Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutGPA 11-07; Robertson Ranch West Village Part I; General Plan Amendment (GPA)«~\ ~ CITY OF CARLSBAD LAND USE REVIEW APPLICATION P-1 Development Services Planning Division 1635 Faraday Avenue (760) 602-4610 www.carlsbadca.gov APPLICATIONS APPLIED FOR: (CHECK BOXES) Development Permits 0 Administrative Permit 0 Coastal Development Permit (*} 0 Minor 0 Conditional Use Permit (*) 0 Minor 0 Extension liJ Environmental Impact Assessmet:~t lil] Habitat Management Permit ~ Hillside Development Permit (*) 0 Planned Development Permit 0 Minor 0 Residential 0 Non-Residential 0 Planned Industrial Permit 0 Planning Commission Detennination 0 Site Development Plan I![] Special Use Pennit I![] Tentative Tract Map 0 Variance 0 Administrative (FOR DEPT. USE ONLY) Legislative Permits 0 General Plan Amendment 0 Local Coastal Program Amendment (*} [gJ Master Plan I![] Amendment 0 Specific Plan 0 Amendment 0 Zone Change (*} 0 Zone Code Amendment List other applications not specified 0 0 0 (*} = eligible for 25% discount (FOR DEPT. USE ONLY) ~P02D'?~ NOTE: A PROPOSED PROJECT REQUIRING MULTIPLE APPLICATIONS MUST BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO 3:30P.M. A PROPOSED PROJECT REQUIRING ONLY ONE APPLICATION MUST BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO 4:00P.M. ASSESSOR PARCEL NO(S}.: 208-010-40-00 PROJECTNAME: ROBERTSON RANCH WEST VILLAGE BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF THE 219.4 ACRE ROBERTSON RANCH WEST VILLAGE. DEVELOPMENT TO INCLUDE 688 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, A COMMERCIAL VILLAGE CENTER AND OPEN SPACES. BRIEF LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOTS E AND I OF RANCHO AGUA HEDIONDA, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUN'rY OF SAN DIEGO, ACCORDING TO MAP 823 IN THE OFFICE OF THE SAN DIEGO RECORDER. LOCATION OF PROJECT: 5056 EL CAMINO REAL ON THE: BElWEEN P-1 NORTH (NORTH, SOUTH, EAST, WEST} CANNON ROAD (NAME OF STREET} SIDE OF AND STREET ADDRESS EL CAMINO REAL (NAME OF STREET} TAMARACK AVENUE (NAME OF STREET} Page 1 of 5 Revised 07/10 0 0 OWNER NAME (Print): RANCHO COSTERA LLC APPLICANT NAME (Print): RANCHO COSTERA LLC MAILING ADDRESS: 8383 WILSHIRE BLVD 11700 MAILING ADDRESS: 8383 WILSHIRE BLVD 11700 CITY, STATE, ZIP: BEVERLY HILLS CA 90211 CITY, STATE, ZIP: BEVERLY HILLS CA 90211 TELEPHONE: 323.988.7518 TELEPHONE: 323.988.7518 - EMAIL ADDRESS: eEfahler@shaEell.com EMAIL ADDRESS: epfahler@shapell.com I CERTIFY THAT I AM THE LEGAL OWNER AND THAT ALL THE ABOVE I CERTIFY THAT I AM THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE OWNER INFORMATION IS TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY AND THAT ALL THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE AND CORRECT TO KNOWLEDGE. ~~M~ ~ THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. -/l""'h~ SIGNATU~~ DATE SIGNATII~~ DATE -r-- APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE (Print): PAUL J KLUKAS -PLANNING SYSTEMS MAILING ADDRESS: 1530 FARADAY AVE #100 CITY, STATE, ZIP: CARLSBAD CA 92008 TELEPHONE: 760.931.0780 EMAIL ADDRESS: Eklukas@Elannin~s~stems.net I CERTIFY THAT I AM THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE APPLICANT AND THAT ALL THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. SIGNATURE DATE IN THE PROCESS OF REVIEWING THIS APPLICATION IT MAY BE NECESSARY FOR MEMBERS OF CITY STAFF, PLANNING COMMISSIONERS OR CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS TO INSPECT AND ENTER THE PROPERTY THAT IS THE SUBJECT OF THIS APPLICATION. IM/E CONSENT TO ENTRY FOR THIS PURPOSE. NOTICE OF RESTRICTION: PROPERTY OWNER ACKNOWLEDGES AND CONSENTS TO A NOTICE OF RESTRICTION BEING RECORDED ON THE TITLE TO HIS PROPERTY IF CONDITIONED FOR THE APPLICANT. NOTICE OF RESTRICTIONS RUN WITH THE LAND AND BIND ANY SUCCESSORS IN INTEREST. ~ FOR CITY USE ONLY P-1 Page 2 of 5 RECE MA'< 0 9 2011 CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANN\NG DEPT DATE STAMP APPLICATION RECEIVED RECEIVED BY: I ~ Revised 07/10 ~~--~~----------------~r-~--------------------------~'"~----------------------~ -~ DISCLOSURE Develooment Services «·~' ¥ CITY OF STATE ME Nl:.-----·---.. ·----------- 1 P-1 (A) r CITY oF CARLSBAD, Planning Division 1635 Faraday Avenue (760) 602-4610 CARLSBAD '"" ., 71'r'il I' ! ,·<, ~ L.,.t.,.l ·~ I www.carlsbadca.gov .Pt td\!1\itr~.v·· nj;: •;; t.d.i t :~~·~=t~.rr l Applicant's statement or disclosure of certain ownership interests on all applications which will require discretionary action on the part of the 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. 2. P-1(A) 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, 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 publicly-owned corporation, include the names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if necessary.) Person / Corp/Part KA-Nc,Ho C.Os•eRA-LL<!- Title __ ___,_NL.J/'-Lft_.__"'?'Z"'----- Address ___ t __ / _____ _ OWNER (Not the owner's agent) Title 0 ().:) N e:-R. Address &3 'ls"~ lAJtLSlkllC-e f?.L\ID 4J.-(oo 'BE?V~.e.LY H-L L..u;. c.A '1 t>ZI I 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 publicly-owned corporation, include the names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if necessary.) Person _______ ___, __ _ Corp/Part RAN~ ~n?AA Lt-C- Title·-----:-1-+---~----Title __ _;:D;...;~;....._N~I?R.-J...:....::::;.._ _______ _ Address ~3'iS3 W\L.S~·Hi<E f:>L.\./D .1-l /OD Page 1 of2 Revised 07/10 . , c 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 trustee or beneficiary of the. Non Profit/Trust / Non Profit/Trust. ____ -+------ Title ____ ---+r!fl~:tt~V __ _ Address __________ _ 4. Have you had more than $500 worth of business transacted with any member of City staff, Boards, Commissions, Committees and/or Council within the past twelve (12) months? D Yes JZJ No If yes, please indicate person(s): ___________ _ NOTE: Attach additional sheets if necessary. fu.J~f'51Hhe above information is true and correct to the best of my knowledge. \ ' , Pf"--A ~~ C--f ~~ 0' o , ~(2---~ · ~ Z7r (L- Signature of owner/date Signature of applicant/date Wlt-Ut4M f. Wesr J ~r[)elV( Print or type name of owner {)JtLJ....t~ f'~ I,Jfesr. ~/~( Print or type name of applic~nt Signature of owner/applicant's agent if applicable/date Print or type name of owner/applicant's agent P-1{A) Page 2 of2 Revised 07/10 , c Shapell Land Company LLC is the sole owner of Rancho Costera LLC RANCHO COSTERA LLC, a Delaware limited liability company By: Nrune: ________________________ _ Title: Rancho Costera LLC Officers: Willirun P. West, President Tim Saunders, Vice President Jon H. Sasaki, Treasurer Thomas A. Ingrrun, Secretary City of Carlsbad Faraday Center J' Faraday Cashiering 001 1227901-2 10/05/2012 98 Fri, Oct 05, 2012 08:51 AM Receipt Ref Nbr: R1227901-2/0003 PERMITS -PERMITS Tran Ref Nbr: 122790102 0003 0003 Trans/Rcpt#: R0091597 SET #: CT110001 Amount: Item Subtota 1 : Item Tot a 1: ITEM(S) TOTAL: Check (Chk# 002326) Total Received: Have a nice day! 1 @ $446.14 $446.14 $446.14 $446. 14 $446.14 $446.14 **************CUSTOMER COPY************* )I City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 I IIIII ill Ill~ 111111111111111~~ IIIII Applicant: RANCHO COSTERA LLC Description Amount CT110001 446.14 5056 EL CAMINO REAL CBAD Receipt Number: R0091597 Transaction ID: R0091597 Transaction Date: 10/05/2012 Pay Type Method Description Amount Payment Check 446.14 Transaction Amount: 446.14 --------------------------------------------------------------------------· «~~; ~ CITY OF CARLSBAD APPLICATIONS APPLIED FOR: (CHECK BOXES) LAND USE REVIEW APPLICATION P-1 Development Services Planning Division 1635 Faraday Avenue (760) 602-4610 www.carlsbadca.gov Development Permits (FOR DEPT. USE ONLY) Legislative Permits (FOR DEPT. USE ONLY) D Administrative Permit D Coastal Development Permit(*) D Minor D Conditional Use Permit (*) D Minor D Extension D Environmental Impact Assessment D Habitat Management Permit D Minor D Hillside Development Permit (*) D Planned Development Permit D Residential D Non-Residential D Planned Industrial Permit D Planning Commission Determination D Site Development Plan D Special Use Permit D Tentative Tract Map D Variance D Administrative ~ General Plan Amendment D Local Coastal Program Amendment (*) D Master Plan D Amendment D Specific Plan D Amendment D Zone Change (*) D Zone Code Amendment List other applications not specified D D D (*) = eligible for 25% discount 1---------l NOTE: A PROPOSED PROJECT REQUIRING MULTIPLE APPLICATIONS MUST BE SUBMITIED PRIOR TO 3:30P.M. A PROPOSED PROJECT REQUIRING ONLY ONE APPLICATION MUST BE SUBMITIED PRIOR TO 4:00 P.M. ASSESSOR PARCEL NO(S).: 208-010-40-00 PROJECT NAME: ROBERTSON RANCH WEST VILLAGE GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: MODIFICATION OF GENERAL PLAN BOUNDARIES BRIEF LEGAL DESCRIPTION: LOTS E AND I OF RANCHO AGUA HEDIONDA, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, ACCORDING TO MAP 823 IN THE OFFICE OF THE SAN DIEGO RECORDER. LOCATION OF PROJECT: 5056 EL CAMINO REAL ON THE: NORTH (NORTH, SOUTH, EAST, WEST) BETWEEN CANNON ROAD (NAME OF STREET) P-1 SIDE OF AND STREET ADDRESS EL CAMINO REAL (NAME OF STREET) TAMARACK AVENUE (NAME OF STREET) %-V l\011 Page 1 of 5 Revised 07/10 c OWNER NAME (Print): RANCHO COSTERA LLC APPLICANT NAME (Print): RANCHO COSTERA LLC MAILING ADDRESS: 8383 WILSHIRE BLVD. 1700 MAILING ADDRESS: 8383 WILSHIRE BLVD. 1700 CITY, STATE, ZIP: BEVERLY HILLS I CA 90211 CITY, STATE, ZIP: BEVERLY HILLS1 CA 90211 TELEPHONE: {232} 288-7518 TELEPHONE: {232} 288-7518 EMAIL ADDRESS: egfahle~!shagell.