air Quality 1^ Biological Resources ^ Cultural Resources ^ Geology/Soils I I Greenhouse Gas Emissions {C\ Population and Housing 1^ Hazards/Hazardous Materials \C1 Public Services I I Hydrology/Water Quality I I Land Use and Planning I I Mineral Resources I I Noise I I Recreation I I Transportation/Traffic I I Utilities & Service Systems Mandatory Findings of Significance Rev. 06/29/10 GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/5 /SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO DETERMINATION. (To be completed by the Lead Agency) • Kl • • • I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. 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 the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. 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 "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. 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. n-ie-zjDii Date 7-/9'-// City Planner's Signature Date Rev. 06/29/10 3 i-Ws GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-(J4/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, Section 15063 requires that the City conduct an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) to determine if a project may have a significant effect on the environment. The Environmental Impact Assessment appears in the following pages in the form of a checklist. This checklist identifies any physical, biological and human factors that might be impacted by the proposed project and provides the City with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), Negative Declaration, or to rely on a previously approved EIR or Negative Declaration. • A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by an information source cited 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. A "No Impact" answer should be explained when there is no source document to refer to, or it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards. • "Less Than Significant Impact" applies where there is supporting evidence that the potential impact is not significantly adverse, and the impact does not exceed adopted general standards and policies. • "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The developer must agree to the mitigation, and the City must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to a less than significant level. • "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect is significantly adverse. • Based on an "EIA-Initial Study", if a proposed project could have a potentially significant adverse effect on the environment, but all potentially significant adverse effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or nutigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, and none of the circumstances requiring a supplement to or supplemental EIR are present and all the mitigation measures required by the prior environmental document have been incorporated into this project, then no additional environmental document is required. • When "Potentially Significant Impact" is checked the project is not necessarily required to prepare an EIR if the significant adverse effect has been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and the effect will be mitigated, or a "Statement of Overriding Considerations" has been made pursuant to that earlier EIR. • A Negative Declaration may be prepared if the City perceives no substantial evidence that the project or any of its aspects may cause a significant adverse effect on the environment. • If there are one or more potentially significant adverse effects, the City may avoid preparing an EIR if there are mitigation measures to clearly reduce adverse impacts to less than significant, and those mitigation measures are agreed to by the developer prior to public review. In this case, the appropriate "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated" may be checked and a Mitigated Negative Declaration may be prepared. • An EIR must be prepared if "Potentially Significant Impact" is checked, and including but not limited to the following circumstances: (1) the potentially significant adverse effect has not been discussed or mitigated in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and the developer does not agree to mitigation measures that reduce the adverse impact to less than significant; (2) a "Statement of Overriding Considerations" for the significant adverse impact has not been made pursuant to an earlier EIR; (3) proposed mitigation measures do not reduce the adverse impact to less than significant; or (4) through the Rev. 06/29/10 3-04/S GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-()4/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO EIA-Initial Study analysis it is not possible to determine the level of significance for a potentially adverse effect, or determine the effectiveness of a mitigation measure in reducing a potentially significant effect to below a level of significance. A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears after each related set of questions. Particular attention should be given to discussing mitigation for impacts, which would otherwise be determined significant. Rev. 06/29/10 GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/5 /SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact • • • X • • • X • • • X • • X • I, AESTHETICS - Would the project: 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) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light and glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? a-c) No Impact. The subject property is located within the Sunny Creek Specific Plan Area (SP 191), which was adopted by the City of Carlsbad in 1985. The existing environment of the subject property can be generally characterized as rural. The proposed development area of the property is largely in agricultural use with upland and riparian/wetland habitats located within the northern quarter and southern half of the property. The proposed project is situated on a hill which offers valley views in the northwesterly direction towards the Robertson Ranch and Calavera Hills development areas. Agua Hedionda Creek flows from east to west along southern quarter of the property, and an unnamed tributary of Agua Hedionda Creek flows from east to west within the northern quarter of the property. The Sunny Creek Specific Plan (SP 191) establishes guidelines and development standards that promote a rural estate atmosphere and which serve to preserve the unique environmental resources within the area. The plan includes development standards, design criteria, and density patterns that are intended to preserve the residential estate-type character of the Sunny Creek area. The density pattern of the Specific Plan allows for single-family development with half-acre minimum lot sizes. The project is designed to be consistent with the Sunny Creek Specific Plan. Through its compliance with the Specific Plan, the project will not substantially damage any scenic resources, and no substantial degradation of the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings will occur. Since the project site is not listed as including any scenic vistas in either the City's General Plan or the Sunny Creek Specific Plan, no substantial adverse effect on any scenic vistas is assessed. Since the existing project site does not include any buildings on-site, the proposed project will not have any effect on historic buildings. Lastly, the proposed development area is not located within the view shed of a State scenic highway or any State highway that is designated by the California Department of Transportation as eligible for listing as a scenic highway. Therefore, no aesthetic impacts are assessed. d) Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed single-family residential subdivision will introduce new street lights and eventually residential lighting to an area which is presentiy characterized as rural. The existing Terraces at Sunny Creek project and the multiple-family residential apartment complex located adjacent to the south, already includes street lights, parking lot lights, and residential outdoor lighting, as does the El Camino Real corridor located just beyond. The approved Cantarini Ranch project, which is located adjacent to the north and is expected to develop ahead of this project, will also include similar street lights and outdoor residential lighting conditions. While the proposed project is anticipated to generate new sources of light, which will slightiy increase ambient lighting conditions in the area, it is not expected that the project will contiibute a significant amount of light or glare. Therefore, a less than significant impact is assessed. Rev. 06/29/10 GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-WsUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO II. AGRICULTURAL AND FOREST RESOURCES - (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, including timberland, 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.) Would the project: 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)), 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? Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact • • • • • • • • • • m • • • n • a) Less Than Significant Impact. The Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) is implemented by the California Department of Conservation (CDC), Division of Land Resource Protection and recognizes the suitability of land for agricultural production. The FMMP is non-regulatory and was developed to inventory land and provide categorical definitions of important farmlands to provide consistent and impartial data to decision makers for use in assessing present status, reviewing trends, and planning for the future of California's agricultural land resources. Rev. 06/29/10 GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/S /SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO The most recent mapping prepared for the project site (RECON Number 3889-lB, November 19, 2010) is based on the California Resource Agency mapping prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. It indicates that the site contains a total of approximately 12 acres of Unique Farmland; 23 acres of Locally Important Farmland; and 0.25 acres of Statewide Important Farmland. There is also 8.26 acres of "Other Land" present in the southern part of the site, which is of a lower tier that typically does not have any agricultural value. These comprise the lower tier assigned to agricultural land. An additional 0.37 acre of land within the study area is identified as "Built Up" and "Urban Land." This occurs in an off-site sewer easement area located on the adjacent parcel (APN 209-060-23) within an existing road, and does not support any agricultural value. Of the two top tiers, no Prime Farmland is present on the site, and 0.25 acres of Statewide Important Farmland is identified along the northeastern periphery of the property. The project proposes to convert 10 acres of Unique farmland which is defined as having lesser quality soils (no prime soils or soils constituting statewide importance) being used in the production of the State's leading agricultural crops. In addition, 2 acres of Locally Important Farmland, and 0.21 acres of Statewide Important Farmland would be affected. The definition of Locally limportant Farmland is delegated to the County. This land is defined by the County as land that meets all of the characteristics of Prime and Statewide with the exception of irrigation. Lands not meeting this definition can be included if they show a good history of production of locally adapted truck crops and orchard crops. The project proposes to cluster development within the central portion of the site, and the remainder, approximately 67% of the site, would be preserved in open space. The development proposal will preserve almost 100% of the Locally Important Farmland and a portion of the Statewide Important Farmland. The policy of the City of Carlsbad through its General Plan is to accommodate conversion of agricultural lands to uses consistent with the policies of the General Plan. These policies can be found in the Land Use Element of the General Plan (amended September 14, 2010) and the Open Space and Conservation Element of the General Plan (amended November 7, 2006). The conversion of these areas is consistent with the City of Carlsbad's General Plan and Habitat Management Plan (see Biology Resources Section IV). Therefore, impacts are considered less than significant. b) No Impact. The subject site is not encumbered by any Williamson Act contracts. Therefore, no impact is assessed. c-d) No Impact. The subject site does not contain any timberland or forest land. Therefore, no impact is assessed. e) Less Than Significant Impact. The properties located on the northern and western boundaries of the subject site have already been approved for or are currentiy in the process of converting from agriculture to a residential use consistent with the City's General Plan. The properties to the south (i.e., The Terraces at Sunny Creek and Multiple- family apartment complex) are already developed with residential uses with portions restricted to open space. The adjacent properties to the east are designated by the General Plan for residential uses and are subject to the same conversion policies as the subject site. Therefore, changes in the existing environment through facility extension would have a less than significant impact on decisions related to conversion of farmland to non-agricultural uses. 10 Rev. 06/29/10 GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06 -OITS /SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO III. AIR QUALITY - (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.) Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) 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 (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concenttations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Potentially Significant Impact Potenfially Significant Unless Mitigafion Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact • • • • • • • H m • K • • • • • M • a) No Impact. The project site is located in the San Diego Air Basin which is a state non-attainment area for ozone (O3) and for particulate matter less than or equal to 10 microns in diameter (PMio). The periodic violations of national Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS) in the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB), particularly for ozone in inland foothill areas, requires that a plan be developed outlining the pollution conttols that will be undertaken to improve air quality. In San Diego County, this attainment planning process is embodied in the Regional Air Quality Sttategies (RAQS) developed jointiy by the Air Pollution Conttol District (APCD) and the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG). A Plan to meet the federal standard for ozone was developed in 1994 during the process of updating the 1991 state- mandated plan. This local plan was combined with plans from all other California non-attainment areas having serious ozone problems and used to create the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). The SIP was adopted by the Air Resources Board (ARB) after public hearings on November 9* through 10* in 1994, and was forwarded to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for approval. After considerable analysis and debate, particularly regarding airsheds with the worst smog problems, EPA approved the SIP in mid-1996. The proposed project relates to the SIP and/or RAQS through the land use and growth assumptions that are incorporated into the air quality planning document. These growth assumptions are based on each City's and the County's General Plan. If a proposed project is consistent with its applicable General Plan, then the project presumably has been anticipated with the regional air quality planning process. Such consistency would ensure that the project would not have an adverse regional air quality impact. Section 15125(d) of the State of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines contains specific reference to the need to evaluate any inconsistencies between the proposed project and the applicable air quality management plan. Transportation Conttol Measures (TCMs) are part of the RAQS. The RAQS and TCM plan set 11 Rev. 06/29/10 GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/5 /SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO forth the steps needed to accomplish attainment of state and federal ambient air quality standards. The California Air Resources Board provides criteria for determining whether a project conforms with the RAQS, which include the following: • Is a regional air quality plan being implemented in the project area? • Is the project consistent with the growth assumptions in the regional air quality plan? The project area is located in the San Diego Air Basin, and as such, is located in an area where a RAQS is being implemented. The project is consistent with the growth assumptions in the regional air quality plan and will in no way conflict with or obsttuct implementation of the regional plan. b) Less Than Significant Impact. The closest air quality monitoring station to the project site is at Camp Pendleton. Data available for this monitoring site from 2000 through December 2004 indicate that the most recent air quality violations recorded were for the state one hour standard for ozone (a total of 10 days during the 5-year period). No other violations of any air quality standards have been recorded during the 5-year time period. The project would involve minimal short-term emissions associated with grading and construction. Such emissions would be minimized through standard construction measures such as the use of properly tuned equipment and watering the site for dust conttol. Long-term emissions associated with travel to and from the project will be minimal. Although air pollutant emissions would be associated with the project, they would neither result in the violation of any air quality standard (comprising only an incremental conttibution to overall air basin quality readings), nor contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. Any impact is assessed as less than significant. c) Less Than Significant Impact. The air basin is currently in a state non-attainment zone for ozone and suspended fine particulates. The proposed project would represent a conttibution to a cumulatively considerable potential net increase in emissions throughout the air basin. As described above, however, emissions associated with the proposed project would be minimal. Given the limited emissions potentially associated with the proposed project, air quality would be essentially the same whether or not the proposed project is implemented. According to the CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(h)(3), the proposed project's incremental conttibution to the cumulative effect is not cumulatively considerable. Any impact is assessed as less than significant. d) No impact. As noted above, the proposed would not result in substantial pollutant emissions or concenttations. In addition, there are no sensitive receptors (e.g., schools or hospitals) located in the vicinity of the project. No impact is assessed. e) Less Than Significant Impact. The construction of the proposed project could generate fumes from the operation of construction equipment, which may be considered objectionable by some people. Such exposure would be short-term or ttansient. In addition, the number of people exposed to such ttansient impacts is not considered substantial. Any impact is assessed as less than significant. 12 Rev. 06/29/10 o GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06 /SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO rv. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would the project: 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 Wildhfe Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (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? 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? Potenfially Significant Impact • • • • • • Potenfially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Kl Less Than Significant Impact No Impact • • • • • • • • • • • • a-f) Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. The City of Carlsbad has an adopted Habitat Management Plan (HMP), which is a comprehensive, citywide, program to identify how the City, in cooperation with the federal and state wildlife agencies, can preserve the diversity of habitat and protect sensitive biological resources within the City while allowing for additional development consistent with the City's General Plan and its Growth Management Plan. In so doing, the Plan is intended to lead to citywide permits and authorization for the incidental take of sensitive species in conjunction with private development projects, public projects, and other activities, which are consistent with the Plan. As discussed in the subsequent passages, the project does not conflict with the provisions of the HMP. The HMP identifies the subject property as a Standards Area (Zone 15); is located adjacent to and south of an Existing Hardline Preserve Area; and includes a small finger shaped portion of Core Area 5 covering its southern half (which runs east/west following Agua Hedionda Creek). The HMP conservation goals for Zone 15 require developments to establish, enhance, and maintain a viable habitat linkage across Linkage Area C (located to the northeast) to ensure connectivity for gnatcatchers and other HMP species between Core Area 3 (located to the north) 13 Rev. 06/29/10 GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06 3 /SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO and Core Area 5 (located south and southeast of Linkage Area C); and that they conserve the majority of sensitive habitats in or contiguous with biological core and linkage areas, including a no-net-loss of wetland habitats and coastal sage scrub within Core Area 3 and Linkage Area C. Protection of coastal sage scrub (CSS) is of particular importance in the Standards Areas, and therefore 67% of the CSS is required to be conserved. Table 11 (Pg. D-113) of the HMP identifies mitigation ratios for impacts to habitat types identified as sensitive in the HMP, and furthermore allows for impacts to agriculture, eucalyptus, and disturbed lands to be mitigated through the payment of an in-lieu mitigation fee. A Biological Technical Report for the Rancho Milagro Study Area was prepared by RECON Environmental Inc. (dated April 27, 2011) and summary letter dated May 4, 2011, for which eleven vegetation communities were indentified within the study area. In addition, a Wetland Delineation Study was also prepared by RECON Environmental Inc. (dated April 24, 2009), which identified jurisdictional areas belonging to both the United States Army Corp of Engineers (USACE) and the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG). Tables No. 1 and 2 below summarize the vegetation communities, jurisdictional areas, and project related impacts, while Table No. 3 summarizes the proposed mitigation. TABLE 1: VEGETATION COMMUNITIES AND PROJECT IMPACTS Vegetation Communities Existing Conditions Vegetation Communities Rancho Milagro Terraces Mitigation Area* Off-site Sewer Total Study Area Total Project Impacts^ Mitigation Ratio Required Mitigation Available Mitigation Areas On- site^ Wetland/Riparian: - Fresh Water Marsh 0.21 0.21 — 3:1 -0.21 - Southern Willow Scrub 0.90 1.68 2.58 0.05 3:1 0.15 0.85 - Mule Fat Scrub 0.04 0.04 — 3:1 — 0.04 - Sycamore/Oak Woodland 0.11 9.34 9.45 0.02 3:1 0.06 0.09 Upland: - Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub/Disturbed Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub" 7.46 1.05 8.51 2.56 1:1 (no net loss) 2.56 5.95" - Coast Live Oak Woodland 1.05 2.36 3.41 0.02 3:1 0.06 1.03 - Non-native Grassland 4.40 0.96 5.36 2.50' 0.5:1 1.25 1.90 - Eucalyptus Woodland 0.06 0.06 -In-Lieu Fee In-Lieu Fee 0.06 - Agricultural Land 12.06 12.06 11.83^ In-Lieu Fee In-Lieu Fee 0.23 - Developed Land 0.98 0.91 0.06 1.95 1.18 N/A N/A 0.77 TOTAL ACRES: 27.27 16.30 0.06 43.63 18.16 1L13 The "Terraces Mitigation Area" column refers to a portion of the study area that was previously dedicated as open space for the purpose of wetiand mitigation associated with the mitigation for impacts to an off-site project known as the Terraces at Sunny Creek. ^Total impacts include impacts from proposed restorafion when it consists of conversion from one mapped vegetation community to coastal sage scrub or riparian scrub. 'Acres remaining within study area available for mitigation after excluding the development impact area and the area previously dedicated as open space for wetiand mitigation from the development of the Terraces at Sunny Creek. ''Acreage is based on all coastal sage scrub present with the total study area. 14 Rev. 06/29/10 GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT O6-1 -04/5 /SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO TABLE 2: JURISDICTIONAL AREAS AND PROJECT IMPACTS Jurisdictional Areas^ Existing Conditions Total Project Impacts^ Mitigation Ratio Required Mitigation Jurisdictional Areas^ Rancho Milagro Terraces Mitigation Area* Off-site Sewer Total Study Area Total Project Impacts^ Mitigation Ratio Required Mitigation USACE Jurisdiction: - Wetiand 1.06 0.13 — 1.19 0.05 3:1 11 IS - Non-wetiand Jurisdictional Waters 0.07 1.59 — 1.66 0.001 1:1 0.001 TOTAL ACRES: L13 1.72 --2.85 0.051 0.151 CDFG Jurisdiction: - Riparian" 1.20 — — 1.20 0.07 3:1 0.21 - Streambed 0.07 — — 0.07 0.001 1:1 0.001 - Terraces at Sunny Creek Mitigation Site' — 11.01 11.01 TOTAL ACRES: 1.27 11.01 12.28 0.071 0.211 Isolated Drainage^ 0.06 0.47 -0.53 0.04 The "Terraces Mitigation Area" column refers to a portion of the study area that was previously dedicated as open space for the purpose of wetland mitigation associated with the mitigation for impacts to an off-site project known as the Terraces at Sunny Creek. ^Total impacts include impacts from proposed restoration when it consists of conversion from one mapped vegetation community to coastal sage scrub or riparian scrub. 'Does not include jurisdictional areas in the open space dedicated for wetland impacts on the off-site Terraces at Sunny Creek, nor does it include drainages delineated as isolated. Acreage overlaps and includes USACE jurisdictional drainage. ^This drainage has been delineated in the report and does not appear to fall under the jurisdiction of either USACE or CDFG. TABLE 3: PROPOSED PROJECT MITIGATION Biological Resource Proposed Mitigation VcKctalion Communities Wetland/Riparian: The project related Wetland/Riparian community impacts are being mitigated as described below in the Jurisdictional Areas section of this table (please see below). - Fresh Water Marsh The project related Wetland/Riparian community impacts are being mitigated as described below in the Jurisdictional Areas section of this table (please see below). - Southern Willow Scrub The project related Wetland/Riparian community impacts are being mitigated as described below in the Jurisdictional Areas section of this table (please see below). - Mule Fat Scrub The project related Wetland/Riparian community impacts are being mitigated as described below in the Jurisdictional Areas section of this table (please see below). - Sycamore/Oak Woodland The project related Wetland/Riparian community impacts are being mitigated as described below in the Jurisdictional Areas section of this table (please see below). Upland: - Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub/ Disturbed Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub The project is required to restore/create at least 2.56 acres of CSS to achieve a no-net-loss of this vegetation community. The project is creating a total of 2.94 acres of CSS on-site through the conversion of 1.50 acres of agricultural land, 0.04 acres of developed land, and 1.40 acres of non-native grasslands within the northern open space lots (Lots 23 and 24). The proposed 2.94 acre restoration will result in a net gain of total CSS. - Coast Live Oak Woodland Through on-site preservation, the project is preserving 0.06 acres of Coast Live Oak Woodland in Open Space Lots 21, 23, and 24. - Non-native Grassland Through on-site preservation, the project is preserving 1.25 acres of Non- native Grassland in Open Space Lots 21 and 23. - Eucalyptus Woodland Through on-site preservation, the project is preserving 0.06 acres of eucalyptus woodland in Open Space Lot 21. - Agricultural Land Payment of an in-lieu mitigation fee - 11.83 acres of Group F habitat type. 15 Rev. 06/29/10 GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT O6-1 •Wn /SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO TABLE 3: PROPOSED PROJECT MITIGATION (CONTINUED) Biological Resource Proposed Mitigation Jurisdictional .\reas USACE Jurisdiction: Wetiand Non-wetland Jurisdictional Waters CDFG Jurisdiction: Riparian Streambed Impacts to wetiand communities, including southern willow scrub and sycamore/oak woodland shall be mitigated at a 3:1 ratio, with a minimum 1:1 creation component that achieves the "no net loss" standard. The project is proposing to mitigate impacts to 0.05 acres of southern willow scrub through the on-site creation of 0.15 acres of southern willow scrub in preserved open space. The project is proposing to mitigate impacts to 0.02 acres of sycamore/oak woodland through the on-site creation of 0.06 acres of sycamore/oak woodland in preserved open space. A conceptual restoration plan has been prepared as part of project biotechnical report, which is proposing to convert a minimum of 0.21 acres of agricultural fields located in Open Space Lot 23 adjacent to the northern drainage to suitable wetland/riparian habitat. The creation of 0.07 acres, representing a 1:1 mitigation ratio, will be accomplished outside of the 100-foot wetland habitat buffer. The remaining 0.14 acre (2:1 mitigation ratio) will be located within the buffer and will serve to connect the restoration outside of the buffer to the existing drainage. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, and/or the clearing of any habitat on-site, a final wetlands/riparian restoration plan shall be approved by the City of Carlsbad Planning Department (with concurrence by the USFWS, USACE, and CDFG) to mitigate for the above impacts. In addition, impacts to USACE (Jurisdictional Wetiands and Non-Wetland Waters of the U.S.) and CDFG (Riparian and Stteambed) jurisdictional areas will require a Section 404 nationwide permit from the USACE, a 1602 Stteambed Alteration Agreement from the CDFG, and a 401 State Water Quality Certification from the Regional Water Quality Control Board, all of which must be obtained prior to the issuance of a grading permit and/or the clearing of any habitat on-site. Sensitive Plant Species According to the biological technical report, three sensitive plant species were observed within the study area; California adolphia, spiny rush, and Nuttall's scrub oak. Of these, spiny rush and Nuttall's scrub oak are not impacted by the project. However, the project does propose direct impacts on approximately 15 individual California adolphia plants, a California Native Plant Society (CNPS) List 2 species, which are located in the northern half of the study area. To mitigate this impact, a minimum of 30 individual California adolphia plants will be included in the plant palette of the proposed Diegan CSS restoration. Seeds will be collected from plants on-site and propagated in an appropriate nursery facility until they are of a sufficient size for planting. Inclusion of this species within the upland restoration that is proposed for the open space areas on-site will reduce impacts to a less than significant level. The remaining species of California adolphia identified in the report will be preserved in open space. Sensitive Wildlife Species According to the biological technical report, five sensitive bird species were observed within the study area: Cooper's hawk, northern harrier, white-tailed kite, yellow warbler, and yellow-breasted chat. Several other sensitive species were identified in the report as either being known to occur in the vicinity of the project or having a potential to be present within the study area. Of those having a potential to be present in the study area, five are state/or federally listed species: arroyo toad, western yellow-billed cuckoo, least Bell's vireo, southwestern willow flycatcher, and coastal California gnatcatcher. Due the rarity of these species and lack of historical records in the area, the biological technical report lists the arroyo toad and western yellow-billed cuckoo 16 Rev. 06/29/10 GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-o3f/S /SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO as not expected to occur within the study area, and thus no focused protocol surveys were required. Individual focused protocol surveys were prepared for the least Bell's vireo, southwestern willow flycatcher, and coastal California gnatcatcher. None of the surveys detected or observed any of these species within the study area. However, given the habitat types within the study area and vicinity, the report does identify a potential, ranging from low to moderate, that one or all of these species could be present on-site during the breeding season. Therefore, the project was designed to avoid and minimize impacts to the habitat on-site to the greatest extent possible, and mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project that reduce the potential direct and indirect impacts to these species, if present. Measures include removing vegetation that is critical to these species outside of the breeding season to avoid direct impact to nests and establishing a protocol of surveying and monitoring to avoid indirect impacts to nests within 500 feet of consttuction activity. Both the yellow warbler and yellow-breasted chat were identified within the riparian habitat during the focused protocol surveys for least BeU's vireo and southwestern willow flycatcher. Implementation of the mitigation measures for the least Bell's vireo and southwestern willow flycatcher will mitigate impacts to these two species to a less than significant level. The entire riparian area along Agua Hedionda Creek contains hundreds of ttees and therefore is considered a suitable raptor nesting area. To avoid any potential direct impacts to nesting raptors, mitigation is included that requires the removal of any trees to be outside of the breeding season (September 1*' to January 31*') of local raptor species. If it is determined that ttee removal must be conducted during the breeding season (February 1^' to August 30""), a raptor nest survey will need to be conducted by a qualified biologist prior to any removal of trees, to determine if raptor nests are present. If active nests are discovered, a 500 foot minimum buffer will be required to be established around the tree until the young are independent of the nest site, and no consttuction activity will be allowed to occur within the buffer area until a qualified biologist determines that the fledglings are independent of the nest. Wetlands The proposed project involves impacts to both USFWS and CDFG jurisdictional areas and wetland/riparian vegetation communities as illusttated above in Tables 1 and 2 with proposed mitigation illusttated in Table 3. According to the HMP, all projects that would affect HMP Type A Habitats (riparian and wetland habitats, including vernal pools), must demonstrate that the impacts 1) cannot be avoided by a feasible alternative, 2) have been minimized to maximum extent possible, and 3) will be mitigated in ways that assure no net loss of habitat value or function. In regards to the first finding, the project proposes a single road crossing of the northern drainage area with associated wetland habitat. This crossing is necessary to assure access to the property, as the only developable portion of the site is landlocked between two drainages supporting riparian and wetland vegetation. The location of the crossing is designed to coordinate with the circulation system of the adjacent approved project to the north (Cantarini Ranch). Primary access to the site will be provided through the extension of "K" Street through this residential development to the north. Currently, the primary access to the site is from the south along a small dirt road (Sunny Creek Road) in the southwestern portion of the site. This will be converted to a utility easement and pedestrian access area, as conversion of this road to a primary access that conforms to City standards would result in larger impacts to hillsides and the southern drainage (Agua Hedionda Creek), which supports a larger and higher functioning riparian corridor. In regards to the second finding, the HMP states that road projects which "cross a wetland must demonstrate that the crossing will occur at the narrowest and/or least sensitive location and that all feasible minimization measures have been employed." Consistent with this requirement, the road has been aligned to cross the narrowest section of the southern willow scrub. In addition, the proposed crossing will consist of a Con-Span or similar three-sided 12-foot- by-5-foot product that will span the creek, while maintaining a soft soil bottom that will allow for natural flow of the creek beneath the crossing. The buffer between the proposed lots and the jurisdictional areas in the northwestern portion of the site measures a minimum 100 feet in width along the entire interface in compliance with the HMP Planning Standards for Zone 15. This site design demonsttates that all feasible minimization measures were employed to reduce impacts to jurisdictional areas in the northern portion of the study area and to meet the planning standards as identified in the HMP. 17 Rev. 06/29/10 c o GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-03/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO Additionally, the jack-and-bore method will be used to install the sewer pipeline beneath Agua Hedionda Creek in accordance with the mitigation measure established as part of the approved South Agua Hedionda Interceptor Sewer (SAHT IE, Phase II) project, resulting in no impacts to this jurisdictional resource. This method however has a potential to sometimes results in what is known as a "frac-out," which is when subsurface fractures conduct bentonite drilling fluid to the surface, creating localized surface seepage. In the event of a "frac-out" or any other unexpected impact as a result of the jack-and-bore method, the extent of the resultant impact will be assessed, measured, and mitigated. Work will cease immediately and measures taken to contain any resultant slurry within as small of an area as possible will occur. A qualified biologist will assess impacts to the natural resources and contact the City and appropriate resource agencies within 24 hours of the event. Additional mitigation for impacts would be required at a ratio of at least 3:1. The location and composition of this mitigation would be determined at the time of the impact, once the scope and nature of the impact, can be determined. Lastly, in regards to the third finding, the wetland habitats present on-site are not unique (e.g., vernal pool), but are considered rare simply for the fact that they are wetiands which are a declining habitat type. Both the northern and the southern drainages support sensitive riparian species, such as yellow warbler and yellow-breasted chat, though neither federal nor state-listed species have been observed within either drainage. The proportion of native to exotic plant species in the two drainages is high, indicating that there are lower levels of non-native invasive species. The existing levels of disturbance within the drainages are low; though the adjacent upland areas are predominately agricultural, disturbed, or developed as residential. The northern drainage carries flow from upstream riparian areas and ultimately connects to the Agua Hedionda watershed; however, the drainage ends at a culvert at the western boundary of the property and is diverted across the adjacent property, and thus there is no direct continuation of the riparian vegetation along the northern boundary. The southern drainage (Agua Hedionda Creek) supports a continuous riparian corridor that runs east to west through the southern quarter of the property. In order to maintain the current functions and values of the wetiand and riparian habitats on-site, the impacts associated with the road crossing will be mitigated on-site through restoration of an approximately 0.21-acre area. A conceptual restoration plan was prepared and is provided in Attachment 3 of the biological technical report. A total of 0.21 acre of riparian habitat is proposed to be restored in the northern portion of the site through the conversion of a 0.19 acre area of agricultural fields and a 0.02 acre area of non-native grassland. This would mitigate the project impacts within the drainage. Based on the above, the project was designed to minimize the total impact to the wetland habitats on-site and to maintain the functions and values of the riparian and wetland areas. Indirect Impacts The proposed project is located adjacent to and south of an existing HMP Hardline Preserve Area and is proposing additional open space areas, which will ultimately become new hardline preserve areas. In order to minimize edge effects, the project has incorporated project features to comply with the HMP Adjacency Standards. This includes the following topics: fire management; erosion conttol; landscaping; fencing, signs, and lighting; and predator and exotic species conttol. 