~am EMAIL ADDRESS: egfahle~shagell.~am I CERTIFY THAT I AM THE LEGAL OWNER AND THAT ALL THE ABOVE I CERTIFY THAT I AM THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE OWNER INFORMATION IS TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY AND THAT ALL THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE AND CORRECT TO KNOWLEDGE. THE BEST OF MY KNOWLEDGE. (SEE ATTACHED) (SEE ATTACHED) SIGNATURE DATE SIGNATURE DATE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE (Print): PAUL J. KLUKAS -PLANNING SYSTEMS MAILING ADDRESS: 1530 FARADAY AVE. 1100 CITY, STATE, ZIP: CARLSBAD, CA 92008 TELEPHONE: (76) 931-0780 EMAIL ADDRESS: pk1ukas@p1anninqsystems.net I CERTIFY THAT I AM THE LEGAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE AP~~NT AND THAT ALL THE ABOVE INFORMATION IS TRUE AND c~~E\ o~wLEDGE. S} I 0 / (I SIG~TURE J DAtE I IN THE PROCESS OF REVIEWING THIS APPLICATION IT MAY BE NECESSARY FOR MEMBERS OF CITY STAFF, PLANNING COMMISSIONERS OR CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS TO INSPECT AND ENTER THE PROPERTY THAT IS THE SUBJECT OF THIS APPLICATION. 1/WE CONSENT TO ENTRY FOR THIS PURPOSE. NOTICE OF RESTRICTION: PROPERTY OWNER ACKNOWLEDGES AND CONSENTS TO A NOTICE OF RESTRICTION BEING RECORDED ON THE TITLE TO HIS PROPERTY IF CONDITIONED FOR THE APPLICANT. NOTICE OF RESTRICTIONS RUN WITH THE LAND AND BIND ANY SUCCESSORS IN INTEREST. (SEE ATTACHED) PROPERTY OWNER SIGNATURE FOR CITY USE ONLY P-1 Page 2 of 5 RECEIVED SEP 0 1 2011 CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DEPT DATE STAMP APPLICATION RECEIVED RECEIVED BY: I ~ Revised 07/10 c RANCHO COSTERA LLC, By: Name: F£d7< Title: ~/(;)E7l// «~,, ~ CITY OF CARLSBAD PROJECT DESCRIPTION P-1(8) Development Services Planning Division 1635 Faraday Avenue (760) 602-4610 www.carlsbadca.gov PROJECTNAME: ____ R_o_b_e_rt_so_n_R_an __ c_h_VV __ es_t_V_i_lla~g~e ________________________ __ APPLICANT NAME: ---=-R=an~c.=.:h=o:.....C:::..o:::..:s::..:;te::.:or.=.a-==L:..=L:....::C:...__ ___________________________ _ Please describe fully the proposed project by application type. 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: The proposed project involves modifications to land use policy documents and master tentative subdivision map over the 219.4 acres VVest Village property of the Robertson Ranch. A package of several policy and permit actions are requested; a Master Plan Amendment, a Master Tentative Tract Map, a Hillside Development Permit, a Special Use Permit and a Habitat Management Plan Permit. The VV est Village Final residential Land Uses include a total of 688 dwelling units in six single~family and cluster single family residential neighborhoods and two multifamily neighborhoods. Single family neighborhoods within the VV est Village include 318 dwelling units which are distributed as follows: 24 units on 8,500 square-foot minimum lots, 78 units on 6,000 square-foot minimum lots, 65 units on 5,000 square-foot minimum lots, 89 units on 4,000 square-foot lots, and 62 units on cluster single family 3,500 square-foot minimum lots. The two high-density multifamily neighborhoods include a total of370 dwelling units, including the required inclusionary housing units and a maximum of 56 units of moderate income housing. In addition to the residential component of the Master Plan, the VV est Village provides a 11.5 net-acre Village Center which will accommodate commercial uses and all or a portion ofthe project's 5.0-acre community facilities requirement. The Village Center also could be developed as a mixed use project and is expected to include joint-use parking facilities. The Master Plan Community Facilities requirements will be accommodated in whole or in part within the Village Center. The VVest Village also provides a public park site on 13.9 acres, RV storage (within Planning Area 2), and 1.0- net acre of centralized community recreation for the surrounding neighborhoods. The VV est Village provides approximately 81.5 acres of open space, mostly located within the wildlife corridor, as well as recreation and circulation trails to encourage alternative transportation methods. P-1(B) Page 1 of 1 Revised 07/10 .. «~' ~ CITY OF CARLSBAD HAZARDOUS WASTE AND SUBSTANCES STATEMENT P-1(C) Development Services Planning Division 1635 Faraday Avenue (760) 602-4610 www.carlsbadca.gov Consultation of Lists of Sites Related to Hazardous Wastes (Certification of Compliance with Government Code Section 65962.5) Pursuant to State of California Government Code Section 65962.5, I have consulted the Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List compiled by the California Environmental Protection Agency and hereby certify that (check one): [i] The development project and any alternatives proposed in this application are not contained on the lists compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the State Government Code. D The development project and any alternatives proposed in this application are contained on the lists compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 of the State Government Code. APPLICANT PROPERTY OWNER Name:_Ra_n_c_h_o_c_o_s_t_e_r_a_LLC ________ _ Name: __ Ra_n_c_h_o_C_o_s_t_e_r_a_LLC __ _ Address: 8383 Wi1shire B1vd. 1700 Address: 8383 Wi1shire B1vd. 1700 Bever1y Hi11s, CA 90211 Bever1y Hi11s, CA 90211 Phone Number: (323) 988-7518 Phone Number: (323) 988-7518 Address of Site: Robertson Ranch West Vi11aqe Local Agency (City and County): City of Car1sbad, County of San Dieao Assessor's book, page, and parcel number:_2_1_4_-_0_1_0_-_4_0_-o_;_o.:...._ _____________ _ Specify list(s): Hazardous Waste and Substances Site List Regulatory Identification Number: ________________________ _ Date of List: 10/21/08 ----5 U AT7/f cl-/ Ci'J ------ Applicant Signature/Date Property Owner Signature/Date The Hazardous Waste and Substances Sites List (Cortese List) is used by the State, local agencies and developers to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act requirements in providing information about the location of hazardous materials release sites. P-1(C) Page 1 of2 Revised 07/10 c .. By: Name: EIZ!K fFA+f~ . ' Title: Pt:J:?st/21:Q\fl «~';} ~ CITY OF CARLSBAD TIME LIMITS ON DISCRETIONARY PROJECTS P-1(E) PLEASE NOTE: Development Services Planning Division 1635 Faraday Avenue {760) 602-4610 www.carlsbadca.gov 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 upon the date of the completion letter. If you have any questions regarding application submittal requirements (i.e., clarification regarding a specific requirement or whether all requirements are necessary for your particular application) please call (760) 602-4610. Applicant Signature: Staff Signature: Date: To be stapled with receipt to the application P-1 (E) Page 1 of 1 Revised 07/10 ROBERTSO NCH WEST VILLAGE -"RAN 0 COSTERA" PHOTOGRAPHS (5-6-11) View southwest onto West Village from East Village (under construction) View west onto West Village from East Village (under construction) View north onto West Village from El Camino Real at Lisa St. View northwest onto West Village from El Camino Real at Lisa St. View onto West Village from El Camino Real/ Tamarack Ave. intersection. View southeast onto West Village from near north property boundary near Glasgow St. stub. • View south onto West Village from near north property boundary near Glasgow St. stub. c 0 Chicago Title Company Builders Services Division 2365 Northside Drive, Suite 500, San Diego, CA 92108 (619) 521-3400 Title Department: Chicago Title Company Attn: Tom Votel/Ken Cyr Email: votelt@ctt.com & ken.cyr@ctt.com Phone: (619) 521-3553 & (619) 521-3555 Fax: (619) 521-3608 Order No.: 930022073-050 PRELIMINARY REPORT Property Address: 5056 El Camino Real Carlsbad, Ca. Dated as of: March 16, 2011 at 7:30am In response to the application for a policy of title insurance referenced herein, Chicago Title Company hereby reports that it is prepared to issue, or cause to be issued, as of the date hereof, a policy or policies of Title Insurance describing the land and the estate or interest therein hereinafter set forth, insuring against loss which may be sustained by reason of any defect, lien or encumbrance not shown or referred to as an Exception herein or not excluded from coverage pursuant to the printed Schedules, Conditions and Stipulations or Conditions of said Policy forms. The printed Exceptions and Exclusion from the coverage and Limitations on Covered Risks of said Policy or Policies are set forth in Attachment One. The policy to be issued may contain an arbitration clause. When the Amount of Insurance is less than that se forth in the arbitration clause, all arbitrable matters shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or the Insured as the exclusive remedy of the parties. Limitations on Covered Risks applicable to the CLTA and ALTA Homeowner's Policies ofTitle Insurance which establish a Deductible Amount and a Maximum Dollar Limit of Liability for certain coverages are also set forth in Attachment One. Copies of the policy forms should be read. They are available from the office which issued this report. This report (and any supplements or amendments hereto) is issued solely for the purpose of facilitating the issuance of a policy of title insurance and no liability is assumed hereby. If it is desired that liability be assumed prior to the issuance of a policy of title insurance, a Binder or Commitment should be requested. The policy(s) oftitle insurance to be issued hereunder will be policy(s) of Chicago Title Insurance Company Please read the exceptions shown or referred to herein and the exceptions and exclusions set forth in Attachment One of this report carefully. The exceptions and exclusions are meant to provide you with notice of matters which are not covered under the terms of the title insurance policy and should be carefully considered. It is important to note that this preliminary report is not a written representation as to the condition of title and may not list all liens, defects, and encumbrances affecting title to the land CALIFORNIA LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION STANDARD COVERAGE POLICY CLTA Preliminary Report Form-Modified (11-17-06) Page I .f ~----------~----~~-------------------c Order No.: 930022073-USO SCHEDULE A 1. The estate or interest in the land hereinafter described or referred to covered by this report is: A Fee 2. Title to said estate or interest at the date hereof is vested in: Rancho Costera LLC, a Delaware limited liability company 3. The land referred to in this report is situated in the State of California, County of San Diego and is described in the Legal Description, attached hereto: END OF SCHEDULE A CLTA Preliminary Report Form-Modified (11-17-06) Page2 c Order No.: 930022073-USO LEGAL DESCRIPTION ALL THAT PORTION OF LOTS "E" AND "I" OF RANCHO AGUA HEDIONDA, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO PARTITION MAP THEREOF NO. 823, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID SAN DIEGO COUNTY, NOVEMBER 16, 1896 DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF RECORD OF SURVEY 16661, BEING ALSO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF CT 76-12 PER MAP 9935, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY ON JULY 14, 2000 AND DECEMBER 16, 1980 RESPECTIVELY; THENCE SOUTH 1°42'35" WEST 1619.75 FEET, SOUTH 63°42'38" EAST 313.13 SOUTH 73°19'52" EAST 230.87 FEET, SOUTH 4°56'41" EAST 472.54 FEET, SOUTH 67°15'16" WEST 15.60 FEET, SOUTH 53°49'59" WEST 241.03, FEET SOUTH 46°32'58" WEST 281.65 FEET, SOUTH 24°02'16" WEST 40.09 FEET, SOUTH 37°46'23" WEST 139.56 FEET, SOUTH 42°27'17" WEST 23.56 FEET, SOUTH, 31°48'12" WEST 60.19 FEET, SOUTH 29°07'38" WEST 77.37 FEET, SOUTH 25°38'31" WEST 100.08 FEET, SOUTH 23°31'32" WEST 109.80 FEET, NORTH 82°48'22" WEST 72.17 FEET, SOUTH 32°44'07" WEST 16.78 FEET TO A POINT IN THE NORTH LINE OF THAT 90 FOOT STRIP OF LAND SHOWN ON ROAD SURVEY NO. 1800-1; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID 90 FOOT STRIP, BEING A CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 6855.31 FEET A DISTANCE OF 476.75 FEET; THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 3°59'05' THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE, NORTH 60°32'15" WEST 449.43 FEET (N60°25'46" W 449.30R) TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE TO THE SOUTH AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 2045.09 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 31°40'36"; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE 1,130.65 FEET; THENCE, TANGENT TO SAID CURVE, SOUTH 87°47'10"WEST( RECORD NORTH 87° 47' 10'EAST) 761.88 FEET TO A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE TO THE NORTH AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 1555.07 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 43°01 '37"; THENCE, WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE 1167.80 FEET; THENCE, TANGENT TO SAID CURVE NORTH 49°11'14" WEST 511.31 FEET TO A TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE TO THE SOUTH AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 2045.09 FEET, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 5°23'02"; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG SAID CURVE 192.17 FEET TO A POINT, SAID POINT BEING THE INTERSECTION OF THE NORTH LINE OF SAID ROAD SURVEY 1800-1 AND THE EAST LINE OF RECORD OF SURVEY NO. 8927 FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY ON FEBRUARY 4, 1982; THENCE NORTHERLY AND EASTERLY ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID RECORD OF SURVEY NO. 8927; NORTH 35°25'44" EAST 55.00 FEET (35°27'02" E 55.00' R) NORTH 44°53'07" WEST 132.79 FEET (N44°51 '49" W 132.79' R) NORTH 31 °52'21" EAST 69.52 FEET (N31°53'39" E 69.52' R) NORTH 36°53'17" EAST 92.46 FEET (N36°54'35" E 92.46' R) NORTH 42°37'04" EAST 92.46 FEET (N42°38'22" E 92.46' R) NORTH 48°26'33" EAST 92.75 FEET (N48°22'09" E 92.46' R) NORTH 63°26'12" E 92.35 FEET (N63°22'33" E 92.93' R) NORTH 47°38'51" EAST 94.49 FEET (N47°34'26" E 94.11' R) NORTH 78°03'31" EAST 93.72 FEET (N77°48'51" E 94.10' R) NORTH 77°30'47" EAST 91.01 FEET (N77°35'14" E 91.01' R) NORTH 76°56'34" EAST 89.97 FEET (N77°01 '01" E 89.97' R) NORTH 64°32'02" EAST 96.25 FEET (N64°36'30" E 96.25' R) NORTH 84°58'35" EAST 96.38 FEET (N85°03'02"E 96.03' R) NORTH 89°31'55" EAST 100.00 FEET (N89°01'00" E) 100.00' R) NORTH 88°50'52" EAST 100.13 FEET (N89°00'56" E 100.13' R) NORTH 85°52'25" EAST 106.46 FEET(N86°02'29" E 106.46' R) SOUTH 86°48'16" EAST 110.56 FEET (N86°38'12" W 110.56' R) NORTH 61°21 '44" EAST 110.57 FEET (N61 °31 '48E 110.56' R) NORTH 66°10'33" EAST 106.20 FEET (N66°09'36" E 106.32' R) NORTH 60°33'09" EAST 105.87 FEET (N60°25'04" E 105.83' R) NORTH 54°35'52" EAST 104.85 FEET (N54°44'11" E 104.55' R) NORTH 55°32'10" EAST 99.66 FEET (N55°24'00" E 100.00' R) NORTH 58°20'10" EAST 100.12 FEET (58°15'45" E 100.12' R) NORTH 58°14'41" EAST 100.18 FEET CLTA Preliminary Report Form-Modified (11-17-06) Page 3 c LEGAL DESCRIPTION (continued) 0 Order No.: 930022073-USO (N58°15'45" E 100.13' R) NORTH 55°22'41" EAST 99.96 FEET (N55°24'00" E 100.00' R) NORTH 52°29'55" EAST 100.20 FEET (N52°32'14" E 100.13' R) NORTH 51°34'19" EAST 103.75 FEET (N51 °19'35E 103.56' R) NORTH 48°25'31" EAST 104.73 FEET (N48°41 '45" E 104.95' R) NORTH 42°59'01" EAST 104.95 FEET (N42°57'58" E 104.96' R) NORTH 41°35'15" EAST 101.54 FEET (N41 °31 '05" E 101.58' R) NORTH 41 °19'05" EAST 100.09 FEET (N4J018'45" E 100.13' R) NORTH 38'24'41" EAST 99.98 FEET (N38°27'00" E 100.00' R) NORTH 37°43'45" EAST 106.34 FEET (N37°30'57" E 106.26' R) TO THE WESTERLY PROLONGATION OF THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF CT 76.12 PER MAP 9935; THENCE SOUTH 89°25'37" EAST (S89°25'10" E R) 2088.48 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING AS DESCRIBED IN CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE RECORDED NOVEMBER 28, 2001 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 2001-0865065 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS. EXCEPT THEREFROM THAT PORTION THEREOF DESCRIBED IN DEED TO THE CITY OF CARLSBAD RECORDED AUGUST 14, 2008 AS FILE NO. 2008-0435947, OFFICIAL RECORDS, BEING THAT PORTION OF PARCEL 2 OF LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT ADJ 01-13 PER CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE CE 01-55, RECORDED NOVEMBER 28, 2001 AS FILE NO. 2001-0865065, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 2, SAID POINT BEING THE MOST SOUTHERLY CORNER OF THAT PORTION OF WIND TRAIL WAY GRANTED TO THE CITY OF CARLSBAD ACCORDING TO DOCUMENT NO. 2007-0388769 FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY ON JUNE 8, 2007; THENCE ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE THE FOLLOWING BEARINGS AND DISTANCES: SOUTH 04°56'41" EAST 35.81 FEET; SOUTH 67°15'16" WEST 15.60 FEET; SOUTH 53°49'59" WEST 241.03 FEET; SOUTH 46°32'58" WEST 281.65 FEET; SOUTH 24°02'16" WEST 40.09 FEET; SOUTH 37°46'23" WEST 139.56 FEET; SOUTH 42°27'17" WEST 23.56 FEET; SOUTH 31 °48'12" WEST 60.19 FEET; SOUTH 29°07'38" WEST 77.37 FEET; SOUTH 25°38'31" WEST 9.96 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID EASTERLY LINE NORTH 47°23'48" WEST 71.12 FEET; THENCE NORTH 66°34'56" WEST 16.06 FEET; THENCE 49°00'19" WEST 21.99 FEET; THENCE NORTH 50°46'26" WEST 46.12 FEET; THENCE NORTH 47°39'34" WEST 32.41 FEET; THENCE NORTH 47°55'10" WEST 40.97 FEET; THENCE NORTH 48°21'33" WEST 30.47 FEET TO A POINT ON A NON-TANGENT 1,730.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE, CONCAVE TO THE SOUTHEAST, A RADIAL TO SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 60°40'04" EAST; THENCE NORTHEASTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 34°33'01" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 1,043.22 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID WIND TRAIL WAY, SAID POINT BEING ON A NON-TANGENT 50.