1. Fire Management: A Fire Protection Plan has been included as part of the project design. AU fire management activities will occur completely within the development boundaries and will not occur within any of the HMP open space conservation areas. Landscaping on these adjacent slopes will include low-fuel native species in compliance with the HMP. 2. Erosion conttol: Mechanical and biological methods will be implemented to conttol potential erosion, including engineering the manufactured slopes to maximize slope stability; choosing appropriate plants for the slopes to reduce the level of erosion of the slopes; implementing post-consttuction best management practices (BMPs) that will ensure run-off is appropriately tteated to minimize the potential for erosion; and implementing consttuction-level BMPs to prevent any silt from entering any of the HMP open space conservation areas. 3. Landscaping: Landscaping plans for the brush management zones and along development slopes adjacent to the HMP conservation areas require the use of a native plant palette consistent with the adjacent native vegetation communities, prohibit the use of ornamental invasive species, and limit the use of fertilizers to 18 Rev. 06/29/10 Q sW/s GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO prevent excess run-off from entering the open space. Irrigation should only be installed temporarily in order to ensure the establishment of plants and shall be controlled to prevent runoff from spreading into the HMP conservation areas. In addition, the use of cultivars of native species shall be prohibited to avoid genetic contamination of the native plant species in the preserve. 4. Fencing, signs, and lighting: Fencing will be installed along the perimeter of the development to discourage the access of humans and limit domestic pets into the HMP open space conservation areas. Fencing placed at the property lines between the residential lots and the HMP open space conservation areas will consist of a minimum 5-foot-high black vinyl coated chain-link. Fencing separating the HMP open space conservation areas from the project boundaries along Street "K", Street "X", and the riparian overlook seating area (Lot 25) will consist of a minimum 42 inch high 3 rail composite wood ranch-style fence. Signage will be placed at consistent intervals along the fence lines to inform the public about the presence and function of the HMP open space preserve. Lighting in the residential yards and along the project boundaries located adjacent to the HMP open space conservation areas shall be of a minimum necessary for safety and security and shall be shielded or directed away from the HMP open space conservation areas to the maximum extent practicable so as to avoid increasing the nighttime light input into the open space preserve. 5. Predator and exotic species conttol: The perimeter fence separating residential lots located adjacent to the HMP open space conservation areas will consist of a minimum 5-foot-high black vinyl coated chain-link designed to limit access of domestic and feral animals to the HMP open space conservation areas. Project CC&R's shall include text to educate homeowners regarding responsible pet ownership (e.g., keeping pets indoors, spaying/neutering pets, prohibiting the release of pets into the wild, etc.). Any long-term management on-site may also include development of a cowbird ttapping program, native predator program, and exotic plant control program. HMP Planning Standards: Project compliance with the HMP Planning Standards are included below. The planning standard is identified in boldface type followed by an explanation of how the project complies. 1. 67% of coastal sage scrub shall be conserved overall (emphasis added) within the Standards Areas, as well as 75% of gnatcatchers. Some zones may conserve more or less than these percentages due to parcel size, location, resources, or long-term conservation potential (HMP, Standards Area, pg. D-73). This is a citywide preservation standard and applies to many other properties than just the subject property. Upon final preserve assembly, the City is responsible for ensuring that there was 67% preservation of CSS within all Standards Areas. The Rancho Milagro project is proposing impacts to 2.56 acres (30%) of the existing 8.51 acres of unoccupied Diegan coastal sage scrub/ Disturbed Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub on-site, resulting in 5.95 acres (70%) remaining to be preserved in open space. In compliance with this requirement, the proposed project has been designed to preserve 70% of the existing coastal sage scrub on-site and; therefore, conttibutes its fair share of CSS preservation to the overall citywide standard. In addition, the project is mitigating its 2.56 acre impact as discussed above at a 1:1 ratio through on-site creation of 2.94 acres of CSS, which will occur through the conversion of 1.50 acres of agricultural land, 0.04 acres of developed land, and 1.40 acres of non-native grasslands within the northern open space lots (Lots 23 and 24). The proposed 2.94 acre restoration when added to the 5.95 acres being preserved will result in a net gain of total CSS on- site. 2. Maintain and enhance a habitat linkage across Linkage Area C and adjoining portions of Core Areas 3 and 5 that average between 500 and 1,000 feet wide, with a minimum width of no less than 500 feet. Emphasis should be on improving gnatcatcher habitat within the linkage (HMP, Zone 15 Planning Standards, pg. D-79). This standard is not applicable to the Rancho Milagro project, since the project site is not within Linkage Area C, nor is it within the adjoining portions of Core Areas 3 and 5. 19 Rev. 06/29/10 o 5-(M/Sl GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-O47SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO As additional information, there is a finger shaped portion of Core Area 5 present within the southern half of the project site that primarily encompasses the Agua Hedionda Creek riparian corridor. This is not directiy a part of the habitat linkage between Core Area 3, Linkage Area C, and Core Area 5, but does serve to increase the open space protection of Core Area 5. With the exception of approximately 1.9 acres that are clustered on the northern and western edges of the portion of Core Area 5, the project proposes to maintain all of this as preserved open space. In fact, the southern 16.3 acres of this area is predominately riparian habitat and was previously dedicated as open space to mitigate for wetiand/riparian impacts from the adjacent Terraces at Sunny Creek project. The additional open space that will be added from the proposed project within Core Area 5 includes 3.67 acres of coastal sage scrub, which would increase the amount of potential gnatcatcher habitat within this core area. In addition to the portion of the site within Core Area 5, the northeastern corner of the site abuts Linkage Area C. This northern area will be maintained as open space, including 1.21 acres of existing coastal sage scrub, and will be restored to include an additional 2.94 acres of coastal sage scrub and 0.21 acre of riparian habitat, which further connects the Linkage Area C through hardline open space to Cantarini Ranch to the north. 3. Areas of upland habitat outside of the designated Linkage Area C may be taken in exchange for restoration and enhancement inside the linkage, as long as the result is no net loss of coastal sage scrub and the associated gnatcatcher population within the southern portion of the zone (HMP, Zone 15 Planning Standards, pg. D-79). The project site is not within Linkage Area C and thus impacts to coastal sage scrub are mitigated on-site as to meet the no-net-loss standard. Impacts to 2.56 acres of coastal sage scrub will be mitigated through the preservation of 5.95 acres of coastal sage scrub within the total project ownership and the conversion of 2.94 acres of agricultural fields, developed land, and non-native grassland to coastal sage scrub within the northern open space lots. As additional information, the northern portion of the project is proposed as an open space area that is connected to Linkage Area C via a designated hardline area on the property to the north (Cantarini Ranch). The vegetation communities within the open space lot include both riparian and upland areas with a few small patches of Diegan coastal sage scrub. In addition, the southern open space lots (Lots 20, 21, and a portion of 23) includes several patches of coastal sage scrub to be preserved for a total of 8.89 acres of coastal sage scrub in preserved open space. These areas are located within Core Area 5, which connects to Linkage Area C. 4. Creation of linkage should utilize patches of existing habitat to the maximum extent practicable. Creation of the linkage must utilize patches of existing habitat within the identified linkage alignment (HMP, Zone 15 Planning Standards, pg. D-79). The northern portion of the project is proposed as an open space area (Lots 23 and 24), which are connected to Linkage Area C via a designated hardline area on the property to the north (Cantarini Ranch). This open space area includes a wetland/riparian corridor and patches of native coastal sage scrub and coast live oak woodland. The hardline open space area on Cantarini Ranch includes an upstteam portion of this drainage that is connected to the drainage in Linkage Area C. Preservation of this portion of the Rancho Milagro site as open space will increase the protection for this drainage system. In addition, restoration is proposed for the northern open space lots that will convert the majority of the agricultural fields and non-native grassland to coastal sage scrub and riparian habitats. The linkages created by the project utilize patches of existing habitat to the maximum extent practicable within the identified linkage alignment. Based on the evidence above, the project is consistent with this standard. 5. Maintain and enhance the wildlife movement potential between core areas using sensitive design of any road or utiUty crossings of Linkage C (HMP, Zone 15 Planning Standards, pg. D-79). This standard is not applicable to the project, since the project site is not within Linkage Area C and thus has no road or utility crossings. For additional information, please see above findings for discussion of proposed open space and how it relates to Linkage Area C. 20 Rev. 06/29/10 o o ^ GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-0?7S SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO 6. Conserve all riparian habitats on-site, and prohibit fill or development within the existing floodplain except where required for Circulation Element roads, Drainage Master Plan facilities, or other essential infrastructure (HMP, Zone 15 Planning Standards, pg. D-79). All on-site riparian habitat and floodplains are preserved, except where impacts are required in order to provide for essential infrasttucture, such as the extension of "K" Stteet into the site and the 16 ft. wide bridge maintenance access road. To minimize impacts, the proposed extension of "K" Stteet has been shifted to the narrowest portion of the riparian habitat/floodplain. The project preserves nearly all of the riparian habitat/floodplain, and project impacts on the riparian habitat/floodplain are minimal. The project conserves all riparian habitats and prohibits fill or development within the existing floodplain on-site except where required for Drainage Master Plan facilities and other essential access roads and infrasttucture. Based on the evidence above, the project is consistent with this standard. 7. Conserve any Narrow Endemic plant populations identified during planning (HMP, Zone 15 Planning Standards, pg. D-79). Pursuant to the biological technical report that was prepared for the project, no Narrow Endemic plant populations have been identified on the project site. 8. When conversion of agricultural lands to other uses is proposed, set back all development impacts at least 100 feet from existing wetland habitats and require habitat restoration or enhancement in the riparian and buffer areas (HMP, Zone 15 Planning Standards, pg. D-79). On the south side of the project site, adjacent to Agua Hedionda Creek, the average setback from the wetiand is approximately 300 feet. The exception to this is the proposed bio-filttation detention area on the western edge of the property. The stormceptor collector system associated with this bio-filtration detention area is designed to handle the 85"" percentile storms and will remove the majority of any storm-related sediment associated with those storms. This bio-filttation detention area will be inspected annually, but maintenance is not expected to be needed as trash and sediment will be caught and removed at the stormceptor collector. This bio-filttation detention area will have an earthen berm and bottom to allow for growth of natural vegetation as identified in the HMP. On the north side of the project site, adjacent to the unnamed ttibutary, the project has been designed so that the setback from the wetiand is a minimum of 100 feet except for storm outfalls and a small (16 ft. wide) emergency all- weather access road for bridge maintenance. In addition, the project proposes to create, restore, and enhance wetland/riparian habitat within the open space lots on-site to achieve no net loss of wetiand/riparian habitat. This is proposed on the west end of the project north of the drainage. The creation of 0.07 acres, representing a 1:1 mitigation ratio, will be accomplished outside of the 100-foot wetland habitat buffer. The remaining 0.14 acre (2:1 mitigation ratio) will be conducted within the buffer and will serve to connect the restoration outside of the buffer to the existing drainage. The setback for all development impacts is at least 100 feet from existing wetiand habitats. In addition, restoration of wetland and riparian impacts will occur on-site within the riparian and buffer areas. Based on the evidence above, the project is consistent with this standard. 21 Rev. 06/29/10 GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06 o -04/5 /SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the signifi- cance of an archeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? c) Directiy or indirectly destroy a unique pale ontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact • • • • Kl Kl Kl • • • • • • • • a, b & d) Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated. A Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Rancho Milagro study area was conducted by RECON and detailed in a report dated October 27, 2010 (RECON Number 3889.1A). The results of the survey indicate that within a 0.5-miIe radius of the project site there are five previously recorded sites (CA-SDI-9092, CA-SDI-9698, CA-SDI-9699, CA-SDI-9701 (SDM-W-601), and CA-SDI-14339H). Of these five previously recorded sites, three (CA-SDI-9698, CA-SDI-9699, and CA-SDI- 9701 (SDM-W-601)) are located within the Rancho Milagro Study Area. A pedestrian survey of the area was conducted on August 2, 2010 by RECON archeologists, whereby the three previously recorded sites were located again in the field. CA-SDI-9698 and CA-SDI-9699 are described as shell middens, and CA-SDI-9701 is described as a possible viUage site. As currently designed, the proposed project will impact all of CA-SDI-9698 and CA-SDI- 9699, and part of CA-SDI-9701, thereby significantiy impacting historical resources as defined within Section 15064.5 of the State CEQA Guidelines. Under CEQA, the preferred mitigation for impacts is to redesign the project to avoid the three sites. However, because of other project constraints, avoidance is not possible. Therefore, in order to reduce impacts to a less than significant level, a mitigation program, which involves a data recovery program for CA-SDI-9698, CA-SDI-9699, and for the portion of CA-SDI-9701 located within the project impact area is required, all of which is to be completed under the direction of a qualified archeologist. In accordance with the Tribal Consultation Guidelines for the State of California (California State Senate Bill 18, Chapter 905, Statutes of 2004), and as recommended by the Native American Heritage Commission in a letter dated December 9, 2010, the City of Carlsbad sent formal requests for consultation to the Mesa Grande Band of Mission Indians, San Pasqual Band of Mission Indians, Kwaaymii Laguna Band of Mission Indians, San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians, Ewilaapaayp Tribal Office, Rincon Band of Mission Indians, Sycuan Band of the Kumeyaay Nation, La Jolla Band of Mission Indians, Barona Group of the Capitan Grande, Pauma & Yuima, Lipay Nation of Santa Ysabel, and the Inaja Band of Mission Indians. Of those listed, the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians requested a formal consultation with the City of Carlsbad, which was held at the project site on April 6, 2011. No additional information regarding knowledge of any known archeological or cultural resources within the project study area was provided to staff from the representatives of the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians during the meeting, other than a request that the developer enter into a formal pre-excavation agreement prior to issuance of a grading permit and use of tribal monitors in addition to archeological monitoring during grading activities to address any cultural resources that may be discovered given the Band's traditional territory. Therefore, through implementation of the required mitigation measures identified in the Cultural Resources Survey Report for the Rancho Milagro study area, along with the requirements of ttibal monitoring and a formal pre- 22 Rev. 06/29/10 GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-(WSUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO excavation agreement with the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians, impacts to cultural resources are reduced to a less than significant level. c) Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. A Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation was conducted by Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. for the proposed project on April 5, 2005 and was later updated on April 27, 2009 (Job No. 04-8849). The results of the report indicate that the subject property is located in an area underlain by the undifferentiated Eocene-age Del Mar/Torrey/Santiago Formations. According to the Master Environmental Impact Report (MEIR 93-01, March 1994) covering the last General Plan update for the city, these formations have a high potential for containing significant fossil resources. In some areas, the project proposes to excavate up to 15 to 20 feet to develop level pads and improvement, which may involve disturbance of these Eocene-age formations. Destruction of any fossils that may exist in these formations would represent a significant impact. A mitigation program, which involves the review of the grading plans and full time attendance of a qualified paleontologist during grading operations, with the authority to direct grading in order to salvage and curate resources, will mitigate impacts to a less than significant level. 23 Rev. 06/29/10 GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT O6-1 Ws SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO VL GEOLOGY AND SOILS - Would the project: a) Expose people or sttuctures to 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. Sttong 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 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? Potentially Significant Impact • • • • • • Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated • • • • • • • • Kl • Less Than Significant No Impact Impact M • Kl Kl • • • • • • Kl M M • • Kl a.i.-a.iii., and c) Less Than Significant Impact. A Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation was conducted by Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. for the proposed project (April 27, 2009, Job No. 04-8849) in order to provide subsurface information and geotechnical recommendations specific to the proposed project. According to this report, the subject site is not located within any Earthquake Fault Zones as created by the Alquist-Priolo Act, nor are there any known major or active faults on, or within, the immediate vicinity of the site. Because of the lack of known active faults on the site, the potential for surface rupture at the site is considered remote. While considered remote, the main seismic hazard that may affect the site is ground shaking from one of the active regional faults, with the nearest known active fault being the Rose Canyon Fault Zone located approximately eight miles west and southwest of the site. Since no submerged loose sand or silt conditions exist at the site, risk of seismic-related ground failure or liquefaction is not a significant concern and impacts are considered to be less than significant. 24 Rev. 06/29/10 i-^S GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO a.iv.) No Impact According to the Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation (Geotechnical Exploration, Inc., April 27, 2009, Job No. 04-8849) that was prepared for the project, there are no known or suspected ancient landslides located on the site. Therefore, no impact is assessed. b) No Impact. During finish grading, exposure of soils could lead to an increased chance for the erosion of soils from the site. However, the project's compliance with the standards outlined in the City's Excavation and Grading Ordinance, which prevent the erosion of soil through slope planting and installation of temporary erosion control measures, will avoid substantial soil erosion impacts. Therefore, no impact is assessed. d) Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated. The Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation (Geotechnical Exploration, Inc., April 27, 2009, Job No. 04-8849) that was prepared for the project revealed surficial soils of varying compaction and of very high expansion potential underlying the property to depths ranging from less than one foot to approximately five feet in some areas. According to the report, in their present condition, the surficial fill soils, cultivated and in-place topsoils, slopewash/colluviums and aUuvium will not provide a stable soil base for future residential structures and improvements. However, the report indicates that when properly prepared, moisture conditioned, and compacted, these soils will have good load-bearing properties. As such, the Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation recommends that these materials be removed and re-compacted as part of the site preparation work prior to the addition of any new fill or sttuctural improvements. Through this measure and the implementation of the geotechnical design recommendations outlined within the report, development of the site is considered feasible and impacts from expansive soils are considered to be less than significant. e) No Impact. The project does not propose any septic tanks and will instead utilize the public sewer system. Therefore, there will be no impacts involving soils that support the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. 25 Rev. 06/29/10 yWs' GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-m/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact VIL GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directiy 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? a) Less Than Significant Impact. The project is expected to generate GHG emissions in the short-term as a result of consttuction emissions and in the long-term as a result of automobile ttips and energy consumption. Based on the GHG emission calculations contained within the Greenhouse Gas Screening Assessment prepared for the project by Ldn Consulting, Inc., October 25, 2010, the proposed project is expected to generate a total of 371.90 mettic tons of carbon dioxide equivalent emissions (C02e). Of this, automobile trips would represent 250.46 mettic tons of C02e emissions, energy consumption would represent 116.1 metric tons of C02e emissions, and project related construction emissions would represent 5.34 mettic tons of C02e emissions averaged over a 30 year period. The California Air Pollution Conttol Officers Association (CAPCOA) published a white paper with a suggested significance screening threshold criteria of 900 mettic tons of GHGs. While the proposed project is expected to generate some short-term and long-term GHG emissions that could contribute directiy and indirectiy to the environment, the total GHG emissions (371.90 C02e) generated by the project, combined with the state and federal reduction measures discussed in the Section "b" below, are not considered significant. Therefore, impacts from GHG emissions on the environment are considered to be less than significant. b) Less Than Significant Impact. In recognition of the adverse effects of global warming, GHG legislation has been adopted on both the state and federal levels. At the federal level, the federal Corporate Average Fuel Economy (CAFE) standard determines the fuel efficiency of certain vehicle classes in the United States. In 2007, as part of the Energy and Security Act of 2007, CAFE standards were increased for new light-duty vehicles to 35 miles per gallon by 2020. In May 2009, plans were announced to increase CAFE standards to require light duty vehicles to meet an average fuel economy of 35.5 miles per gaUons by 2016. Al the state level, Executive Order (EO) S-3-05 calls for a reduction in GHG emissions in Califomia to year 1990 levels by the year 2020 and for an 80-percent reduction in GHG emissions by the year 2050. AB 32 was passed by the state legislature to provide guidance on implementation of EO S-3-05. Under SB 32, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) is charged with the primary responsibility for determining how to achieve the reductions to 1990 levels by the year 2020. In order to quantify the goal, the CARB has established the year 1990 level of GHG emissions at 427 MMT C02e (CARB 2007b). The CARB estimates that a reduction of 173 MMT net C02e emissions below the "business as usual" (BAU) condition, defined as no change in current ttends or policies, would be required by the year 2020 to meet the 1990 levels. The BAU condition is determined by the GHG levels that would occur by the year 2020 without additional actions taken to reduce GHG emissions. A reduction of 173 MMT net C02e emissions represents a 15 percent reduction from today's levels and a 30-percent reduction from projected BAU levels in the year 2020. Thus, future development must reduce its GHG emissions by at least 30 percent over the BAU condition to achieve the goal of EO S-3-05 to reduce emissions to 1990 levels by the year 2020. 26 Rev. 06/29/10 GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-^/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO The CARB has adopted the Scoping Plan (CARB 2008) as directed by AB 32. The Scoping Plan proposes a set of actions designed to reduce overall GHG emissions in California to the levels required by AB 32. The measures in the Scoping Plan approved by the Board will be in place by the year 2012, with further implementation details and regulations to be developed, followed by the rulemaking process to meet the 2012 deadline. Measures applicable to development projects include the following: • Maximum energy efficiency building and appliance standards, including more sttingent building codes and appliance efficiency standards, and solar water heating; • Use of renewable sources for electricity generation, such as photovoltaic solar associated with the Million Solar Roofs program; • Regional ttansportation targets, including integration of development patterns and the transportation network to reduce vehicle ttavel, as identified in SB 375; and • Green Building strategy, including siting near transit or mixed use areas; zero-net-energy buildings; "beyond-code" building efficiency requirements; and the use of the CECs Tier II Energy Efficiency goal. Relative to transportation, the Scoping Plan includes nine measures or recommended actions. One of these is measure T-3, Regional Transportation-related GHG Targets, which relies on SB 375 implementation to reduce GHG emissions from passenger vehicles through reducing vehicle miles traveled. The other measures are related to vehicle GHG, fuel, and efficiency measures and would be implemented statewide rather than on a project-by-project basis. The Pavely vehicle emissions standards (AB 1493) requires the CARB to set GHG emission standards for passenger vehicles, light duty ttucks, and other vehicles determined to be vehicles whose primary use is non-commercial personal ttansportation in the state, manufactured in 2009 or later. When fully phased in, the near-term (years 2009 to 2012) standards would result in a reduction of approximately 22 percent in GHG emissions compared to the emissions from the year 2002 fleet, while the mid-term (2013 to 2016) standards would result in a reduction of approximately 30 percent. AB 75 mandates that state agencies develop and implement an integrated waste management plan to reduce GHG emissions related to solid waste disposal. The bill requires diversion of at least 50 percent of the solid waste from landfills and transformation facilities. SB 1368 requires the Public Utilities Commission (PUC) to develop and adopt a "GHGs emission performance standard". The PUC adopted an interim standard on January 25, 2007, but has formally requested a delay for the local publicly owned electtic utilities under its regulation. These standards apply to all long-term financial commitments entered into by electric utilities. Executive Order S-01-07 directs that a statewide goal be established to reduce the carbon intensity of California's transportation fuels by at least 10 percent by 2020. It orders that a Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS) for transportation fuels be established for Califomia, and directs the CARB to determine if a LCFS can be adopted as a discrete early action measure pursuant to AB 32. The CARB approved the LCFS as a discrete early action item with a regulation adopted and implemented in 2010. Based on the San Diego County Greenhouse Gas Inventory (SDCGHGI), the percent reductions in GHG emissions can be reduced by 15 percent through implementation of the Federal CAFE standard, 11 percent through LCFS, 6.6 percent through Pavley standard, and 4 percent by the light/heavy vehicle aerodynamic efficiency/hybridization standard. GHG emissions from vehicles would, therefore, be reduced by as much as 36.6 percent as a result of state and federal programs by the year 2020. Furthermore, compliance with the California Green Building Standards (effective January 1, 2011) will ensure additional reductions in GHG emissions. The combined reductions from state and federal programs formed to target a reduction in GHG emissions would exceed the BAU threshold of 33 percent. Therefore, the project would not conflict with state or federal policies aimed at reducing GHG emissions. 27 Rev. 06/29/10 GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06 -W5 VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERULS Would the project: Potentially Significant Impact 7SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Mitigation Significant No Incorporated Impact Impact • • • • K • Kl • • K • Kl • • • Kl 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 for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, |^ ^ would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physicaUy interfere with [ [ [ [ | [ ^ an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of | [ ^ | | [ | loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? a-b) Less Than Significant Impact. The initial phase of the project consists of grading and preparation of land for single-family residential lots, public roads, and drainage improvements. Future development will include the construction of individual homes on nineteen (19) half-acre minimum lot sizes. During both the grading and consttuction phases of the project, heavy equipment and materials (i.e. pettoleum products, paint, oils, and solvents) typically associated with land development may be ttansported and used on-site. Upon completion of construction, some use of hazardous cleaning products on the site may occur. Other than during this initial constmction phase, the project will not routinely utilize hazardous substances or materials. All ttansport, handling, use, and disposal of any cleaning substances will comply with all federal, state, and local laws regulating the management and use of such 28 Rev. 06/29/10 ^ GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-^5 /SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO materials. No exttaordinary risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances is anticipated with consttuction, development, and implementation or operation of the proposed project. It is concluded that the minimal amount of hazardous materials utilized during the consttuction period is not significant, and therefore the impact to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials is considered to be less than significant. c) No Impact. The site is not located within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. Therefore, no impact is assessed. d) No Impact. A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment was prepared for the project by Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. (April 5, 2005, Job No. 04-8849). Soil samples for agricultural chemicals were collected from the site with the results published in a foUow-up letter dated April 15, 2005. According to the findings, no detectable quantities of agricultural chemical residue were found in the soil samples taken from the site. Additionally, the California Environmental Protection Agency's listing of sites containing hazardous waste and substances (a.k.a. the Cortese List) was searched via the State's website on October 6, 2010. The results revealed that the project is not located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. Therefore, the project will not create a significant hazard to the public or environment and no impact is assessed. e) No Impact. The subject site is located approximately one mile north of the McClellan-Palomar Airport and is subject to the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP). The project was submitted to the San Diego County Regional Airport Authority (SDCRAA) on December 9, 2010 for an ALUCP Consistency Determination. A consistency determination was received from the SDCRAA in a letter dated March 16, 2011. In their letter, the SDCRAA determined the project to be "conditionally compatible". The SDCRAA identifies the project site as being located within Safety Zone 6, is within an overflight notification area, is outside of the 60 db CNEL noise contour, and is in compliance with the ALUCP airspace protection surfaces. The ALUCP identifies residential uses located within Safety Zone 6 and outside of the 60 db CNEL noise contour as being compatible with airport uses. However, because the proposed project is located within an overflight notification area, the ALUCP requires as a condition of approval that an overflight notification be recorded with the County Recorder for new residential land uses. A condition to that effect will be applied to the project. As such, it is concluded that the project site will not cause a safety hazard for people residing or working within the project area. Therefore, no impact is assessed. f) No Impact. The project site is not in the vicinity of a private airstrip. Therefore, no impact is assessed. g) No Impact. The project site is located in close proximity to El Camino Real, which is one of five primary arterials designated in the General Plan as an emergency access or emergency evacuation route to move people during emergencies. A signalized intersection located at the future extension of College Boulevard (Reach A) and Stteet "A" of the approved Cantarini Ranch tentative map (CT 00-18) will provide primary access to the project site. This access will serve to provide emergency evacuation onto College Boulevard and ultimately El Camino Real if necessary. The City of Carlsbad's Fire Department will provide all basic fire and emergency medical services to the project site. Specifically, the project will be served by Fire Station No. 3 located at 3701 Catalina Drive, and Fire Station No. 5 located at 2540 Orion Way. The project site is within a five minute response time for these fire stations. Additionally, the City of Ceirlsbad's Fire Department has agreements with other agencies, such as the County of San Diego, to provide additional services, including hazardous materials incident response. In the event of a large scale incident, the City of Carlsbad will activate its Emergency Operations Center (EOC) and provide details to residents. The proposed project will not impact the ability to provide emergency services to the project site, nor will it physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Therefore, no impact is assessed. h) Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated. The existing environment of the subject property can be generally characterized as rural. The development area of the property is largely developed in agriculture with upland and riparian/wetland habitats located along the northernmost and southern periphery of the property. An approximately 60-foot high, north-facing hillside slope exists within the northern half of the property, and an approximately 70-foot high, south facing hillside slope exists within the southern half of the property. Canyon centeriines cross the southeast and northeast to northwest corners of the property. The Agua Hedionda Creek bed flows from east to west along southern portion of the property, and an unnamed ttibutary of Agua 29 Rev. 06/29/10 sW/s ^ GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-OT/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO Hedionda Creek flows from east to west along the northern portion of the property, both of which contain dense native habitat. The project proposes grading of residential pads with some uphill and downhill perimeter slopes located adjacent to natural habitat. A Fire Suppression Plan is included as part of the project exhibits, which includes the requirement of a 60 foot wide Fire Suppression Zone (FPZ) consistent with the City of Carlsbad's Landscape Manual and Fire Department standards. Reduced fire buffers have been approved by the City's Fire Marshal on Lots 4, 7, and 19. Where this has occurred, consttuction of a six (6) foot tall solid masonry wall, and/or a modified FPZ regulation has been required in place of the 60 foot wide FPZ to mitigate impacts to a less than significant level. 30 Rev. 06/29/10 GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-W/sUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY - Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local ground water table level (i.e., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stteam or river, in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off- site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the flow rate or amount (volume) of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off- site? e) Create or contribute runoff water, which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood delineation map? h) Place within lOO-year flood hazard area sttuctures, which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? Potentially Significant Impact • • Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Mitigation Significant No Incorporated Impact Impact • • • • Kl • • Kl m • • • Kl • Kl • • • • • K! • • • • Kl • • • Ki • • • Kl • • • Kl 31 Rev. 06/29/10 GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO a) Less Than Significant Impact. The project is required by law to comply with all federal, state and local water quality regulations, including the Clean Water Act, California Administtative Code Title 23, specific basin plan objectives identified in the "Water Quality Control Plan for San Diego Basin" (WQCP), and the city's Standard Urban Storm Water Management Plan (SUSMP). The WQCP contains specific objectives for the Carlsbad Hydrologic Unit, which includes the requirement to comply with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) and the use of Best Management Practices (BMPs). Construction activities for this project are covered under state-wide construction permit Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ issued by the State Water Resource Control Board Permit. As part of the permit requirements, the applicant will prepare and submit a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for the project. Through each phase of construction, the SWPPP will identify specific erosion conttol and storm water pollution prevention plan practices that will be implemented to protect downstream water quality. Post-development activities for this project are covered under Order No. R9-2007-0001 issued by the California Regional Water Quality Conttol Board San Diego Region. As part of these requirements, the applicant must prepare and submit a Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) addressing what treatment Best Management Practices (BMP's) will be constructed to treat the post-development runoff from the project. The SWMP will address how pollutants from this project will be reduced, captured, filtered, and/or tteated prior to discharge from the project site. Through this process, the project will not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements and impacts are therefore considered to be less than significant. b) No Impact. The project does not propose to directly draw any groundwater. Instead, the project will be served by public water disttibution lines that will be extended to the site. Therefore, no impact is assessed. c-e) Less Than Significant Impact. A preliminary Hydrology & Hydraulics Study (March 11, 2009) and a preliminary Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) (March 9, 2009, JN 1674) were prepared for the project by Manitou Engineering to address hydrology and water quality. According to these reports, existing runoff from the project's south facing slope flows directly towards Agua Hedionda Creek, while the remainder drains towards a northerly intermittent watercourse that flows westerly into a small pond on the adjacent property before draining into Agua Hedionda Creek. Once in Agua Hedionda Creek, drainage flows west towards Agua Hedionda Lagoon and ultimately the Pacific Ocean. The drainage pattern on the site is being altered by the development and grading associated with the proposed project. However, while storm water discharge points will divert runoff from the existing condition, the ultimate discharge points will remain relatively the same. After being filtered through bio- swales located on individual Lots 4-8 and 10-13, and a bio-filtration detention basin located on Lot 22, the majority of the anticipated runoff will be directed towards several locations within the open space areas in an effort to reduce the locations of concentrated flow and to maintain and promote growth of the natural vegetation and wetland habitats. Additionally, project development includes spanning the northerly intermittent watercourse with the development of "K" Stteet. Flow at this crossing will be maintained via a soft-bottomed bridge stmcture that will span a 12 foot section of the watercourse at its narrowest section. The soft-bottom sttucture is designed to more closely replicate natural drainage flows than a standard culvert design used for drainage crossings. Through the implementation of a storm water conveyance system, individual bio-swales, and also a bio-filtration detention basin, the runoff rate exiting the site will be slightiy reduced when compared to the existing condition and therefore will not cause erosion or flooding. To address water quality for the project, Best Management Practices (BMP's) will be implemented during construction activities and post-consttuction development. Pollutants of concem are being addressed through site design, source conttol, and tteatment control BMP's. Landscaping of slopes will be utilized to reduce erosion. Riprap placed in locations of storm drain outfalls will be used to reduce velocities. Treatment conttol BMP's, such as landscaping, bio-filttation swales and bio-filttation detention basins will address water quality. Through these efforts, the project will not violate any water quality standards, or otherwise substantiaUy degrade water quality; will not substantially alter existing drainage patterns causing substantial erosion, siltation, or flooding; and will not significantly impact the capacity of storm water drainage systems. Therefore, impacts are considered to be less than significant. f) Less Than Significant Impact. Consttuction of the proposed project improvements is required by law to comply with all federal, state and local water quality regulations, including the Clean Water Act and associated NPDES regulations. As mentioned above, the project includes a preliminary SWMP, and temporary impacts associated with consttuction operation will be mitigated to a less than significant level. The project will not result in permanent or long term degradation of water quality as a result of the proposed pollution control program. 32 Rev. 06/29/10 ^ GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-M/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO g-h) No Impact. The 43.58-acre project site is located within a lOO-year flood hazard area according to Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) No. 060773C0769F. June 19. 1997 (LOMR August 29. 2002). The boundary of this flood hazard area follows Agua Hedionda Creek, which is located in the southern portion of the property and outside of the development area of the project. Therefore, the project does not place any housing or structures that could impede or redirect flood flows within the 100-year flood hazard area. No impact is assessed. i) No Impact. According to the Citv of Carlsbad Geotechnical Hazards Analvsis and Mapping Studv. Catasttophic Dam Failure Inundation. Tsunami, and Seiche Hazard Zone Maps (September 1992). the southern portion of 43.58- acre project site located along Agua Hedionda Creek is within a Catastrophic Dam Failure Inundation Zone for Squires Dam and Reservoir. However, no portion of the proposed development area is located within this hazards area. Therefore, the project will not expose people or sttuctures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding. No impact is assessed. j) No Impact. According to the City of Carlsbad Geotechnical Hazards Analvsis and Mapping Studv. Catastrophic Dam Failure Inundation. Tsunami, and Seiche Hazard Zone Maps (September 1992). the subject property is not located within a Tsunami and Seiche Hazard Zone. Therefore, the project would not be impacted or inundated by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. No impact is assessed. 33 Rev. 06/29/10 W/S GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Signiflcant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact • • • • • Kl • • • X • X. LANDUSE AND PLANNING - Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? a) No Impact. Development of the proposed project will not physically divide an established community. Therefore, no impact is assessed. b-c) Less Than Significant Impact. The 43.58-acre Rancho Milagro project site is located within the Sunny Creek Specific Plan Area (SP 191), which was adopted by the City of Carlsbad in 1985. The existing environment of the subject property can be generally characterized as rural. The specific development area is situated on a previously disturbed portion of the property in the northern boundary, which is presently used for agriculture. Upland and riparian/wetland habitats surround this area within the northern quarter and southern half of the property. Topographically, the property ranges from approximately 80 feet above mean sea level (MSL) in the southwesterly portions of the property to approximately 200 feet above MSL in the northeasterly portions of the property. Agua Hedionda Creek flows from east to west through the southern quarter of the property and an unnamed tributary of Agua Hedionda Creek flows from east to west through the property's northern quarter. The surrounding environment can be generally characterized as rural, interspersed by agricultural fields, native habitat, and scattered residential estate and ranch type properties. To the north is the Cantarini property, which was previously developed in agriculture, but is presently fallow. This property is entitled with an approved residential subdivision known as Cantarini Ranch (CT 00-18), and will eventuaUy be developed with 105 single-family residential lots (half-acre minimum lot sizes), an 80 unit multiple-family residential apartment complex, and several open space lots. To the south is an existing 172 small lot single-family residential development known as the Terraces at Sunny Creek (CT 96-02), a multiple-family apartment complex, and the Madonna Hill assisted living facility. To the east, the subject property is bounded by five large parcels of land, three of which are estate/ranch type properties with single-family residences, one is developed in agriculture (northeast parcel, known as the Mandana property), and the other (southeast parcel) is developed with a landscaping business (Brickman Landscaping) which takes access off of Cougar Drive near its intersection with El Camino Real. To the west is a parcel of land known as the Barlow property, which is developed with a single-family residence, several small outbuildings, horse stables, and an outdoor equesttian riding facility. The northerly portion of the subject property, where the residential development is proposed, has a General Plan Land Use designation of Residential Low-Medium Density (RLM). The remaining portion of the property, located in the general vicinity of the Agua Hedionda Creek, has a General Plan Land Use designation of Open Space (OS) over its majority, however, there are two narrow bands of property located between the Agua Hedionda Creek channel and the Terraces at Sunny Creek development that have a combination General Plan Land Use designation of Residential High Density, Commercial, and Office (RH/C/O). This RH/C/O General Plan Land Use designation is a remnant land use designation from a previously approved project (Sycamore Specific Plan, 1984), which never developed and was eventually replaced by the Terraces at Sunny Creek project. A General Plan Amendment is included with the proposal to change the existing designations of the property from RLM/OS/RH/C/O to RLM/OS in order to 1) correct a mapping error, 2) to adjust the General Plan Land Use boundaries to coincide with the Sunny 34 Rev. 06/29/10 (-04/S1 GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-O47SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO Creek Specific Plan land use type and density pattern, and 3) preserve Open Space land in a configuration that coincides with the City of Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan (HMP) requirements. The General Plan Amendment will include amending the Official Open Space & Conservation Maps to reflect the newly expanded open space areas. The OS designation will be applied to open space lots (Lots 20-25) and the RLM designation will be applied to the boundaries of the residential lots (Lots 1-19). The RLM General Plan Land Use designation anticipates single-family residential dwellings at 0 to 4 dwelling units per acre with a Growth Management Conttol Point (GMCP) of 3.2 dwelling units per acre. The project site has a net developable area of 16.62 acreages. At the GMCP, the site yields 53 dwelling units. Given the requirement to develop half-acre minimum lot sizes per the Sunny Creek Specific Plan and the preservation requirements of the HMP, the project site can yield no more than 19 single-family residential lots. The 19 lot subdivision results in a density of 1.14 dwelling units per acre, which is within the RLM density range of 0 to 4 dwelling units per acre and is therefore consistent with the General Plan. The project is compatible with the City of Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan in that the site is designated as a Standards Area and the site does not contain any significant natural resources that cannot be mitigated (see Section IV, Biological Resources). The project is in compliance with the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (see Section VIII, e-f) for which an Airport Land Use Commission Consistency Determination has been granted by the San Diego County Regional Airport Authority in a letter dated March 16, 2011. Therefore, impacts are considered to be less than significant. 35 Rev. 06/29/10 GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06 -04/5 7SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO XI. MINERAL RESOURCES - Would the project: 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? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated • • Less Than Significant Impact No Impact • Kl • • • Kl 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? a-b) No Impact. There is no indication that the subject property contains any known mineral resources that would be of future value to the region or the residents of the state. Therefore, no impact is assessed. 36 Rev. 06/29/10 GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-( /SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO xn. NOISE - Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundboume vibration or groundboume noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within 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? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Potenfially Significant Impact • • • Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No • • • • • • • Impact Impact • Kl Kl • • Kl K • • m • • • Kl a) No Impact. The project will not result in exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the General Plan or the City of Carlsbad Noise Guidelines Manual. The proposed project is located a distance greater than 500 feet from a General Plan Circulation Element Roadway (i.e., EI Camino Real, and the future extension of College Boulevard (Reach-A)), is outside of the 60 dB(A) CNEL noise contour as indicated in the City of Carlsbad's General Plan Noise Element and Noise Guidelines Manual (Carlsbad Future Noise Exposure Contours Map, forecast year 2010), and is outside of the 60 dB(A) CNEL noise contour as indicated in Exhibit III-l of the McClellan-Palomar Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP). Therefore, no impact is assessed. b & d) Less than Significant Impact. The anticipated grading operations associated with the proposed project will result in a temporary and minor increase in groundborne vibration and ambient noise levels. Following the completion of grading, ambient noise level and vibrations are expected to return to pre-existing levels. Therefore, impacts are considered to be less than significant. c) No Impact. The Rancho Milagro project consists of 19 single-family residential lots with half-acre minimum lot sizes. The proposal is a large-lot rural estate subdivision for the development of future custom single-family homes. Surrounding the project to the north is the approved, but not yet built Cantarini Ranch residential subdivision consisting of 105 half-acre sized single-family residential lots and an 80-unit multiple-family residential apartment complex. To the south are the Terraces at Sunny Creek residential subdivision, consisting of 172 small lot single- family homes, and also a multiple-family residential apartment complex. The proposed project design is consistent with the Sunny Creek Specific Plan, which establishes standards for the residential development of the area and is 37 Rev. 06/29/10 GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT OeWsUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO intended to promote a rural estate atmosphere. The proposed project is consistent in land use and intensity with the surrounding residential development and therefore will not result in sustained ambient noise levels that would exceed the established standards. Therefore, no impact is assessed. e) No Impact. The subject site is located approximately one mile north of the McClellan-Palomar Airport and is subject to the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP). The project was submitted to the San Diego County Regional Airport Authority (SDCRAA) on December 9, 2010 for an ALUCP Consistency Determination. A consistency determination was received from the SDCRAA in a letter dated March 16, 2011. In their letter, the SDCRAA determined the project to be "conditionally compatible". The SDCRAA identifies the project site as being located within Safety Zone 6, is within an overflight notification area, is outside of the 60 db CNEL noise contour, and is in compliance with the ALUCP airspace protection surfaces. The ALUCP identifies residential uses located within Safety Zone 6 and outside of the 60 db CNEL noise contour as being compatible with airport uses. However, because the proposed project is located within an overflight notification area, the ALUCP requires as a condition of approval that an overflight notification be recorded with the County Recorder for new residential land uses. A condition to that effect will be applied to the project. As such, it is concluded that the project site will not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels. Therefore, no impact is assessed. f) No Impact. The project site is not within the vicinity of a private airstrip, and therefore will not expose people residing or working in the project vicinity to excessive noise levels. Therefore, no impact is assessed. 38 Rev. 06/29/10 ^ J GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-OT/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING - Would the project: a) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrasttucture)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the consttuction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the constmction of replacement housing elsewhere? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigafion Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact • • • • • • • m • Kl • Kl a-c) No Impact. The project site is located within the boundaries of the City of Carlsbad's Zone 15 Local Facilities Management Plan (LFMP). Existing land uses include agriculture mixed with upland and riparian/wetiand habitats. The Zone 15 LFMP was prepared pursuant to the City's Growth Management Program, as outiined in Chapter 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. Based on the underlying Zoning and General Plan Land Use designations, the Zone 15 LFMP anticipates that the project site (area RLM-11) would be developed with single-family residential units. Using the residential build out projections, the Zone 15 LFMP identifies the necessary amount of infrastructure and services (i.e., water, sewer, park, libraries, drainage facilities, fire, open space, school, and circulation elements) that will be required for each development. According to the Zone 15 LFMP, the anticipated number of residential dwelling units for the project site was 88 dwelling units. The proposed residential unit count for the proposed project is 19 dwelling units, representing a 78% reduction from the 88 units originally anticipated by the approved Zone 15 LFMP. Implementation of the proposed project will result in a reduction in the number of residential units and population from that anticipated by the Zone 15 LFMP. Public Services and Utilities implementation of the project would not adversely impact planned or current levels of service for public facilities such as sewer, water, open space, parks, libraries, fire, and police due to the reduction in the number of units anticipated for the site. As a result, the proposed project is not anticipated to have a significant adverse impact to planned residential unit count, population, or growth patterns in the area; and furthermore, the proposed project does not displace existing housing or people. Therefore, no impact is assessed. 39 Rev. 06/29/10 GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06 o -(W5 7SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant No Impact Impact a) Would the project 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 consttuction 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? • • • X ii) Police protection? • • • X ni) Schools? • • • X iv) Parks? • • • X v) Other public facilities? • • • X a.i. - a.v.) No Impact. The project's size, consisting of 19 single-family residential lots at a density of 1.14 dwelling units per acre, is consistent with the General Plan and Sunny Creek Specific Plan. Therefore, the project will not affect the provision and availability of public facilities (fire protection, police protection, schools, parks, libraries, etc.). Furthermore, the proposed project shall be subject to the conditions and facility service level requirements within the Zone 15 LFMP. As a result, no significant public service impacts will occur as a result of this project. Therefore, no impact is assessed. 40 Rev. 06/29/10 GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06 o -04/S /SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO XV. RECREATION 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? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated • • • • Less Than Significant Impact No Impact • K • Kl a-b) No Impact. As part of the City's Growth Management Program, a performance standard for parks was adopted. The park performance standard requires that three acres of Community Park and Special Use Area per 1,000 population within a park district be provided. The project site is located within Park Disttict No. 2, which is within the Northwest Quadrant of the city. All development within the Zone 15 LFMP is conditioned to pay a park- in-lieu fee to satisfy the performance standard established by the City Growth Management Program. Furthermore, the project does not include any recreational facilities, nor does it require the construction of expansion of existing recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. Therefore, no impact is assessed. 41 Rev. 06/29/10 GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06 i^5 7SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO XVL TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC Would the project: a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass ttansit and non-motorized ttavel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, stteets, highways and freeways, pedesttian and bicycle paths, and mass ttansit? b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and ttavel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic pattems, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public ttansit, bicycle, or pedesttian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? Potentially Significant Impact • • • • Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Signiflcant Impact • • • • • • No Impact • • Kl • Kl • • Kl • Kl • m • K a) Less Than Significant Impact. The 19 lot single-family residential subdivision with minimum half-acre sized lots will generate 228 Average Daily Trips (ADT). This ttaffic will utilize College Boulevard and EI Camino Real through the extension of the approved CoUege Boulevard Reach A once consttucted!. While the increase in ttaffic from the proposed project may be slightly noticeable, the street system is designed and sized to accommodate traffic from this project along with cumulative development within the city of Carlsbad. The proposed project will not cause an increase in traffic that is substantial in relation to the existing ttaffic load and capacity of the street system. Therefore, impacts from the proposed project are considered to be less than significant. b) Less Than Significant Impact. SANDAG acting as the County Congestion Management Agency has designated three roads (Rancho Santa Fe Rd., EI Camino Real, and Palomar Airport Rd.) and one highway segment in Carlsbad as part of the regional circulation system. The existing LOS on these designated roads and highway in Carlsbad are as follows: 42 Rev. 06/29/10 GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06^/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO LOS Rancho Santa Fe Road "A-D" El Camino Real "A-D" Palomar Airport Road "A-D" SR 78 "F" The Congestion Management Program's (CMP) acceptable Level of Service (LOS) standard is "E", or LOS "F" if that was the LOS in the 1990 base year (e.g., SR 78 in Carlsbad was LOS "F" in 1990). Accordingly, all designated roads and Highway 78 is currently operating at or better than the acceptable standard LOS. Achievement of the CMP acceptable Level of Service (LOS) "E" standard assumes implementation of the adopted CMP sttategies. Based on the design capacities of the designated roads and highway and implementation of the CMP sttategies, they will function at acceptable level(s) of service in the short-term and at build-out. c) No Impact. The proposed project does not include any aviation components. The project is consistent with the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) for McClellan-Palomar Airport. It would not, therefore, result in a change of air ttaffic patterns or result in substantial safety risks. Therefore, no impact is assessed. d) No Impact. All project circulation improvements will be designed and constructed to City standards; and, therefore, would not result in design hazards. The proposed project is consistent with the City's General Plan and Zoning. Therefore, it would not increase hazards due to an incompatible use. No impact is assessed. e) No Impact. The proposed project has been designed to satisfy the emergency requirements of the Fire and Police Departments. Therefore, no impact is assessed. f) No Impact. The project site is located approximately one half-mile northeast of the El Camino Real and College Boulevard intersection. A signalized intersection located at the future extension of College Boulevard (Reach-A) and Street "A" of the approved Cantarini Ranch tentative map (CT 00-18) will provide primary access to the project site. The future extension of College Boulevard Reach-A will connect El Camino Real and Cannon Road. College Boulevard, El Camino Real, and Cannon Road are each served by public transportation (North County Transit District). College Boulevard Reach-A is designed and approved to include bus stops as well. Bus routes from around North County, as well as bus service to and from the Coaster and Sprinter stations are available. Therefore, no impact is assessed. 43 Rev. 06/29/10 GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06 -Ws SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Conttol Board? b) Require or result in the consttuction of new water or wastewater tteatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the consttuction of which would cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater tteatment 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? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Potentially Significant Impact • • • • • • Potentially Significant Unless Less Than Mitigation Significant No Incorporated Impact Impact • • • • • • • • • 13 • Kl • Kl • Kl • Kl • K • m a-g) No Impact. The proposed residential development will be required to comply with all Regional Water Quality Conttol Board requirements. In addition, the Zone 15 LFMP anticipated that the subject project site would eventually be developed with residential uses at a higher density of 3.2 du/ac compared to 1.14 du/ac being proposed, and therefore wastewater tteatment facilities were planned and designed to accommodate future residential uses on this site. All public facilities, including water facilities, wastewater tteatment facilities and drainage facilities have been planned and designed to accommodate the growth projections for the City at build-out. The proposed development is anticipated to increase the demand for these facilities; however, the proposed density (1.14 du/ac) is less than what was originally anticipated (3.2 du/ac at the Growth Management Control Point) for this site, and thus will not result in an overaU increase in the City's growth projection in the northeast quadrant. Therefore, the project does not create development that will result in a significant need to expand or consttuct new water facilities/supplies, wastewater treatment, or storm water drainage facilities. No impact is assessed. 44 Rev. 06/29/10 GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06 7SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated XVIIL MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to 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, 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? ("Cumula- tively 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 directiy or indirectiy? • Kl Less Than Significant No Impact Impact • • • • K • • • • m a) Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. The proposed project's required mitigation, as outlined in the Biological Resources section of this report, will ensure that there is no degradation of the environment or substantial reductions of habitat and wildlife species. Cumulative impacts to sensitive plant and wildlife species within the Multiple Habitat Conservation Plan (MHCP) Subarea would occur through the proposed project, in absence of the implementation of the HMP, and specificaUy the adjacent preserve system. However, the implementation of the HMP provides mitigation for these cumulative impacts because the plan has anticipated region-wide impacts and has adopted a preserve system that mitigates for these impacts. The project is consistent with the MCHP guidelines and the HMP regional planning efforts in the City of Carlsbad. Therefore, there will be no cumulative impacts to sensitive upland or wetiand/riparian habitats, and/or fish and wildlife species. Furthermore, the project's required mitigation as outlined in the Cultural Resources section of this report will preclude any elimination of important examples of major periods of California history or prehistory, thus reducing impacts to less than significant. b) Less Than Significant Impact. The San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) projects regional growth for the greater San Diego area, and local General Plan Land Use policies are incorporated into SANDAG projections. Based upon those projections, region-wide standards, including storm water quality control, air quality standards, habitat conservation, congestion management standards, etc., are established to reduce the cumulative impacts of development in the region. AU of the City's development standards and regulations are consistent with the region wide standards. The City's standards and regulations, including grading standards, water quality and drainage standards, ttaffic standards, habitat and cultural resource protection regulations, and public facility standards, ensure that development within the City will not result in a significant cumulatively considerable impact. There are two regional issues that development within the City of Carlsbad has the potential to have a cumulatively considerable impact on. Those issues are air quality and regional circulation. As described above, the project would conttibute to a cumulatively considerable potential net increase in emissions throughout the air basin. However, the air quality would be essentially the same whether or not the development is implemented. 45 Rev. 06/29/10 )-Ws GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-WSUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO The County Congestion Management Agency (CMA) has designated three roads (Rancho Santa Fe Rd., El Camino Real and Palomar Airport Rd.) and two highway segments in Carlsbad as part of the regional circulation system. The CMA had determined, based on the City's growth projections in the General Plan, that these designated roadways will function at acceptable levels of service in the short-term and at build-out. The project is consistent with the City's growth projections, and therefore, the cumulative impacts from the project to the regional circulation system are less than significant. With regard to any other potential impacts associated with the project. City standards and regulations will ensure that development of the site will not result in any significant cumulatively considerable impacts. c) No Impact. Based upon the residential nature of the project and that future development of the site will comply with City standards, the project will not result in any direct or indirect substantial adverse environmental effects on human beings. No impact assessed. 46 Rev. 06/29/10 w .M GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-W5 SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO XVIII. 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 this case 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. 47 Rev. 06/29/10 o 6-W/S ^ GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-W/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO 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. 1. Final Master Environmental Impact Report for the City of Carlsbad General Plan Update (MEIR 93-01). City of Carlsbad Planning Division. March 1994. 2. Carlsbad General Plan. City of Carlsbad Planning Division. March 1994. 3. Citv of Carlsbad Municipal Code. Title 21 Zoning. City of Carlsbad Planning Division, as updated. 4. Habitat Management Plan for Natural Communities in the Citv of Carlsbad. City of Carlsbad Planning Division. November 2004. 5. Biological Technical Report for the Rancho Milagro Studv Area. Carlsbad. California (RECON Number 3889.1B). RECON Environmental Inc. AprU 27, 2011. 6. Rancho Milagro Compliance with HMP Zone 15 Planning Standards Letter. RECON Environmental Inc. May 4, 2011. 7. Wetiand Delineation Report for the Rancho Milagro Studv Area. Carlsbad. California (RECON Number 3889B). RECON Environmental Inc. April 24, 2009. 8. California Environmental Protection Agency Website: "Cortese List Data Resources". http://www.calepa.ca.gov/SiteCleanup/CorteseList/. Accessed October 6, 2010. 9. Cultural Resources Survev Report for the Rancho Milagro Studv Area. Carlsbad. California (RECON Number 3889-lA). RECON Environmental Inc. October 27, 2010. 10. Rancho Milagro Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program Lands (RECON Number 3889-IB). RECON Environmental Inc. November 19, 2010. 11. Rancho Milagro Greenhouse Gas (GHG) Screening Letter. Ldn Consulting. Inc. October 25, 2010. 12. Phase I Environmental Site Assessment. Rancho Milagro Development. Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. April 5, 2005 (Job No. 04-8849). 13. Update Report of Geotechnical Investigation. Rancho Milagro Residential Development. Geotechnical Exploration, Inc. April 27, 2009 (Job No. 04-8849). 14. Storm Water Management Plan for Citv of Carlsbad Tract No. 06-04. Rancho Milagro. Manitou Engineering Company. March 9, 2009 (JN 1674). 15. Preliminarv Hvdrologv & Hvdraulics for Citv of Carlsbad Tract No. 06-04. Rancho Milagro. Manitou Engineering Company. March 11, 2009. 16. Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM) No. 060773C0769F. June 19, 1997 (LOMR August 29, 2002). 17. Citv of Carlsbad Geotechnical Hazards Analvsis and Mapping Studv. Catasttophic Dam Failure Inundation. Tsunami, and Seiche Hazard Zone Maps. City of Carlsbad Planning Division. September 1992. 18. Citv of Carlsbad Noise Guidelines Manual. City of Carlsbad Planning Division. September 1995. 48 Rev. 06/29/10 ^ GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-?H!!^SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO 19. McClellan-Palomar Airport Land Use Compatibilitv Plan. Airport Land Use Commission, San Diego County. March 4, 2010. 20. Airport Land Use Commission Consistency Determination - Rancho Milagro Tract. Citv of Carlsbad. San Diego County Airport Authority. March 16, 2011. 49 Rev. 06/29/10 JWS GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-(M/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO LIST OF MITIGATING MEASURES (IF APPLICABLE) 1. To avoid any impacts to potentially active least Bell's vireo nests, all grading and vegetation clearing activities within 500 feet of riparian habitat shall be conducted outside of the breeding season (September 16 to March 14""). Indirect noise impacts could occur if active nests are located within 500 feet of construction during the breeding season. If this condition arises, a qualified biological monitor shall be required to be on-site during construction activities. 2. To avoid any impacts to potentially active southwestern willow flycatcher nests, all grading and vegetation clearing activities within 500 feet of riparian habitat shall be conducted outside of the breeding season (September 16"" to April 31*'). Indirect noise impacts could occur if active nests are located within 500 feet of consttuction during the breeding season. If this condition arises, a qualified biological monitor shall be required to be on-site during construction activities. 3. To avoid any impacts to potentially active coastal California gnatcatcher nests, all grading and vegetation clearing activities within or adjacent to suitable habitat shall be conducted outside of the breeding season (August 16"" to February 28""). Indirect noise impacts could occur if active nests are located within 500 feet of consttuction during the breeding season. If this condition arises, a qualified biological monitor shall be required to be on-site during consttuction activities. 4. To avoid any impacts to potentiaUy active raptor nests, ttees shall be removed outside of the breeding season (September 1*' to January 31*') of local raptor species. If it is determined that ttees must be removed during the breeding season (February 1*' to August 30"*), a raptor nest survey shall be conducted by a qualified biologist prior to the removal of any ttees to determine if raptor nests are present. If active nests are discovered, a 500 foot minimum buffer shall be established around the ttee until the young are independent of the nest site. No construction activity shall be allowed to occur within the buffer area until a qualified biologist has determined that the fledglings are independent of the nest. 5. Impacts to wetland communities, including southern willow scrub and sycamore/oak woodland shall be mitigated at a 3:1 ratio, with a minimum 1:1 creation component that achieves the "no net loss" standard. Impacts to 0.05 acres of southern willow scrub shall be mitigated by the on-site creation of 0.15 acres of southern willow scrub in preserved open space. Impacts to 0.02 acres of sycamore/oak woodland shall be mitigated by the on-site creation of 0.06 acres of sycamore/oak woodland in preserved open space. A conceptual restoration plan has been prepared as part of project biotechnical report, which is proposing to convert a minimum of 0.21 acres of agricultural fields located in Open Space Lot 23 adjacent to the northern drainage to suitable wetland/riparian habitat. The creation of 0.07 acres, representing a 1:1 mitigation ratio, shall be accomplished outside of the 100-foot wetland habitat buffer. The remaining 0.14 acre (2:1 mitigation ratio) shall be located within the buffer and shall serve to connect the restoration outside of the buffer to the existing drainage. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, and/or the clearing of any habitat on-site, a final wetlands/riparian restoration plan shall be approved by the City of Carlsbad Planning Department (with concurrence by the USFWS, USACE, and CDFG) to mitigate for the above impacts. Additionally, impacts to USACE (Jurisdictional Wetiands and Non-Wetiand Waters of the U.S.) and CDFG (Riparian and Stteambed) jurisdictional areas shall require a Section 404 nationwide permit from the USACE, a 1602 Stteambed Alteration Agreement from the CDFG, and a 401 State Water Quality Certification from the Regional Water Quality Conttol Board, which shall be obtained prior to the issuance of a grading permit and/or the clearing of any habitat on-site. 6. To avoid any potential impacts to vegetation communities in the event of a "frac-out" (escape of bentonite slurry into the environment) or any other unexpected impact as a result of the jack-and-bore process associated with the installation of a sewer pipeline beneath Agua Hedionda Creek, the project developer/contractor shall submit an Emergency Frac-Out Containment Plan to the satisfaction of the Planning Director and City Engineer prior to the start of construction. The plan shall outline actions to be taken in the event of a frac-out. The plan shall include a requirement to immediately notify a qualified biologist (to be named) who will assess impacts to the natural resources and contact the City and appropriate resource agencies within 24 hours of the event. Any mitigation for impacts shall be required at a ratio of at least 3:1. The location and composition of this 50 Rev. 06/29/10 sW/s ^ GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO mitigation shall be determined at the time of the impact, once the scope and nature of the impact can be determined. 