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE TO THE WEST, A RADIAL TO SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 81°46'14" EAST; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID WIND TRAIL WAY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 3°54'16" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 3.41 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A REVERSING 594.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID WIND TRAIL WAY, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 20°03'38" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 207.97 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CLTA Preliminary Report Form-Modified (11-17-06) Page4 c LEGAL DESCRIPTION (continued) Order No.: 930022073-USO ALSO EXCEPT THEREFROM THAT PORTION THEREOF DESCRIBED IN DEED TO THE CITY OF CARLSBAD RECORDED MAY 11, 2009 AS FILE NO. 2009-0247694, OFFICIAL RECORDS, BEING THAT PORTION OF PARCEL 2 OF LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT ADJ 01-13 PER CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE CE 01-55, RECORDED NOVEMBER 28, 2001 AS FILE NO. 2001-0865065, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: THAT PORTION OF PARCEL 2 OF LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT ADJ 01-13 PER CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE CE 03-55, RECORDED NOVEMBER 28,2001 AS FILE NO. 2001-0865065, IN THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE MOST NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF THAT PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN DOCUMENT NO. 2008-0435946 FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY ON AUGUST 14, 2008; THENCE NORTH 00°14'53" WEST 4.75 FEET; THENCE NORTH 16°32'33" EAST 22.22 FEET; THENCE NORTH 17°41 '43" EAST 25.83 FEET; THENCE NORTH 20°05'59" EAST 24.51 FEET; THENCE NORTH 23°44'32" EAST 26.06 FEET; THENCE NORTH 28°18'16" EAST 27.22 FEET; THENCE NORTH 31°28'07" EAST 28.46 FEET; THENCE NORTH 33°10'05" EAST 30.06 FEET; THENCE NORTH 37°23'17" EAST 15.91 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 60°10'35" EAST 489.73 FEET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID PROPERTY; THENCE ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE SOUTH 51°18'20" WEST 65.43 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 42.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE TO THE NORTHWEST; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE, ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 27°18'10" AN ARC DISTANCE OF 20.01 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE THE FOLLOWING BEARINGS AND DISTANCES; SOUTH 78°36'30" WEST 74.10 FEET; SOUTH 42°931 '50" WEST 78.50 FEET; NORTH 60°10'35" WEST 365.48 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. APN: 208-010-40 END OF LEGAL DESCRIPTION CLTA Preliminary Report Form-Modified (11-17-06) Page 5 c Order No.: 930022073-USO SCHEDULED At the date hereof, items to be considered and exceptions to coverage in addition to the printed Exceptions and Exclusions in said policy form would be as follows: 1. Property taxes, including any assessments collected with taxes, for the fiscal year 2011 -2012 that are a lien not yet due. 2. Property taxes, including any personal property taxes and any assessments collected with taxes, for the fiscal year 2010 -20 11 1st Installment: 2nd Installment: Penalty and Cost: Homeowners Exemption: Code Area: Assessors Parcel Number: $43,548.54 (Paid) $43,548.54 $4,364.85 (Due after April 10) $none 09162 208-010-40 3. The lien of supplemental taxes, if any, assessed pursuant to the provlSlons of Chapter 3.5 (commencing with Section 75) of the revenue and taxation code of the State of California 4. Water rights, claims or title to water, whether or not shown by the public records. 5. An easement for the purpose shown below and rights incidental thereto as set forth in a document. Granted To: Purpose: Recorded: Affects: Oceanside Municipal Water Co., a corporation pipeline July 11, 1930 as Instrument No. 33022, in book 1796, page 142 of Deeds The route thereof affects a portion of said land and is more fully described in said document. 6. The privilege and right to extend drainage structures and excavation and embankment slopes beyond the limits of El Camino Real, where required for the construction and maintenance of said highway, as contained in the deed recorded March 10, 1936 as Instrument No. 16633 in Book 479, page 341 of Official Records and June 12, 1936 as Instrument No. 33744, in Book 521, page 230 of Official Records 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, egress November 27, 1951 as Instrument No. 143719 in Book 4302, page 427 of Official Records The route thereof affects a portion of said land and is more fully described in said document. CLTA Preliminary Report Form-Modified (11-17-06) Page 6 c SCHEDULEB (continued) Order No.: 930022073-USO 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, egress June l, 1953 as Instrument No. 74511 in Book 4874, page 143 of Official Records The route thereof affects a portion of said land and is more fully described in said document. 9. 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, egress June l, 1953 as Instrument No. 74512 in Book 4874, page 148 of Official Records The route thereof affects a portion of said land and is more fully described in said document. 10. An easement for the purpose shown below and rights incidental thereto as set forth in a document. Granted To: Purpose: Recorded: Affects: Carlsbad Municipal Water District a pipeline or pipelines for any and all purposes, together with their necessary fixtures and appurtenances including but not limited to conduits and cables for power transmission and communication June 16, 1961 as Instrument No. 96185 or Official Records The route thereof affects a portion of said land and is more fully described in said document. 11. 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, egress June 16, 1966 as Instrument No. 98887 of Official Records The route thereof affects a portion of said land and is more fully described in said document. 12. An easement for the purpose shown below and rights incidental thereto as set forth in a document. Granted To: Purpose: Recorded: Affects: The County of San Diego the construction and maintenance of a drainage channel March 12, 1970 as Instrument No. 44687 of Official Records The route thereof affects a portion of said land and is more fully described in said document. 13. 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, egress CLTA Preliminary Report Form-Modified (11-17-06) Page 7 c Recorded: Affects: SCHEDULER (continued) Order No.: 930022073-U50 November 20, 1970 as Instrument No. 213363 of Official Records The route thereof affects a portion of said land and is more fully described in said document. 14. An easement for the purpose shown below and rights incidental thereto as set forth in a document. Granted To: Purpose: Recorded: Affects: The City of Carlsbad drainage July 2, 1974 as Instrument No. 74-177855 of Official Records The route thereof affects a portion of said land and is more fully described in said document. 15. A document entitled "Parkland Agreement for the Robertson Ranch Master Plan", dated, October 27, 2006, executed by City of Carlsbad, a municipal corporation, Gary Robertson and Brian Robertson as co-successors trustee of the Robertson Family 1995 trust, dated April 19, 1995, as to an undivided one half interest, Gary Robertson and Brian Robertson co-trustees under Declaration oftrust dated October 8, 1976, as to an undivided 7% interest; and Gary Robertson and Brian Robertson, co-successor trustees of the Elsie M. Kelly Irrevocable trust dated June 19, 1989 as to an undivided 43% interest and Calavera Hills II, LLC, a California limited liability company, subject to all the terms, provisions and conditions therein contained, recorded January 31, 2007 as Instrument No. 2007-0066979 of Official Records. Reference is hereby made to said document for full particulars. 16. A document entitled "Parkland Purchase Agreement", dated, October 27, 2006, executed by Gary Robertson and Brian Robertson, as co-successors trustees of the Robertson Family 1995 trust dated April19, 1995, as to an undivided one-half interest, Gary Robertson and Gary Robertson co- trustees under Declaration of trust dated October 8, 1976, as to an undivided 7% interest, and Gary Robertson and Brian Robertson, co-successor trustees of the Elsie M. Kelly Irrevocable Trust dated June 19, 1989 as to an undivided 43% interest and City of Carlsbad, a municipal corporation, subject to all the terms, provisions and conditions therein contained, recorded January 31, 2007 as Instrument No. 2007-0066990 of Official Records. Reference is hereby made to said document for full particulars. 17. An easement for the purpose shown below and rights incidental thereto as set forth in a document. Granted To: Purpose: Recorded: Affects: City of Carlsbad Public Street and Public Utility June 8, 2007 as File No. 2007-0388769 of Official Records The route thereof affects a portion of said land and is more fully described in said document. 