7. The project shall preserve a minimum 67% (5.70 acres) of existing coastal sage scrub in open space. 8. Direct impacts to 2.56 acres of unoccupied Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub/Disturbed Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub (HMP Habitat Group D) shall be mitigated at a 1:1 ratio. The impacts shall result in no net loss of coastal sage scrub as provided in the HMP. Impacts to 2.56 acres of unoccupied Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub/Disturbed Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub shall be mitigated by the on-site creation of a minimum 2.56 acres of Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub in preserved open space. A conceptual restoration plan has been prepared as part of project biotechnical report, which proposes to convert 1.50 acres of agricultural lands, 0.04 acres of developed lands, and 1.40 acres of non-native grassland to Diegan coastal sage scrub. The restoration will occur in Open Space Lots 23 and 24. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, and/or the clearing of any habitat on-site, whichever occurs first, a final restoration plan shall be approved by the City of Carlsbad Planning Department (with concurrence by the USFWS and CDFG) to mitigate for the above impacts. 9. Impacts to 15 California adolphia (Califomia Native Plant Society List 2 species) shall be mitigated through the on-site creation of 30 California adolphia, which shall be included in the plant palette of the required Diegan coastal sage scrub restoration. Seeds shall be collected from the plants on-site and propagated in an appropriate nursery facility until they are of sufficient size for planting. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, and/or the clearing of any habitat on-site, whichever occurs first, a final restoration plan shall be approved by the City of Carlsbad Planning Department (with concurrence by the USFWS and CDFG) to mitigate for the above impacts. 10. Impacts to 2.50 acres of non-native grassland (HMP Habitat Group E) shall be mitigated at a ratio of 0.5:1 through the on-site preservation of 1.25 acres of non-native grassland. 11. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, and/or the clearing of any habitat, whichever occurs first, mitigation for impacts to 11.83 acres of agricultural lands (HMP Habitat Group F) shall be mitigated through the payment of an in-lieu mitigation fee. 12. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, and/or the clearing of any habitat on-site, whichever occurs first, the Developer shall take the following actions to the satisfaction of the Planning Director in relation to Open Space Lots 20, 21, 23, and 24, which are being conserved for natural habitat in conformance with the City's Habitat Management Plan: a. Select a conservation entity, subject to approval by the City, that possesses qualifications to manage the open space lot(s) for conservation purposes. b. Prepare a Property Analysis Record (PAR) or other method acceptable to the City for estimating the costs of management and monitoring of the open space lot(s) in perpetuity in accordance with the requirements of the North County Multiple Habitats Conservation Plan and the City's Open Space Management Plan. c. Based on the results of the PAR, provide a non-wasting endowment or other financial mechanism acceptable to the Planning Director and conservation entity, if any, in an amount sufficient for management and monitoring of the open space lot(s) in perpetuity. d. Record a Conservation Easement over the open space lot(s). e. Prepare a Preserve Management Plan which will ensure adequate management of the open space lot(s) in perpetuity. 13. Fire Management: A Fire Protection Plan has been included as part of the project design. AU fire management activities shall occur completely within the development boundaries and shall not occur within any of the HMP open space conservation areas. Landscaping on these adjacent slopes shall include low-fuel native species in compliance with the HMP. 51 Rev. 06/29/10 o 5-04/S GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO 14. Erosion control: Prior to issuance of a grading permit. Developer shall obtain approval of an erosion conttol plan. The plan shall identify areas susceptible to erosion on the property and immediately adjacent to the HMP open space conservation areas. Mechanical and biological methods shall be implemented to conttol any potential erosion, including engineering the manufactured slopes to maximize slope stability; choosing appropriate plants for the slopes to reduce the level of erosion of the slopes; implementing post-consttuction best management practices (BMPs) that shall ensure mn-off is appropriately treated to minimize the potential for erosion; and implementing consttuction-Ievel BMPs to prevent any silt from entering any of the HMP open space conservation areas. 15. Landscaping Resttictions: The Final Landscape plans for the brush management zones and along development slopes adjacent to the HMP open space conservation areas shall require the use of a native plant palette consistent with the adjacent native vegetation communities, prohibit the use of ornamental invasive species, and limit the use of fertilizers to prevent excess run-off from entering the HMP open space conservation areas. The project shall conttol irrigation of landscaping adjacent to the HMP conservation areas so as to prevent runoff from spreading into the preserve. In addition, the use of cultivars of native species shall be prohibited to avoid genetic contamination of the native plant species in the preserve. 16. Fencing and Signs: Prior to the release of grading securities or the issuance of a building permit for any homes, whichever occurs first, fencing shall be installed along the perimeter of the development to discourage the access of humans and limit domestic pets into the HMP open space conservation areas. Fencing placed at the property line between the residential lots and the HMP open space conservation areas shall consist of a minimum 5-foot-high black vinyl coated chain-link. Fencing separating the HMP open space conservation areas from the project boundaries along Street "K", Street "X", and the riparian overlook seating area (Lot 25) shall consist of a minimum 42 inch high 3 rail composite wood ranch-style fence. Signage shall be placed at consistent intervals along these fence lines to inform the public and individual homeowners about the presence and function of the HMP open space conservation areas. 17. Lighting Resttictions: Exterior lighting in the residential yards and along the project boundaries located adjacent to the HMP open space conservation areas shall be of a minimum necessary for safety and security and shall be shielded or directed away from the HMP open space conservation areas to the maximum extent practicable so as to avoid increasing the nighttime light input into the open space preserve. Project CC&Rs shall include such lighting restrictions. 18. Predator and exotic species conttol: The perimeter fence separating residential lots located adjacent to the HMP open space conservation areas shall consist of a minimum 5-foot-high black vinyl coated chain-link designed to limit access of domestic and feral animals to the open space areas. Project CC&Rs shall include text to educate homeowners regarding responsible pet ownership (e.g., keeping pets indoors, spaying/neutering pets, prohibiting the release of pets into the wild, etc.). Any long-term management on-site may also include development of a cowbird ttapping program, native predator program, and exotic plant control program. 19. Archeological mitigation measures shall be implemented as follows: a. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the owner/developer shall retain the services of a qualified archeologist to oversee and implement the cultural resources mitigation measures as discussed herein. Verification shall be documented by a letter from the developer and the archeologist to the City of Carlsbad Planning Director. b.' Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the collection and documentation of a valid sample of the significant scientific data contained within CA-SDI-9698, CA-SDI-9699, and the portion of CA-SDI-9701 impacted by the project shall be performed. The collection and documentation shall involve the following actions: 1) preparation of a research design; 2) excavation of a phased sample (the size of the samples shall be sufficient to recover the scientific data for which the resources were determined significant); 3) catalogue and report results of the field work; and 4) curation of all cultural materials, including original maps, field notes, catalog information, and final report with an appropriate institution consistent with state and federal standards. All work shall be completed under the direction of a qualified archeologist and to the satisfaction of the City of Carlsbad Planning Director. 52 Rev. 06/29/10 o GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-(3?7SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO o 5-04/Sl c. Prior to commencement of grading, a qualified archeologist shall be present at the pre-consttuction meeting to consult with the grading and excavation contractors. d. Prior to commencement of grading, the owner/developer shall enter into a pre-excavation agreement with a representative of the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians. The purpose of this agreement will be to establish the requirement of tribal monitoring and to formalize procedures for the tteatment of Native American human remains and burial, ceremonial, or cultural items that may be uncovered during any ground disturbance activities. e. In the event that any cultural resources, concenttation of artifacts, or culturally modified soil deposits are discovered within the project area at any time during bmshing, grading, and/or constmction activities, the archeologist shall be empowered to suspend work in the immediate area of the discovery until such time as a data recovery plan can be developed and implemented. f. The discovery of any resource shall be reported to the City of Carlsbad Planning Director prior to any evaluation testing. g. If any deposits are evaluated as significant under CEQA, mitigation may be required as recommended by the archeologist. 20. Paieontological mitigation measures shall be implemented as follows: a. The owner/developer shall contract with a Qualified Paleontologist to be on-site at the time of the initiation of project grading, and a report of the findings shall be submitted to the City of Carlsbad Planning Director following completion of excavation. b. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the owner/developer shall provide a letter stating that a Qualified Paleontologist has been retained to implement the monitoring program described herein. A Qualified Paleontologist is defined as any person holding an advanced degree in paleontology, or closely related discipline such as geology or paleobiology, and also having at least four (4) years of experience with the geological formations of San Diego County. The Qualified Paleontologist shall supervise Paieontological Field Monitors to be utilized during the project. Minimum qualifications for Paieontological Field Monitors shall be a Bachelors degree in paleontology, plus one (1) year of experience with the geological formations of San Diego County. c. All persons involved in the paieontological monitoring of this project shall be approved by City staff prior to the start of consttuction excavation. The owner/developer shall notify City staff of the start and end of the construction. d. The Qualified Paleontologist shall attend any preconstruction meeting to make comments and/or suggestions concerning the monitoring program as it specifically relates to the construction plans and schedule. All areas requiring monitoring shall be noted on the grading plans of the job foreman and the Paieontological Field Monitor. It is thejob foreman's responsibility to notify the Qualified Paleontologist 24-hours prior to grading areas where monitoring is required. e. The Qualified Paleontologist or Paieontological Field Monitor shall be present on-site full-time during excavations in moderately or highly sensitive geological formations. In the event that fossils are encountered, the Qualified Paleontologist or Paieontological Field Monitor shall notify thejob foreman and shall have the authority to divert, re-direct, or temporarily stop ground disturbing activities in the area of discovery to allow an initial assessment of the deposit as well as to recover samples. A fossil discovery may be of a caliber that the Qualified Paleontologist must evaluate its significance to determine if a larger salvaging program is required to mitigate adverse impacts. All discovered fossil sites shall be recorded at the San Diego Natural History Museum in conformance with their standard procedures. f If the Qualifled Paleontologist determines that a discovery is significant, then he or she will prepare a salvage plan that specifies techniques to be used for the recovery of fossils in a timely fashion. City staff 53 Rev. 06/29/10 o sW/s GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO must review and approve the salvage plan prior to its implementation and prior to the resumption of excavation anywhere near the discovery locale. g. All fossil remains recovered during the monitoring program shall be cleaned, sorted, repaired, and cataloged. Specialized studies such as palynology, grain-size, or radiometric analyses shall be conducted as appropriate. Ultimately, all recovered specimens, field notes, photographs, sketches, catalogs, special studies, and related items will be prepared for curation in an appropriate institution. The owner/developer shall curate all collections to the receiving institution and shall provide a copy of the letter of acceptance from the qualified curation facility in an appendix to the final monitoring report. h. The Qualified Paleontologist shall be responsible for preparing an appropriate technical report to fully document the results of the monitoring program. Minimally, negative monitoring reports must briefly describe the consttuction project, list the personnel utilized, and specify the dates monitoring was performed. The field methods used must be identified and a summary of the observed sttatigraphy shall also be provided. i. If fossils are encountered and collected during the monitoring program, the monitoring report shall include some or all of the following information as appropriate. The methods discussion shall include techniques used in the salvage effort in addition to a complete description of the various laboratory methods used including any special studies undertaken. The sttatigraphy of each collecting locality shall be described and a full description of all invertebrates, reptiles, birds and mammals collected or observed shall be provided. The results of any special studies shall be presented along with a discussion of the importance of the total collection to expanding knowledge of the prehistoric past. 21. Prior to the addition of any new fill or structural improvements on-site, the developer shall remove and re- compact expansive soils in accordance with the recommendations identified in the "Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation" prepared by Geotechnical Exploration Inc. (April 27, 2009, Job No. 04-8849). 22. A portion of the northeasterly boundary of Lot 7, as shown on the conceptual landscape plans, shall be restticted by a modified 30-foot wide Fire Protection Zone A-l standard, all to the satisfaction of the City of Carlsbad Fire Marshall and Planning Director. 23. A portion of the southeasterly boundary of Lot 4, as shown on the conceptual landscape plans, shall be restricted by a modified 40-foot wide Fire Protection Zone A-l standard and a solid 6 foot high masonry fire protection wall, all to the satisfaction of the City of Carlsbad Fire Marshall and Planning Director. 24. A portion of the northerly boundary of Lot 19, as shown on the conceptual landscape plans, shall be restricted by a modified 40-foot wide Fire Protection Zone A-l standard and a solid 6 foot high masonry fire protection wall, all to the satisfaction of the City of Carlsbad Fire Marshall and Planning Director. 54 Rev. 06/29/10 o 5-04/S GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 RANCHO MILAGRO APPLICANT CONCURRENCE WITH MITIGATION MEASURES THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASURES AND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT. Date 55 Rev. 06/29/10 (J> o I CO o CL Q I o I CD o a. Z3 o CD O F-O fsi cp CD o O N o I CD O O w cc lU CQ ^ Z LU a CO o c CO a: lii < z 1-o Ul o> O QL Q. X b ui H- s —I O a: CL CL < CO .c ^ S « (U C CD OT O CJ < ^ o O 3 Q. ^ (0 to .5 CO CU CD .-ti .«2 .O) 5 ^ E m Ox: CO 0) CO > o 3 CT CD c Q- k < ^ 5 v.- -s<: c ° Ji? o i -.^ TJ >» o> c (0 £ CD = O "O 3 C *' •- (U T3 -o Q: CD E CO O "D o o c CD CO A—. c 0 E 0) Q. E T3 C OT .2* CO CD CD '55 3 OT CO <D E c o CO .-t: CO M- > o o ^ •<- _ T3 rg 9 J c 0) Q..2 03 O 0) O " CO E ts S o _ CO -Q o ™ OT ,n C C" c c 5 0) CD CO 0) 3 C 3 o ^ I s CD IJ- CD p ^ E o o) > 5 -9 c C .2 3 i -coS^ =5 .2 S 00 I- £ QQ CO to <D •D iS > ® c CO C <D •c c o £ o ^ D) c •g © 3 t 0 c C CO D) & c c a. LU CO O -D <1> ^ C .ti ^ E CB c CO w 0) .52 D) Q. c g o C OT c c 3 O •D O CO O) CD == C jQ E — CQ ^ 0) CO OT O CO iS CO 0 CD CO D) ^ > ro -= 'i— .ro ro c"i.g- a> ro 1 ° O .9 CD OT ro *- "G coo ro o Q._ is> E ro j- >. -£ ro 5 •2 ^ w O CD O > •> ro 0) 3 O .Q O i ° S 58 ro c ro Q. .b OT fc *; t3) CD ^ C « T3 O T3 CD C (U c: •« ro CD .i= — T3 ^ CD S> CO J2- to 3 x: 0^ o o c TJ ro CD 5 (D •G ^ .> 3 o t; •o^ ro o"cb OT cu •*-' M- ro CO ~ « .3^ -4—• OTO ro c c cu ^ o •"ro'^ •E g'to CD .2 o 2 X> CJ •Q -D P CU .E « 3 £ ro -o O) " .ti ro « -2 w o OT 5> g ro o — , _ W T3 3 O O S O O C T3 C D) ro c CU c c c ro ^ CL LU D) ro O) T3 c ro (U o c ro i 2 s c g 3 E ~ 2'-^= -D E-i « 3 O Q. .52 O) Q. TJ o t § ro CD CO CD 3 I ro ts O) ro c C CD = Z CL . o i2 OT OT CD ro . ro " c o OT ro CD OT .ro c 2."S •c 2> s- -Q ° cu cu ±: CU o 0 cu IT) -g _ CO 1 = o cu ro Q-o E o - in OT .£ "o £ gj cu ^ o w_ ro CO OT OT CD ro CO c: b :> {8 § ™ 0 c c OT fc g oro tj 0 O « fll « g - CO W 2i m CO _ S ,^ $ -D 2 ^ 18 = (0 ^ 0 o > *-* 03 ro 1^ ro o ^1 CM 0 3 E " 0 Sro O OT = 3 D) ro "D .E g. 0 ^ ra w •D ™ jL (- OT" o •2 « S t3 'fe 3 ro o o V. c •— 0 ^8? (11 TJ •D c (0 T3 : ni = (TI C ^ ni •f c -8€ E o (U - Q..Q (0 i * .<» .2> (U .a o I =" I (U gj8| = J ° a c <i> ° , 0 o) 1 " S 3^-1 5 I « E t o i -S § g O) O t :ti (fl S E - ti ID a> « § .E E II fi SCO II c ^ ra « S X a o.< -u c E " g i2 & S'E E ' .c o a> Q tn>OCCC o CM <D CL ro E 0 c o 1 © E •1-2 ^1 ro O 0 C3) C o •"5 0 5|2^ E ,2 (0 ra 1 O) ro .2 .2 0 c c CL LU ro o 0 •D c g D) ro E ^ -§ ^ E c I 5 52 C3) CL c g ts 3 C OT C C 3 O •D O ro g OT -.^3 ro ro 8^ ro ro ro c o OT ro 0 OT O) c 0 ro ^ 3 0 OT 0 —' r- w O -Q ro T3 0 *3 0 O) o T3 ro cu >- "2 O OT Q. ro CJ OT 0 OT C O 1- ro 0 ^•5 U 0 ro E o — to 0 c OT .E •s| 2> 0 ._ -I—' ^ o OJ ro 2 CM OT C 3 Z o i "o > CD E is is — ro "2 ro s. ro £ o ro t- O CO CO o .2 3 TJ > c 5^ CJ ro 0 ro 15 O OT 0 B CD 3 T- O O OT O §,12 < o o- o OT 0 fc ro (o c fc :> O .-K tj J8 ro roo 0 c c OT fc g D) ro tj "D O) *i 0 O « 2 .2 o •=3 O) ro TJ 0 ro « . c OT O •ii! ro o §^ •= 0 TJ C o o 3 o-0 TJ C O) ro .2 D) fc .2 0 c c CL LU ro c TJ .2 ro "S ;s C .ti CJ)i3 § « E .2 « i 2 fc 3 g .52 D) Q.TJ o 0 o c OT OT CO OT .9i 0 ro o o o. 2 ro ^ CD 0 Q. OT OT O 0 0 2 •|-°ro ro^ ^ ro o o •E 0 !2 t? W CO O -f o° TJ OT 0 ro c Q. E o D) ro 2 3£ •o e TJ" ^ to il £ < 0 o o -Q J (ft OT ^ ro OT 3 0 k <]J ro TJ 0 c ro = a> ro -Q JI E O OT 0) ro « Q- 0 CD 0 0 .52 .fc .fc CD TJ 0 0 C 3 fc tJ-O) ro"" >,-2 -Q 0, ? S °5 i!| 11 OT ..^ CD ^ O " o 0 0 0 ro ro -° ^ ~ JS ro OT -c 0 OT c OT _c "5) TJ 0 0 22 2 o S-2 3 tj -Q ro -1 E ^ .2 g ^ OT £ o ro o If) OT to ro 0 '^TJ >^ ^ O 0 2 8 OT ro > S tj ^ § C S O O £ ^ tj " 0 E 0 ^I'gto .-= g-°£ 0 •g CJ 0, 3 o £ (0 . 0 *-< 3 CJ 0 o TJ 0 C 0 *J •ffi to _ O *r -C -K O li O *^ TJ ID'S I 1^ ro - C 0 0 JQ Q._ ro 0 m OT CU ro ^ 52 ^ b) c o ' g OT 0 0 "D CU 0 TJ fc C W TJ 0 OT T3 C (0 T3 . (U IS ra = •P '5 ra 3 O •5 ra Q. ra •) c •c o .ti c o E c o a (fl !» •Ml E B E o 8 (U (i> i 0) 9> 5 a> E c (fl O 0 ra JS ^ .c re 1 2 .ra (fl re (fl (U E (3) C o 0) O) .> o c o (0 c re Q >< UJ I3> II ° a 0) a o" D) 11 s t (fl .2 c iS 15 (U m fi ^ Ceo (U o « uco JB » C X Q- o.^ "5 c E " § If E2 OT > K K o CO <u CO I ro i c o ro "E c ° Q- CO c 2 •c- _s o t: fc ro o oT 5D O) c 'C o o ^ S I £ at 'C o 1 ra O) c 'c c ro CL ro 0 o o 1- ro o 3 C (0 Q_ OT o JS 0 £ D)5 S**-- 1- c ro 0 •2 F o c .c .fc TJ E =i fc ^ CO 2 0 c c c o> £1 ro u ro o C 0 fc-° 3 ro o -c OT CO DJTJ C C TJ J5 3 TJ O g OT" V: .2 ro .ti O c " 3 E E ro o E • o OT OT £1 C T-i 0 g ^ J3 fc ro = ^|ro w ^ v;. 3 "OT h Eo« ^ _ 5 E 0 o ro " 0 * OT CO - 0 g > o m •— CO C .C 0 O i--ro " ^ ro CO .~ ™ ro lo ro .c o fS *' o "5 E o TJ 0 *^ 0 C OT •S'E S 181 0 o CO S5 Q. OT C 0 £3. • . O O 1- TJ O 0 0 OT 0 ro t cu o. " c 0 1 s 0 t ro Z •^3 3 E o C OT OT 0 cu o ro sz OT TJ C ro TJ CD o o Jt: o ro ^ lis t O CO ro :2 °- CD.2 OT C »*- ro 'OT "s; o ro cl O fc ro 3 Q. O S .52 CD Q- ro 0 .2 o c 0 c fc £ .2 ^ ro O . .fc fl^ ro E 5 T-t; "S -o x: •K T- TJ 0 ro o O CM ro ^ ijv ro — o 0 OT ro -j; c c OT ° ro 2 cu TJ o x: o ro o CM >' 5 o ^ ci TJ ro ^ <u .5 .S ro 0 CO .2> o £^ s IE sr o _ CL'«-ro 0 CN •Q._ O c ro fc o 2 ° ra (— ^ 2 S E S.2 1 E § tj ro EL.§,t c O M- O ooo 8 E c " 0 ro o) occ ro ro =0* 2- c: ro -E CO ^ 0 «^ ro Q. o I ^ cu co" "02 li" g w 9 Q. O O o^-c o fc cu j- 0 ro .y c fc ro •= ro o 2 P o -fc o -2? C3 O CJ) C " 0 ro o .fc C J3 ro ro 3 JO OT >• 0 ro ^ .2 c ,^ .2 2 c .-^ « ro 3 E o fc 1" Q. . E fc O it O 3 ro cu ro = ro ro -c x: w ^ .2 5 2i 5 2 TJ £ ro c o 0 fc ° C CJ) CL 2 . ro 0 0 CJ) o ro c 0 c 0 ro Q Q- D) c .2 o c fc ^ 2 i5 2 Q- CO -o 9> ro XJ OT (!) LL Q O TJ C ro UJ O < CO D CO" 1 c fc ro t) ^^ro .52 3 c 0 3^ lU ° O CO < 0 E g TJ OT o .2 .2 •fc to -i o > 0 -.g -g E 0 ro 0) o <3 ^>>'° CO ^ ro o c « ro ^ 0 •Q u = 0 ro c sz c OT O ^ O .2 o to ^ <- 0 c ^ O CD fc CO ro a> = ro E C OT ^ £ *- Q ll CO ro •g.fc" 0 E 0 Q. CJ) c TJ 2 CJ) ._ ro ro O o go IE ro ^ .2 TJ «*- CD "J CU OL .fc Q. OT ro O _ ro CO 2- Z) E 1^ ^ CJ •Q ro 0 cu C 4-' 0) >^ o 0 g ™ 8.2) :£ E 5 o ro 0 3 -g cu CJ E f5 ro ^ ro .2 O .ro i= c ro c • o O fc >»•-9? to -t^ til CO OT^ .li TJ . C >. ro TJ c ro c ro „ •r- ro ro u. CO „ ra 0 ro OT ro c g "-+3 TJ TJ < 3 C7 0 CD ^ Q 5 O w ro o Q O 0 ro c g CJ) 0 QC: 0 CJ) c TJ 2 O) m CU ro H_ CO ° c 0 o I;; .fc § B OT ro CO c ro 4— CJ) 1- c o c c ro Q. 0 ^ 0 2 £ ro 1- O TJ C 0 ro •P -s: ll OT Q. ra . (U |B1 (fl ro E ro ^ •— (U -o OJ • llll ro c llll ro ^ .« - .2 5 r. £ ra c i_ °-i c£ tj)8 E o •i f i £ 1 n .i « 5 (fl c ra c 5 S ¥ E ra S E c **i C (fl o (U o ra = 3 = " g £•= = 2 = c O (fl fc Q. o ra rn (0 (fl 0) c (U •— c .= OJ t: o «.2 g " IS ^-11.So ^ ill o .2 c iS *j ro (1) w t E U • 5 5 c o ' " II C £ « re S £ X Q n •5.< -5 Q. c o; (0 a. S E A O £ 4) 4) Q s OT >Q: Of I ro E CD ••.2 to TJ C 0 g ® >£ 2> 0 o-i •fc ro c CL C3» •c -g •fc 0 5 CL p ?;i £ 3 M o •« ra -o C CJ) ro .2 O) fc .2 0 c c gf CL LU 0 cf g tj •1= O ^ o -e ^ ° £ g OT O O 0 JZ 0 fc Q. P ro ^ o >• « E 0 ro =^ o 3 P 5=- 0 ro c = .i= 9> -9 0 ro ro I fc o o ro £ ro fc to OT ro -ti > c 0 3 CO CD 0 ^ -g o > ro 0 o ??E 1 p is ro x: OT •> ro > o cu ro -e CL ro E CJ .2 o OT TJ CO 0 ro 0 OT tj 6 ^ 0 ro £ fc CL >, O 0^5- - E' -g P ro 0 E ™ O r- ro ro ro TJ fc 0 c E -JC .2 .Q 0 OT O X = ro c ro x: ra 3 CO ;^ D) ,_ Q- < P 2 p E ^ ro "ra 0 >»-m 0 •c 0 ro ro -D +-» 3 CO <u -J3 0 c £ P ~ o OT ro c -C fc .2 " fc tj c Q. ro ro >'to .52 P 5) 3 .55 < fc £ ^ .2 2 •° 0 •p £ 0 *' o p .2 fc c -t; 0 ro 0 ro o E.^ 0 ro c ro o tj ro CL E ••= TI P 7^ ro ro E c o 0 O XJ 0 c 3 a P 5 c o .2 0 CJ ro J3 fc P o c _g CJ 15 ^ *- .2- 0 ^ Q.TJ O fc 0 CL ^ :i 0 •- fc -C ro ti ^ c o •CJ ro CO ro u_ 0 ro P F M- tj I- p Q g CD CJ)tj m C 3 ^ c -fc P c CO -c CL o .2 3 « -tj ro Q. >, E o 2 OT CO P ro CO — 0 > 11 2=5-^ 0 g 1 0 fc 0 •3 -o P" o 0 £ ro ^ o " g 0-= x: Tl- CM tj| c o o OT O 0 Q. JZ E o ro 0 sz OT 0 TJ "O c c OT " 0 0 E E 3 3 o o W OT 0 0 ro g 0 «ro| tj -2 0) ro Si Q. cu c x: = •£ H ro i_ x: O CO .2 cVj .2 ti ro ro .2>OT .2> .fc ro .fc E P E 2 3 ro T3 c ro 0 CJ. o o OT 0 JZ TJ 0 0 o c §1 ^- 0 ^ p 2.TJ C 0 .2 .Q CD CJ) c 'c c ro CL ro 0 o o 1- ro o 3 C OT a. CO 0 'fc 3 •) CJ)-Q c ti >- c ro 0 -6 E P -iz -C .fc ra c: -D ro >, 2 0 c P c c CJ) Q. ro o ro o OT o eg vP ro tf^ CL OT CD c ,- P 3 P E 2 .2 -Q E E o ro <« 0 CD CJ) ^ ro C- OT 0 _ ^ ro (U •<-' C OT CL ro o = tJ ro o) •gi OT tj X 0 0 £"5 OT p 2 h- ro T3 C re ra ra c •o -•o D re = . ill ro c ro ll| S 8-i -Q (fl •- 8 E o £ g 3 •= (fl (A re in a c re X II> O) .a o ro § E o n c re Q X 111 o •50 O) II (U " Q: •= II : c (fl o 1 o re -.c 1 1. (» re rn ! .« g E fc o c o> i §.0 fc (fl S E 5 •2 c B re 4> (A O)^ O) « S .E E II fi F, c o II c £ Siia; re » £ X Qu a< ^ c E " S £ 4> < isg. o c c _ C 4) 0) Q V)>C£ C£ o lO CD O) 03 CL I ro E CC tz o •S ro **• sz 0 ii ^ C Q. ^ CL CO c c P •c E p t: fc ro o ar SO c .c p 'S:(^: £ 3 (0 s s ts 2 ••s ra CJ) c 'c c JO CL ro 0 s: CJ) -t! - fc 0 o £ c .fc 5^ E OT P.2 CJ) ja c ro 0 •o 0 c c c CL.^cj)cxrooroo c 0 ro ro cj)^ S'co ™ ro -t!' •C3 ti) 2, 0 ro .2) Q. o .ti E o S c 0 2 ro -Q c CD — 2 to o a 3 fl5-= fc X 0 fc Q OOT 0 0 CJ).Q ro _ W -TO .c to to -ca ro o o O CO .- P S. ro 3 •= CO m CM E 3 E c E ro 0 o 0 p X) OT TJ c ro P ^ P ro CM *: *J OT n ro _ Q. ro Si 3 C O 2 •- b ro .2 <^ 1^ o o O fc CL ro £ 3 OT P in ^•§to _ I— .*-' P CJ 'o CO -g ^ p=^ |C0| ro ^ O OT -° 0 CO E .fc O O Q O CO od -D 0 •g •> o 0 J3 3 o OT 0 C3) ro OT £ to ro o o o CO 0 CJ) ro CO ro £ OT TJ ro •18 ^ b to-° 2 tj fc ^ O 0 Si CO fc 2 to Si CO E lfi o CM CO J:J c ro CJ) P Q ro CJ) 0 •roP" £ Q- Q-v*- 0 o 8 a OT ro TJ 2 P ro 2.2 OT CX TJ C ro OT' TJ c ro TJ 0 CJ. o -o i_ . c o •§ ™=o d CO c ocM ro 0 2.ti i CO a, 0 ro ro to CL CJ) ro CO 2 " g 2 C Q. D) bZ'S jo ^ «= b 2 0 32 o >^ fc TJ > 0 0 > JZ O :F ^ > CL $ ro >< 0 XI > o 0 Si o ro 2 0 3 *- la O 0 fc ro CJ) ir > CJ) 0 0 .fc -Q OT _ ito O JZ OT 2 o 3 .-K .2< 18 2 OT 0 OT O CJ. 2 C2.0 TJ P ^ S|S OT > CO OT _ OT ro 2 k- O 0)^3 O ro 0 >-> P k IIE ro t- Si i5 ro CJ. I.i fc •*—' ro ro O CJ CJ) « .2 2 ll O if= 0 o E -C ^ roo Ll_ P " O P^-r, C TJ IS •D ^ 2 CO £ ja -) CJ J2 CD fc P ^ O £ .2 O) c 'c c ro ro 0 'fc £ •2 E CJ c -c .fc TJ E fc w ra >- TJ >» I £L.S2cj)Cj.rooroo 0 .c .c > CJ) o fc ^ :5 2 5 W ^ JJ lU gj g .55 -o -55 c 0 x: tofc-g ro .c OT OT TJ 0 0 CO ra 0 ro J2 E ^ = .2 Q. ro fc « OT-Q .2.g^ fc ^"5 fc CO ro CM o O 52 ro lfi J 2 CJ o P 0 *- O fc ,« O CO •g CO c ro 0 0 ro CL ro ro CL 0 C5 fc fc." 0 a CJ)- c 0 ^ x: o 1^ 0 Z.2 5 TJ ro CJ) ro = "•00 = ro -K fc r ro 0 ro OT ro I— o 4—i (/} 2 Si 3 o OT 0 CJ) ro OT to OT ro o o c ro CJ) 0 0 o " 0 o c ro 3 OT >..52 . 0 0 Si % c -c o w c ro ro 5^ ro c o o >c- 0 ^ fc CJL C g) ~ 0 -E ro 2 ro OT = O £ ro v_ ro g 0 0 2 ^ CJ) ElB 2 0 g CD Q. ro o >»- OT O 0 TJ C ro CO CO ID 2>-s; ro 0 2 O ro fc >» P XI _ a £ ^ ii= ^ 0 ^P fc. 0 CJ. N ro OT fc ^ c ro I 3 3 *= O O C O >. O O J3 O OT tj ro CJ. E 0 > o Si ro 0 C3> T3 C re T3 re T3 — (D T3 <U •Sl f s i IH • re ;5 <" r ro a ra at c o "= 1? ° E S >- ° ^ fe o c o •= . .E (fl s (fl ra c S § S S c C (fl o o ra -.c .9 (fl c o a. (fl (U (D .2> (0 ta iu at Ei Ol (U i = 5 sa-fe (fl ,> o .0 " (5 O) II c . 'o o> 11 s 11 •S c iS ra <u (fl .2>£ O) § E II :g Ceo II C £ « « 5 >< Q. a< c E " g c -o S ii • .C 0) IB O OT > 0: D£ ro E 0 C g 1 lj ra 0 tz p -E fc ra ^ Q. O ST ra c p p S SP o CO OJ to CL o ra CJ) c 'c c ro CL .52 ro o 0 o c: ro 3 W OT 0 'fc ro rn -t- U) 'Si c fc" fc c ro 0 li c P c x: .fc TJ fc ra --^ « m u_ tJ v; ^ I 2 0 c P c c CJ) QL ro o ro o S lfi o X d c= TJ P g.o OT ro w >- 2 ro CJ) .k^ 0 ™ > TJ '.1= 0 c ro 1 CJ) c •*= 0 ro ro o LU CJ. CM 3 o 2 (3 tj ro ^1 El OT 2 o ro lfi CM 0 +^ tt o i5 fl) c> 3i OT £ 2 x: CJ) D) 0 2-^ £ 2 CJ) c 'c c ro Q. CL .52 ro 0 ^ £ FT) 2 D)S 2'-.-- 1- c ro 0 :i c P c -c .fc 2 0 c P c c CJ) CL ro o ro o P -""to x: OT c ,fc 3 3 .2 TJ 0 ro CJ) CO .2 1 I L 0 0 •° g CO -m fc ^ 2 .2 .2) CJ. 0 O OT .fc " ^ E ro CJ) .g ^ c x: CO u. — ^ rr\ ^ $ CO i— _ m £ o ro .— x> fc ro CO o x: tj ro 0 ^ CL ^ ^E ro ro •- 3 ^ CO M_ o OTO P cj).2 =- c D).P to fc fc.2> •c 0 fc CL o E 3 0 Q-'T 3 C 2 c (D ro O ro -ti .ti c J3 0 ro E X >, ro CL Q- X -" ? 2 ro x: re T3 TJ c ra 0) "O (fl ra ra ^ 0) -D 'I O T3 •= a iS, ra •2>« !S .31 ral o) 8 Is ic E iS 0) o o s c 2 o Q. (fl 8.2 s s-3 S S rag I 1 i g ro ll 11 1? c £ <» w E o 0) . -5.2 .E 3 - Jg E . < S? S .> o .2 ra ro (0 o re re 4) .5} (0 t Si> fc o c •2 § ro »tr g, O .ti (fl E 2 c a 4) (fl .C 13) ro c •)ii II 4) Q. 2" ? c Q.-E o II S c So -c H E OT II :g c u 0 (fl l« B ^ S-2 . c ro Q. 1 £ X •5.< T3 E » S ~ <« Q. •O Q. ^ re< > Q£ QE: o <D O) CO CL I ro E c p to •E •« P II •C CJ. •c P -c fc ro O 0* S Q ra •c 'iZ O tl ra i CJ) c 'E c ro CL ro «+— o 0 0 x: o ro ra P -c TJ ro c« 2 fc c P 52 ra CJ. ro o Si ro 0 .c .fc >, «P c c ro o 0 *j- 0 -C CO - CO £ 3 OT o c p C CJ) 0 0 c .c 5- p O .Q £ 2 0 5 >» 0 .CJ ra 0 > 0 0 .c CJ. g 'sz _ O) > = C fc" 0 CD -2 o ro 0 E 2 .2 ^ >J:i o 0 ro ti fc) <f ^ ro P ^ ro ro ©to CO 2^ o 2TJ b g ra .2 co" C CM c ro CL c o o c c — ro to Q. SE ro 0 ^ E QL O ro ro C OT ro 0 OT o 3 Q. £ ^ Q.s= £ ro - ;Q Q. ro CO =^ c 0 £ 2 c .P ro to f ^ wis ^ 3 c: 3r CJ- o E .0 ^ P $ o -2 r-" 2 CM 3 OT 0 QL — O O 0 ro ^ 0 2 pro., •J- 0 P 0 _ £ C3 r CN .2 5 tj ro 0 0 ra ro m c: ro ro - CO ^ O 0 OT «= CO ro «;5 a. £ CO .Q ro X OT ">< b 0 ro ro x: P. *- OT ...J: C 0 m P C P ^ 0 CJ. P ra o fc -2 0 ..-^ ro £ E *r < •*= CJ fc. 0 ra I2I OT^S OT 0 -D >.x: c to "5 ^2E -p 0 8."? - 0 OT 0 ro " S. ro .2 0 c o ro " E OT "S b g- 0 o -0 0 0 CO £ £ ro ro ro -ti fl) 5 2 TJ o 2 p S D. E o 0 o ro CJ. OT 0 _ to >».ti Eo 3 o 0 0£ x: -C TJ O C Z ro P c £ ro OT C E .2 il 2 p 3 OT cr o 2o c o c ro 0 -q •> o u. CJ. DC < QL 0 x: I ro ro 5« CJ ^ tj E 2j ro • o c ™ ra ,2 c 0 o ro CJ. OT c 0 g 3 c CO 0 CJ. c o 3 o ro ~ £ 0 ° 0 .fc 3 C OT ro 0 ^ 0 E -c 0 *^ E 0 o ro 0 £ « ro ro S CQ fc -K JZ 0 E2 ro ro g> = fc £ p ro £ c 0 E o C TJ .g* ro E E 0 0 0 .2 P5 ra£ .2 Q. •«) P !S CJ ro o 5 ro E 0 ra ro ro •3 0 CJ. I— 0 CJ. c 0 CJ. o 0 0 > o c 0 E 0 OT ro LU c g ro 0 OT C o O ^ OT ro is" o 8 ^ 0 a: Q. OT O CM x: o 0 o ro CJ. OT c 0 CJ. o 0 CL g ° E E 0 0 ra £ 0 ra ro c ro E 0 0 0 -c:' CO fc 0 ro £ i- 3 0 £L cr Q. 0 tr ro TJ 0 ro CJ. 0 r-k- 0 .2 ro 5- ~ P- 3 OT" 0 OT Cli-c fc Q. 0 P 0 o 5 ra T3 4) -o 'I £ 4) JS, <" •9':-5 !s .31 "E rel D) 8 •g.« E iS 0} o c I o .c Q. (0 5"3 4) C ,> O ,0 ra re 81 (fl T c £ E o 4) -•5.2 .E 3 Sl (A C C n 4) z V-o c o re c re a X 111 P! "rec ran II 4) " CL •2"? = D.-E o 11 S c 8.1 5 So -c h- S OT c o c 2" •2 § re ^ O) o « in E a c 2 4) (fl I.? M .2 s §•2 . c ra Q. 1^ >< a< T3 E " 5 & ^ E A O 4) O > o£ Q: o CO cu D) (0 CL I ro E 0 CC tz o 1 c •p p ll c a ra % P -c fc ro S p^ o ^ ra c fc © S a. ra 9 TJ -o C c ra ro ro c ra ing eeri c ing eeri c c c £ 0 ro c: CL LL CL LU ro o 0 2 M g'.ti i_ ro 4= c •8 5 2 fc CL .52 ra Q. I? 6 8 C 0 0 ^ 0 J2 OT < ro I ^ CL -OT r- P tj tj £ 0 DL CL 2 2 x: JZ = > > >^ 3 0 CJ *-» o 0 o p p fc "= "1 °1 ro to «^ 2 0^.^ OT p £ .p CO P ro ^ 0 .2 Js " CL 2 S CZ = X 2 ro 0 ro-S£ ^ -c 0 K fc O CJ 0 O OT g P E J o 0 a S CJ E CL ro 2 OT :3 O C ™ C 0 CJ. o 0 OT 0 £ -a Q, " g E E H fc P p "TJ ro 0 E £ c o OT P O 0 CJ. OT 0 r- fc ro CL C ro _ *r O 0 P OT 3 >. C > c ro ^ ro _J 2 CO ro 0 c: c fc >- ro := p •8 5 2 fc Q. .52 D) QL I? 6 8 .fc o iE 0 o Q. O ra c .2 2 TJ OT 2 2 ra 0 ro c M- ro 0 o o c ro 3 OT OT 2 2 to 2 0 E c S 0 ro — ox: Q. ro 1^ « £ \u OT ro 0 ro — t{8 ro E c 'ro XJ o to x: OT 0 CL O 0 > 0 Q c g _ ro ETJ ^ 0 c 0 ;6 ro « >» o c == t: o " " aS p 1^ c CJ. (5- g 0 -#-' c o ra p-i S CJ) 0 c E P .2 EE 0^ -Q o = c ro •- L- 0 -&* o ••= 3 XJ -CJ ro 2 o °- 0 OT C 0 CL O OT - ^.i O CO ^ 2 0 0 E , Q. OT o OT 0 N 0 i ro £ E OT 2 ro Q. S p tl OT P. P .8 <= H °£L ..ii c w ro P P CJ. 0 £ to ro TJ Q-S *= 0 CJ. •S. c: != ro S'^ £ 2 0^? .2 Q.£ .2 ro ro E o to ™ o £ CJ. 0 £ p S Q. O 2 OT fc. 0 CJ.-P O 0 OT £ 0 0 £ ra ro fc sz o ra c E .2 ^ OT OT O 0 fc^ M- c: P P £ o 0 ra N c EE P fc 0 P Q. 0 ro 0 TJ >, ro 0 •4—' .2 c" fc..2 2 8 CJ. >-. CL 0 ro fc .2 i- -ti 4- ro = 0 OT OT C >, o c " 0 o ro Q. OT c 0 > 2 c OL 0 Q. O ° DL S^ OT ^ .- ^ CD 0 '§'2_2 ^_ Si's EIP c 2 c c w 3 0 P ro c Q. 3 2) P i: OT ro 0 OT £ 52 0 ro " E 2 0 ro in a c ro 4> X o c o ra c re a X UJ re T3 T3 c ro T3 • _; S (0 TO c ra T3 •- 4> 73 4) ^IS . llll <S, TO c <" •) •.= fc c s -g 3 E !|8| ro ^ « '3 .2 5-.! •C c TJ O S F £ >- °- 3 C ra -2 4) t: o)8 E o •i .!2 i £ •= . .E <o fe (fl c- <" C 5 5 2 fc 5 S E fe 1^.° (= C (0 o 4) o ra o C -C TO ^ i s-f §1 3 E D. <« ra rn (fl (0 4) *- 4j C o rii§ < c (fl ) i- c E 3 : o .2 c JS i re WW ! ? i I i " ^ ' ro c c o P&S.2 8 P " 11 C £ ' I racx )'-' E a.< T) r i" c E " g • I « 5 & L S O C fc _ , O f 4> 4) Q S OT > nc o c^ ra (0 CL I ro E c O 1 -« p TJ c 0 c p 'E Q. if c ° OT £ fc ^ CL CO o> g c P £ P tl ~ ra fc Q. 5 J? S.u ra c o Is .1 (0 ra ra c c c ro CL ro 0 o c O 3 ra - c .fc ™ ^ E ra _ OT 2 0 Q. .52 D) Q. •fc fc o 8 OT C _ro CJ. 0 Q. ro o OT •o c ro ra 0 o ro OL OT ro OT c g OT 0 Q^ CJ c •Q ro o w TJ c ro lfi c TJ 0 C CJ. ro o CL OT ^ o 0 0 0 > > ro ro c c ro o 8 0 ro CO •5' :3 CD 0 0 to P c 0 g 2 & E P „ ro .N £: ill 0 o OT 3 0 E 2 0 l§ ro ro E CO 0 CJ. x: P « w Si cz 0 0 i. £ o 0 o| «*: TJ x: lu 0 £ ^ 3 ±3 0 > C 0 ro JZ . OT CO ^ -2 ro ro ^ °- 0 ^E gi5 o a ^•fc ._ ?>E 5 £ 0 ^ .fc E fc E CJ .= '^ co" _ !t .2 ? o fc I F ro c ico"^ c .2 CO fc o « O 0 0 P Q. O (ft X g p '4= p ro > c P ffi ^ CO 5 0 P c S > .fc CJ. p ^ E g^'*= o st = 0 o ro £ c E OT CJ ^ tj E 0 0 -I ^ °-8 fc. 0 ro rC: "o" o I— ro o .2 o 0 > OT ro ^ o 0 .C TJ 0 -ti c ja .2 Z fc o ? ^ ro a, r- -Q 0 x: ro OT CO ra ro ro .2 CD CL o ro CO o W OT ^ ra ro ro 0 CO ^ CO 8.2 2 8 CJ. CJ. 0 " 2 9i OT 0 O 0 CJ. OT ro CJ. 0 > ro c 0 ~ ro _ *: P ro - E c p >^ .i= 0 '4= o ro OT ro ra c cj. p o OT .fc o ra P .E {0 ro 5 2s a 3 OT o c g *+-» ro c E ro E o CJ 0 .2 2 2 OT 0 2 ra CL T3 tz ra ro E ra fc .E 0 c c ro c Q. lU ra ra CJ. fc 0 x> E p OT m P ro x: OT 0 0 ra .£ OT c -c ro ^ 3 -s;±=0raO(urot>,.^ ?2o0"0.c'^Pc:-E .E£2D)OT£ocjLro$ 0 o ^ c .E ro -CJ o 3 = H- o 2 .fc OT .CJ g ifc.l E > *- O P OT 3 O O o ra c .E P p fc ra-D ra >> ro fc fc. CJ ra**- 0 o Si c to P ^ ffi 0 2 y_ .fc OT P E 0 0 OT Q. ro 0 ra P 2 sz c 0 3 £-Q o " CJ CL c ro 3 E CJ. g ra 0 c > 8^ p fl) *- 0 0 OT C g CO TJ c " OT a 0 E o c 0 0 2 0 3 c o .fc gb 0 .E P $ ro li •p 8 £ c ro o OT " £ 0 ro o E 55 3 cx .E <0 0 E .E O > o •So. CO 2 fc 2 I § -° X CO JSi CM 0 O E O ro 0 > o 0 ra ro 0 — I— \j 0 X) 0 E ra P OT " OT P 0 8| ro| 0 0 o ro CJ. OT •c 0 -I 0 X £ 0 •S ^ ro TJ .P ro ^ "fi ? E ro ra E ro CL P E n- fc.0 o ro 0 £ ro Q. 0 OT ra E O E 0 OT TJ « 1^8 W C .E 0 O *i o Z P .E i5 P OT P E1 o {2 0 g'£ 3.2 8 <2 .52 0 "D Q. CJ._ ro g^E 2 0 8:2 .52 ^ 8.E = ro 1-5 « -P OT 0 ro *i 0 ro E o ro o >< to S to 2 P ro 2 lfi o CO CO p k d. '2 P fc ro OT 0 0 c: P fc o i= ro "CO 8 E -B s.g s OT ro OT OT .2 -TO t cp 0 .E E O .- E ro E 1- 0 TJ 52 O OT O E 5 P ^ O 0 -w .ti ro O TJ CJ. 0 F CJ fc ro 8 Q. — 0 ro -P .fc g TJ tj E E ro 3 H— M TJ -c £ 3 ro CJ. 0 2 0 CJ ro r~ E ^ 0 E _ OT O E 0 •*= fc k ro 2 ^ E 0 0 — x: c2 o £ CO o 0 ro sz E « ra 0 ro o ra .E CO 8 fc E E ^1 0 0 OT 0 0 m CJ ro ro CJ. ^x (fl TO re TJ « T3 'I O T5 0) iS, ra ,S>s ! = s ^ ,31 rel o) 8 .E in T3 4) T3 C re J c re c I I| c £ E o .£ Ci. 3 !1> Era fe °->c c 4) O =5 i o S c 2 o .c Q. (fl ^3 O) c . < ^ S 5 .> o .0 ro re ..ill ro c S g>" 11 c S>,° Q. .2 2 i" c 1SCL.C O C II o c •5 8.C 5 X >. O £ LU I- S OT D) E 6 c o> •2 § re «*- D) o £ (fl E 3 c iS 4) (fl 11 fi c u 0 W 4) s-2 . c ro Q. 1 £ X o.< =0 E " 5 — <» Q. •O J« d 5 5< E A 0) 4) O > CC o o T— o CJ) (T3 CL ro 0 E • 2 fc £ P 0 P m '1 PJ IS o t: •tt ro o ^ ra E' O •"S 0 P s SP o ra ra E 'E E ro CL ro > o P S- Q- Q. E ro ra g .E O TJ ra E O O 0 .a; TJ OT 0 ro m 0 ro E g ro o — E O OT 0 ro c: ^ •g P ra OT E O o 0 o ro CJ. TJ E <u ro S 2 > 1 ^ ro % 2 fc £ ro M- O 0 E 2 ro -P OT i_ OT O ra ai ^1 2-G P.£ 0 to O 0 ro CJ. CJ) OT 0 Q^ D E fc. c 0 CL 0 O ro 0 g TJ OT 0 0 E E 2 O _ 0 ro CO E p F)^2 ro P x: o^ 8 « £ m 0 o OT CL •= ro x: E ro OT 0 o 0 CO TJ E ro 0 CO o "E 55, ro ^ >. ro o P 0 J3 "c ro •= 3 .2 fc o Zj r— O CL--2 E = fc.— ro -t- OT ^ CJ) ,' 0 = w TJ E ro n X) = 3 ro o OJ .E 0 _^ OT OT ±: E .25 13 .fc C 0 X ro 0 2 E £ ti: ra E E E ro E ro ro > o CL E ro ra o E ti •p TJ ra E £ P O O 0 0 ro 0 ^ E £ •E *^ .52 0 E OT Q. 0 E a P 0 ro o £ ^ = I — ro ro 2 8 S g-2 fc O OT c fc OT o .2 •e.i| Q E 0 OT 0 CO "2 5 .2 CO 8 •*= 0 CJ g ^ P 0 CJ) o '•'Era -n •*= CJ. •P ro OT ro ro E . CL 0 2 8 & •§ So- CL 2 X 00 1 ° 0 OT ro 0 £ 0 0 • OT .E to E-^ ™ ro "2 TJ £ p ^ fc TJ ro r-P fc O g —- U—' >< OT E 0 > E o .it: TJ 2 *-jO o JD OT OT 0 8 E ro I of 2| lfi •8 p •P Q. "O P E -P — W I g « g-OT 0 •St ,n- CO 2 -ffi fc E « W OT •- 0 ra-p E CJ. « £ P- r> oa ra O .£ o-E o JZ ra 0 0 o* Q: 2 0 CO i ro g 2 0 ro E o CJ. 0 ro ra.E •Q.2 P -5 0 .o w to o ti ^ o P -P X E ;5 0 " 8 £ c CJ ro I ro £ ° E ro CL o ^ g ra p 8 S.£ CO ro OT . P Cj)^ CD ? 2 c 0 >- - 0 3 .ii o o >^ 0 to E > TJ < 0 0 fc. 0 O TJ E M fc 2^ E CO c 0 E T3 P -n 0 2 - •$< o 0 0 = 0 0 J=J '•) fc ro E O TJ .E 2 ? P > ro 5 Q. O OT o p^ ro CO o 2 ro 2 .E E Q. TJ E ra ro E ra fc .E 0 E E gf CL UJ ro 0 "o £ 0 p 8 4-' E i_ ro o 3 E CO Q. CO ra . E .fc 2 fc ra CJ. •i 2 « ^ .E D) 0 £ 2> E fc p I 2tj S £ ra ro 0 Si ro sz OT 0 ro £ ^ 0 p E OT" P .fc CO Q. E P E b .2 .E 0 > °-0-o CO fc ra ro 1 .E <» 2 £ 0 2 2 ra c 0 H- £ S O 0 .2 0 3 OT ro OT T3 ro 0 OT 0 ro CO 2> 5 -5 o OT _ ro ro TJ O 0 £ 0 0 _ 8 ro ro -5 3 OT OT OT OT ra O 1— o p 0 E 0 Q. <.i CJ) 0 CL 0 O -fc 2 p fc O-g-D i_ 0 fc p S to S 3 P o- E 3 O 0 -§ E 0 .Q E = o ro JZ ro OT .2> E -.2 ^ to o OT ii=: 0 C 2 ^ 3 •> O OT c 2 I _ P ro sz 3 TJ ^ 0 3 CO O CO 3 0 OT £ TJ 52 ra o o 0 " fc .8tj ±: 0 "is ro o) I- E 0 F C^ E o ro 0 TJ TJ ra 0 -9 E i2 ^-^ k_ c= ro 2 >i= o fc ^ ^ b 0 ^ — 0 ro E .^£ ro 4) O) < T3 C re • .... !l.| 11:1 ) T3 4) : C J3 : ra = . 11*1 I ra c ra nii j ^ „ £ ^3 C£ J) O E o J £ c 3 : - •= (O 5 (fl c ra = S E 5 0--° c i c (fl o ) O ra -i: c .c ro S 2 = : o 3 E ». w ro Ol ! iS g .c - 4) fc O ; ^ c o) r|5 § (A D C n 4> X c o •o n c re a X .1 Is-li O) 11 c . 4) " O" O) 11 s ^1 S E 3 •2 c JS 13 0) « .5)£ o> E 11 rg S c fe |.2 ig 11 c ^ ro 4} £ X CL a< •a c E " g o- in a. ,- V a. S ® m < Is c . o c e _ £ 4) 4) O OT XK a: o OJ CJ) CO Q_ ro I E .2 3 f .« P II if 8> © •E E p -E fc ro £ CL^ p 0 S Q ra E •E. P P C o ra 33 0 .E OT" I ro ra > £ro 2 o 0>E >^ .2 P fc ro o 0 CJ. E _ ro .fc OT $ i "5 1 JZ tz CO g 1.1 TJ 0 E £ 0 E .E O O ^ ro ro r~ M— OT P E E 2 P fc £ 2 E m 0 E 0 O CO 1 c fc 55 0 p o CO E 2 w 0 E 0 E 3 O o TJ •D E ro E g P TJ 0 c £ ro CJ) CO ra TJ -J- 0 9 CO ro E O .2 3 ^ o ^ T3 T- •CJ E ro o 0 ro C» T-ra o CO ra ra 0 _i_ _i_ o .1!; Ill Cl Q CO CO P TJ JZ 0 •8| 8..E OT TJ 0 OT ro sz CJ. 0 ro^ H- — p ro g « fc ro ffi':: > 0 CO 55 CJ. ro g E -a ©roo ^ OT ijr CM 0 CI c x: 0 ra-^ o OT w 0 •D JZ p E O ^ -= m-^ 'o E ro >t; o 0 E 3 O ra P 2 ro 3 to c^ . p f ¥ ro 9 E :2 ra 0 OT © •P £ © O .2 © 0 £ N ro p 0 OT F 0 £ OT 0 .£ P E CO fc *i 0 3 ti) « •8 2 2 p p S-5 2 •O E TJ .2 g -»-» » i P o > fc S--C •S ro -g OT ^ CL r- - 2i ro _ 5 E ro ^ .i'liE PTJ£ E .52 ra ro OT E - c £ 8 3 g CJ 8ro E •- E .2 OT"2 -i .2 to fc ra.E •m 2 ?££ ^ ro ro _ o c 5" - 9-2 P fc. 3 P Q. o E ro TJ TJ ra ©EE © ro 0 0 ra 2.W g fc E^ 0.8-S -O -§ OT I— L_ = ro ro ro (•) E TJ OT © X-fc ° fc to 5s i = ro P < £ . E o OTOE ^ -G .2 ro 0 tj ? •- J5 g-p;^ t«.8 ro _ i: OT fc P^- :s£^ fc CJ.TJ ro 2 g. 0 ro 0 ro £ |it0 £ TJ *- 5 ro E _ 1- 0 fc ro OT © 0 E E O •*= ro > ro ro o E X -5 P 2 2 ro Q. ro o o •II P fc OT E ro O QL P^ © O = E ro © E E « E 8.« ra o P o 3 OT E O O CO 0 £ CJ ra 2 B^ 1 8 £ g E P P CO OT P © CJ. -c: fc CL O © © f > P £ <« © g) .— © £ 3 o ro O" o CJ. 0 E ^ .52 ro ' E 3 E -.C: g 2 0 S o = £ ™ © x: E « o S-o ro ,« -»-' OT E C © ro 2l Q.— 0 c 2 ro CO OT © 0 :y CD J:= to .2 I § fc •Q £ E ro < 0 0 i- E ro 0 ro z •° rafc — E " © ro o E g fc -P .8 fc OT OT ^ 2 TJ ~ E ro o £ ra 3 O >% fc^ ro" 8* E E O 3 E "P P S E © £ b Q. ro 2 5 E X OT ^ E TJ O E o ro £ © i_ © Q- O 0 " Sir E TJ © E E ro O E t; © g E o s: .p 0 CQ 0 0 >, 0 ro fc)P fc):8 .8 ro QC ro i= £ 0 > 8 « 8 .p 0 tj 2 'L. 3 X> TJ E ro XI ro o T3 4) ro TD 73 C ro T3 . 4) £•2.1 (0 ro c re T3 — 4) TJ 4) c " = o TI 5 iS, TO c I3) i: fc c 3 .- !S8f TO .'^ (fl .31^. •C C TJ an S,8i •i .at § 2' c ETO 8 fe C (fl (I) O TO 3 c .c f I £ C 2 3 o .fx « Q. (o re ^ <l) C i3.| i< = l ; ° 2 c i *; 15 « il E „ re c c i'&5.2 !> " 11 c S- c E S C g c 0£ ffl S OT > o (fl 3 s (A D) re CL 4> < Tl " s (fl Q. re < E ' ffl o cc w o CM (D CJ) CO Q. I ro E 0 OC E. p 1 -g TJ 8 i i •E '••Q, if E e E 5 ra OCL CO gg •c E p tr fc ra E CM O © SvQ = 0 S P c o ra OT ro ro TJ © © m ro P 0 d o' ^fc. ro n P 2 -P TJ E = ro ro 0 > o o CO .S« -= ^ " "o ra fc 2 £ 0 3 O P ra 2 .52 TJ ra ro P ^8 E g> ro 0 ffi ^ S Si . OT P rati E > to 2 "•g P © lr- t^ ^ -f- ro g OT E ro fc 0 -Q. c u/ a. i.i .i E — o .c "P 5 o £ TI ^ E « TJ fc := 0 S-it 2 " £ CO E E .fc 0 OT E 0 2 E tj •^3 3 © CO 5 o g P > TJ TJ g 0 © CJ XJ OT P ^ O E O i O TJ © OT >% E E O ro O O © CJ P-£ c= Er i5 0 p d p >. E "o ro P P E s «- CL p 0 .J: jQ p ro © .E .fc OT Q ^ra o i $ ro *- Q. ro 55 . -w CO P -E .2 ^ ro to © O © P P £ CJ -^.2 52 •^•ss •Pb J .8 © 5 i= £ © OT P ^ E 3 E 2 ro o 3 fc ?" O) OT ro •D o © "o ro ^ P •i E o ro fc > ro P 0 2 g2 ro >» ro XI .2 .F-O OT -F P O E TJ d E 0 © "° ^- S >,< E £ O p ro LU o fc O 2 ro ro E 'E E ro ro © sz o g •L. CL ra • E .fc 2 © ra CJ. •i 2 « ^ .E ro 0 £ q) .E p 2 2-G S £ ro ro 0 Si ro x: OT E g ro .. O) w iti > E2 2 _ OT ro ro ro 0 £ 0 E E O 0 C3 CM TJ 0 0 x: ro 3 o 0 TJ E ro *^ XJ OT P P fc C © ro E 1 p ^ JZ tj 2 to .»-» o © o fc _ OT ro E E O OT >- © 0 ja QL O P © •— © to 5 ro fc£ E P 5 E p p © p JZ ro I- CL ro ro -fc O P M-Q. o © ro b TJ © E E ro —' o =§ P -I 1« 2"^ Q._ © Q. E o o ro E O o •G P = Q ro b -c OT .2 ro fc c ro ~ 11 E ro.2 E to E > E ro ro CJ QL © T3 • -ri -2 : re = ill. 1 ra 11 1^.1 c "5 o E £ 3 c £ — 4) O r- »-O E O ^i£ r.E 3 (fl c ra E ffl 9! •S S E D.X) c C (fl o 0 ra •£ c- -c re 1 fii* o fe .5 c fc (fl re m ffl ffl E T C O) ffl (3) ffl< o _ro -t-*" |5 3 o _ o re V- re o) •5Q (3) II C . °^ ffl C3 o* O) 11 s ffl ~ fc:« (fl S E £ •2 c JS IS ffl w § .c E II fi c c b |.2ig S E go-re ffl S X a. Q.< "5 c E " £ o z: «! Q. Q a _ "D S O u t _ f ffl ffl a OT > o: o: o CO cu U) CO Q. I ro E 0 CC • E O •§ •E P II •C Q. I E E S P I a. rai •i E p t: fc ro £ PJ p © s o ra E •F © P s ra 0 CJ. ra E 2 ra ro ro p •o ^ 0 ro .Q 2 "SB E -i ^ .fc ro -n ro 0 OT E CO E CO ~ ro OT ro P ^ *' a; ZJ ra CO p 0 E .E <u £ .52 -y ro © ffi 1" i.» = c: to P g •c: £ E " E o P © P CJ.-^ E oro ©D- 52 ra g o +.* E O 0 ro •. TJ 0 to 3 o TJ .2-© o O OT g^ TJ 0 ro -ti JO E 2 -S "C w 5 P E E E 0=0 E ro -Q^ 5 ^ c o O .i r^ 0 O) OT .E o ? ^ -c o o ra OT P fc £ CL c o >, p E ro ro CJ. >^ ^ P >» ra o g Si o © ro CJ. ts "S o 2 ral^ o ro So ra © © .E .ti >s § I © O 80 S o ra © QL.S; X D © ^ £ o ro CO S2fc ro P © ^ ro fc i o o O =» Js! © 3 i to .E .2 S ra £^ gi" © CJ. 8i II Q.TJ ^ -D W 0 ro = OT 3 .ffi .8 f2 2 ffi to P -i .2 °- 5) E . o C3 >^-H 1 g^ LL 0 - 55 ro P-.fc £ © o © ro E •S.0.2 ro ti ro > ro o g ra^ '*i o >. ro o -o E -P © X £ 0 E it ro 2 2 E CJ p .fc © E ro P 22^S £ o> p © © TJ I 2 p P '2^ 8m .2 ro to © .2 .Q >t to to 3 E cr OT 8 i E O fc o o ra 0 X — © b M- E p ro ro 'S 0 ° >i OT E ^.2 ^ ro 8g g2 ^ > <^ ro fc c: ro tj © 0 E £ -Q to = E ^ ro o EEO - CO ^ TJ ° © .P,t; > 2 £ o cj.to E 52 0 '"££ OT E O OT p £ ra u. E o OT b •*= E o o "^-^ ^8 fc o 8-^ •5 E fc © $ E p ro c P ro -o E ro £ to I E p o •D E 0 OT ro E 2 ra o P n i=; > c: CJ. £ CJ. o ro = CJ ro ^ ro < E to I— to ro .E " © -ffi ro ra E o o o E ra o .2 P -ffi ro 0 0- E ^.i fc o ro E o 8 o p^ 1- CJ. TJ 0 TJ ja E .Q E O ro _ ro —• OT ro E 0 E JZ ro E J5 E c^ ra 2 .ffi S -g 2 -B o r, ^ o E 3 fc OT E O O © £ •*= ^ tr /'^ E ra«»- o E O ^ 0 .fc OT x: 3 E "o TJ CO 0 ro fc 2 ro ro 3 O ra 0 TJ -c 2 fc) ;^o o E i_ g £'fc. <« ffi 0 ro •s P i5 Js ^ ro ra E -= OT >» (o io o 2 -CJ © 3 CT -o O 2 "ra ra o © 2 ro ^ P \U l~ W f~ CJ -5 P ^ Q. P OT -C O ti W x: E • o E © P ro TJ 0. © 8- ^ , OT £ o CM ro CL E ffi c: P CO o ra-F OT J=: E o E 2 © p fc n ro -E 2 CL $ ro E E CJ T3 ffl IS TJ TJ C TO TJ ffl TO T3 ffl T3 'I O T3 •= ffl iS. TO O) -r^ g5 5 I IS S. ra c ,S);.g fc Ifll ro ^ « 3 S ffl .2 s n £ •c c o ™ n L. °-i c£ CD8 E o S S F 3 •= . .E (o 5 (0 t- ™ F S S S fc JS ffl E fe °--o c *c= c w o (i> o ro -.^ ^ 1 £5 i| 3 E Q. O TO rn S .i2 " .c ^ ffl C o >; T C D) li -B § 5 ro CO ^ < C .^i (O ) u! (= E 2 : ° -2 c JS s —- IS « w I E „ I ro c c o &^.o 8 " II C £ » re ffl £ X ™5: Q.<=6 g" c E " g I ? ^ -S2 i: .S 1 ,s is < i o'c E ' O £ ffl ffl Q S OT > oc E E o 0) CD CO OL CO ro E © CC tz o fc ra E -« P II E CX I E g»© •c .E £ t: •fc ro E dJ 2 P S Q ra •tz o S P 1 s ra ra to P >^ g E -c ra v -S* p = .E 22 E ^ O © P 0 .ti °- g P >- ^ 2 o E © © T3 ro -D 0 to 3 o © sz © > ro QL o OT 0 ]g © © sz .s ro x: OT E sz^ -. P o o 52 ro -P OT OT • Sii 0 C ra fc fc P °- £ © .E g^ © _ OT ro ro E QL E P OT OT -E TJ g 0 to P § i 2 8 •F c: ro 0 TJ E ro E ro E 2 m .P ro g 'ra p o tz o 0 ro CL E OT ra ?>, ra c^ P fc 0.8 x: TJ 0 > P .52 0 P -F 8)^ ro > TJ ro ro 0 ©s P F •O 3 _ P OT ^ £ P CO ro CL XI o = p © ra ro TJ . > ^ ra p p -•—» E P © ro CL © o ro p P to ^ i! o 0 fc ro 3 o •D E E .2 3 I- U_ T3 0 > '.E i2 8 CO g 8 OT >«r tj .2 2 CO 0 > .jj" ro 0 ra > E T3 3 +-» OT >,'P •E TJ P E E 3 •3 2 ro ra •E .P OT TJ © 0 .E .2 <l CO O © B^ E ro *; OT ro .E p p 0 TJ TJ 2 O .fc —' 3 p S" o 2 ro CO o £, ro ra S£ 8 .fc OT O «x fc. "E ro TJ E ro p S)!2 E ra .fc 0 0 0 gQ£ o E x: .52 g fc •P CO 5 ro 2> ro ro Q. £ 2 0 = .E $ §^ P w 0 i_ TJ O -f 0 .52 E ra c 2 g P .E tz . o -p ro o CL 4= TJ >» 0 .ti OT O 3 -° g 2 S fl^ ™ 0 It- li o •*= © m 4^ ro CO c 0 .fc h= OT 0 w Q. g OT £ E © ro Sl © £ ra ^ 2 ro -c OT Q. © © tz ro -£ « fc' CO P> = P !_ o fc 2 to o ro OT ti- ro o OT fc. _ © p 5 -E CJ ti ro ro c ra £ .2 (o © 5 ro ro-*" 3 ro to > > ro © CO -CJ O) 0 .— OT >4— t= 55 P . TJ £ P tj -D ^ ro fc o P- 8 CJ E © E ro 3 o .52 © > o o 52 TJ P o ^ ro .E E ^ ro ^ °-8 © 0 ra 2: 5 © © > 2 c= fc. 2 g-2 E TJ © c E © CJ. E ro © © OT ro -»-' CO I- ro £ OT U P E 11 OT CL E ro E P ro > ro o X © 0 ro o E2 B ^ a. © 1 ° ^ o CO OT 2^ © ro T> T3 . ffl tfl TO c re T> - ffl TJ ffl liM ra ra c ra ES8-2 ra ;5 !2 Z .31^5 C -D •fe ra c *1J i_ °-3 C£ o) O E o (fl .ffi _ ._ ffl . .S (fl o S c "I c £ ffl S E .2 ffl E fe 0-.° (= >t: c (fl o ffl o ra '.s * ffl (o > a; -.g c 2 3 E o .c « fc QL c ra cn I- ffl C o riii" li.§.o E 2 ra (A O c 'S re ffl I c .0 re c re Q X UI ° -2 c JB IS 4) (fl c D) £: 11 ro c c o " 11 C £ « re S £ X .lill< S ofe E ' O £ ffl ffl Q s<n>occc w E 0 CC c .2 ra E ^ P TJ C || if E ? E E 5 JD 2 CL CO g> P •c E P •£ P 0 S'€ ra E •E P •F P 1^ o irj QJ CJ) CO •L i (0 Q P S c o ra ra-D E E E ro o +.» E -C g 2 E ro P ©• © ra- -D 5) •CJ - 0 TJ P8 Is © o 'ro = E ro 2-g 1 E OT ro o •i= ra _ o < fc. ra 81 to CJ. ffi ro © ^ CO 0 «»" 2 p 0 sz > o P -ffi o P -w © OT © £ i= to © o ro OT" p 2 to ro E £ *= o 5-£ U 5 3 fc > .fc OT to E .E £ 0 •— TJ.ra £ fc. ro o £ o 8 ^ B 8 8 ro E o -c o S? TI ro k_ 3 o TJ © CJ. © ro E N TJ 'ro P o £ OT" ro © •fc.8 p ^ -o E ro OT" © CJ. CJ. ro E ro © _ © Q_ fc ^ ro ro JZ OT E -E i2 >- Q.. P V. TJ ©" © N S)'OT -•i fc ro o ro CL ro P OT ro . •D 2 0 OT •R c: £ .2 w fc .2 3 o o CJ. o OT *i 3 O _ TJ " g OT c 1- O © '.^ CJ. 3 o^.fc _ -I-.' 0 CO > E ro2 £ ro ro P-0 ro fc o CJ. © TJ © E O © ro -E 3- CJ ^ E 0 _ JZ ro *- E E o 0 J=£ 82 2 E X £ ^ CJ. E © © O CJ. 5^ P-ro ro P >• d E o ro o *- p &i ^ 2 i-ra 2 c © *- E -Q ro £ = 'E IE 8 to P E ^ 0 0 0 p fc o .52 0 x: E ^ f-n .2. ri CJ. 2 to 0 3 a E 0 OT £ -e o <o CJ.= tJ ra © .2 P" OT © TJ ro .o 0 to P ro 3 CO E c -Q •E d o o E © © o CO £ E OT OT © o ro I'-•© ^ 0 0 o E .E .ro g'.ro.- £ fc.° E 2 OT ro ro $ D- E *- TJ " P 0 ro£ l^ E '— ro ro E 3 Q. © a 2 E © ?-5 O CJ. g.i ro o ro o © 8 © ro XJ .i fc •I 8 s -p TJ O ro sz -ffi © E E :g >».p fc l»-o © © CL.C OT |_ TJ E ro TJ © © fc N = 0 3 a TJ ro P E o- E P 3 -Q (O o J2 ro ro ro E OT 0 CO fc ro fc •*= g 2 :2 to £"S = -S Ifl ra re T3 ffl TJ 'I O T3 •= ffl iS, TO TO .31 ral o) 8 TO T) T3 C TO T3 ffl TO •g.i O J E iS £? <1) O ^ * c o o .c Q. (fl (fl (fl ffl .Si £ 3 - (fl F, <" ffl ffl ^E i_ c o .9 81 (fl £ « 12 c £ E o 0) -•5.2 .E 3 TO ffl E 13) ^3.2 M O C ••5 re ffl I Hm o c .2 re c JS Q X UJ TO *; TO 3 g .S> i EF "TOC gill II ffl " E I'e g Q. .£ O >; o £ H S OT ffl .y 3'I E-i - O) •2 § re O) o S (fl E 3 c JS ffl (0 II ^ c o 0 O .— ffl 1 £ X E " g — Ma. •o a 5 S< •- E„ ffl ffl Q > D: ce o CD T— (D CJ) CO CL i ffi E 2 Ct:: E ° CO S c: PQ. CO 8>p •i E p t; .fc fc P 0) s o ra E In o ra ra 0 3 TJ •P © •G © o o TJ E ro TJ P >» OT p2 ra p-ffi ra o CJ .2 2 3 fc -t^ .J= .= ~ P OT 1- fc ra — TJ r> 0 ro OT E g OT OT 3 o 52 TJ OT -o O O Si ro _ ro CO 'O 3 O ro > © E ro ._ ro ts g E P -.8 E •p .2- ro o E (I) = ro '5 CO " ro TJ © TJ .E © I- E © OT . © © CJ. 1 0 p = p. ^•8-5 .2; ^ 2 0 *. is -» - p E 2 ra p p E O 3 © to •= C E .fc •OT P © E o OT © TJ .3 O E © x: H- 2 2 'i_ CL O L-Q. CJ. ro o 0 ^ •D P OT © © P-^ E o o JZ c^ -ffi ro E g-™ - E -n OT .2> 0 P to 8 2 p-g - x: " CO h- © £ •P to L— d to -g © JZ £ •^^ " © •8 S_ 3 P to p-g OT = © OT .P OT •D _ © ro t o p s OT CJ. X) CO o ro 0 0 © o © E ra ro TJ •fc © ^ 1 E E © t- ro .i ^ OT © OT 8£ 52 TJ E m C3 ro ..p o 0 TJ 0 fc CO O ii 0 3 82 5 CJ o o o ra o to to £ OT ro CL g tmm o 2 p. E ra ro .2 ra fc .£ 0 E E rol' CL UJ 0 M- = OT +.» E © P £ g 5 P £ I- fc c: -Q .2 -CJ >. p I- -D E i: Q. ro ro OT to E 0 ^ P p .fc fc.'P E £ © ^ £ ro O 0 p > o E © OT — ro ^ w 5 fc © Q. ^ P P £ p ro -D X- 0 p ^ i 4 fc OT •D TJ ro E o OT E 21 ^1 © CL o = E ro TJ © fc£ o o ro c i2 © '5 fc OT © ^ :2 'OT g ffi g-.2 to ro g E fc^ P O CO © 00 •° 6 TJ Z 2 XJ ro o CL-J 0 _ S CJ> p-o . o E CM ro CM ra:= •*= fc OT CJ. © < 2 d — E ro — 2 E E o ra © £ cu o fc .-ro © E E p o © 0 CL .E ili CM O CD £ fc P -Q. O LU TJ E ro ra E 'E g ^ a. LL © ro 0 "o £ 0 o 2 ra . -Js E c .fc I- ro := E •8 5 2 fc CL .52 ra CJ. ra d .2 P P S ra-o Ss OT 0 ro Si |^'=S ro fc O OT _i <*- w" O E C" Q. ro TJ © E CJ. 3 ro o o .Q OT -CJ E -E ro 0 -• 1 8 0 £ x: D. -fc © 0 o £ © (— >»— g o •^.^^ 2 o 2 0 CL £ 2 'G LL E O 0 •*= •D g O •G 2 •Q •§ ro ro ^ OT .2 o ro O CO ro CL 6 ^ .E < OT CM CM o .8 °- CO 5= TJ -D £ g 2 = = fc ro ro fc c- ro ro ro "8 S >'2.2 -C CO ii TJ V -D 2 < 55 •C © i2 ffi o ro 2 N O T3 5! ffl T3 = ^ (fl TO re T3 ffl TJ 'I o ^ • = OJ JS. ro ,31 "E Q. fc -I re ' 11 8^ £ <i> TI" O •c £ E o .£±= E f= c E ro _ffl o J3 c " c (fl o TO c ro S 2 S S c re ffl X a. m (fl (fl £ffl 5-3 g g . < ^ ffl i_ c .> o .9 IS *; 15 lit 3|^ CL ffl D) 11 II 3 E E-i c g> S § re «*— O) o its (fl E 2 c JS ffl (fl i.? II :g C O O (fl •S ffl ffl'-' E 'S'g'c II S c 5; o £ I- s w JS „ g-2 . c ro Q. i £ >< a< TJ E » g — (fl o. •D H .£ i5< - E ' ffl ffl • > K CC o OJ CJ) CO CL ro E 0 E' P 1 •E ^ I if c o I" PQ. CO o>g Imm #X- •c fc 2 % fc ro E OJ P © SQ ra -p -D E E ro ro ro ro E E 'E 'E £ p ro E £ p ro E CL LL CL LL ro © 'p £ © P 2 C3) . •ti E c .fc I- ro = c § 8 2 fc CL .ffi ra CJ. D) E .E P o i-E ra "CJ 51 CO © E ro j3 p to © o-g 8 -CL M- OT O E 0 >^ ro .fc £r-Q.u. f 0 .g E Q. ^ 5 ro $ o o ^ -CJ CO t^ TJ P >< c o fc ro "r 0 — o ro 2 -n P 2 ^ x: CJ..2 3 P ~ O CJ TJ OT c: P " O E 0 o c: £ 0 P >•-£>» O *^ J2 £ g g ^ © '•c E -G o 5 E o 1^ <^ 2 CO CM 2*5 i»- ^.^ g" OT 0 ro x: E £ f .ii^ 0 « ra £^.E CO .52 fc •p to P ^ CO Q. CO 0 -D ro -c £ " ro 1 ° ro sz TJ =F 2 fc ro ^ = S £i.2 OT LL ^ O -CJ 0 0 OT O "£ o 2 ro N fc.O ro © "o o 8 ro . E c .fc 1- ro ..= c •8 I 2 1 CL .52 ra Q. ro E .E P p -5 raTJ 58 E -P T- P o ^ OT t« £ OT 0 O ro «- N -° g o ro CJ _J .E 0 '5 '"-2 £r8°- ro CO CD 3 © p CJ. © XJ ro -o >.8i .8 £ o t 2 P E to O © fc £ S-^ 8fc g o P _ 0 fc o £ ro 3^^ >^ < o ja E 0 o .fc •*= LL O 0 T3 "o ro 2 Ja Q. OT 15 o >. iSb E © P'M- P E O tj p E .fc O .2 Q >»— <J ' CD 8 ra 1 « 'i P -S E OT ro OT ro p E g '•c ro 0) Q- T3 X: TJ £ c: ro o ro 2 ro ro ro to 5 S •<5-CM TJ ffl 13 TJ TJ ZZ ro TJ £^1 (fl TO c ro TJ - ffl -n ffl iif . llll ss, TO c i'li g !ffl8-i JS .i2 Z 3 := ic ffl t c TJ O S i £ °-3 C£ s,8ii illi •1 n .E 3 ffl .Q (fl : g g g .^ffl E I- (fl o 0 TO -j: ,- x: ro 1 2 -t fc o C O) o c ffl O) 4i< •> O il sl" ™ re c re a X UJ S S'S fc ±i (fl S E 2 •2 c JS 13 ffl to O) .C rr E S C Si"' "S c o ffl iJ g-O) CL 'C II s li HE lit (3) § .c 11 fi Ceo ffl o « - .= ffl 5S ro ffl 2 X Q. a.< -D ' c E " ^ o ~ "ffl O ~ in a. ^ TJ Jt S sfe E ' f ffl ffl Q OT > o: CC EXHIBIT "ADDM" ADDENDUM TO THE MITIGATED >flEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR RANCHO MILAGRO GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01/HMP 09-01 The purpose of this Addendum to the Mitigated Negative Declaration is to describe revisions to the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program associated with the Rancho Milagro project, and to state the determination that this revision does not create any new significant environmental effects, that none of the conditions contained in Section 15162 of the Califomia Envirorunental Quality Act (CEQA) have occurred, and that a subsequent Mitigated Negative Declaration is not required. The revisions contained in this addendum revise Mitigation Measures No. 15 and No. 19a-f of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. The revised mitigation measures shall apply as follows: 7 J. Landscapins Restrictions: The Final Landscape plans for the brush management zones and along development slopes adjacent to the HMP open space conservation areas shall require the use of a native plant palette consistent with the adjacent native vegetation communities, prohibit the use of omamental invasive species, and limit the use of fertilizers, pesticides, and herbicides to prevent excess run-offfrom entering the HMP open space conservation areas. The project shall control irrigation of landscaping adjacent to the HMP conservation areas so as to prevent runofffrom spreading into the preserve. In addition, the use of cultivars of native species shall be prohibited to avoid genetic contamination of the native plant species in the preserve. 19. Archeological mitigation measures shall be implemented as follows: a. Prior to the issuance of grading permits and/or initiation of the data recovery program discussed below, the owner/developer shall enter into a pre-excavation agreement with a representative of the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians. Verification shall be documented by a letter fi'om the property owner/developer and the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians to the City of Carlsbad City Planner. The purpose of this agreement will be to establish the requirement of tribal monitoring and to formalize procedures for the treatment of Native American human remains and burial, ceremonial, or cultural items that may be uncovered during any ground disturbance activities. b. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the property owner/developer shall retain the services of a qualified archeologist to oversee and implement the cultural resources mitigation measures as discussed herein. Verification shall be documented by a letter from the property owner/developer and the archeologist to the City of Carlsbad City Planner. c. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the collection and documentation of a valid sample of the significant scientific data contained within CA-SDI-9698, CA-SDI-9699, and the portion of CA-SDI-9701 impacted by the project shall be performed. The collection and documentation shall involve the following actions: 1) preparation of a research design; 2) excavation of a phased sample (the size of the samples shall be sufficient to recover the scientific data for which the resources were determined significant); 3) catalogue and report results of the field work; and 4) curation of all cultural materials, including original maps, field notes, catalog information, and final report with an appropriate institution, or as may be stipulated in the pre-excavation agreement entered into with the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians, consistent with state and federal standards. All work shall be completed under the direction of a qualified archeologist and to the satisfaction of the City of Carlsbad City Planner. A copy of the final data recovery findings report shall be provided to the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians. d. Prior to commencement of grading, a qualified archeologist and Native American Monitor and/or representative of the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians shall be present at the pre-construction meeting to consult with the grading and excavation contractors. EXHIBIT "ADDM" In the event that any cultural resources, concentration of artifacts, or culturally modified soil deposits are discovered within the project area at any time during brushing, grading, and/or construction activities, the archeologist shall be empowered to suspend work in the immediate area of the discovery until such time as a data recovery plan can be developed and implemented. The discovery of any resource shall be reported to the City of Carlsbad City Planner prior to any evaluation testing. g. If any deposits are evaluated as significant under CEQA, mitigation may be required as recommended by the archeologist in coordination with the Native American Monitor. These revisions are not considered substantial or significant as it relates to the environmental effects associated with the project, or the conditions contained in Section 15162 of CEQA, and a subsequent Mitigated Negative Declaration is not required. Date: Don Neu City Planner GEGTECHNICAL EXPLORATION, INC. SOIL & FOUNDATION ENGINEERING • GROUNDWATER HAZARDOUS MATERIALS MANAGEMENT • ENGINEERING GEOLOGY 13 July 2005 Mr. Xavier Sustaeta RANCHO MILAGRO, LLC P.O. Box 9177 La Jolla, CA 92038 Job No. 04-8849 Subject: Results of Soil SamplinopXJ^^^ Rancho Milagro Residential Developnnent APN 209-060-61-00 North of Sunny Creek Road Carlsbad, California Dear Mr. Sustaeta: As requested, we herein respond to a City of Carlsbad letter dated May 20, 2005, written by Mr. Don New, Assistant Planning Director. The letter is addressed to Jack Henthorn and Associates and includes a list of items needed to deenn the application as connplete. The City of Carlsbad letter includes the geotechnical issues excerpted as follows: Revise the preliminary geotechnical investigation, under page 16, to elaborate on the "suspicious feature" located near Jots 5 and 6. Clarify if a soli boring(s) or other methods are required to help explore this feature. This report should clearly identify impacts such as remedial grading and/or slope restoration methods to address a potential landslide. Additional remedial grading may require grading outside the limits of this project, which may impact habitat. GEI Response: As Indicated in the geotechnical report, there are no known or suspected landslides on the site. However, based on a review of the topographic map and aerial photographs, we observed a suspicious geologic feature in the southeast portion of the property (in the area of Lots 5 and 6). Based on recent 7420 TRADE STREET • SAN DIEGO, CA 92121 • (858) 549-7222 • FAX: (858) 549-1604 • E-MAIL; geotech@lxpres.com Rancho Milagro Develoiprhent Carlsbad, California Job No. 04-8849 Page 2 field reconnaissance, the observed topographic feature appears to be an erosional feature related to an outcrop of Cretaceous-age Lusardi Formation along the top of the south-facing hillside. It does not appear to be related to ancient landsliding in the area and will not require further exploration prior to the grading operation. In addition, it is our opinion that no additional remedial grading will be required outside the limits of the project, which could impact habitat. As always required, we will make observations of the geologic conditions exposed in cut slopes and in fill slope keyway excavations. The findings and opinions presented herein have been made in accordance with current geotechnical engineering principles and practice in the field of geotechnical engineering in the City of Carlsbad. No warranty, either expressed or implied, is made. If you have questions regarding this letter, please feel free to contact our office. Reference to our Job No. 04-8849 will help to expedite a response to your inquiries. Sincerely, GEOTECHNICAL EXPLORATION,^ INC. Jtrf K.lleiser Senior Project Geologist D. Reed, President C.E.G. 999[exp. 3-31-07]/R.G. 3391 *3§Tme A. Cerros, P.E R.C.E. 34422/G.E. 2007 Senior Geotechnical Engine ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART I (TO BE COMPLETED BY THE APPLICANT) CASE NO: CT 04-24 DATE: April 14. 2005 BACKGROUND 1. CASE NAME: Rancho Milagro 2. LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS: City ofCarlsbad Planning Dept. 1635 Faradav Ave. Carlsbad CA 92008 3. CONTACT PERSON AND PHONE NUMBER: 4. PROJECT LOCATION: Aprox. 'A mile northeast of intersection of College Blvd. and El Camino Real. Carlsbad CA 5. PROJECT SPONSOR'S NAME AND ADDRESS: Rancho Milagro LLC. PO Box 9177. La Jolla CA 92038 6. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: RLM. OS. RH/C/O 7. ZONING: R-1-20.000. OS 8. OTHER PUBLIC AGENCIES WHOSE APPROVAL IS REQUIRED (i.e., permits, financing approval or participation agreements): PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND SURROUNDING LAND USES: Proiect Description; The proiect is a subdivision consisting of 22 single familv custom home lots and an open space habitat preserve. Access to the residential lots will be through a proposed residential subdivision to the north of the proiect ("Cantarini). The development area will be clustered on the previously-disturbed agricultural area on the north side of the parcel. The majority of the parcel will remain as undisturbed natural open space, and placed in a dedicated open space preserve. Environmental Setting: The proiect site is located in a rural agricultural area, with hillside topography, creek riparian habitat, natural vegetation, agricultural fields, and dirt roads. There are several rural homes and agricultural outbuildings in the area. The proiect site is an undeveloped 43-acre parcel with gently to steeply sloping hillsides, a creek floodplain. and a tributaries. The majority of the north side of the site has been previously disturbed with agricultural fields and dirt roads. The proposed development area is on the north side ofthe site, on the previously disturbed agricultural fields. A small, urmamed tributary floodplain runs through the north side ofthe site. A steep bank slopes dovm fi^om the agricultural fields to the floodplain on the north side of the site. The south side of the site contains a steep hillside which slopes dovm to the floodplain of Agua Hedionda Creek. This floodplain and creek are in a conversation easement as a habitat preserve. The natural vegetation consists of chaparral and brush on the hillsides, and riparian plants and trees in the floodplains. Surrounding Land Uses; The site is surrounded on three sides (to the north, east, and west) by rural agricultural land. There are several rural homes and agricultural outbuildings in this area. East of the site are agricultural fields and a few rural homes. West of the site is a horse ranch, a rural home, and agricultural outbuildings. North of the site are agricultural fields and outbuildings. Southeast of the site is an open space preserve along Agua Hedionda Creek. Further southeast is a large, developed business park area along Palmer Way and Faradav Ave. Southwest of the site is a large, newer residential development- The Terraces at Sunny Creek. The area north of the site is proposed and approved for a large residential development known as Cantarini/Holly Springs. Rev. 07/26/02 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 "Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. 1 1 Aesthetics 1 1 Geology/Soils 1 1 Noise 1 1 Agricultural Resources 1 1 Hazards/Hazardous Materials 1 1 Population and Housing 1 1 Air Quality 1 1 Hydrology/Water Quality 1 1 Public Services 1^ Biological Resources 1 1 Land Use and Planning 1 1 Recreation 1 1 Cultural Resources 1 1 Mineral Resources 1 1 Transportation/Circulation ^ Mandatory Findings of Significance 1 1 Utilities & Service Systems Rev. 07/26/02 Issues (and Supporting Infonnation Sources). (Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached.) AESTHETICS - Would the project: 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) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light and glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Potentially Significant Impact Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant Impact No Impact • • • X • • • X • • X • • • • X II. AGRICULTRAL RESOURCES - (In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are sigmficant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the Califomia Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model-1997 prepared by the Califomia Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland.) Would the project: 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 Califomia Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing enviromnent, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use? III. AIR QUALITY - (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.) Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? • • • • • • • • • • M • • m s • m • Rev. 07/03/02 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). (Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached.) c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is in non-attainment imder an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would the project: 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 Califomia 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 Califomia Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including but not limited to marsh, vemal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filing, hydrological intermption, 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? 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? g) Impact tributary areas that are environmentally sensitive? Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact • • • • • • • • • • • • Kl • • K • • ^ • m • • • • • • • • • m • s • ^ • • Rev. 07/03/02 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). (Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached.) V. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the signifi- cance of an archeological resource piursuant to §15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paieontologi- cal resource or site or imique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS - Would the project: a) Expose people or stmctures to 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 groimd failure, including liquefaction? iv. Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic imit 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 Table 18 - 1-B ofthe Uniform Building Code (1997), creating substantial risks to life or property? Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact • • • • • • • • • Kl • K • S • Kl • • • Kl • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X Rev. 07/03/02 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). (Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached.) e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or altemative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? VIL HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS- Would the project: 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 Govemment 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 for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or stmctures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY - Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Potentially Significant Impact • • • n • Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated • • • • • • • • • • • • • Less Than Significant No Impact Impact • m • Kl • Kl • Kl • m • ^ • Kl • K Kl • • • • S Rev. 07/03/02 o Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). (Supplemental documents may be referred to and attached.) b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with ground water recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local ground water table level (i.e., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Impacts to groimdwater quality? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattem of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off- site? e) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattem of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the flow rate or amount (volume) of surface nmoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off- site? f) 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? g) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? h) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood delineation map? i) Place within 100-year flood hazard area stractures, which would impede or redirect flood flows? j) Expose people or stractures to a significant risk of loss injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? k) Inimdation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? 1) Increased erosion (sediment) into receiving surface waters. m) Increased pollutant discharges (e.g., heavy metals, pathogens, petroleum derivatives, synthetic organics, nutrients, oxygen-demanding substances and trash) into receiving surface waters or other alteration of receiving surface water quality (e.g., temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity)? Potentially Significant Impact • • • • • • • • • Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated Less Than Significant • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • No Impact Impact • m K • • • Kl • • • Kl K Kl Kl K • K Rev. 07/03/02 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). (Supplemental documents may be refened to and attached.) n) Changes to receiving water quality (marine, fresh or wetland waters) during or following constraction? o) Increase in any pollutant to an already impaired water body as listed on the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) Hst? p) The exceedance of applicable surface or groimdwater receiving water quality objectives or degradation of beneficial uses? IX. LANDUSE AND PLANNING - Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? X. MINERAL RESOURCES - Would the project: 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? XI. NOISE - Would the proj ect resuh in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundboume vibration or groundboume noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Potentially Significant Impact • • • • • • • • • o Potentially Significant IJnless Mitigation Incorporated • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Less Than Significant No Impact Impact • • ^ • K • m • m • Kl • Kl • m • M • K • s Kl • Rev. 07/03/02 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). (Supplemental documents may be refened to and attached.) e) For a project located within 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? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING - Would the project: a) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastracture)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the constraction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the constraction of replacement housing elsewhere? Potenfially Potentially Significant Unless Significant Mitigation Impact Incorporated • • • • • • • • • • Less Than Significant No Impact Impact • M • m • Kl • K • Kl XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered govemment facilities, a need for new or physically altered govemment facilities, the constraction 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: XIV. RECREATION 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? • • i) Fire protection? • • • X ii) Police protection? • n • X iii) Schools? • • • X iv) Parks? • • • X v) Other public facilities? • • • X • K 10 Rev. 07/03/02 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). (Supplemental documents may be refened to and attached.) b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the constraction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the enviroimient? XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC - Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the coimty congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic pattems, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? f) Result in insufficient parking capacity? g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting altemative transportation (e.g., bus tum- outs, bicycle racks)? XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS project: Would the a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the constraction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the constraction of which would cause significant enviromnental effects? c) Require or result in the constraction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the constraction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water suppUes available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? Potentially Significant Impact • • Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated • • • • • • • • Less Than Significant No Impact Impact • Kl Kl • • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • • • X • Kl • Kl • m • • • Kl 11 Rev. 07/03/02 Issues (and Supporting Information Sources). (Supplemental documents may be refened to and attached.) e) 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? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildhfe species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of Califomia history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumula- tively 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 cunent 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? Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact • • • • • • Kl • • • Kl • m • • • • M • • • • s 12 Rev. 07/03/02 DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION I. AESTHETICS Less Than Significant Impact. This potential impact has been previously analyzed in the General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR). This document states that the aesthetic character of Carlsbad will be substantially altered from implementation of the General Plan, and that the aesthetic quality of scenic corridors such as El Camino Real will be degraded. This document provides project-level mitigation measures which will be applied to the project to mitigate this potential impact to an insignificant level. Potential impacts will also be mitigated by the project's compliance with the Hillside Development Ordinance, Landscape Manual, and Sunny Creek Specific Plan. II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES Less Than Significant Impact. This potential impact has been previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR, which provides project-level mitigation measures which will be applied to the project to mitigate this potential impact to an insignificant level. III. AIR QUALITY Less Than Significant Impact. This potential impact has been previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. a) The project site is located in the San Diego Air Basin which is a federal and state non-attainment area for ozone (O3), and a state non-attainment area for particulate matter less than or equal to 10 microns in diameter (PM10). The periodic violations of national Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS) in the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB), particularly for ozone in inland foothill areas, requires that a plan be developed outlining the pollution controls that will be undertaken to improve air quality. In San Diego County, this attainment planning process is embodied in the Regional Air Quality Strategies (F?AQS) developed jointly by the Air Pollution Control District (APCD) and the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG). A plan to meet the federal standard for ozone was developed in 1994 during the process of updating the 1991 state-mandated plan. This local plan was combined with plans from all other California non- attainment areas having serious ozone problems and used to create the California State Implementation Plan (SIP). The SIP was adopted by the Air Resources Board (ARB) after public hearings on November 9th through 10th in 1994, and was forwarded to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for approval. After considerable analysis and debate, particularly regarding airsheds with the worst smog problems, EPA approved the SIP in mid-1996. The proposed project relates to the SIP and/or RAQS through the land use and growth assumptions that are incorporated into the air quality planning document. These growth assumptions are based on each city's and the County's general plan. If a proposed project is consistent with its applicable General Plan, then the project presumably has been anticipated with the regional air quality planning process. Such consistency would ensure that the project would not have an adverse regional air quality impact. Section 15125(B) of the State of California Environment Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines contains specific reference to the need to evaluate any inconsistencies between the proposed project and the applicable air quality management plan. Transportation Control Measures (TCMs) are part of the RAQS. The RAQS and TCM plan set forth the steps needed to accomplish attainment of state and federal ambient air quality standards. The California Air Resources Board provides criteria for determining whether a project conforms with the RAQS which include the following: a. Is a regional air quality plan being implemented in the project area? b. Is the project consistent with the growth assumptions in the regional air quality plan? The project area is located in the San Diego Air Basin, and as such, is located in an area where a RAQS is being implemented. The project is consistent with the growth assumptions of the City's General Plan and the RAQS. Therefore, the project is consistent with the regional air quality plan and will in no way conflict or obstruct implementation of the regional plan. b) The closest air quality monitoring station to the project site is in the City of Oceanside. Data available for this monitoring site through April, 2002 indicate that the most recent air quality violations recorded were for the state one hour standard for ozone (one day in both 2000 and 2001) and one day in 2001 for the federal 8-hour average for ozone and one day for the 24-hour state standard for suspended particulates in 1996. No violations of any other air quality standards have been recorded recently. The project would involve minimal short-term emissions associated with grading and construction. Such emissions would be minimized through standard construction measures such as the use of properly tuned equipment and watering the site for dust control. Long-term emissions associated with travel to and from the project will be minimal. Although air pollutant emissions would be associated with the project, they would neither result in the violation of any air quality standard (comprising only an incremental contribution to overall air basin quality readings), nor contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. Any impact is assessed as less than significant. c) The Air Basin is currently in a non-attainment zone for ozone and suspended fine particulates. The proposed project would represent a contribution to a cumulatively considerable potential net increase in emissions throughout the air basin. As described above, however, emissions associated with the proposed project would be minimal. Given the limited emissions associated with the proposed project, air quality would be essentially the same whether or not the proposed project is implemented. According to the CEQA Guidelines Section 15130 (a)(4), the proposed project's contribution to the cumulative impact is considered de minimus. Any impact is assessed as less than significant. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES a) throuah f) The proposed development will impact the following sensitive vegetation communities: southern willow scrub, Diegan coastal sage scrub, disturbed Diegan coastal sage scrub, coast live oak woodland, sycamore/oak woodland, agricultural fields, and disturbed land. The proposed development will impact the following jurisdictional areas: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers wetlands, California Department of Fish and Game riparian habitat and streambed, and city of Carlsbad wetlands. Impacts to these sensitive vegetation communities and jurisdictional areas can be mitigated through on-site preservation, restoration, and/or creation, purchase of off-site habitat, and/or payment of fees into an authorized mitigafion bank. The impacts associated with the sewer line alignment through the Agua Hedionda Creek riparian area have already been reviewed and approved by the City of Carlsbad according to the Mitigated Negative Declaration dated April 4, 2000 (City of Carlsbad 2000). The proposed development will impact California adolphia, a California Native Plant Society (CNPS) List 2 species. RECON biologists will conduct a rare plant survey in April 2005 to search for additional state and federally listed plant species, CNPS List 1B and List 2 plant species, and city of Carlsbad's Habitat Management Plan (HMP) sensitive plant species that have a potential to occur in the study area. Mitigation of unavoidable impacts to sensitive plant species not covered by the HMP shall include transplantation of any impacted species or inclusion of the species in the plant palette of proposed restoration. The primary mitigation of impacts to HMP plant species is the conservation and management of habitat for the species in the preserve system. RECON biologists will conduct focused surveys for the following federally and/or state listed wildlife species beginning in the middle of April 2005 and continuing through the end of July 2005: least Bell's vireo, southwestern willow flycatcher, and coastal California gnatcatcher. If any of these species are detected within the study area, additional mitigation may be required. Based on a letter from the city of Carlsbad Planning Department dated December 10 2004 (City of Carlsbad 2004a), a tree survey may be conducted at a later date to map the location and measure the trunk diameter of each tree within the study area suitable for nesting raptors if determined to be necessary. The Rancho Milagro study area is located within a designated standards area (planned open space) in the city of Carlsbad's HMP preserve system that contains patches of undeveloped native habitat. The revised site design shows efforts to reduce impacts to these areas as well as wildlife movement corridors on and adjacent to the study area. See attached biology report for additional details and analysis. V. CULTURAL RESOURCES No Impact. The project will not impact historical or archeological resources. See attached Cultural Resources Survey Results letter report. The project has the potential to impact paieontological resources. Potential impacts will be mitigated by a paleontology survey prior to issuance of a grading permit, and paleontology monitoring during grading operations. In addition, this potential impact has been previously analyzed in the General Plan EIR. This document provides project-level mitigation measures which will be applied to the project to mitigate this potential impact to an insignificant level. VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS 1. The project would not expose people or structures to 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. ii. Strong seismic ground shaking. iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction. iv. Landslides b) The project would not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. c) The project would not 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) The project would not be located on expansive soils, as defined in Table 18 - 1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1997), creating substantial risks to life or property. e) Not applicable See attached geotechnical report for additional analysis and details. VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS Less Than Significant Impact. The project does not involve the use, transport or disposal of hazardous materials. The project site is not on the State Hazardous Waste and Substances List. The project will not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. See attached Phase 1 Report for additional analysis and details. The project could potentially expose people or structures to wildland fires. To mitigate this potential impact, the project has been designed in compliance with fire safety regulations, and the brush management requirements of the Landscape Manual. Also, the project will be reviewed by the City Fire Department and conditioned to comply with fire safety regulations. In addition, this potential impact has been previously addressed in the General Plan EIR. This document provides project-level mitigation measures which will be applied to the project to mitigate this potential impact to an insignificant level. VIM. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY 1. The project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. 2. The project would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with ground water recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local ground water table level. 3. The project would not impact groundwater quality. 4. The project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site. 5. The project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the flow rate or amount (volume) of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off-site. 6. The project would not 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. 7. The project would not substantially degrade water quality. 8. The project would not place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood delineation map. 9. The project would not place structures within a 100-year flood hazard area, which would impede or redirect flood flows. 10. The project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam. 11. The project would not result in inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow. 12. The project would not result in a significant increase of erosion (sediment) into receiving surface waters. 13. The project would not result in a significant increase of pollutant discharges into receiving surface waters, or other alteration of receiving surface water quality. See attached Hydrology Report and Stormwater Management Plan for additional analysis and details. IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING No Impact. The proposed density and type of development are consistent with the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Growth Management Program, Zone 15 Local Facilities Management Plan, and Sunny Creek Specific Plan. The project would not divide an established community. The project would not conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. The project would not conflict with the Habitat Management Plan. X. MINERAL RESOURCES No Impact. The project would not 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, or the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site. XI. NOISE Less than Significant Impact. The project will result in an increase in ambient noise levels due to auto traffic, residents, pets and equipment. This is not considered a significant impact. The project will generate a temporary increase in ambient noise levels due to construction activities. This is not considered a significant impact. Project residents would be subject to auto traffic noise on College Blvd. and El Camino Real. However, due to the substantial distance between these streets and the residents (approximately 1,500 feet minimum), this noise impact would not be significant. In addition, this potential impact has been previously addressed in the General Plan EIR. This document provides project-level mitigation measures which will be applied to the project to mitigate this potential impact to an insignificant level. XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING No Impact. The proposed density and type of development are consistent with the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Growth Management Program, Zone 15 Local Facilities Management Plan, and Sunny Creek Specific Plan. XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES No Impact. Pursuant to the General Plan EIR, the project will be conditioned to comply with the Growth Management Program and Zone 15 Local Facilities Management Plan performance standards for public facilities and services to ensure that adequate public facilities and services are provided prior to or concurrent with the development. XIV. RECREATION No Impact. This potential impact has been previously addressed in the General Plan EIR. XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC Less Than Significant Impact. The project will generate approximately 264 vehicle trips per day (ADT). Based on the significance criteria outlined in the City's Growth Management Plan, the traffic generated by the project will not have a significant impact on the traffic capacity of local roadways. This potential impact has been previously addressed in the General Plan EIR. This document provides project-level mitigation measures which will be applied to the project to mitigate this potential impact to an insignificant level. XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS No Impact. Pursuant to the General Plan EIR, Growth Management Program, and Zone 15 Local Facilities Management Plan, the project will be conditioned to comply with the Growth Management Program and Zone 15 Local Facilities Management Plan performance standards for utilities and services to ensure that adequate utilities and services are provided prior to or concurrent with the development. XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE 1. Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated, for biological resources. See attached biology report. 2. Less than Significant Impact. 3. No Impact. The project will not have substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. t VI. EARLIER ANALYSIS and REFERENCES The following documents were used in the environmental analysis of this project. These documents are attached and/or on file at the City of Carlsbad Planning Department, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California 92008. 1. Final Master Environmental Impact Report for the Citv of Carlsbad General Plan Update. City of Carlsbad Planning Department, March 1994. 2. Biological Technical Report, prepared for subject project by Recon, June 2004, Revised April 2005. 3. Wetland Delineation Report, prepared for subject project by Recon, June 2004. 4. Rancho Milagro Cultural Resources Survev Results, letter report prepared for subject project by Recon, May 2004. 5. Preliminarv Geotechnical Investigation, prepared for subject project by Geotechnical Exploration Inc., April 2005. 6. Citv of Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan. City of Carlsbad Planning Department, December 1999, and Addendum-June 2003. 7. Citv of Carlsbad Growth Management Program. Municipal Code Chapter 21.90, City of Carlsbad Planning Department. 8. Citv of Carlsbad Zone 15 Local Facilities Management Plan, City of Carlsbad Planning Department, June 1998, and Amendment C-August 2004 9. Citv of Carlsbad Municipal Code Title 21-Zoning, City of Carlsbad Planning Department. 10. Draft Environmental Impact Report for the Cantarini/Holly Springs Developments, City of Carlsbad Planning Department, June 2003, and Re-circulated Draft EIR-May 2004. 11. Final Environmental Impact Report for The Terraces at Sunnv Creek Proiect, City of Carlsbad Planning Department, January 1998. 12. State of California Hazardous Waste and Substances List, City of Carlsbad Planning Department, April 1998. 13. Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment, prepared for subject project by Geotechnical Exploration Inc., April 2005. Jason Goff From: Liz Ketabian Sent: Monday, December 19, 2011 3:52 PM To: Jason Goff Subject: RE: Rancho Milagro - Request for Condtion Expires: Wednesday, March 28, 2012 12:00 AM Hi Jason, Thanks for bringing this to my attention. I just reviewed these conditions and they are fine as is. The amount for the current trail plan check fee is $970 for under one mile of trail development and 1,975 for over 1 mile of trail development. Liz From: Jason Goff Sent: Monday, December 19, 2011 12:36 PM To: Gregory Ryan; Liz Ketabian Cc: Jason Goff Subject: Rancho Milagro - Request for Condtion Importance: High Greg/Liz, I have tentatively scheduled the Rancho Milagro project for the Planning Commission hearing of February 15, 2012. On the last review both of you indicated that you had no further comments. However, I need to know if either of you will have specific conditions for this project? 1 have gone ahead and prepared some conditions already, which would fall within each of your jurisdictions. Those conditions are listed below for each ofyou to take a look at. Please let me know if these are appropriate. If they need to be revised please do so and return them to me ASAP. If you have more conditions to include, please send those to me at your earliest convenience via separate correspondence. If these conditions are not applicable, then please let me know. Greg, Under the Planning Department's Standard CC&R condition, I have added the following subconditions that are related to Fire Department items of concern. Please note that Subcondition "h" was lifted off of a note on the Landscape Plans (see Landscape Sheets 2 and 3): g. An exhibit shall be prepared for each residential lot and provided to future property owners showing the locations of the Fire Suppression Zones, fire deflection walls, water quality bio-swales, open space easements, maintenance responsibility areas, and approved fence locations. In addition to the above, the exhibits shall identify those lots subject to the Hillside Development Regulations (C.M.C. Chapter 21.95) and the Hillside Development & Design Guidelines. h. Fire Suppression Zones: A disclosure shall be included identifying all lots where Fire Suppression Zones extend into private yard areas. The disclosures shall include a site plan of the lot, location of the Fire Suppression Zones, and the fuel modification standards required for the various zones. Additionally, where a Fire Suppression Zone intrudes to within 10 feet of a structure envelope, the following shall be required to the satisfaction of the City of Carlsbad Fire Marshall: i. The lot sl^ have no exterior flame producing devi(:@(s), outdoor fire place(s), outdoor fire pit(s), and/or open flame torch(es). ii. Patio covers shall be constructed of an ignition resistant material of the same rating as the structure wall that it is being attached to. Liz, I'm not sure if these conditions are applicable or not for the trails that we have proposed in this project. Can you please let me know ASAP one way or another? If more conditions are required, then please get those to me ASAP. 36. Prior to approval of the final map, the Developer shall provide an irrevocable offer of dedication to the City of Carlsbad for a trail easement for trail(s) shown on the tentative map within Open Space Lot(s) 20 and 22. If the City of Carlsbad accepts dedication of the trail easement, the trail shall be constructed by the applicant at its expense as a public trail and will be maintained by of the City of Carlsbad. If the City of Carlsbad does not accept dedication of the trail easement, the trail shall still be constructed by the applicant but it shall be constructed as a private trail and shall be the maintenance responsibility of the applicant or its successor in interest (i.e. Master Homeowners Association). 37. Prior to the approval of a final map the Developer shall pay to the City a Trail Plan Check fee and inspection fee in accordance with the current city fee schedule. I plan to submit the Staff Report for internal review on Wednesday of this week. If you could please take a minute and look at these, 1 would greatly appreciate it. If you have more conditions to add, please let me know when you think you could deliver those to me. Much thanks! Sincerely, Jason. ^ C I T "f Of CARLSBAD Planning Department Jason Goff Associate Planner City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 P: 760.602.4643 F: 760.602.8559 Jason.Goff@carlsbadca.gov CITYOFCARLSBAD REVIEW AND COMMENT MEMO DATE: NOVEMBER 30, 2010 PROJECT NO(S): GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/HDP 06-01/SUP 06-05/HMP 09-01 REVIEW NO: 7 PROJECTTITLE: RANCHO MILAGRO APPLICANT: JACK HENTHORN TO: 1^ Land Development Engineering-Terie Rowley O^ytyw^/ /ifiM^^ I i Police Department-J. Sasway y IXI Fire Department-James Weigand I I Building Department-Will Foss I I Recreation - Mark Steyaert I I Public Works Department (Streets) - Thomas Moore I I Water/Sewer District IXI Landscape Plancheck Consultant - PELA • School District I I North County Transit District - Planning Department I I Sempra Energy - Land Management I I Caltrans (Send anything adjacent to 1-5) IXI Parks/Trails - Liz Ketabian *ALWAYS SEND EXHIBITS FROM: PLANNINGDEPARTMENT Please review and submit written comments and/or conditions to the PLANNING TRACKING DESK in the Planning Department at 1635 Faraday Avenue, by 12/21/10. If you have "No Comments," please so state. If you determine that there are items that need to be submitted to deem the appiication "complete" for processing, please immediatelv contact the applicant and/or their representatives (via phone or e-mail) to let them know. Thank you iridriK you rs COMM ENTS: I \r> -Tux" A-Vi'g.r npmm&ijV^ Signature Date PLANS ATTACHED Review & Comment 03/10 ^ CITY OF CARLSBAD * REVIEW AND COMMENT MEMO DATE: NOVEMBER 30. 2010 PROJECT NO(S): GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/HDP 06-01/5UP 06-05/HMP 09-01 REVIEW NO: 1_ PROJECT TITLE: RANCHO MILAGRO APPLICANT: JACK HENTHORN TO: ^ Land Development Engineering-Terie Rowley I I Police Department - J. Sasway 1X1 Fire Department-James Weigand I I Building Department-Will Foss I I Recreation - Mark Steyaert I I Public Works Department (Streets) - Thomas Moore I I Water/Sewer District IXI Landscape Plancheck Consultant - PELA I I School District I I North County Transit District - Planning Department I I Sempra Energy - Land Management I I Caltrans (Send anything adjacent to 1-5) ^ Parks/Trails - Liz Ketabian •ALWAYS SEND EXHIBITS FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT Please review and submit written comments and/or conditions to the PLANNING TRACKING DESK in the Planning Department at 1635 Faraday Avenue, bv 12/21/10. If you have "No Comments," please so state. If vou determine that there are items that need to be submitted to deem the appiication "complete" for processing, please immediatelv contact the applicant and/or their representatives (via phone or e-mail) to let them know. Thank you COMMENTS: ^6 fS^^ 6^ flan<, cUiicd- 'Vza //t» • . jJtL^run^.^ Id I ll Signature Date PLANS ATTACHED Review & Comment 03/10 CITY OF CARLSBAD ^ REVIEW AND COMMENT MEMO DATE: NOVEMBER 30. 2010 PROJECT NO(S): GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/CT 06-04/HDP 06-01/SUP 06-05/HMP 09-01 REVIEW NO: J7^ PROJECT TITLE: RANCHO MILAGRO APPLICANT: JACK HENTHORN TO: ^ Land Development Engineering-Terie Rowley I I Police Department - J. Sasway IXI Fire Department-Jarae*-Weigand I [ Building Department-Will Foss I I Recreation - Mark Steyaert I I Public Works Department (Streets) - Thomas Moore I I Water/Sewer District IXI Landscape Plancheck Consultant - PELA I I School District I I North County Transit District - Planning Department I I Sempra Energy - Land Management I I Caltrans (Send anything adjacent to 1-5) 1^ Parks/Trails - Liz Ketabian •^ALWAYSSEND EXHIBITS FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT Please review and submit written comments and/or conditions to the PLANNING TRACKING DESK in the Planning Department at 1635 Faraday Avenue, by 12/21/10. If you have "No Comments," please so state. If vou determine that there are items that need to be submitted to deem the application "complete" for processing, piease immediatelv contact the applicant and/or their representatives (via phone or e-mail) to let them know. Thank you COMMENTS: Ab ^ l^^v^^J^^'S^ 77=< f ^AC-^ Signature Date PLANS ATTACHED Review & Comment 03/10 Discretionary Review Checklist PROJECT NUMBER: GPA 06-03 / ZC 06-02 / CT 06-04 / HDP 06-01 / SUP 06-05 / HMP 09-01 BUILDING ADDRESS: Rancho Milagro Carlsbad CA 92010 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Tract Development - ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NUMBER: FIRE DEPARTMENT APPROVAL The item you have submitted for review has been approved. The approval is based on plans, infomiation and/or specifications provided in your submittal; therefore, any changes to these items after this date, including field modifications, must be reviewed by this office to insure continued conformance with applicable codes. Please review carefully all comments attached, as failure to comply with instructions in this report can result in suspension of permit to build. By: Date: 12.30.10 DENIAL Please see the attached report of deficiencies marked with EE). Make necessary corrections to plans or specifications for compliance with applicable codes and standards. Submit corrected plans and/or specifications to this office for review. By: By: By: Date: Date: Date: ATTACMENTS: FIRE DEPARTMENT CONTACT PERSON Name: Gregory Rvan. Deputy Fire Marshal City of Carlsbad ADDRESS: 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008 PHONE: 760.602.4663 K:\Fire Pian ReviewMO Plan Checks\CT 06-04 Rancho Milaqro.docx CITY OF CARLSBAD REVIEW AND COMMENT MEMO : FILE COPY DATE: NOVEMBER 30. 2010 PROJECT NO(S): GPA 06-03/ZC 06-02/a 06-04/HDP 06-01/SUP 06-05/HMP 09-01 REVIEW NO: 7 PROJECTTITLE: RANCHO MILAGRO APPLICANT: JACK HENTHORN TO: ^ Land Development Engineering-Terie Rowley I I Police Department - J. Sasway IX Fire Department - James Weigand I I Building Department - Will Foss I I Recreation - Mark Steyaert I I Public Works Department (Streets) - Thomas Moore I I Water/Sewer District IX Landscape Plancheck Consultant - PELA I I School District I I North County Transit District - Planning Department I I Sempra Energy - Land Management I I Caltrans (Send anything adjacent to 1-5) IXI Parks/Trails - Liz Ketabian •ALWAYS SEND EXHIBITS FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT Please review and submit written comments and/or conditions to the PLANNING TRACKING DESK in the Planning Department at 1635 Faraday Avenue, bv 12/21/10. If you have "No Comments," please so state. If vou determine that there are items that need to be submitted to deem the application "complete" for processing, please immediatelv contact the applicant and/or their representatives (via phone or e-mail) to let them know. Thank you COMMENTS: Signature Date PLANS ATTACHED Review & Comment 03/10 DATE: TO: CITY OF CARLSBAD REVIEW AND COMMENT MEMO l\/IAY4, 2010 REVIEW NO: 3+ O Engineering, Development Services - Terie Rowley O Police Department - J. Sasway ^ Fire Department - James Weigand • Building Department - Will Foss Q Recreation - IVlark Steyaert • Public Works Department (streets) - Thomas IVIoore • Water/Sewer District 1X1 Landscape Plancheck Consultant - PELA • School District • North County Transit District - Planning Department n Sempra Energy - Land Management • Caltrans (Send anything adjacent to 1-5) IXI Parks/Trails - Liz Ketabian *ALWAYS SEND EXHIBITS FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT ON PROJECT NO(S): GPA 06-03/ZC 06- 02/CT 06-04/HDP 06-01/SUP 06-05/HMP 09-01 PROJECTTITLE: Rancho Milagro APPLIGANT: Jack Henthorn & Associates PROPOSAL: Subdivision for 14 single familv residential lots and 3 open space lots. Please review and submit written comments and/or conditions to PLANNING TRACKING DESK, in the Planning Department at 1635 Faraday Avenue, bv 05/20/10 . If you have "No Comments", please so state. Thank you COMMENTS: DATE: PLANS ATTACHED Review & Comment 09/07 Rancho Milagro May 4, 2010 Review and Comment Memo 1. Show 60ft ftiel treatment area for Lot 1. 2. Lot 4 Wall is acceptable at bottom of slope as shown, per our 15 Dec 2009 meeting. Further, with the wall placement 40 foot of fuel treatment will be adequate. Wall will adjoin 60ft fuel treatment zones on lot 3 and lower lot 4. This lot will be noted as restricted, per plan notes. 3. Existing callout plan comments on page three are inaccurate. Please use comments generated from the 15 Dec 2009 Meeting with Jim Weigand Fire Marshal ^ CITY OF CARLSBAD ^ LANDSCAPE DRAWING REVIEW AND COMMENT MEMO DATE: MAY 4, 2010 TO: MTCE & OPERATIONS ATTN: CROSS CONNECTION CONTROL TECHNICIAN, Pam Adams FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT ON LANDSCAPE DWG NO(S): GPA 06-03/ZC 06- 02/CT 06- 04/HDP 06-01/SUP 06- PROJECTID: 05/HMP 09-01 PLANCHECKNO.: 3+ PROJECT NAME: RANCHO MILAGRO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: JACK HENTHORN & ASSOCIATES 760-438-4090 Please review and submit written comments and/or conditions to PLANNING TRACKING DESK in the Planning Department by 05/20/10. If you have "No Comments," please so state THANKYOU COMMENTS: s /f it Signature Date PLANS ATTACHED 03/10 CITYOFCARLSBAD 1635 FARADAY AVENUE CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008-7314 (760) 602-4600 PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO: Liz Ketabian, James Wiegand, Jeremy Riddle LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL DATE 5/17/2010 Project No. GPA 06-03 . ATTENTION RE: Rancho Milagro n Notified WE ARE SENDING YOU • Shop Drawings • Copy of letter Dated S Attached • Under separate cover via • Prints • Plans • Samples • Specifications • Change Order • the following items: COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION 1 5/17/2010 Hillside Constraints Exhibits (Sheets 1-4) 1 5/17/2010 Conceptual Landscape Plans (Sheets 1-10) THESE ARE TRA MSMITTEl D AS CHECKED BELOW: I I For approval • For your use • As requested 1^ For review and comment Q For your action O For checking • • Approved as submitted • O Approved as noted O O Returned for corrections • Resubmit copies for approval Design only, not for construction Return corrected prints Remarks: Please find enclosed supplemental exhibits to the April 29, 2010 resubmittal of the Rancho Milagro project. The attached exhibits were unintentionally left out of the resubmittal package, and are now hereby included to facilitate your review of the project in its entirety. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me via email or by telephone (760) 602-4643. Thanks - COPY TO: SIGNED; If enclosures are not as noted, kindly notify us at once. ^^^^^^ '"'^^g^ CITY OF CARLSBAD REVIEW AND COMMENT MEMO RLE COPY DATE: MAY 4,2010 REVIEW NO: 3+ TO: Engineering, Development Services - Terie Rowley • Police Department - J. Sasway S Fire Department - James Weigand • Building Department - Will Foss • Recreation - Mark Steyaert n Public Works Department (streets) - Thomas Moore • Water/Sewer District IEI Landscape Plancheck Consultant - PELA • School District n North County Transit District - Planning Department • Sempra Energy - Land Management O Caltrans (Send anything adjacent to 1-5) IEI Parks/Trails - Liz Ketabian *ALWAYS SEND EXHIBITS FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT ON PROJECT NO(S): GPA 06-03/ZC"06^ 02/CT 06-04/HDP 06-01/SUP 06-05/HMP 09-01 PROJECTTITLE: Rancho Milagro APPLICANT: Jack Henthorn & Associates PROPOSAL: Subdivision for 14 single familv residential lots and 3 open space lots. Please review and submit written comments and/or conditions to PLANNING TRACKING DESK, in the Planning Department at 1635 Faraday Avenue, bv 05/20/10 . If you have "No Comments", please so state. Thank you COMMENTS: DATE: PLANS ATTACHED Review & Comment 09/07 ^ CITYOFCARLSBAD ^ riLClfUr LANDSCAPE DRAWING REVIEW AND COMMENT MEMO DATE: MAY 4, 2010 TO: MTCE & OPERATIONS APN: CROSS CONNECTION CONTROL TECHNICIAN, Pam Adams FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT ON UNDSCAPE DWG NO(S): GPA 06-03/ZC 06- 02/CT 06- 04/HDP 06-01/SUP 06- PROJECTID: 05/HMP 09-01 PLANCHECKNO.: 3+ PROJECT NAME: RANCHO MILAGRO LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT: JACK HENTHORN & ASSOCIATES 760-438-4090 Please review and submit written comments and/or conditions to PLANNING TRACKING DESK in the Planning Department by 05/20/10. If you have "No Comments," please so state. THANKYOU COMMENTS: Signature Date PLANS ATTACHED 03/10 ^ LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL Parks and Recreation Department 799 Pine Ave. Suite 200 Carlsbad, CA 92008 Phone (760) 434-2826 FAX (760) 434-5088 TO: h DATE: JOB NO. ATTN: RE: MJ^^ /Lu CJUt^ WE ARE SENDING YOU •Attached DUnder separate cover via the following items: •Prints QSamples QShop Drawings •Copy of Letter •Specifications •Originals •Submittals • Dated 1 1 S/:ii(f[fs ravieOji\tu,J) ^(it^ef Creifi^ iiu/^ " "SJJ- l^ieAul THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: •For approval DFor checking •For your use •Approved as submitted •As requested •Approved as noted •For review and comment •Retumed for corrections •For your action •Return after use REMARKS •Resubmit copies for approvai •Design only, not for construction •Return ^corrected prints • \^ARKS ^ -J1LYPD<, / .jtcUjh. n(M^fA^II. P\lL^^'S»m aPA^y, Atjt JtAAJD. tiUk^U^ COPY TO ^^i^ fji^i^ HAIBRARY/WORDffllANK FORMSnfrTER OF TRANSMITTAL MASTER SIGNED: 3fsi-P 9 FILE COPY CITY OF CARLSBAD REVIEW AND COMMENT MEMO DATE: MAY 4,2010 REVIEW NO: 3+ TO: Engineering, Developrheht Services - Terie Rowley • Police Department - J. Sasway Fire Department - James Weigand • Building Department - Will Foss • Recreation - Mark Steyaert • Public Works Department (streets) - Thomas Moore • Water/Sewer District mp^* Landscape Plancheck Consultant - PELA • School District • North County Transit District - Planning Department • Sempra Energy - Land Management • Caltrans (Send anything adjacent to 1-5) Parks/Trails - Liz Ketabian *ALWAYS SEND EXHIBITS FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT ON PROJECT NO(S): GPA 06-03/ZC 06- 02/CT 06-04/HDP 06-01/SUP 06-05/HMP 09-01 PROJECTTITLE: Rancho Milagro APPLICANT: Jack Henthorn & Associates PROPOSAL: Subdivision for 14 single familv residential lots and 3 open space lots. Please review and submit written comments and/or conditions to PLANNING TRACKING DESK, in the Planning Department at 1635 Faraday Avenue, by 05/20/10 . If you have "No Comments", please so state. Thank you . COMMENTS: ^y. ^<^o d^^tck 5(^[io DATE: PLANS ATTACHED Review & Comment 09/07 4^im> CITY OF ^ CARLSBAD www.carlsbadca.gov Memorandum May 20, 2010 To: Jason Goff, Associate Planner From: Jeremy Riddle, Associate Engineer Re: RANCHO MILAGRO PROJECT 8*" SUBMITTAL (CT 06-04) Land Development Engineering staff has reviewed the revised Tentative Map(TM) other resubmittal documents associated with this project. Prior to recommending this project, please have the applicant address the following issues: 1. The Wildlife Agencies raised concerns about having some ofthe lots in this project drain towards the rear yards. Some of the lots proposed storm drains and discharges that extend down (protected) open space slopes. From our review of the Tentative Map, it appears that most ofthe rear-draining lots can be redesigned so that they drain to the street per city standard requirements. Please see redlines and revise the TM to address the Wildlife Agency concerns. 2. Lots 11,12 and 13 current drain into the open space area. Please redesign these lots so they drain to a street. For example, lots 11, 12, and 13 could be served by a common private storm drain that discharges across lot 16 to Street X. Refer to redlines. Revise the TM to show all the covenants of easements required. 3. To avoid draining to the open space, the pads for Lots 7 and 8 could be raised slightly to create positive drainage so they drain to Street X. Refer to redlines and address. 4. For lots 4, 5 and 6, instead of a common private storm drain discharging down the slope into open space, consider a common private storm drain along the rear yards that connects into the storm drain for Street X. Refer to redlines. Revise the TM to show the covenants of easements required. 5. Revise the Drainage Study and Storm Water Management Plan to address TM changes prior to resubmittal. 6. Please note that upcoming storm water requirements (Hydromodification) will change how this project handles, treats, infiltrates and retains storm runoff. For example Community & Economic Development 1635 Faraday Ave. I Carlsbad, CA 92008 I 760-602-2710 I 760-602-8560 fax Ranch Milagro LDE Review May 30, 2010 Page 2 permanent onsite bio-retention (or other measures) may be required on each lot so that, during a defined range of storm events, the flow volume and rates match pre- development conditions. Please note that you will be required to meet the latest storm water requirements in effect at the time the project is under design review. Please provide any comments on this study to me so I can pass them onto the project planner who will forward them onto the Developer/Applicant. If you have questions please call me at ext. 2737. Thank you. c: Glen Van Peski, Senior Civil Engineer Land Development Engineering file Q May 6, 2010 TO: Jason GofF, Associate Planner Michele Masterson, Senior Management Analyst FROM: Michael Elliott, City of Carlsbad's Contract Landscape Architect RE: Landscape Architectural Review - Conceptual Review - 7* Review Rancho Milagro - 21 Lot Subdivision Vicinity of El Camino Real & College Drive CT 06-04 HDP 06-01 ZC 06-02 GPA 06-03 SUP 06-05 PELA file: 5 - Rancho Milagro CT06-04 - ConV Landscape Architect: GMP, Phone: (858) 558-8977 Please advise the applicant to make the following corrections to the plans so that they will meet the requirements of the City of Carlsbad's Landscape Manual. REPEAT COMMENTS l-U Completed. IA. Completed. IB. All HOA maintained areas should use reclaimed water as it appears to be available. Please revise water use plans as appropriate. Submit one extra copy of plans with the next submittal and indicate in your transmittal to route this copy to Pam Adams in Public Works Maintenance and Operations for review. 6*** Review: The applicant has now shown all landscape areas to be irrigated with recycled water. Typically only HOA maintained areas are specified to be irrigated with recycled water. Privately maintained areas typically use potable. Is it the intent to supply both a potable and recycled water meter to all lots? Please clarify and revise reclaimed water plans as appropriate. Submit one extra copy of plans with the next submittal and indicate in your transmittal to route this copy to Pam Adams in Public Works Maintenance and Operations for review. Review: Plans have been forwarded to PWM& Ofor review. Any comments will be returned to the applicant. IC. Completed. ID. Please see Fire Comment No. 7 and revise plans accordingly. 7'^ Review: See New Comments that address previous fire comments. NEW COMMENTS IE. Per previous Fire Department comment #1, Lot 1 is to include the standard 60' fiiel treatment area per the City of Carlsbad standards. Please show the 60' (i.e. 20'-A-l, 20'-A-2, and 20'-A-3) fire suppression zones. 2E. Please remove trees from fire suppression area A-l. 3E. Per previous Fire Department comment #2, Lot 4 is to have a 6' high masonry wall at the top of slope along the property boundary. The wall appears to be located at the bottom of the slope. Please verify the desired location with the Fire Department and relocate as appropriate. 4E. Per previous Fire Department comment #2, a 50' A-l fire suppression width is required on Lot 4. Please revise as appropriate. 5E. Please label the fire suppression zone on Lot 7 as A-1. Rancho Milagro - 21 Lot Subdivision May 6, 2010 Conceptual Review Page 2 6E. Please label the fire suppression zone on Lot 19 as A-l. 7E. Please remove shrubs from the fire suppression zone A-l legend. 8E. This area is shown to be maintained by the Rancho Milagro open space manager. It is also shown to be irrigated with recycled water. Will there be a separate recycled water meter required to separate this from the Rancho Milagro HOA maintained areas? Please address. 9E. Please address landscaping of the bio-filtration detention area and add this area to the recycled water use map. /j^* ^ RLE COPY ^ ^ CITYOFCARLSBAD REVIEW AND COMMENT MEMO DATE: MAY 4,2010 REVIEW NO: 3+ TO: Engineering , Development Services- Tafie; Rowley • Police Department - J. Sasway ^ Fire Department - James Weigand • Building Department - Will Foss • Recreation - Mark Steyaert • Public Works Department (streets) - Thomas Moore • Water/Sewer District 1^ Landscape Plancheck Consultant - PELA • School District • North County Transit District - Planning Department • Sempra Energy - Land Management • Caltrans (Send anything adjacent to 1-5) ^ ; Parks/Trails - Liz Ketabian *ALWAYS SEND EXHIBITS FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT ON PROJECT NO(S): GPA 06-03/ZC 06- 02/CT 06-04/HDP 06-01/SUP 06-05/HMP 09-01 PROJECTTITLE: Rancho Milagro APPLICANT: Jack Henthorn & Associates PROPOSAL: Subdivision for 14 single familv residential lots and 3 open space lots. Please review and submit written comments and/or conditions to PLANNING TRACKING DESK, in the Planning Department at 1635 Faraday Avenue, bv 05/20/10 . If you have "No Comments", please so state. Thank you COMMENTS: DATE: PLANS ATTACHED Review & Comment 09/07 Jason Goff From: Sent: To: Cc: Subject: Monty Kalin Tuesday, December 08, 2009 3:44 PM Jason Goff James Weigand Rancho Milagro Comments Jason, Spoke with the FM regarding policy found in Public Street and Traffic Standards, Section 3 Alignment, sub-paragraph C, which allows up to 24 or less units on a single entry. Milagro currently meets this standard. Remove comment 8, No occupancy will be permitted until two (2) points of access both primary and secondary has been developed. Thanks Monty CITY OF CARLSBAD REVIEW AND COMMENT MEMO DATE: TO: OCTOBER 26, 2009 REVIEW NO: 5 ^ Engineering, Development Services - Terie Rowley • Police Department - J. Sasway 1^ Fire Department - James Weigand • Building Department - Will Foss • Recreation - Mark Steyaert • Public Works Department (streets) - Thomas Moore • Water/Sewer District ^ Landscape Plancheck Consultant - PELA • School District • North County Transit District - Planning Department • Sempra Energy - Land Management • Caltrans (Send anything adjacent to 1-5) ^ Parks/Trails - Liz Ketabian *ALWAYS SEND EXHIBITS FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT REQUEST FOR REVIEW A 06-03/SUP Oe-OS/HMP 09-01 COMMENT ON PROJECT NO(Sl: AND COMMEh CT 06-04/HDP 06-01/GPA PROJECT TITLE: Rancho Milagro APPLICANT: Jack Henthorn & Associates PROPOSAL: presidential & 5 open space lots. Please review and submit written comments and/or conditions to Michele Masterson in the Planning Department at 1635 Faraday Avenue, by 11/12/09. If you have "No Comments," please so state. Thank you COMMENTS: PLANS ATTACHED Review & Comment 09/07 3 Comment Attachment: 4 Dec 2009 In the past year, CalFire and the FRAP project designated portions of areas bordering the project as Very High Fire Severity, open space and undeveloped properties are considered within a 30 to 50 year timeline. Fuel will have considerable additional fuel loading at the extent of this period as compared with the current loading. Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 17 and 19 are non-conforming in respect to required Fuel Modification guidelines found in the City Landscape Manual, Fire Protection Program, Policies and Requirements. The following additions are required to minimize the risk, and mitigate for non-conformance. 1. For lots 1, 2, 3 and 4 construct a six (6) foot masonry wall at top of slope along property boundary. Masonry wall assembly may have a two (2) foot section of rated glass at the top. • Change the 50ft of fuel treatment to a Zone A-l standard. Fuel Treatment will be inside wall. 2. Lot 4 drive way will be designed and installed to support a 70,0001b fire apparatus. 3. For lot 5 and 6, construct a six (6) foot masonry wall on the outer edge of the buildable pad. Wall will start at X Street and tie into the east boundary wall of lot 4. Masonry wall assembly may have a two (2) foot section of rated glass at the top. • Change the 50ft of fuel treatment to a Zone A-l standard. Fuel Treatment will be outside wall. 4. For lot 7, constmct a six (6) foot masonry wall on the outer edge ofthe buildable pad. Masonry wall assembly may have a two (2) foot section of rated glass at the top. • Change any portion ofthe Fire Protection Zone with less than 50 feet to a Zone A-l standard, fuel treatment will be outside wall 5. For lot 19 and a portion of lot 17, construct a six (6) foot masonry wall at top of slope along property boundary. Masonry wall assembly may have a two (2) foot section of rated glass at the top. • Entire area inside wall will be changed to Zone A-l standards 6. All structure enhancements for Very High Fire Hazard areas, found in the 2007 Califomia Building Code Chapter 7a, January 2009 Supplement will be applicable to include section 704A.3.2.2 Exterior glazing. The standards will apply to the entire structure not just the portion facing the FPZ, and include any future structure adjacent to the Interface that has less than the full 60 feet of Fuel Modification. (Lots 1, 2, 3,4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, 17 and 19) Li addition, the entire development will have NFPA 13D Residential Sprinkler Systems installed. 7. Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 12, and 19, are to be considered non-conforming in that a full 60 feet of Fuel Modification is not provided. Restriction will apply on type(s) of landscaping and use of backyard space. • The following will be noted in the CC&Rs. Lots 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 and 19 will be considered restricted, any patio cover constructed shall be of ignition-resistant material. Where a Fire Protection Zone intrudes into the buildable pad area, the lot will have no exterior flame producing devices, outdoor fire places, outdoor fire pits, and open flame torches. 