18. An easement for the purpose shown below and rights incidental thereto as set forth in a document. Granted To: Purpose: Recorded: City of Carlsbad, a municipal corporation public pedestrian access June 8, 2007 as Instrument No. 2007-0388770 of Official Records CLTA Preliminary Report Form-Modified (11-17-06) Page 8 c Affects: SCHEDULEB (continued) Order No.: 930022073~U50 The route thereof affects a portion of said land and is more fully described in said document 19. An easement for the purpose shown below and rights incidental thereto as set forth in a document. Granted To: Purpose: Recorded: Affects: City of Carlsbad, a municipal corporation temporary easement for construction June 8, 2007 as Instrument No. 2007~0388771 ofOfficial Records The route thereof affects a portion of said land and is more fully described in said document. 20. An easement for the purpose shown below and rights incidental thereto as set forth in a document. Granted To: Purpose: Recorded: Affects: City of Carlsbad, a municipal corporation easement and public drainage and access June 8, 2007 as Instrument No. 2007-0388772 of Official Records The route thereof affects a portion of said land and is more fully described in said document. 21. A document entitled "Deed Restriction", dated, June 7, 2007, executed by Gary Robertson and Brian Robertson, as co-trustees of the Robertson Family 1995 Trust dated April 19, 1995, as to an undivided one-half interest, Gary Robertson and Brian Robertson, co-trustees under Declaration of Trust dated October 8, 1976, as to an undivided 7% interest; and Gary Robertson and Brian Robertson, co-successor trustees of the Elsie M. Kelly Irrevocable Trust dated June 19, 1989 as to an undivided 43% interest and California Regional Water Quality Control Board, subject to all the terms, provisions and conditions therein contained, recorded June 14, 2007 as Instrument No. 2007- 0404419 of Official Records. Reference is hereby made to said document for full particulars. 22. The terms and provisions contained in the document entitled "Notice of Restriction on Real Property" recorded December 19, 2007 as Instrument No. 2007-0781702 of Official Records. 23. The terms and provisions contained in the document entitled "Notice of Restriction on Real Property" recorded December 19,2007 as Instrument No. 2007-0781703 of Official Records. 24. A document entitled "Conservation Easement Deed", dated, December 18, 2007, executed by Gary Robertson and Brian Robertson, Co-Trustees of the Robertson Family 1995 Trust dated April 19, 1995 as to an undivided one-half interest; Gary Robertson and Brian Robertson, Co-Trustees under Declaration of Trust dated October 8, 1976, as to an undivided 7% interest and Gary Robertson and Brian Robertson, Co-successor trustees of the Elsie M. Kelly Irrevocable trust dated June 19, 1989 as to an undivided 43% and Center for Natural Lands Management, subject to all the terms, provisions and conditions therein contained, recorded December 21, 2007 as Instrument No. 2007-0786167 of Official Records. Reference is hereby made to said document for full particulars. CLTA Preliminary Report Form-Modified (11-17-06) Page9 c SCHEDULEB (continued) Order No.: 930022073-USO 25. A document entitled "Memorandum of Management and Funding Agreement", dated, December 18, 2007, executed by Gary Robertson and Brian Robertson, Co-Trustees of the Robertson Family 1995 Trust dated April 19, 1995 as to an undivided one-half interest; Gary Robertson and Brian Robertson, Co-Trustees under Declaration of Trust dated October 8, 1976, as to an undivided 7% interest and Gary Robertson and Brian Robertson, Co-successor trustees of the Elsie M. Kelly Irrevocable trust dated June 19, 1989 as to an undivided 43% and Center for Natural Lands Management, a California public benefit nonprofit corporation, subject to all the terms, provisions and conditions therein contained, recorded December 21, 2007 as Instrument No. 2007- 0786169 of Official Records. Reference is hereby made to said document for full particulars. 26. An easement for the purpose shown below and rights incidental thereto as set forth in a document. Granted To: Purpose: Recorded: Affects: City of Carlsbad, a municipal corporation open space January 16, 2008 as Instrument No. 2008-0021749 of Official Records The route thereof affects a portion of said land and is more fully described in said document. 27. An easement for the purpose shown below and rights incidental thereto as set forth in a document. Granted To: Purpose: Recorded: Affects: City of Carlsbad, a municipal corporation public pedestrian trail purposes June 16, 2008 as Instrument No. 2008-0322654 of Official Records The route thereof affects a portion of said land and is more fully described in said document. 28. An irrevocable offer to Dedicate a portion of said land for the purposes stated herein. In Favor Of: For: Recorded: Affects: The City of Carlsbad Northeast Quadrant Park August 14, 2008 as File No. 2008-0435946, Official Records The route thereof affects a portion of said land and is more fully described in said document. 29. Any rights, interests or claims which may exist or arise by reason ofthe following matters disclosed by an inspection or survey: (a) The fact that there are encroachments offences of various widths onto said property along the North property line as shown an ALTA Survey prepared by O'Day Consultants, Inc, dated November 3, 2010, as job number 191397 (b) The fact that there is an unrecorded SDGE Access Road per Dwg. 447-4A, as shown on an ALTA Survey prepared by O'Day Consultants, Inc, dated November 3, 2010, as job number 191397, North of Southeasterly corner running Westerly to the power lines. CLTA Preliminary Report Form-Modified (11-17-06) Page 10 c SCHEDULED (continued) Order No.: 930022073-U50 30. Matters which may be disclosed by an inspection and/or by a correct ALTA/ACSM Land Title Survey of said land that is satisfactory to this Company, and/or by inquiry of the parties in possession thereof. This office must be notified at least 7 business days prior to the scheduled closing in order to arrange for an inspection of the land; upon completion of this inspection you will be notified of the removal of specific coverage exceptions and/or additional exceptions to coverage. 31. Any rights of parties in possession of said land, based on any unrecorded lease, or leases. This Company will require a full copy of any unrecorded lease, together with all supplements, assignments, and amendments for review. END OF SCHEDULE B CLTA Preliminary Report Form-Modified (11-17-06) Page 11 c Order No.: 930022073-USO INFORMATIONAL NOTES Note No. 1: The policy of title insurance will include an arbitration provision. The Company or the insured may demand arbitration. Arbitrable matters may include, but are not limited to, any controversy or claim between the Company and the insured arising out of or relating to this policy, any service of the Company in connection with its issuance or the breach of a policy provision or other obligation. Please ask your escrow or title officer for a sample copy of the policy to be issued if you wish to review the arbitration provisions and any other provisions pertaining to your Title Insurance coverage. Note No. 2: The policy to be issued may contain an arbitration clause. When the Amount of Insurance is less than the amount, if any, set forth in the arbitration clause, all arbitrable matters shall be arbitrated at the option of either the Company or the Insured as the exclusive remedy of the parties. Note No.3: Your open order request indicates that a Limited Liability Company will be acquiring, encumbering or conveying real property in your transaction. Under the provisions of "the California Limited Liability Act, effective September 30, 1994" the following will be required: 1. A copy of the Articles of Organization (and all amendments, if any) that has been filed with the Secretary of State. 2. The requirement that this Company be provided with a copy of the Operation Agreement. The copy provided must be certified by the appropriate manager or member that it is a copy of the current operating agreement. 3. If the Limited Liability Company is member-managed then this Company must be provided with a current list of the member names. MLM. CLTA Preliminary Report Form-Modified (11-17-06) Page 12 c INFORMATIONAL NOTES (continued) ATTACHMENT ONE PRIVACY STATEMENT IMPORTANT INFORMATION: Order No.: 930022073-USO For those of you receiving this report by electronic delivery the Privacy Statement and Exclusions From Coverage are linked to this report. Please review this information by selecting the link. For those of you who are receiving a hard copy of this report, a copy of this information has been submitted for your review. CLTA Preliminary Report Form-Modified (11-17-06) Page 13 cCtAGO TITLE INSURANCE COM~Y Fidelity National Financial Group ofCompanies' Privacy Statement July 1, 2001 We recognize and respect the privacy oftoday's consumers and the requirements of applicable federal and state privacy laws. We believe that making you aware of how we use your non-public personal information ("Personal Information"), and to whom it is disclosed, will form the basis for a relationship of trust between us and the public that we serve. This Privacy Statement provides that explanation. We reserve the right to change this Privacy Statement from time to time consistent with applicable privacy laws. In the course of our business, we may collect Personal Information about you from the following sources: • From applications or other forms we receive from you or your authorized representative; • From your transactions with, or from the services being performed by, us, our affiliates or others; • From our Internet web sites; • From the public records maintained by government entities that we wither obtain directly from those entities, or from our affiliates or others; and • From consumer or other reporting agencies Our Policies Regarding The Protection Of The Confidentiality And Security Of Your Personal Information We maintain physical, electronic and procedural safeguards to protect your Personal Information from unauthorized access or intrusion. We limit access to the Personal Information only to those employees who need such access in connection with providing products or services to you or for other legitimate business purposes. Our Policies and Practices Regarding the Sharing of Your Personal Information We may share your Personal Information with our affiliates, such as insurance companies, agents, and other real estate settlement service providers. We may also disclose your Personal Information: • to agents, brokers or representatives to provide you with services you have requested; • to third-party contractors or service providers who provide services or perform marketing or other functions on our behalf; and • to others with whom we enter into joint marketing agreements for products or services that we believe you may find of interest. In addition, we will disclose your Personal Information when your direct or give us permission, when we are required by law to do so, or when we suspect fraudulent or criminal activities. We also may disclose your Personal Information when otherwise permitted by applicable privacy laws such as, for example, when disclosure is needed to enforce our rights arising out of any agreement, transaction or relationship with you. One of the important responsibilities of some of our affiliated companies is to record documents in the public domain. Such documents may contain your Personal Information. Right To Access Your Personal Information And Ability To Correct Errors Or Request Change Or Deletion Certain states afford you the right to access your Personal Information and, under certain circumstances, to find out to whom your Personal Information has been disclosed. Also, certain states afford you the right to request correction, amendment or deletion of your Personal Information. We reserve the right, where permitted by law, to charge a reasonable fee to cover the costs incurred in responding to such requests. All requests must be made in writing to the following address: Multiple Products or Services: Privacy Compliance Officer Fidelity National Financial, Inc. 601 Riverside Drive Jacksonville, FL 32204 If we provide you with more than one financial product or service, you may receive more that one privacy notice from us. We apologize for any inconvenience this may cause you. Privacy Statement (10-21-03) -c ATTACHMENT ONE AMERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION RESIDENTIAL TITLE INSURANCE POLICY (6-1-87) EXCLUSIONS In addition to the Exceptions in Schedule B, you are not insured against loss, costs, attorneys' fees, and expenses resulting from: I. Govermnental police power, and the existence or violation of any law or government regulation. This includes building and zoning ordinances and also laws and regulations concerning: land use improvements on the land land division environmental protection This exclusion does not apply to violations or the enforcement of these matters which appear in the public records at Policy Date. This exclusion does not limit the zoning coverage described in Items 12 and 13 of Covered Title Risks. 2. The right to take the land by condemning it, unless: a notice of exercising the right appears in the public records on the Policy Date the taking happened prior to the Policy Date and is binding on you if you bought the land without knowing of the taking 3. 4. 5. Title Risks: that are created, allowed, or agreed to by you that are known to you, but not to us, on the Policy Date -unless they appeared in the public records that result in no loss to you that first affect your title after the Policy Date -this does not limit the labor and material lien coverage in Item 8 of Covered Title Risks Failure to pay value for your title. Lack of a right: to any land outside the area specifically described and referred to in Item 3 of Schedule A OR in streets, alleys, or waterways that touch your land This exclusion does not limit the access coverage in Item 5 of Covered Title Risks. In addition to the Exclusions you are not insured against loss, costs, attorneys' fees, and the expenses resulting from: I. Any right, interests, or claims of parties in possession of the land not 3. Any facts about the land which a correct survey would disclose and 2. shown by the public records. which are not shown by the public records. This does not limit the Any easements or liens not shown by the public records. This does not limit the lien coverage in Item 8 of Covered Title Risks. 4. forced removal coverage in Item 12 of Covered Title Risks. Any water rights or claims or title to water in or under the land, whether or not shown by the public records. CALIFORNIA LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION STANDARD COVERAGE POLICY -1990 EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE The following matters are expressly excluded from the coverage ofthis policy and the Company will not pay loss or damage, costs, attorneys' fees or expenses which arise by reason of: (a) whether or not recorded in the public records at Date of Policy, but created, suffered, assumed or agreed to by the insured claimant; I. 2. 3. (a) Any law, ordinance or governmental regulation (including but not limited to building or zoning laws, ordinances, or regulations) restricting, regulating, prohibiting or relating (i) the occupancy, use, or enjoyment of the land; (ii) the character, dimensions or location of any improvement now or hereafter erected on the land; (iii) a separation in ownership or a change in the dimensions or area of the land or any parcel of which the land is or was a part; or (iv) environmental protection, or the effect of any violation of these laws, ordinances or governmental regulations, except to the extent that a notice of the enforcement thereof or a notice of a defect, lien, or encumbrance resulting from a violation or alleged violation affecting the land has been recorded in the public records at Date of Policy. (b) Any governmental police power not excluded by (a) above, except to the extent that a notice of the exercise thereof or notice of a defect, lien or encumbrance resulting from a violation or alleged violation affecting the land has been recorded in the public records at Date of Policy. Rights of eminent domain unless notice of the exercise thereof has been recorded in the public records at Date of Policy, but not excluding from coverage any taking which has occurred prior to Date of Policy which would be binding on the rights of a purchaser for value without knowledge. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters: 4. 5. 6. (b) not known to the Company, not recorded in the public records at Date of Policy, but known to the insured claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by the insured claimant prior to the date the insured claimant became an insured under this policy; (c) resulting in no loss or damage to the insured claimant; (d) attaching or created subsequent to Date of Policy; or (e) resulting in loss or damage which would not have been sustained if the insured claimant had paid value for the insured mortgage or for the estate or interest insured by this policy. Unenforceability of the lien of the insured mortgage because of the inability or failure of the insured at Date of Policy, or the inability or failure of any subsequent owner of the indebtedness, to comply with the applicable doing business laws of the state in which the land is situated. Invalidity or unenforceability of the lien of the insured mortgage, or claim thereof, which arises out of the transaction evidenced by the insured mortgage and is based upon usury or any consumer credit protection or truth in lending law. Any claim, which arises out of the transaction vesting in the insured the estate of interest insured by this policy or the transaction creating the interest of the insured lender, by reason of the operation of federal bankruptcy, state insolvency or similar creditors' rights laws. SCHEDULE B, PART I EXCEPTIONS FROM COVERAGE This policy does not insure against loss or damage (and the Company will not pay costs, attorneys' fees or expenses) which arise by reason of: I. 2. Taxes or assessments which are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the public records. Proceedings by a public agency which may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or 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 public records but which could be ascertained by an inspection of the land or which may be asserted by persons in possession thereof. Attachment One (11-17 -06) 3. 