8. No occupancy will be permitted until two (2) points of access both primary and secondary has been developed. DATE: TO: CITY OF CARLSBAD REVIEW AND COMMENT MEMO OCTOBER 26, 2009 REVIEW NO: 5 Engineering, Development Services - Terie Rowley ^ • Police Department - J. Sasway IEI Fire Department - James Weigand • Building Department - WIII Foss • Recreation - Mark Steyaert • Public Works Department (streets) - Thomas Moore • Water/Sewer District ^ Landscape Plancheck Consultant - PELA • School District • North County Transit District - Planning Department • Sempra Energy - Land Management • Caltrans (Send anything adjacent to 1-5) ^ Parks/Trails - Liz Ketabian *ALWAYS SEND EXHIBITS FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT ON PROJECT NO(S): CT 06-04/HDP 06-01/GPA 06-03/SUP 06-05/HMP 09-01/ oL^ PROJECT TITLE: Rancho Milagro APPLICANT: Jack Henthorn & Associates PROPOSAL: 22 residential & 5 open space lots. Please review and submit written comments and/or conditions to Michele Masterson in the Planning Department at 1635 Faraday Avenue, by 11/12/09. If you have "No Comments," please so state. Thank you COMMENTS PLANS ATTACHED , ^, - « rv Review & Comment CITY OF CARLSBAD REVIEW AND COMMENT MEMO DATE: TO: OCTOBER 26, 2009 REVIEW NO: • • • • • • • • • Engineering, Development Services - Terie Rowley Police Department-J. Sasway Flre Department - James Weigand Building Department - Will Foss Recreation - Mark Steyaert Public Works Department (streets) - Thomas Moore Water/Sewer District Landscape Plancheck Consultant - PELA School District North County Transit District - Planning Department Sempra Energy - Land Management Caltrans (Send anything adjacent to 1-5) Parks/Trails - Liz Ketabian *ALWAYS SEND EXHIBITS FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT ON PROJECT NO(S): CT 06-04/HDP 06-01/GPA 06-03/SUP 06-05/HMP 09-01 / ^ 0 .n(p^ O ^ PROJECT TITLE: Rancho Milagro APPLICANT: Jack Henthorn & Associates PROPOSAL: 22 residential & 5 open space lots. Please review and submit written comments and/or conditions to Michele Masterson In the Planning Department at 1635 Faraday Avenue, by 11/12/09. If you have "No Comments," please so state. Thank you COMMENTS: PLANS ATTACHED Review & Comment 09/07 DATE: Nov. 12, 2009 TO: ASSOCIATE PLANNER- GOFF FROM: Park Planner, Ketabian RE: TRAIL PLAN CHECK-RANCHO MILAGRO )^^V\\3^ Ho 5 I have completed the review of the Tentative Map and Landscape Plans for the above project and have the following comments pertaining to the trail development: (I have no comments on the HDP 06-01) General Comment: Improvement Plans do not indicate the specialty pavement as indicated on the Landscape Plans, therefore the improvement plans need to be revised to indicate where the specialty concrete is planned. TENTATIVE MAP-CT-06-04 Revise Legend on Sheet 1 to include a symbol for the specialty sidewalk paving. Revise Sheets 4 & 6 to indicate the specialty paving in front of lots 1-6. See also redline comments on plans. LANDSCAPE CONCEPT PLANS- Sheet 3- Note on plan refers to detail for trail construction on sheet 6, however, the trail detail is shown on sheet 5, please correct to show correct sheet number for details as being on sheet 5.. Please forward a copy of this memo of plan check comments to Jack Henthorn & Associates so that the above revisions may be addressed. THANK YOU LIZ cc: Park Development Manager Rancho Milagro- CW Trail - Plan Check File Associate Engineer, Jeremy Riddle October 29, 2009 Jason Goff, Associate Planner Michele Masterson, Senior Management Analyst Michael Elliott, City of Carlsbad's Contract Landscape Architect Landscape Architectural Review - Conceptual Review - 6* Review RANCHO MILAGRO - 21 LOT SUBDIVISION Vicinity of El Camino Real & College Drive CT 06-04 HDP 06-01 ZC 06-02 GPA 06-03 SUP 06-05 PELA file: 5 - Rancho Milagro CT06-04 - Con6 Landscape Architect: GMP, Phone: (858) 558-8977 Please advise the applicant to make the following corrections to the plans so that they will meet the requirements of the City of Carlsbad's Landscape Manual. REPEAT COMMENTS 1-5 Completed. 6. Show Fire Protection zones, per the Manual on all slopes that abut natural areas. This applies to manmade and natural slopes. Adjust the "old" Fire Protection zone lines to be reflective of the proposed building footprints shown on the plans. In discussions with Greg Morrad, Henthom & Associates and Greg Ryan (6/7/07), there appears to be no reason why the Fire Protection zones should not be shown as required by the Landscape Manual. Graphically show trees in Zone A-3 spaced at 20' O.C. Reduce the size of brow ditches to a realistic dimension. They arc currently shown as 10' wide and impact the area that could be planted. See Attachments "B" & "C" for how zones aro defined. There are no sizes or spacings provided in the Fire Protection Zone legend.—Slopes in Zone A-3 must moot all slope planting requirements.—Zones A-l & A 2 must meet all slope planting requirements with thc exception of trees. The legend must demonstrate conformance with the Manual requirements. ^ Review: Please address comment above. Please provide trees or large shrubs in zone 3 per slope revegetation requirements at 1 per 200 square feet (in fire zones mimmum 20' apart). Please indicate proposed plantings in the HOA maintained drainage casement. Please also add the following notes to the plans: Slopes 6:1 or steeper requiring erosion control measures as specified herein shall be treated with one or more of the following planting standards: a.—Standard J—Cover Crop/Reinforced Straw Matting: Cover crop shall be a seed mix typically made up of quick germinating and fast covering grasses, clovers, andfor wildflowers. Submit the specific seed mix for City approval prior to application. The cover crop shall be appliod at a rate and manner sufficient to provide 90% coverage within thirty (30) days. Type of reinforced straw matting shall be as approved by thc city and staked to thc slope as recommended by thc manufacturer. Rancho Milagro - 21 Lot Subdivision October 29, 2009 Conceptual Review Page 2 Reinforced straw matting shall be required when planting occurs between August 15 and April 15. The cover crop andfor reinforced straw mat shall be used the remainder of the year. b-.—Standard ft 2—Ground Cover One hundred (100%) percent of the area shall be planted with a ground cover Imown to have excellent soil binding characteristics (plantedfrom a minimum size offlatted material and spaced to provide full coverage within one year). e-.—Standard ft 3—Low Shrubs Low spreading woody shrubs (plantedfrom a minimum of 2-3/4 inch liners) shall cover a minimum of seventy (70%) percent of thc slope face (at mature size). d.—Standard it 4—Trees and or Large Shrubs Trees andfor large shrubs shall be (plantedfrom a minimum of 1 gallon containers) at a minimum rate of one (1) per two hundred (200) square feet. Slopes—6:1 or steeper and: a.—3' or less in vertical height and arc adjacent to public walks or streets require at minimum Standard ffl. b-.—3' to 8' in vertical height require Standards ffl, If 2 and if 3. €-.—In excess of 8' in vertical height require Standards iil, it 2, ii3, and ii4. Areas graded flatter than 6:1 require Standard HI (cover crop) with temporary irrigation when they havo one or more of the following conditions: a. —Shoot graded pads not scheduledfor improvements within 6 months of completion of rough grading. b. A potential erosion problem as determined by thc City. e-.—Identified by the City as highly visible areas to the public or have special conditions that warrant immediate treatment. 7-11 Completed. IA. Completed. IB. All HOA maintained areas should use reclaimed water as it appears to be available. Please revise water use plans as appropriate. Submit one extra copy of plans with the next submittal and indicate in your transmittal to route this copy to Pam Adams in Public Works Maintenance and Operations for review. 6'^ Review: The applicant has now shown all landscape areas to be irrigated with recycled water. Typically only HOA maintained areas are specified to be irrigated with recycled water. Privately maintained areas typically use potable. Is it the intent to supply both a potable and recycled water meter to all lots? Please clarify arui revise reclaimed water plans as appropriate. Submit one extra copy of plans with the next submittal and indicate in your transmittal to route this copy to Pam Adams in Public Works Maintenance and Operations for review. NEW COMMENTS IC. Please correct for title block and note overlap. CITY OF CARLSBAD REVIEW AND COMMENT MEMO OCTOBER 26, 2009 REVIEW NO: 5 • • • • • • • • • Engineering, Development Services - Terie Rowley Eu.'*^-, >Jt)J. 7Jb^ zoa^ Police Department - J. Sasway Fire Department - James Weigancl^^^^^^ij^ Building Department - Will Foss Recreation - Mark Steyaert Public Works Department (streets) - Thomas Moore Water/Sewer District Landscape Plancheck Consultant - PELA ; Ock , zoo^ School District North County Transit District - Planning Department Sempra Energy - Land Management Caltrans (Send anything adjacent to 1-5) Parks/Trails - Liz Ketabian ZJBC^: Kko. ^2 , loa'i *ALWAYS SEND EXHIBITS FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT ON PROJECT NO(S): CT 06-04/HDP 06-01/GPA 06-03/SUP 06-05/HMP 09-01 /'2- CL OCp-<^ PROJECT TITLE: Rancho Milagro APPLICANT: Jack Henthorn & Associates PROPOSAL: 22 residential & 5 open space lots. Please review and submit written comments and/or conditions to Michele Masterson in the Planning Department at 1635 Faraday Avenue, by 11/12/09. If you have "No Comments," please so state. Thank you COMMENTS: PLANS ATTACHED Review & Comment 09/07 CARLSBAD FIRE DEPARTMENT FIRE PREVENTION DIVISION Project Name: Rancho Milagro Date: 8-27-29 Project Number: CT 06-04 Staff Planner: Jason Goff • This project is currently in a very high wild land hazard zone therefore the street widths will have to be 28 feet clear and unobstructed. • Please revise the name of the Fire Marshal on sheet-4 to James Weigand. • Fire Access grades not to exceed 10%. • Please indicate on the plans that all residences shall have fire sprinklers. Dominic Fieri 602-4664 May 19, 2009 PLAH^"MG DEPT TRACKING DESK REC'D:i^Ha- TO: Jason Goff, Associate Planner Michele Masterson, Senior Management Analyst Meghan McKillop, Senior Office Specialist FROM: Michael Elliott, City of Carlsbad's Contract Landscape Architect RE: Landscape Architectural Review - Conceptual Review - 5* Review RANCHO MILAGRO - 21 LOT SUBDIVISION Vicinity of El Camino Real & College Drive CT 06-04 HDP 06-01 ZC 06-02 GPA 06-03 SUP 06-05 PELA file: 5 - Rancho Milagro CT06-04 - Con5 Landscape Architect: GMP, Phone: (858) 558-8977 Please advise the applicant to make the following corrections to the plans so that they will meet the requirements of the City of Carlsbad's Landscape Manual. REPEAT COMMENTS 1-5 Completed. 6. Show Fire Protection zones, per the Manual on all slopes that abut natural areas. This applies to manmade and natural slopes. Adjust the "old" Fire Protection zone lines to be reflective of the proposed building footprints shown on the plans. In discussions with Greg Morrad, Henthom & Associates and Greg Ryan (6/7/07), there appears to be no reason why the Fire Protection zones should not be shown as required by the Landscape Manual. Graphically show trees in Zone A-3 spaced at 20' O.C. Reduce the size of brow ditches to a realistic dimension. They are currently shown as 10' wide and impact the area that could be planted. Soo Attachments "B" & "C" for how zones arc defined. There are no sizes or spacings provided in the Fire Protection Zone legend.—Slopes in Zone A-3 must moot all slope planting requirements. Zones A-l & A 2 must meet all slope planting requirements with the exception of trees. The legend must demonstrate conformance with the Manual requirements. ^ Review: Please address comment above. Please provide trees or large shrubs in zone 3 per slope revegetation requirements at 1 per 200 square feet (in firo zones minimum 20' apart). Pieaso indicate proposed plantings in the HOA maintained drainage easement Please also add tho following notes to tho plans: Slopes 6:1 or steeper requiring erosion control measures as specified herein shall bo treated with ono or more of tho following planting standards: a.—Standard 1—Cover Crop/Reinforced Straw Matting: Cover crop shall bo a seed mix typically mado up of quick germinating and fast covering grasses, clovers, andfor wild flowers. Submit the spocific seed mix for City approval prior to application. The cover crop shall be applied at a rate and manner sufficient to provide 90% coverage within thirty (30) days. Type of reinforced straw matting shall be as approved by the city and staked to thc slope as recommended by thc manufacturer. Rancho Milagro - 21 Lot Subdivision May 19, 2009 Conceptual Review Page 2 Reinforced straw matting shall be required when planting occurs between August 15 and April 15. The cover crop andfor reinforced straw mat shall be used thc remainder of the year. bl—Standard it 2—Ground Cover One hundred (100%) percent of tho area shall be planted with a ground cover Imown to have excellent soil binding characteristics (plantedfrom a minimum size offlatted material and spaced to provido full coverage within one year). C-.—Standard ft 3—Low Shrubs Low spreading woody shrubs (plantedfrom a minimum of 2 3/4 inch liners) shall cover a minimum of seventy (70%) percent of thc slope face (at mature size). d.—Standard it 4—Trees and/or Large Shrubs Trees andfor largo shrubs shall be (plantedfrom a minimum of 1 gallon containers) at a minimum rate of one (1) por two hundred (200) square feet. Slopes—6:1 or steeper and: a. —3' or less in vertical height and arc adjacent to public walks or streets require at minimum Standard itl. h.—3' to 8' in vertical height require Standards Hi, it2 and it3. e-.—In excess of 8' in vertical height require Standards ffl, ft 2, ft 3, and it 4. Aroas gradedflatter than 6:1 require Standard itl (cover crop) with temporary irrigation when they havo one or more of the following conditions: Ol—Sheet graded pads not scheduledfor improvoments within 6 months of completion of rough grading. b. A potential erosion problem as determined by tho City. e-.—Identified by the City as highly visible areas to the public or have special conditions that warrant immediate treatment. 7-11 Completed. IA. Completed. NEW COMMENTS IB. All HOA maintained areas should use reclaimed water as it appears to be available. Please revise water use plans as appropriate. Submit one extra copy of plans with the next submittal and indicate in your transmittal to route this copy to Pam Adams in Public Works Maintenance and Operations for review. CITY OF CARLSBAD REVIEW AND COMMENT MEMO PLANNING DEPT TRACKING DESK REC'D: G/q/oq DATE: TO: MAY 18, 2009 REVIEW NO: 4 FROM: 1^ Engineering, Development Services - Terie Rowley • Police Department - J. Sasway IE) Fire Department - Greg Ryan • Building Department - Will Foss • Recreation - Mark Steyaert • Public Works Department (streets) - Thomas Moore • Water/Sewer District 1^ Landscape Plancheck Consultant - PELA • School District • North County Transit District - Planning Department • Sempra Energy - Land Management • Caltrans (Send anything adjacent to 1-5) 1^ Parks/Trails - Liz Ketabian *ALWAYS SEND EXHIBITS PLANNING DEPARTMENT REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT ON PROJECT NO(S): GPA 06-03/ ZC 06-02/ CT 06-04/ SUP 06-05/ HDP 06-01 PROJECT TITLE: RANCHO MILAGRO APPLICANT: RANCHO MILAGRO LLC PROPOSAL: 22 RESIDENTIAL & 5 OPEN SPACE LOTS Please review and submit written comments and/or conditions to MEGHAN MCKILLOP. Senior Office Specialist in the Planning Department at 1635 Faraday Avenue, bv 06/04/09 . If you have "No Comments", please so state. If you have any questions, please contact JASON GOFF ,at X4643 . Thank you COMMENTS: Q_ /^-^oh)d Cj^ryu/r\^ud' j^yvutA)-^ fd^iU^ PLANS ATTACHED Review & Comment 09/07 * DATE: June 8, 2009 TO: ASSOCIATE PLANNER- GOFF FROM: Park Planner, Ketabian RE: TRAIL PLAN CHECK- RANCHO MILAGRO I have completed the review of the Tentative Map and Landscape Plans for the above project and have the following comments pertaining to the trail development: (I have no comments on the HDP 06-01) TENTATIVE MAP-CT 06-04 Sheet 1 of 11 - Trail Detail- The grade shown on the plans looks like it says it is 24% after the series of stairs. There's not enough grading information on the plans to determine if this is a typo or if it is indeed to be that steep. This is too steep ( minimum of 15% is acceptable) if that is indeed the case, another series of stairs may be required for safety purposes. Sheet 2 of 11- The note below the Local Public Street Section regarding where the d.g. path ends and the sidewalk begins needs to be a bit more clearer. Indicate the lot numbers where the sidewalk is to be (lots 1-6) in order to differentiate more clearly where the sidewalk begins. See also redline comments on sheet 4 that pertain to this same item. LANDSCAPE CONCEPT PLANS- Sheet 3- Note on plan refers to detail for trail construction being on sheet 6, however, the trail detail is shown on sheet 5, please correct to show correct sheet number. Sheets 1-10 Decomposed Granite Trail and Sidewalk- The proposed d.g. trail should not be constructed in front of residential lots 1-6 as currently shown on plans. This should be indicated as sidewalk, to be consistent with the improvement plans and also because this is not the material of choice to have in conjunction with the concrete drives that will cross the trail. The plans need to indicate the extent of the concrete sidewalks and the dg trails. See the redline mark up and comments on sheets 1,2,3,5,6,7,8,9,10 of plans that pertain to this item. Please forward a copy of this memo of plan check comments to Jack Henthorn & Associates so that the above comments may be addressed with the next submittal and plan check for this project. THANK YOU LIZ cc: Park Development Manager Rancho Milagro- CW Trail - Plan Check File Associate Engineer, Jeremy Riddle CITY OF CARLSBAD REVIEW AND COMMENT MEMO DATE: MAY 18,2009 REVIEW NO: 4 TO: 13 Engineering, Development Services - Terie Rowley • Police Department - J. Sasway 13 Fire Department - Greg Ryan • Building Department - Will Foss • Recreation - Mark Steyaert • Public Works Department (streets) - Thomas Moore • Water/Sewer District 13 Landscape Plancheck Consultant - PELA • School District • North County Transit District - Planning Department • Sempra Energy - Land Management • Caltrans (Send anything adjacent to 1-5) 3 Parks/Trails - Liz Ketabian *ALWAYS SEND EXHIBITS FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT ON PROJECT NO(S): GPA 06-03/ ZC 06-02/ CT 06-04/ SUP 06-05/ HDP 06-01 PROJECT TITLE: RANCHO MILAGRO APPLICANT: RANCHO MILAGRO LLC PROPOSAL: 22 RESIDENTIAL & 5 OPEN SPACE LOTS Please review and submit written comments and/or conditions to MEGHAN MCKILLOP, Senior Office Specialist in the Planning Department at 1635 Faraday Avenue, by 06/04/09 . If you have "No Comments", please so state. If you have any questions, please contact JASON GOFF , at X4643 . Thank you COMMENTS: PLANS ATTACHED Review & Comment 09/07 CARLSBAD FIRE DEPARTMENT Fire Protection Services PROJECT REVIEW REPORT PLANNING DEPT TRACKING DESK REC'D: \/<6./n^ PROJECT NAME: Rancho Milagro Date: 01/08/09 Project number: CT 06-04/HDP 06-01/GPA06-03/SUP 06-05 Staff Planner: J. Goff Engineer: Initial review: (Note: This report identifies fire protection issues associated with the project, and/or prescribes specific corrections or information needed to achieve Fire Department approval.) Fire has reviewed the submittal for the above named project and would comment that the changes have been noted, and Fire has no additional comments or conditions. GR w w PLANNING DEPT TRACKING DESK City of Carlsbad REC'D:jHlku::2^ ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT SERVICES MEMORANDUM December 26, 2008 TO: Jason Goff, Planning FROM: Jeremy Riddle, Engineering SUBJECT: 7th ENGINEERING REVIEW OF RANCHO MILAGRO (CT 06-04) Engineering Department staff has completed a review of the above subject. Prior to recommending this project for approval with conditions, the applicant must resolve the following: With this recent submittal, staff identified previously resolved issues that have reappeared. They are: 1. Add the trail symbol to the legend on sheet 1. See redlines. 2. Add the slope of the proposed trail to the detail on sheet 1. Refer to redlines for additional information. Based on the modifications to the exhibits, we have identified new issues. They are: 1. Consider deleting the 480-ft+/- of 8-inch sewer line in Street 'K' that was serving the now deleted lots. 2. Clarify whether a new offsite retaining wall and grading is proposed near Street K and the subdivision boundary with CT 00-18. If so, add top-of-wall/bottom-of-wall elevations and the retaining wall symbols. Refer to redlines. 3. If offsite grading is proposed near the Street 'K' connection, revise the TM to annotate the offsite grading and note that a letter of permission will be required prior to grading permit issuance. 4. Delete what appear to be water/sewer laterals in Street 'K' serving the deleted lots. 5. Revise the inundation lines on sheet 3 so they match the legend symbol. 6. Label the new line added near the inundation line upstream of the culvert crossing on Street 'K'. This was not shown on previous sets. 7. On sheet 3, label the adjacent 'Remainder Lots' from CT 00-18. 8. On sheet 3, add the lot areas for lots 223 and 24 in the same manner of labeling as on the other lots. 9. The previous TM used to show fiiel modification zones on sheets 3 &4 per the legend. This Rancho Milagro 7 revievW w December 26, 2008 Page 2 of 2 version does not show it any more. Please revise exhibits to address this. 10. Provide an updated title report showing the new owner and any new encumbrances to the property. Revise the exhibits to show any new easements. 11. Please amend the soils report and hydrology report to reflect the updated project, excluding the two lots. The technical documents for this project should match the current proposal. Staff also offers the following new issues: 1. On sheet 3, extend the drainage access road, just north of lot 19, so it provides access the headwall for city crews. Refer to redlines. 2. On sheet 3, clarify how the detention basin will discharge after it is fiill of water. Provide an improved overflow with concrete and/or rip-rap to address erosion. Also address how the detention basin will drain after rainfall events. Clarify if a standpipe/outlet is needed to drain the basin to address potential vector issues. 3. On sheet 4, show the limits of bio-swales on lots 4, 5 & 6 as these lots drain to the rear yard. Refer to redline comments. If you have any quesfions, please call me at 602-2737 or email me at jridd@ci.carlsbad.ca.us. CITY OF CARLSBAD REVIEW AND COMMENT MEMO PLANNING DEPT TRACKING DESK REC'D:i2424M- DATE: TO: DECEMBER 2. 2008 REVIEW NO: 3 FROM: ^ Engineering, Development Services - Terie Rowley • Police Department - J. Sasway ^ Fire Department - Greg Ryan • Building Department - Will Foss • Recreation - Mark Steyaert • Public Works Department (streets) - Thomas Moore • ^Water/Sewer District 13 Landscape Plancheck Consultant - PELA • School District • North County Transit District - Planning Department • Sempra Energy - Land Management • Caltrans (Send anything adjacent to 1-5) 3 Parks/Trails - Liz Ketabian *ALWAYS SEND EXHIBITS PLANNING DEPARTMENT REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT ON PROJECT NO(S): GPA 06-03/ ZC 06-02/ CT 06-04/ SUP 06-05/ HDP 06-01 PROJECT TITLE: RANCHO MILAGRO APPLICANT: RANCHO MILAGRO LLC PROPOSAL: 22 RESIDENTIAL & 5 OPEN SPACE LOTS Please review and submit written comments and/or conditions to MEGHAN JACOBSON, Senior Office Specialist in the Planning Department at 1635 Faraday Avenue, bv 12/10/08 . If you have "No Comments", please so state. If you have any questions, please contact JASON GOFF , at X4643 . COMMENT^^TWl 00?-O^- Ko Cjpvvutux^xi^ PLANS ATTACHED Review & Comment tv 09/07 December 5, 2008 TO: Baroam^Kennedy, Associate Planner Michele Masterson, Senior Management Analyst Meghan Jacobson, Senior Office Specialist FROM: Michael Elliott, City of Carlsbad's Contract Landscape Architect RE: Landscape Architectural Review - Conceptual Review - 4* Review RANCHO MILAGRO - 21 LOT SUBDIVISION Vicinity of El Camino Real & College Drive CT 06-04 HDP 06-01 ZC 06-02 GPA 06-03 SUP 06-05 PELA file: 5 - Rancho Milagro CT06-04 - Con4 Landscape Architect: GMP, Phone: (858) 558-8977 Please advise the applicant to make the following corrections to the plans so that they will meet the requirements of the City of Carlsbad's Landscape Manual. REPEAT COMMENTS 1. Provide street trees as shown on the redline plans. 2-5 Completed. 6. Show Fire Protection zones, per the Manual on all slopes that abut natural areas. This applies to manmade and natural slopes. Adjust the "old" Fire Protection zone lines to be reflective of the proposed building footprints shown on the plans. In discussions with Greg Morrad, Henthorn & Associates and Greg Ryan (6/7/07), there appears to be no reason why the Fire Protection zones should not be shown as required by the Landscape Manual. Graphically show trees in Zone A 3 spaced at 20' O.C. Reduce the size of brow ditches to a realistic dimension. They are currently shown as 10' wide and impact the area that could be planted. Sec Attachments "B" & "C" for how zones are defined. There are no sizes or spacings provided in the Fire Protection Zone legend. Slopes in Zone A-3 must meet all slope planting requirements. Zones A-l & A-2 must meet all slope planting requirements with the exception of trees. The legend must demonstrate conformance with the Manual requirements. 4'^ Review: Please address comment above. Please provide trees or large shrubs in zone 3 per slope revegetation requirements at 1 per 200 square feet (in fire zones minimum 20' apart). Please indicate proposed plantings in the HOA maintained drainage easement. Please also add the following notes to the plans: Slopes 6:1 or steeper requiring erosion control measures as specified herein shall be treated with one or more ofthe following planting standards: a. Standard 1 - Cover Crop/Reinforced Straw Matting: Cover crop shall be a seed mix typically made up of quick germinating and fast covering grasses, clovers, and/or wildflowers. Submit the specific seed mix for City approval prior to application. The cover crop shall be applied at a rate and manner sufficient to provide 90% coverage within thirty (30) days. Type of reinforced straw matting shall be as approved by the city and staked to the slope as recommended by the manufacturer. Rancho Milagro - 21 Lot Subdivision December 5, 2008 Conceptual Review Page 2 Reinforced straw matting shall be required when planting occurs between August 15 and April 15. The cover crop and/or reinforced straw mat shall be used the remainder of the year. b. Standard #2 - Ground Cover One hundred (100%) percent of the area shall be planted with a ground cover known to have excellent soil binding characteristics (planted from a minimum size offlatted material and spaced to provide full coverage within oneyear). c. Standard #3- Low Shrubs Low spreading woody shrubs (plantedfrom a minimum of 2-3/4 inch liners) shall cover a minimum of seventy (70%) percent of the slope face (at mature size). d. Standard ii4~ Trees and/or Large Shrubs Trees and/or large shrubs shall be (plantedfrom a minimum of 1 gallon containers) at a minimum rate of one (1) per two hundred (200) square feet. Slopes - 6:1 or steeper and: a. 3' or less in vertical height and are adjacent to public walks or streets require at minimum Standard Ul. b. 3' to 8' in vertical height require Standards iil,#2 and it 3. c. In excess of 8' in vertical height require Standards #1, #2, #3, and #4. Areas graded flatter than 6:1 require Standard #1 (cover crop) with temporary irrigation when they have one or more of the following conditions: a. Sheet graded pads not scheduledfor improvements within 6 months of completion of rough grading. b. A potential erosion problem as determined by the City. c. Identified by the City as highly visible areas to the public or have special conditions that warrant immediate treatment. 7-11 Completed. NEW COMMENTS 1 A. The landscape area has been revised. Please modify all calculations to reflect current proposed conditions. w CITY OF CARLSBAD REVIEW AND COMMENT MEMO DATE: DECEMBER 2.2008 REVIEW NO: 3 TO: 3 Engineering, Development Services - Terie Rowley • Police Department - J. Sasway 3 Fire Department - Greg Ryan • Building Department-Will Foss • Recreation - Mark Steyaert • Public Works Department (streets) - Thomas Moore • Water/Sewer District 3 Landscape Plancheck Consultant - PELA • School District • North County Transit District - Planning Department • Sempra Energy - Land Management • Caltrans (Send anything adjacent to 1-5) 3 Parks/Trails - Liz Ketabian *ALWAYS SEND EXHIBITS FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT ON PROJECT NO(S): GPA 06-03/ ZC 06-02/ CT 06-04/SUP 06-05/HDP 06-01 PROJECT TITLE: RANCHO MILAGRO APPLICANT: RANCHO MILAGRO LLC PROPOSAL: 22 RESIDENTIAL & 5 OPEN SPACE LOTS Please review and submit written comments and/or conditions to MEGHAN JACOBSON, Senior Office Specialist in the Planning Department at 1635 Faraday Avenue, bv 12/10/08 . If you have "No Comments", please so state. If you have any questions, please contact JASON GOFF , at X4643 . Thank you COMMENTS: PLANS ATTACHED Review & Comment 09/07 CARLSBAD FIRE DEPARTMENT Fire Protection Services PROJECT REVIEW REPORT PROJECT NAME: Rancho Milagro Date: 08/14/07 Project number: CT 06-04 Staff Planner: B. Kennedy Pl • - i *' v: DBPT 0£SfC Engineer: Initial review: (Note: This report identifies fire protection issues associated with the project, and/or prescribes specific corrections or information needed to achieve Fire Department approval.) Fire has reviewed the submittal for the above named project and would comment that the prior requested changes have been noted, and we have no additional comments or conditions. GR April 5, 2007 TO: Barbara Kennedy, Associate Planner Michele Masterson, Management Analyst FROM: Pamela Elliott, City of Carlsbad's Contract Landscape Architect RE: Landscape Architectural Review - Conceptual Review - 3'^'' Review RANCHO MILAGRO - 21 LOT SUBDIVISION Vicinity of El Camino Real & College Drive CT 06-04 HDP 06-01 ZC 06-02 GPA 06-03 SUP 06-05 PELA file: 5- RANCHO MILAGRO CT 06-04 HDP 06-01 ZC 06-02 GPA 06-03 SUP 06-05Con3 Landscape Architect: Gillespie Design Group Phone: 858-558-8977 Fax: 858-558-9188 Please advise the applicant to make the following corrections to the plans so that they will meet the requirements of the City of Carlsbad's Landscape Manual. 1. Provide street trees as shown on Attachment "A". 2. completed 3. completed 4. Reclaimed Water Use Plan: Plan sent to Pam Adams, Public Works Water Operations for review. Pending comments. 5. completed 6. Show Fire Protection zones, per the Manual on all slopes that abut natural areas. This applies to manmade and natural slopes. Adjust the "old" Fire Protection zone lines to be reflective of the proposed building footprints shown on the plans. In discussions with Greg Morrad, Henthom & Associates, there appears to be no reason why the Fire Protection zones should not be shown as required by the Landscape Manual. Graphically show trees in Zone A-3 spaced at 20' O.C. Reduce the size of brow ditches to a realistic dimension. They are currently shown as 10' wide and impact the area that could be planted. See Attachments "B" & "C" for how zones are defined. There are no sizes or spacings provided in the Fire Protection Zone legend. Slopes in Zone A-3 must meet all slope planting requirements. Zones A-l & A-2 must meet all slope planting requirements with the exception of trees. The legend must demonstrate conformance with the Manual requirements. 7. completed 8. completed 9. completed 10. completed NEW COMMENT: 11. Correct sheet references in the Planting and Fence Legend (Sheets 2 & 3). , OF THE MOPIFIEC? DESIGN E PROTECTION ZONES AND ^^PTHS OF THE FIRE ZONES, HEREON, HAS FROM OITT FJRE MARSHAL N AT A MEETING WITH MR. OX JANUARY 2ooe;. HIS M^TIN© IT WAS 4AT ALL BUILPINeS WILL SPRINKLERS, ANP THE INSTRUCTION REGULATIONS 3AN-WILDLAND INTERFACE WILL BE APPLIED TO ALL WHICH FACE NATIVE OPEN fCIAL NOTES TO THIS E INCLUDED HEREON. E PROTE pTH VARIE FIRE PROTECTION ZC NATIVE PLANT PALE THE ADJACENT NATl^ CORRELATES WITH P SHT. 2$3) NO ORH< PLANTS SHALL BE U5 SHALL BE INSTALLEI SS?.VICE SYSTEM. FIRE PROTECTION ZO^ NATIVE PLANT PALETl _ im ADJACENT NATIVI -CORRELATES WITH PL SHT. 243; NO ORNAJ' PLANTS SHALL BE USE SHALL BE INSTALLED SB?VICE SYSTEM. FIRE PROTECTION ZONE LIMITS- APPROVAL OF THE MODIFIH? D FIRE PROTECTION ZONES AND F WIDTHS OF TH&FIRE ZONES, AS HB^N, HAS BEEN OBTAINED P. FIRE MARSHAL ORE© RYAN AT WITH MR. RYAN fAPROX JANUAR PREPARED BY: GROi p IN SECTION irrigation A-1 —2or-i A-2 VES 20- YES i A-3 20' YES NATIVE (UNDISTURBEO) NO o pifinting ' FIRE RETARDANT •LOW FUEL LOW FUEL N/A NO TREES OR SHRUBS ' NAfURAUZINQ -NO TREES NATURALIZING • TREES NO CLOSER THAN 20'ARART iH "CONDITION A" - MANUFACTURED SLOPES flre B0Ctkms Q SECTION Irrigation B-1 20' YES B-2 20' YES. TEMPORARY B-3 20' \ NO NATIVE (UNDISTUmED) Planting FIRE RETARDANT LOW FUEL SPECIES NONE N/A • NO TREES OR SHRUBS REMOUML OF HIQH FUEL SPEQES ' SELECTIVE PRUNING OF 60% OF THE MODERATE FUEL SPECIES VOLUME • 100% REMOVAL OF HIGH FUEL SPECIES • SELECTIVE PRUNING OF 40% OF THE MODERATE FUEL SPECIES VOLUK^ > 100% %MOVM. OF HIGH FUEL SPECIES o "CONDITION B" - NATIVE SLOPES flr0 tectiong « CLEARANCE 3X HEIGHT OF UNDER STORY DATE: TO: CITY OF CARLSBAD REVIEW AND COMMENT MEMO PLANNiWG DEPT TP? r' JULY 19, 2007 REVISED PLANS^ OESK 0^ • ENGINEERING, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES - TERIE ROWLEY • POLICE DEPARTMENT - J. SASWAY • FIRE DEPARTMENT - GREG RYAN • BUILDING DEPARTMENT - WILL FOSS • RECREATION - MARK STEYAERT • PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (STREETS) - THOMAS MOORE • ^WATER/SEWER DISTRICT • LANDSCAPE PLANCHECK CONSULTANT - PELA • SCHOOL DISTRICT • NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT - PLANNING DEPARTMENT • SEMPRA ENERGY - LAND MANAGEMENT • CALTRANS (send anything adjacent to 1-5) M PARKS/TRAILS - LIZ KETABIAN *ALWAYS SEND EXHIBITS FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT ON PROJECT NO(S): GPA 06-03, ZC 06-02, CT 06-04, SUP 06-05, HDP 06-01 PROJECT TITLE: RANCHO MILAGRO APPLICANT: RANCHO MILAGRO LLC PROPOSAL: SUBDIVISION FOR 14 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND 3 OPEN SPACE LOTS Please review and submit written comments and/or conditions to MICHELLE LENKOWSKI, Senior Office Specialist in the Planning Department at 1635 Faraday Avenue, bv OS/08/2007. If you have "No Comments", please so state. If you have any questions, please contact BARBARA KENNEDY, at 602-4626. THANK YOU ^ COMMENTS: iPa^d^ LL 3\JjLt ^ of PLANS ATTACHED Review & Comment 01/07 CITY OF CARLSBAD REVIEW AND COMMENT MEMO DATE: TO: JULY 19, 2007 REVISED PLANS 0 ENGINEERING, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES - TERIE ROWLEY • POLICE DEPARTMENT - J. SASWAY 0 FIRE DEPARTMENT - GREG RYAN • BUILDING DEPARTMENT - WILL FOSS • RECREATION - MARK STEYAERT • PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (STREETS) - THOMAS MOORE • WATER/SEWER DISTRICT 0 LANDSCAPE PLANCHECK CONSULTANT - PELA • SCHOOL DISTRICT • NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT - PLANNING DEPARTMENT • SEMPRA ENERGY - LAND MANAGEMENT • CALTRANS (send anything adjacent to 1-5) 0 PARKS/TRAILS - LIZ KETABIAN *ALWAYS SEND EXHIBITS FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT ON PROJECT NO(S): GPA 06-03, ZC 06-02, CT 06-04, SUP 06-05, HDP 06-01 PROJECTTITLE: RANCHO MILAGRO APPLICANT: RANCHO MILAGRO LLC PROPOSAL: SUBDIVISION FOR 14 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND 3 OPEN SPACE LOTS Please review and submit written comments and/or conditions to MICHELLE LENKOWSKI, Senior Office Specialist in the Planning Department at 1635 Faraday Avenue, by 03/08/2007. If you have "No Comments", please so state. If you have any questions, please contact BARBARA KENNEDY, at 602-4626. THANK YOU COMMENTS: PLANS ATTACHED Review & Comment 01/07 City of Carlsbad ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT SERVICES MEMORANDUM April 30, 2007 TO: Barbara Kennedy, Planning FROM: Jeremy Riddle, Engineering SUBJECT: 5'" ENGINEERING REVIEW OF RANCHO MILAGRO (CT 06-04, ZC 06-02, GPA 06-03, HDP 06-01) Engineering Department staff has completed the 2"** review of the submittal for application completeness. The application and plans submitted for this project are incomplete and unsuitable for further review due to the following missing or incomplete items: Incomplete Items 1. The resubmittal of the new Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) contains a new date on the cover sheet, but the contents were not revised to address any of the previous comments. I have repeated the comment below: The SWMP continues to have missing information regarding complete documentation/justification for pollution control features. The revised SWMP explains that "a portion " of the project will drain into the water quality basin and that the 85"' percentile for this "portion" is estimated to be near .84 cfs per your calculations. The lots assumed for this estimation appear to be inconsistent. Refer to redlines. Revise the SWMP to demonstrate the water quality basin can treat this flow using flow-based calculations. Refer to CASQUA handbooks for assistance. The TM and SWMP also callout a stormceptor unit, but the SWMP does not explain the purpose and value of the bmp treatment train being applied. The SWMP must include calculations to show how the unit is sized (model # to treat the cfs expected). Outline what pollutants the stormceptor removes and what pollutants the basin removes. In the SWMP, it is also demonstrating that the remainder of the subdivision (lots 5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13) are not treated by the stormceptor and basin. Instead, they appear to drain to the natural drainage course (untreated). Address this discrepancy. With these lots, the SWMP narrative, calculations and map in the back should show what bmp measures will be implemented to remove pollutants prior to discharge to natural areas. It is unacceptable to use natural drainage courses/habitat as bmp treatment measures. You might consider having each lot include a permanent vegetated swale before each inlet and prohibit each lot from connecting roof drains directly to the slope drains. Whatever you choose, the SWMP needs to identify (and numerically justify) the bmp treatment measures for these other lots clearly. We would also like to point out the proposed modified "green " D-75 ditch listed in the SMWP and the TM is not a requirement for you to install as it appears to treat offsite property. For the purposes of water quality treatment requirements we only focus on th f*' Rancho Milagro 5 revieir' ^ April 30, 2006 Page 2 of 2 your project pollutant generation, not adjacent properties. However, if you want to install it, you may. Below I have also listed engineering concems that should be addressed prior to final determination or conditioning: Engineering Concems General REPEAT COMMENT: Since the entire public drainage system (alignment and discharge location) has been redesigned, this requires the submittal of a new drainage study that addresses the design of the inlets, pipes, discharges and detention basin design. This should have been provided with this recent submittal. We found hydraulic calculations in the preliminary SWMP but are unable to review without hydrology maps and node maps. Revise the TM to address all redline comments as noted on the retumed plans. Enclosed is a redlined check print of the project. This checl( print must be returned with the revised plans to facilitate continued staff review. If you have any questions, please call me at 602-2737. Attachment CARLSBAD FIRE DEPARTMENT Fire Protection Services PROJECT REVIEW REPORT PLANNING DEPT TI^CKING DESK REC'D: (xt/n/o-,y PROJECT NAME: Rancho Milagro Date: 04/11/07 Project number: CT0604 ^ MOP..^., ,^0.0., G^^ O.O^ O..