4. 5. Page 15 Easements, liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof which are not shown by the public records. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, or any other facts which a correct survey would disclose, and which are not shown by the public 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. c ATTACHMENT ONE (CONTINUED) AMERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION LOAN POLICY (10-17-92) WITH ALTA ENDORSEMENT-FORM 1 COVERAGE EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE The following matters are expressly excluded from the coverage of this policy and the Company will not pay loss or damage, costs, attorneys' fees or expenses which arise by reason of: I. (a) Any law, ordinance or governmental regulation (including but not 2. 3. limited to building and zoning laws, ordinances, or regulations) restricting, regulating, prohibiting or relating to (i) the occupancy, use, or enjoyment of the land; (ii) the character, dimensions or location of any improvement now or hereafter erected on the land; (iii) a separation in ownership or a change in the dimensions or area of the land or any parcel of which the land is or was a part; or (iv) environmental protection, or the effect of any violation of these laws, ordinances or governmental regulations, except to the extent that a notice of the enforcement thereof or a notice of a defect, lien or encumbrance resulting from a violation or alleged violation affecting the land has been recorded in the public records at Date of Policy. (b) Any governmental police power not excluded by (a) above, except to the extent that a notice of the exercise thereof or a notice of a defect, lien or encumbrance resulting from a violation or alleged violation affecting the land has been recorded in the public records at Date of Policy. Rights of eminent domain unless notice of the exercise thereof has been recorded in the public records at Date of Policy, but not excluding from coverage any taking which has occurred prior to Date of Policy which would be binding on the rights of a purchaser for value without knowledge. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters: (a) created, suffered, assumed or agreed to by the insured claimant; (b) not known to the Company, not recorded in the public records at Date of Policy, but known to the insured claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by the insured claimant prior to the date the insured claimant became an insured under this policy; (c) resulting in no loss or damage to the insured claimant; (d) attaching or created subsequent to Date of Policy (except to the extent that this policy insures the priority of the lien of the insured mortgage over any statutory lien for services, labor or material or 4. 5. 6. 7. to the extent insurance is afforded herein as to assessments for street improvements under construction or completed at Date of Policy); or (e) resulting in loss or damage which would not have been sustained if the insured claimant had paid value for the insured mortgage. Unenforceability of the lien of the insured mortgage because of the inability or failure of the insured at Date of Policy, or the inability or failure of any subsequent owner of the indebtedness, to comply with applicable doing business laws of the state in which the land is situated. Invalidity or unenforceability of the lien of the insured mortgage, or claim thereof, which arises out of the transaction evidenced by the insured mortgage and is based upon usury or any consumer credit protection or truth in lending law. Any statutory lien for services, labor or materials (or the claim of priority of any statutory lien for services, labor or materials over the lien of the insured mortgage) arising from an improvement or work related to the land which is contracted for and commenced subsequent to Date of Policy and is not financed in whole or in part by proceeds of the indebtedness secured by the insured mortgage which at Date of Policy the insured has advanced or is obligated to advance. Any claim, which arises out of the transaction creating the interest of the mortgagee insured by this policy, by reason of the operation of federal bankruptcy, state insolvency, or similar creditors' rights laws, that is based on: (i) the transaction creating the interest of the insured mortgagee being deemed a fraudulent conveyance or fraudulent transfer; or (ii) the subordination of the interest of the insured mortgagee as a result of the application of the doctrine or equitable subordination; or (iii) the transaction creating the interest of the insured mortgagee being deemed a preferential transfer except where the preferential transfer results from the failure: (a) to timely record the instrument of transfer; or (b) of such recordation to impart notice to a purchaser for value or a judgment or lien creditor. The above policy form may be issued to afford either Standard Coverage or Extended Coverage. In addition to the above Exclusions from Coverage, the Exceptions from Coverage in a Standard Coverage policy will also include the following Exceptions from Coverage: EXCEPTIONS FROM COVERAGE This policy does not insure against loss or damage (and the Company will not pay costs, attorneys' fees or expenses) which arise by reason of: I. 2. Taxes or assessments which are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the public records. Proceedings by a public agency which may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or 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 public records but which could be ascertained by an inspection of the land or which may be asserted by persons in possession thereof. 3. 4. 5. Easements, liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof, which are not shown by the public records. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, or any other facts which a correct survey would disclose, and which are not shown by the public 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. 2006 ALTA LOAN POLICY (06-17-06) EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE The following matters are expressly excluded from the coverage of this policy, and the Company will not pay loss or damage, costs, attorneys' fees, or expenses that arise by reason of: I. (a) Any law, ordinance, permit, or governmental regulation (including those relating to building and zoning) restricting, regulating, prohibiting, or relating to (i) the occupancy, use, or enjoyment of the Land; (ii) the character, dimensions, or location of any improvement erected on the Land; (iii) the subdivision of land; or (iv) environmental protection; or the effect of any violation of these laws, ordinances, or governmental regulations. This Exclusion !(a) does not modifY or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 5. Attachment One ( 11-17 -06) Page 16 2. 3. (b) Any governmental police power. This Exclusion I (b) does not modifY or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 6. Rights of eminent domain. This Exclusion does not modifY or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 7 or 8. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims, or other matters (a) created, suffered, assumed, or agreed to by the Insured Claimant; (b) not Known to the Company, not recorded in the Public Records at Date of Policy, but Known to the Insured Claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by the Insured Claimant prior to the date the Insured Claimant became an Insured under this policy; (c) resulting in no loss or damage to the Insured Claimant; (d) attaching or created subsequent to Date of Policy (however, this does not modifY or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk II, 13, or 14); or 4. 5. __ , __ ,_,_, ___ , ____________________________ _ c ATTACHMENT ONE (CONTINUED) (e) resulting in loss or damage that would not have been sustained if the Insured Claimant had paid value for the Insured Mortgage. Unenforceability of the lien of the Insured Mortgage because of the inability or failure of an Insured to comply with applicable doing- business laws of the state where the Land is situated. Invalidity or unenforceability in whole or in part of the lien of the Insured Mortgage that arises out of the transaction evidenced by the Insured Mortgage and is based upon usury or any consumer credit protection or truth-in-lending law. 6. 