< Staff Planner: B.Kennedy Engineer: Initial review: (Note: This report identifies fire protection issues associated with the project, and/or prescribes specific corrections or information needed to achieve Fire Department approval.) FIRE would comment that all developable lots shall be provided with an approved automatic fire sprinkler system. I am reiterating this because the TM does not indicate that fire sprinklers are required at each lot only the Landscaping plan makes this reference. Additionally the following lots shall be required to conform with the CA Building Code for one-hour fire resistive construction on those walls that face the Fire Protection Zones: Lots 1,2,3,4,10,20,21 and 22. And again only the Landscaping plan makes reference to these requirements. In addition, the development of this Tract shall be subject to the same restrictions placed upon Cantarini Ranch/ Holly Springs (PRE 02-26) in that no more than twenty (20) residences may be developed before the Carlsbad Fire Code requires a second approved access street to be constructed. GR <^ f IU copy- Fs^i CARLSBAD FIRE DEPARTMENT Fire Protection Services PLAN REVIEW REPORT PROJECT NAME: Rancho Milagro Date: 05/10/05 Project number: CT 04-24 Staff Planner: B.Kennedy Engineer: Initial review: (Note: This report identifies fire protection issues associated with the project, and/or prescribes specific corrections or information needed to achieve Fire Department approval.) After further review of this proposed subdivision application, it has become clear that all of the proposed lots would necessitate the installation of fire sprinklers if the absolute minimum rear set backs were used. It may be prudent to state now that all lots are required to have fire sprinklers regardless. Additionally the following lots shall be required to conform with the CA Building Code for one-hour fire resistive construction on those walls that face the Fire Protection Zones: Lots 1,2,3,4,10,20,21 and 22. GR PUNNING DEPT TRACKING DESK April 5, 2007 TO: Barbara Kennedy, Associate Planner Michele Masterson, Management Analyst Michelle Lenkowski, Senior Office Specialist FROM: Pamela Elliott, City of Carlsbad's Contract Landscape Architect RE: Landscape Architectural Review - Conceptual Review - 2"^ Review RANCHO MILAGRO - 21 LOT SUBDIVISION Vicinity of El Camino Real & College Drive CT 06-04 HDP 06-01 ZC 06-02 GPA 06-03 SUP 06-05 PELA file: 5- RANCHO MILAGRO CT 06-04 HDP 06-01 ZC 06-02 GPA 06-03 SUP 06-05Con 2 Landscape Architect: Gillespie Design Group Phone: 858-558-8977 Fax: 858-558-9188 Please advise the applicant to make the following corrections to the plans so that they will meet the requirements of the City of Carlsbad's Landscape Manual. 1. Provide street trees as shown on the redlines. 2. Provide a more permanent and dependable vine planting for the crib wall than the Morning Glory (Calystegia). 3. Revise the Maintenance Plan to show all parkway areas (including the trail) to be under the maintenance responsibility of the Rancho Milagro HOA. 4. Provide a one sheet colored Reclaimed Water Use Plan. 5. Indicate that reinforced straw mats will be installed on all slopes (3: 1 or greater). 6. Adjust the Fire Protection zones to be reflected of the building footprints. The Fire Protection Zones should be coordinated with Planting Concept Plan and shown on the Planting Concept Plan. The legend for the Planting Concept Plan hatches should be reflective of the specific plantings for each Fire Zone (Zones 1, 2, 3). Use a different hatch for each of the three zones and indicate which plantings will be used in each. Graphically show trees in Zone 3 spaced at 20'. 7. This slope should have trees since it does not abut a natural area. 8. Delete the word "mosf from this note. 9. Add the type of turf to be used in the legend. Indicate sod rather than seed. 10. Indicate that all slopes are to be irrigated with a permanent automatically controlled irrigation system. 11. Retum Redlines. Provide two copies of all plans in your next submittal. CITY OF CARLSBAD REVIEW AND COMMENT MEMO DATE: March 27,2006 REVISED PLANS TO: * ENGINEERING - DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, ATTN: Jeremy Riddle FIRE DEPARTMENT - KARYN VAUDREUIL PUBUC WORKS DEPARTMENT (STREETS) - THOMAS MOORE Carlsbad WATER/SEWER DISTRICT LANDSCAPE PLANCHECK CONSULTANT - LARRY BLACK Carlsbad Unified SCHOOL DISTRICT SEMPRA ENERGY - LAND MANAGEMENT PARKS/TRAILS - LIZ KETABIAN * Always Send Exhibits FROM: Planning Department REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT ON PROJECT NO(S): GPA 04-19/ZC 04-14/ CT 04-24/SUP 05-05/HDP 04-11 PROJECT TITLE: RANCHO MILAGRO APPLICANT: Jack Henthorn & Associates PROPOSAL: 22 lot subdivision Please review and submit written comments and/or conditions to Barbara Kennedy, the Project Planner in the Planning Department at 1635 Faraday Avenue, by April 20, 2006. (If you have "No Comments", please so state.) If not received by the date indicated, it will be assumed that you have no comment and the proposal has your endorsement as submitted. If you have any questions, please contact Barbara at 602-4626. The request for conditions will follow at the appropriate time. THANK YOU COMMENTS: PLANS ATTACHED Review & Comment 01/06 CITY OF CARLSBAD REVIEW AND COMMENT MEMO DATE: March 27,2006 REVISED PLANS TO: ENGINEERING - DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, ATTN: Jeremy Riddle FIRE DEPARTMENT - KARYN VAUDREUIL PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (STREETS) - THOMAS MOORE Carlsbad WATER/SEWER DISTRICT LANDSCAPE PLANCHECK CONSULTANT - LARRY BLACK Carlsbad Unified SCHOOL DISTRICT SEMPRA ENERGY - LAND MANAGEMENT ^ PARKS/TRAILS - LIZ KETABIAN * Always Send Exhibits FROM: Planning Department REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT ON PROJECT NQ(S): GPA 04-19/ZC 04-14/ CT 04-24/SUP 05-05/HDP 04-11 PROJECT TITLE: RANCHO MILAGRO APPLICANT: Jack Henthorn & Associates PROPOSAL: 22 lot subdivision Please review and submit written comments and/or conditions to Barbara Kennedy, the Project Planner in the Planning Department at 1635 Faraday Avenue, bv April 20. 2006. (If you have "No Comments", please so state.) If not received by the date indicated, it will be assumed that you have no comment and the proposal has your endorsement as submitted. If you have any questions, please contact Barbara at 602-4626. The request for conditions will follow at the appropriate time. THANK YOU COMMENTS: PLANS ATTACHED Review & Comment 01/06 CITY OF CARLSBAD REVIEW AND COMMENT MEMO DATE: TO: MARCH 19, 2007 REVISED PLANS • • r ENGINEERING - DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, ATTN: TERIE ROWLEY POLICE DEPARTMENT - ATTN: J. SASWAY AMKUM/^ ncoT FIRE DEPARTMENT - GREG RYAN rLANNINCS DEPT BUILDING DEPARTMENT - MIKE PETERSON TRACKINQ DESK_ RECREATION - MARK STEYAERT REC'D: PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (STREETS) - THOMAS MOORE WATER/SEWER DISTRICT LANDSCAPE PLANCHECK CONSULTANT - PELA SCHOOL DISTRICT PLANNING DEPARTMENT IG DESK NORTH COUNTY TRANSIT DISTRICT SEMPRA ENERGY - LAND MANAGEMENT CALTRANS (send anything adjacent to 1-5) PARKS/TRAILS - LIZ KETABIAN *ALWAYS SEND EXHIBITS FROM: Planning Department REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT ON PROJECT NO(S): CT 06-04, HDP 06-01, ZC 06-02, GPA 06-03, SUP 06-05 PROJECT TITLE: RANCHO MILAGRO APPLICANT: RANCHO MILAGRO LLC PROPOSAL: SUBDIVISION FOR 14 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND 3 OPEN SPACE LOTS Please review and submit written comments and/or conditions to MICHELLE LENKOWSKI, Senior Office Specialist in the Planning Department at 1635 Faraday Avenue, by 04/09/2007. If you have "No Comments", please so state. If you have any questions, please contact BARBARA KENNEDY, at 602-4626. THANKYOU ^ /; /> / COMMENTS: VALCA^^ - Aik~<^<2^ C^e>i^n-<^Wf- • Mtt^ta^ 44a! ^MA^ yLi^ a^^i PLANS ATTACHED Review & Comment 01/07 DATE: April 9,2007 TO: ASSOCIATE PLANNER- KENNEDY FROM: Park Planner, Ketabian RE: TRAIL PLAN CHECK- RANCHO MILAGRO CT 06-04-24 and LANDSCAPE CONCEPT PLAN I have completed the review of the Tentative Map and Landscape Plans for the above project and have the following comments pertaining to the trail development: (I have no comments on the HDP 06-01 and SUP 06-05) TENTATIVE MAP General Notes regarding Trails- 1. The use of Stavlock materials will no longer be an acceptable type of stabilized decomposed granite material for trail use standards. Please remove anv reference to the use of this particular type of product on plans. 2. A detail or cross section of the 10' trail should be shown on plans. Sheet 1- Stair Step Detail- Please indicate with a note that a handrail on each side of the steps will be required. A smooth 1-1/4" O.D. pipe rail with a powder coat finish or similar type of hand rail would be acceptable. Handrail locations and installation shall be per the State Codes for stair hand rail installations. LANDSCAPE PLANS Sheet 2 - Please add note regarding requirement for hand rail, see comment above for Sheet 1 of Tentative Map. See Plans for comments. Sheet 6- Stabilized Decomposed Granite Trail-the 2' mulched maintenance strip is not a requirement for the trails next to native habitat areas, only when next to a landscaped planting area. -Remove any reference to Staylock materials. (Item 4 in the Detail Legend) -Splices will be required a minimum of 6' O.C. -Clarification: All DG materials shall have stabilizer, however Staylock materials are not acceptable. Please fon/vard a copy of this memo of plan check comments to Jack Henthorn & Associates so that the above comments may be addressed with the next submittal and plan check for this project. THANK YOU LIZ cc: Park Development Manager Rancho Milagro- CW Trail - Plan Check File Associate Engineer, Jeremy Riddle DATE: May 16, 2006 TO: ASSOCIATE PLANNER- KENNEDY FROM: Park Planner, Ketabian RE: RANCHO MILAGRO PLAN CHECK -CT-04-24 CITYWIDE TRAILS I have completed the review of the Tentative Map and Landscape Plans for the above project and have the following comments pertaining to the trail development: TENTATIVE MAP Sheet 2- Question-_ls the trail that connects from Sunny Creek Road to the view overlook at the knuckle of X and K Street (on the sewer easement) a private trail or a public trail? It should be called out as a public trail that will allow a connection from Sunny Creek road over to Cantarini/Holly Springs. Please confirm status of trail use. See also the attached Trail Standard Design Guidelines and provide more information on trail grades and materials. Revise to acceptable grades for a Type A -Open Space Trail. For further questions please feel free to contact, Liz Ketabian, Park Planner at 434-2978. LANDSCAPE PLANS Sheet 2 - See Plans for comments pertaining to trail along K Street. Sheet 3- See Plans for comments pertaining to trail surfacing materials in front of residential lots. DG Trail in front of Residential Lots 1, 2,3,5,6 may pose a future safey hazard or not practical in the long term as dg will wear away at edge of concrete pavement and could cause a tripping hazard. Due to this exposed aggregate pavement is recommended as it will provide the rustic character, while providing for a more permanent and safe surfacing for the residential lots. Please indicate this revision on next set of plans as noted on the plans for those lots. Stabilized DG is still acceptable for other parts of the trail system. Sheet 6- See Plans for comments pertaining to Detail D - Stabilized DG Trail. Please fonvard a copy of this memo of plan check comments so that they may be addressed by the applicant on future plans and submittals being provided to Planning and Engineering. THANKYOU LIZ cc: Park Development Manager Rancho Milagro- CW Trail - Plan Check File Associate Engineer, Jeremy Riddle City Trail Standard Design Guidelines Table GUIDELINES NOTES TYPEA Urban/ Suburban/Open Space TYPEB Open Space TYPEC Primitive Open Space TYPED Circulation Element TraU Tread Width 1, la 8'-10' 4' -8' 2'or> S'-IO' Easement Width 2, 3,6 12'-20' 10'-20' 10'-20' 12' Function Recreation/ Non -Motorized Transportation Recreation/ Non -Motorized Transportation Recreation Recreation/ Non Motorized Transportation Grade 4 <15% <20% <40% <15% Cross Slope 1 - 2% 1 - 5% 1 - 8% 2% Surface Material* 7 D.G./Binding Agent D.G. or Suitable Native Soil Suitable Native Soil D.G./Binding Agent Anticipated User Volume High Medium Med - Low High Horizontal Clearance 5 2' Beyond Tread Edge 2' Beyond Tread Edge 1'Beyond Tread Edge At Edge Vertical Clearance 12' 10' 10' 12' 2) 3) Notes: 1) Tread width within the *optimum range will be based on site-specific conditions. la) When Trail shares utility access maintenance easements, or roadways, the trail width and surfacing materials shall be acceptable to all parties sharing jurisdiction of the right of way, while also providing for public safety and maintenance standards. San Diego Regional Standards shall take precedence over these design guidelines where trails are shared in utility access or maintenance areas where the Regional Standards are called out. Easement width within the *optimum range will be dependant on topographical or environmental conditions, i.e. steep slope, rugged terrain, rock outcroppings, or sensitive biological resources or habitat which require the maximum easement width. These are *optimum grade ranges. The following additional criteria can be applied to Type A and B trails if warranted by site conditions. • Ideal: 0% - 5% • Acceptable: Average running grade of 10% or less, for distances over 200 feet • Acceptable: Average running grade of 15% or less, for distances under 200 feet • Acceptable: Average running grade of 20% or less, for distances imder 100 feet • Sufficient switchbacks should be provided to avoid excessive grades • Type C trails may exceed 20% grade due to existing conditions or environmental constraints but for running grades of only brief distances. Type B trails at 4 feet shall provide horizontal clearance 1 foot beyond tread edge to a minimum height of 3 feet. Pathways are trails within road right-of-way. The minimum width specified corresponds to the current minimum parkway / "pathway" width in the Coimty Public Road Standards. Depending on the discretionary project being contemplated, an additional 5 feet of road right-of-way may be required, thus providing a total width of 15 feet for pathway / parkway purposes. Optimal pathways have separation from the roadway, but implementation is often limited due to road right-of- way widths, topographic conditions, and increased construction cost. All decomposed granite materials shall have a stabilizing agent incorporated and blended at the batch plant or quarry. Approved types include but are not limited to: Staylock, RoadOly, (grades over 5%) Polypave, (grades over 10%) Color shall be gold or tan and a submittal sample shall be provided to the ProjectEngineer for through the typical submittal process. 4) 5) 6) 7) City of Carlsbad ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT SERVICES MEMORANDUM May 10, 2006 TO: Barbara Keimedy, Planning FROM: Jeremy Riddle, Engineering SUBJECT: 4* ENGINEERING REVIEW OF RANCHO MILAGRO (CT 04-24, ZC 04-14, GPA 04-19, HDP 04-11) Engineering Department staff has completed the 2"^ review of the submittal for application completeness. The appUcation and plans submitted for this project are incomplete and vmsuitable for further review due to the following missing or incomplete items: Incomplete Items 1. Provide a letter of support from Mandana Cal Co. stating they do not object to this project. This company currently has rights to an easement per item 6 of the preliminary title report, dated August 19, 2004. You response letter indicates Mandana has offered "verbal support" to quitclaim their private road easement. Please note that, in order to ensure the conceptual approval of this project staff needs documentation that land title conflicts can be resolved. As we have repeated since the first review, staff needs "written" support from the easement holder that they are willing to quitclaim their easement. We imderstand the private road easement may not be formally quitclaimed until the public streets within this project are dedicated by the final map (later point in time), but at this point we need written support for your project. 2. The SWMP continues to have missing information regarding complete documentation/justification for pollution control features. The revised SWMP explains that "a portion" of the project will drain into the water quality basin and that the 85* percentile for this "portion" is estimated to be near .84 cfs per your calculations. The lots assumed for this estimation appear to be inconsistent. Refer to redlines. Revise the SWMP to demonstrate the water quality basin can freat this flow using flow-based calculations. Refer to CASQUA handbooks for assistance. The TM and SWMP also callout a stormceptor unit, but the SWMP does not explain the purpose and value of the bmp freatment frain being applied. The SWMP must include calculations to show how the unit is sized (model # to treat the cfs expected). Outline what pollutants the stormceptor removes and what pollutants the basin removes. In the SWMP, it is also demonsfrating that the remainder of the subdivision (lots 5,6,7,8,9,10,11,12,13) are not freated by the stormceptor and basin. Instead, they appear to drain to the natural drainage course (unfreated). Address this discrepancy. With these lots, the SWMP narrative, calculations and map in the back should show what bmp measures will be implemented to remove pollutants prior to discharge to natural areas. It is unacceptable to use natural drainage courses/habitat as bmp treatment measures. You might consider having each lot include a pennanent vegetated swale before each inlet and prohibit each lot from coimecting roof drains directly to the slope drains. Whatever you choose, the SWMP needs to identify (and numerically Rancho Milagro 4*^ reviel May 10, 2006 Page 2 of 2 justify) the bmp freatment measures for these other lots clearly. We would also like to point out the proposed modified "green" D-75 ditch hsted m the SMWP and the TM is not a requirement for you to install as it appears to freat offsite property. For the purposes of water quality freatment requirements we only focus on your project pollutant generation, not adjacent properties. However, if you want to install it, you may. Below I have also listed engineering concems that should be addressed prior to final determination or conditioning: Engineering Concerns General 1. The revised TM contains a revised storm drain layout and alignment. Revise the TM to add invert and rim elevations so staff can gauge the depth of the proposed public storm drain system. 2. Since the entire public drainage system (alignment and discharge location) has been redesigned, this requires the submittal of a new drainage study that addresses the design of the inlets, pipes, discharges and detention basin design. This should have been provided with this recent submittal. We found hydraulic calculations in the preliminary SWMP but are unable to review without hydrology maps and node maps. 3. With the revised TM, lot 10 does not appear to include a rear slope drain pipe. Please clarify how this lot will drain. 4. Per discussion with planning, we understand the application numbers may be changed on this project. When provided, please update the numbers on the upper right hand comer. 5. Revise the legal description of this project to include the remainder lot for CT 00-18 (Cantarini) as it is used to develop lots 21 and 22 of this fract map. Include the owner name and address on the title sheet for the remainder lot of CT 00-18. Refer to redlines for clarification. 6. Revise the TM to callout pedesfrian railing installed along the high retaining wall that supports K Sfreet on both sides. With sidewalks next to these 20-fl high walls, pedestrian safety concems arise. Refer to redlines on TM for clarification. 7. It is our understanding the 18" sewer reflected on dwg 361-6E may not need to be 18" in size. Per discussion with Bill Plummer Deputy City Engineer-Design Division, the fiiture anticipated sewer flows from the adjacent city will not occur as previously thought. Therefore the sewer your project is extending must only be sized to serve this project and the adjacent properties. Please revise the sewer study and TM exhibits to address the size of the sewer required per the revised estimated sewer flows. This is the third time this comment has been repeated. With this recent resubmittal, you did not provide a revised sewer study as requested. Your response on the TM states you have considered the sewer and believe an 18" pipe is necessary to carry the sewer flows across the low slope portion crossing the channel. Your assumptions listed do not support the need for an 18" sewer pipe. A smaller pipe will carry smaller flows more effectively and will improved velocity. A larger pipe is not better to carry less sewer flows. You Rancho Milagro 4 revie' May 10, 2006 Page 3 of 2 also state an 18" pipe helps maintain the minimum distance from the pipe to the flowllne of the creek. Again a smaller pipe can provide a greater separation with the fiowline of the creek. We continue to ask for a revised sewer study that addresses the size of the sewer. It is usually not desirable to construct a sewer that is oversized, unless justification can support it. Per previous comments, the extension of this sewer is not considered reimbursable and you responded you will ask other "future connectees" to enter into a repayment agreement. We assume this is a private venture you are proposing to coordinate between private property owners. If a private agreement is sought, keep in mind it cannot be enforced by the City. We do not collect private money as part of private agreements. We there is no misunderstanding on this issue. 8. On lots 5 and 6, at the toe of slope, the easement indicates "public". This should be changed to "private". 9. Revise the TM to clarify how HOA will access the water pollution confrol basin at the bottom of the slope on lot 25 (for monitoring and maintenance). Indicate the limits of vehicular access that will allow this. 10. Revise the TM to address all redline comments as noted on the retumed plans. Enclosed is a redlined check print of the project. This check print must be returned with the revised plans to facilitate continued staff review. If you have any questions, please call me at 602-2737. Attachment ^^^^ '^^1^ CARLSBAD FIRE DEPARTMENT Fire Prevention Division PROJECT CONDITION REPORT PROJECT NAME: Date: Project number: Staff Planner: Ranclio Milagro 040/5/06 CT 04-24 B. Kennedy Engineer: Proiect conditions: (Note: The following identifies specific conditions necessary to achieve Fire Department approval.) Fire Department has reviewed this project application and has no comments or conditions to submit. GR April 7,2006 TO: Barbara Kennedy, Planner FROM: Pamela Elliott, Landscape Architect RE: Landscape Architectural Review - Conceptual Review - 1 st Review RANCHO MILAGRO - 22 LOT SUBDIVISION Vicinity of El Camino Real & College Drive GPA 04-19 ZC 04-14 CT 04-24 SUP 05-05 HDP 04-11 Landscape Architect: Gillespie Design Group Phone: 858-558-8977 Fax: 858-558-9188 Please advise the applicant to make the following corrections to the plans so that they will meet the requirements of the City of Carlsbad's Landscape Manual. 1. Provide street trees spaced at 40' O.C. maximum, including cul de sacs. 2. There are a number of large retaining walls that will be visible from off site. For all walls over 6', design the wall as a plant-able crib wall with all cells planted with a self supporting vine to provide fiill vegetative wall coverage at maturity. In addition, provide self supporting vines at the base of the wall spaced at 5' O.C. 3. Turf is not allowed in areas with a width less than 6' or on slopes 4:1 or greater. Revise the parkway zone planting to reflect this. Clearly show the edge of all parkways zone plantings and sidewalks. 4. Where parkway plantings and slope plantings are not divided by a sidewalk or trail, provide landscaping in this zone. It is unlikely that these areas will be landscaped by the future homeowner, since they are not adjacent to the home's yard and will become an area where no one will assume responsibility. This could pose a soil erosion problem and also could be unsightly. 5. Provide the spacing for all slope shrub plantings so the shrub planting requirements can be verified. Low spreading woody shrubs must provide a minimum of 70% cover at maturity, except in fire protection zones where other requirements apply. (See comment #6). 6. Provide trees and/or large shrubs at a rate of 1 per 200 SF on all slopes that are 8' or greater in height, except in fire protection zones where other requirements apply. (See comment #6). 7. Since the time of installation is not a certainty, in lieu of hydro-seeding, it is advised that jute net or reinforced straw mats be installed with Myoporum groundcover from flats at 12" O.C. to insure rapid coverage that will deter erosion. The elimination of the hydro- seed will allow maintenance crews to more efficiently weed slopes and thus improve the success of the final permanent planting. This applies to all slope areas. 3 8. Show the Fire Protection Zones on the Planting Concept Plan where slopes abut natural areas. Adjust plantings to provide for the appropriate plantings as delineated in the Manual Section IV.F. Note: Show the zone lines as measured from the proposed structure, not from the edge of slope. It is noted that zones are shown on Sheet 4, but this sheet does not indicate how specifically the Fire Protection requirements and the Planting Concept Plan integrate. 9. Indicate the timing for house construction. If pads will not be improved within 6 months, provide for hydo-seeding for erosion control on the pads. 10. The planting legend indicates Zone 1, but that hatch and Zone does not occur on the planting plan. The hatch is similar to the hatch used in the Parkway Zone. 11. Is Zone 4 to remain as undisturbed native vegetation or is it to be planted? If so with what? Clearly specify the plans for this area. 12. All slopes are to be irrigated with a permanent automatically controlled irrigation system. 13. Provide two copies of all plans in your next submittal. • Barbara Kennedy - Rancho Milagro Page 1 From: To: Date: Subject: Barbara: "Pamela Elliott" <pamelliott@cox.net> "Barbara Kennedy" <bkenn@ci.carlsbad.ca.us> 04/07/2006 11:19:06 AM Rancho Milagro Attached is the conceptual review. Fencing and trails were included in the landscape plans that will require additional review by someone else to determine if they are acceptable. When the applicant resubmits, please route two copies to us for review. Thanks, Pam 858 654 1263 SDG&E 09:59:35 04-05-2006 1 /1 CITY OF CARLSBAD REVIEW AND COMMENT MEMO DATE: TO: March 27. 2006 REVISED PLANS * ENGINEERING - DEVELOPMENT SERViCES, ATTN: Jeremy Riddle FIRE DEPARTMENT - KARYN VAUDREUIL PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (STREETS) - THOMAS MOORE Cartsbad WATER/SEWER DISTRICT LANDSCAPE PLANCHECK CONSULTANT - LARRY BLACK rWCT SEMPRA ENERGY - LAND MANAGEMENT PARKSyTRAILS --till KETADIAM Always Send Exhibits FROM: Planning Department REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT ON PROJECT NO(S): GPA 04-19/ZC 04-14/ CT 04-24/SUP 05-05/HDP 04-11 PROJECTTITLE: APPLICANT: PROPOSAL: RANCHO MILAGRO Jack Henthorn & Associates 22 lot subdivision Please review and submit written comments and/or conditions to Barbara Kennedy, the Projeci Planner In the Planning Department at 1635 Faraday Avenue, bv April 20.2006. (If you have "No Comments", please so state.) If not received by the date indicated, it will be assumed that you have no comment and the proposal has your endorsement as submitted. If you have any questions, please contact Barbara at 602-4626. Tlie request for conditions wili follow at the appropriate time. THANK YOU COMMENTS: tl PLANS ATTACHED Review & Comment 01/06 npr 07 09 10:06a CflRLSBflD USD 7G0-729-4839 p. 1 CITY OF CARLSBAD REVIEW AND COMMENT MEiWO DATE: TO: March 27. 2006 REVISED PLANS * * ENGINEERING - DEVELOPMENT SERViCES, ATTN: Jeremy Riddle FiRE DEPARTMENT - KARYN VAUDREUIL PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT (STREETS) - THOMAS MOORE Carlsbad WATER/SEWER DiSTRiCT LANDSCAPE PLANCHECK CONSULTANT - LARRY BLACK Carisbad Unified SCHOOL DISTRICT SEMPRA ENERGY - LAND MANAGEMENT PARKS/TRAILS ~ LIZ KETABIAN Always Send Exhibits FROM: Planning Department REQUEST FOR REVIEW AND COMMENT ON PROJECT NO(S): GPA 04-19/ZC 04-14/ CT 04-24/SUP 05-05/HDP 04-11 PROJECT TITLE: APPLICANT: PROPOSAL: RANCHO MILAGRO Jack Henthorn & Associates 22 lot subdivision Please review and submit written comments and/or conditions to Barbara Kennedv. the Project Planner in the Planning Department at 1635 Faraday Avenue, bv April 20.2006. (If you have "No Comments", please so state.) If net received by the date Indicated, it will be assumed that you have no comment and the propossil has your endorsement as submitted. If you have any questions, please contact Barbara at (302-4626. The request for conditions will foliow at the appropriate time. THANK YOU COMMENTS: PLANS ATTACHED Review & Comment 01/06 City of Carlsbad ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT SERVICES MEMORANDUM September 29, 2005 TO: Barbara Kennedy, Planning FROM: Jeremy Riddle, Engineering'V^^ SUBJECT: 3"* ENGINEERING REVIEW OF RANCHO MILAGRO (CT 04-24, ZC 04-14, GPA 04-19, HDP 04-11) Engineering Department staff has completed the 2"'' review of the submittal for application completeness. The application and plans submitted for this project are incomplete and unsuitable for further review due to the following missing or incomplete items: Incomplete Items 1. Provide a letter of support from Mandana Cal Co. stating they do not object to this project. This company currently has rights to an easement per item 6 of the preliminary title report, dated August 19, 2004. 2. Revise the TM to depict the construction and extension of the existing sewer over the Agua Hedionda Creek crossing. Refer to redlines for clarification. 3. Where cross-lot drainage conditions occur, revise private drainage easements to specify the lots they will benefit. See previous redlines for clarifications. 4. Revise the preliminary Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) to provide numeric sizing criteria to ensure that structural (treatment) bmp measures for this project are adequate to filter storm water. Use either flow-based or volume-base criteria. Revise the TM to show the location of all biofiiters. Revise the SWMP to include a reduced exhibit of the TM and identify the locations of all treatment control bmp's for the project. ^ 2f. Revise the TM to show conceptual grading required for the road extension measured at least 200-ft from the subdivision boundary. This is the third time this comments has been repeated. Below 1 have also listed engineering concerns that should be addressed prior to final determination or conditioning: Engineering Concerns General 1. Please note that the adjacent development (Cantarini, CT 00-18) has undergone project modifications based on comments from the Regional Water Qualify Control Board (RWQCB). •Rancho Milagro 3'^ reviei September 29, 2005 Page 2 of 2 The adjacent project now contains the use of bioswales to freat run-off from public streets before discharge to the fributary areas. As a precaution, your project concept may change, if it can be shown that more efficient bmp's can be incorporated into the project. Per bmp handbooks, bio- swales are more efficient and removing the target pollutants-of-concem as compared to hydrodynamic separators. In a proactive effort, you may consider contacting the RWQCB to obtain early comments/feedback on the post-constmction bmp's you are choosing to ensure they are adequate. If changes are required, please revise the project now to incorporate more efficient bmp's. 2. It is our understanding the wildlife agencies may have concerns with the lots adjacent to the sensitive habitat crossing the properfy (near the arch culvert). If any changes are required to the Tentative Map based on agency input, staff may have additional comments based on new/revised information. 3. It is our understanding the 18" sewer reflected on dwg 361-6E may not need to be 18" in size. Per Bill Plummer, the fiiture anticipated sewer flows from the adjacent cify will not occur. Therefore the sewer must only be sized to serve this project and those others within the scope of the sumitted sewer study. Please revise the sewer study and TM exhibits to address the size of the sewer required per the revised estimated sewer flows. This is a repeat comment from the last review. 4. Revise the TM to provide private storm drain easements for the lot owners to maintain private rear-yard storm drains that traverse beyond the lots. Refer to redlines for clarification. 5. Revise the TM to depict and callout public storm drain easements that encompass public storm drain infrastructure that traverses outside public right-of-way. The current TM show multiple storm drains, headwalls and rip-rap down slopes that are not shown with proposed easements. 6. Revise the TM to provide/callout D-41 energy dissipaters on outlet structures where no physical maintenance access is provided for Cify maintenance staff (fypical). 7. The storm drain near the arch culvert appears to have two outlet locations. One drains to the habitat area, the other drains to the arch culvert. Revise the TM to clarify which outlet will be consfructed. 8. Revise the TM to address all redline comments as noted on the returned plans. Enclosed is a redlined check print of the project. This check print must be returned with the revised plans to facilitate continued staff review. If you have any questions, please call me at 602-2737. Attachment CARLSBAD FIRE DEPARTMENT Fire Prevention Division PROJECT CONDITION REPORT PROJECT NAME: Date: Project number: Staff Planner: Rancho Milagro 09/27/05 CT 04-24/HDP 04-11 B. Kennedy Engineer: Project conditions: (Note: The following identifies specific conditions necessary to achieve Fire Department approval.) Fire Department has reviewed this project application and have no comments or conditions to submit. GR CARLSBAD FIRE DEPARTMENT Fire Protection Services PLAN REVIEW REPORT PROJECT NAME: Rancho Milagro Date: 05/10/05 Project number: CT 04-24 Staff Planner: B. Kennedy Engineer: Initial review: (Note: This report identifies fire protection issues associated with the project, and/or prescribes specific corrections or information needed to achieve Fire Department approval.) After further review of this proposed subdivision application, it has become clear that all of the proposed lots would necessitate the installation of fire sprinklers if the absolute minimum rear set backs were used. It may be prudent to state now that all lots are required to have fire sprinklers regardless. Additionally the following lots shall be required to conform with the CA Building Code for one-hour fire resistive construction on those walls that face the Fire Protection Zones: Lots 1,2,3,4,10,20,21 and 22. GR City of Carlsbad ENGINEERING DEVELOPMENT SERVICES MEMORANDUM May 20, 2005 TO: Barbara Kennedy, Planning FROM: Jeremy Riddle, Engineering SUBJECT: 2"" ENGINEERING REVIEW OF RANCHO MILAGRO (CT 04-24, ZC 04-14, GPA 04-19, HDP 04-11) Engineering Department staff has completed the 2""* review ofthe submittal for application completeness. The application and plans submitted for this project are incomplete and unsuitable for fiirther review due to the following missing or incomplete items: Incomplete Items 1. Provide a letter of support from Mandana Cal Co. stating they do not object to this project. This company currently has rights to an easement per item 6 of the preliminary title report, dated August 19, 2004. 2. Provide a preliminary sewer study that outlines: a. existing sewer infrastmcture. b. proposed infrastmcture required to serve this project. c. addresses the feasibilify of providing adjacent lots with sewer. Since gravify sewer is required, staff requires assurance the sewer extended by this project can sewer the adjacent projects to the east and north. Verify depth of sewer along the easterly properfy line required to serve the adjacent properties. This project is required to extend sewer as required to serve this project along with future adjacent development. Although previously requested, no sewer study was provided with the resubmittal. 3. Revise the TM to depict the constmction and extension of the existing sewer over the Agua Hedionda Creek crossing. Show the terminus of the existing sewer and easements required for the extension of the public main. 4. Revise the TM to clearly depict and callout the limits of the proposed private road and utilify easement that will be granted over lot 24 for the benefit of adjacent properties. 5. Provide a letter of permission from the westerly adjacent property (APN 209-060-23, Barlow) stating their support in granting a proposed public sewer easement over their properfy as proposed on this TM. Staff needs assurance this sewer alignment is feasible 6. Indicate the disposition of each existing easement encumbering the property (to remain, be extinguished, relocated, etc.). For example, the existing easement to Mandana must be quitclaimed as it conflicts with proposed A Sfreet. Public sfreets must be dedicated to the Cify free and clear of all liens and encumbrances per Cify Standards. Clarify status of all other Rancho Milagro 2"" revi^ May 20, 2005 Page 2 of 3 easements. 7. Depict and callout proposed private drainage easements where cross-lot drainage conditions occur. See redlines for clarifications. 8. Revise the TM to callout proposed private ingress/egress and utility easements where driveways are shared between two adjacent properties. 9. Revise the preliminary Storm Water Management Plan (SWMP) to provide numeric sizing criteria to ensure that stmctural (treatment) bmp measures for this project are adequate to filter storm water. Use either flow-based or volume-base criteria. The SWMP should also discuss hydrodynamic separators in section 4.2.3 as they are listed as freatment bmp's in section 3.2. Include a cross-section of a biofilter as discussed in Section 4.2.3.2. Revise the TM to show the location of all biofiiters and hydrodynamic separators. Discuss maintenance obligations for hydrodynamic separators in Section 5. Revise the SWMP to include a reduced exhibit ofthe TM and identify the locations of all treatment confrol bmp's for the project. 10. Revise the TM to show conceptual grading required for the road extension measured at least 200- ft from the subdivision boundary. 11. Revise the TM to depict and callout the limits of 100-year inundation traversing the property (i.e: the namral watercourse carrying near 90+ cfs crossing "K" Sfreet). Below 1 have also listed engineering concems that should be addressed prior to final determination or conditioning: Engineering Concerns General 1. Revise the TM so lots 21 and 22 are incorporated with the "potential" remainder lots from CT 00- 18 as discussed in the EIR for CT 00-18. Ifthe developer has determined there is no desire to merge with these adjacent remainder lots (that from staffs view would benefit this project design), then add a note to sheet 3 of the TM stating the adjacent remainder lots will deleted from CT 00-18 and will not be available to merge with lots 21 and 22 ofthis project. Ifthe remainder lots are not desired, staff will not permit these remainder lots to be created as useless, non- buildable remainder lots without purpose. 2. Revise the preliminary geotechnical investigation, under page 16, to elaborate on the "suspicious feature" located near lots 5 and 6. Clarify if a soil boring(s) or other methods are required to help explore this feature. This report should clearly identify impacts such as remedial grading and/or slope restoration methods to address a potential landslide. Additional remedial grading may require grading outside the limits of this project, which may impact habitat. 3. Revise the TM to callout slopes (in percent) on all steep driveways. See redlines for clarification. Driveways shall not exceed 14% slope per standards. 4. Please consider revising the TM to delete the 8-inch recycled waterline extended through the subdivision. In order to save significant design and constmction cost, you may install an irrigation meter(s) near the northerly subdivision boundary (or along Street A within CT 00-18) 0 Rancho Milagro 2"^ revi May 20, 2005 Page 3 of 3 and then extend private irrigation lines (in the parkway) to those areas requiring slope irrigation within the subdivision. 5. Revise the TM to clarify why there are two potable waterlines (375 and 490 zone) proposed in A Sfreet. Explain the need for the 490-zone. It appears the 375-zone would be able to provide adequate pressure to the highest lot in the project (215-ft). The Cantarini project is proposing to extend only the 375-zone to the subdivision boundary. If a 490 zone is required, staff must know to coordinate the project needs. If a 490 is not needed, revise the 375-zone line so it is measured 8-ft off the curb per City Standards. 6. Redesign all storm drains discharges so they discharge in existing established watercourses versus over sloping terrain. Discharging on slopes leads to accelerated erosion and will not be permitted. Private pipes discharges should discharge to a combined rip-rap field and within a natural water course also. Refer to redlines for clarification. 7. Revise the TM to depict surface and utility improvements ending at the subdivision boundary. Clarify that no construction will occur offsite. Dash future improvements beyond the subdivision boundary. 8. Revise the TM to depict the location of all treatment confrol bmp's to be installed as part of the project. The SWMP lists hydrodynamic separators and bio-swales, but cannot be found on the TM. 9. Revise the TM to address all redline comments as noted on the retumed plans. Enclosed is a redlined check print of the project. This check print must be returned with the revised plans to facilitate continued staff review. If you have any questions, please call me at 602-2737. Attachment