7. Any claim, by reason of the operation of federal bankruptcy, state insolvency, or similar creditors' rights laws, that the transaction creating the lien of the Insured Mortgage, is (a) a fraudulent conveyance or fraudulent transfer, or (b) a preferential transfer for any reason not stated in Covered Risk 13(b) of this policy. Any lien on the Title for real estate taxes or assessments imposed by governmental authority and created or attaching between Date of Policy and the date of recording of the Insured Mortgage in the Public Records. This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk II (b). The above policy form may be issued to afford either Standard Coverage or Extended Coverage. In addition to the above Exclusions from Coverage, the Exceptions from Coverage in a Standard Coverage policy will also include the following Exceptions from Coverage: EXCEPTIONS FROM COVERAGE This policy does not insure against loss or damage (and the Company will not pay costs, attorneys' fees or expenses) that arise by reason of: I. 2. (a) Taxes or assessments that are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the Public Records; (b) Proceedings by a public agency that may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the Public Records. Any facts, rights, interests, or claims that are not shown by the Public Records but that could be ascertained by an inspection of the Land or that may be asserted by persons in possession of the Land. 3. 4. 5. Easements, liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records. Any encroachment, encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting the Title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the Land and not shown by the Public 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. AMERICAN LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION OWNER'S POLICY (10-17-92) EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE The following matters are expressly excluded from the coverage of this policy and the Company will not pay loss or damage, costs, attorneys' fees or expenses which arise by reason of: I. (a) Any law, ordinance or governmental regulation (including but not limited to building and zoning laws, ordinances, or regulations) restricting, regulating, prohibiting or relating to (i) the occupancy, use, or enjoyment of the land; (ii) the character, dimensions or location of any improvement now or hereafter erected on the land; (iii) a separation in ownership or a change in the dimensions or area of the land or any parcel of which the land is or was a part; or (iv) environmental protection, or the effect of any violation of these laws, ordinances or governmental regulations, except to the extent that a notice of the enforcement thereof or a notice of a defect, lien or encumbrance resulting from a violation or alleged violation affecting the land has been recorded in the public records at Date of Policy. (b) Any governmental police power not excluded by (a) above, except to the extent that a notice of the exercise thereof or a notice of a defect, lien or encumbrance resulting from a violation or alleged violation affecting the land has been recorded in the public records at Date of Policy. 2. Rights of eminent domain unless notice of the exercise thereof has been recorded in the public records at Date of Policy, but not excluding from coverage any taking which has occurred prior to Date of Policy which would be binding on the rights of a purchaser for value without knowledge. 3. 4. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters: (a) created, suffered, assumed or agreed to by the insured claimant; (b) not known to the Company, not recorded in the public records at Date of Policy, but known to the insured claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by the insured claimant prior to the date the insured claimant became an insured under this policy; (c) resulting in no loss or damage to the insured claimant; (d) attaching or created subsequent to Date of Policy; or (e) resulting in loss or damage which would not have been sustained if the insured claimant had paid value for the estate or interest insured by this policy. Any claim, which arises out of the transaction vesting in the insured the estate or interest insured by this policy, by reason of the operation of federal bankruptcy, state insolvency, or similar creditors' rights laws, that is based on: (i) the transaction creating the estate or interest insured by this policy being deemed a fraudulent conveyance or fraudulent transfer; or (ii) the transaction creating the estate or interest insured by this policy being deemed a preferential transfer except where the preferential transfer results from the failure: (a) to timely record the instrument of transfer; or (b) of such recordation to impart notice to a purchaser for value or a judgment or lien creditor. The above policy form may be issued to afford either Standard Coverage or Extended Coverage. In addition to the above Exclusions from Coverage, the Exceptions from Coverage in a Standard Coverage Policy will also include the following Exceptions from Coverage: EXCEPTIONS FROM COVERAGE This policy does not insure against loss or damage (and the Company will not pay costs, attorneys' fees or expenses) which arise by reason of: I. Taxes or assessments which are not shown as existing liens by the 3. Easements, liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof, which are not 2. records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real shown by the public records. property or by the public records. Proceedings by a public agency 4. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, which may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such encroachments, or any other facts which a correct survey would proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or disclose, and which are not shown by the public records. by the public records. Any facts, rights, interests or claims which are not shown by the public records but which could be ascertained by an inspection of the land or which may be asserted by persons in possession thereof. 5. (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. Attachment One ( 11-17 -06) Page 17 c ATTACHMENT ONE (CONTINUED) 2006 ALTA OWNER'S POLICY (06-17-06) EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE The following matters are expressly excluded from the coverage of this policy, and the Company will not pay loss or damage, costs, attorneys' fees, or expenses that arise by reason of: I. (a) Any law, ordinance, permit, or governmental regulation (including those relating to building and zoning) restricting, regulating, prohibiting, or relating to 2. 3. (i) tbe occupancy, use, or enjoyment of the Land; (ii) the character, dimensions, or location of any improvement erected on the Land; (iii) tbe subdivision of land; or (iv) environmental protection; or the effect of any violation of these laws, ordinances, or governmental regulations. This Exclusion !(a) does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 5. (b) Any governmental police power. This Exclusion I (b) does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 6. Rights of eminent domain. This Exclusion does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 7 or 8. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims, or other matters (a) created, suffered, assumed, or agreed to by tbe Insured Claimant; 4. 5. (b) not Known to the Company, not recorded in the Public Records at Date of Policy, but Known to the Insured Claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by the Insured Claimant prior to the date the Insured Claimant became an Insured under tbis policy; (c) resulting in no loss or damage to tbe Insured Claimant; (d) attaching or created subsequent to Date of Policy (however, this does not modify or limit the coverage provided under Covered Risk 9 and 10); or (e) resulting in loss or damage that would not have been sustained if tbe Insured Claimant had paid value for the Title. Any claim, by reason of the operation of federal bankruptcy, state insolvency, or similar creditors' rights laws, that the transaction vesting the Title as shown in Schedule A, is (a) a fraudulent conveyance or fraudulent transfer; or (b) a preferential transfer for any reason not stated in Covered Risk 9 of this policy. Any lien on the Title for real estate taxes or assessments imposed by governmental authority and created or attaching between Date of Policy and the date of recording of the deed or other instrument of transfer in the Public Records that vests Title as shown in Schedule A. The above policy form may be issued to afford either Standard Coverage or Extended Coverage. In addition to the above Exclusions from Coverage, the Exceptions from Coverage in a Standard Coverage policy will also include the following Exceptions from Coverage: EXCEPTIONS FROM COVERAGE This policy does not insure against loss or damage (and the Company will not pay costs, attorneys' fees or expenses) that arise by reason of: I. 2. (a) Taxes or assessments that are not shown as existing liens by the records of any taxing authority that levies taxes or assessments on real property or by the Public Records; (b) proceedings by a public agency that may result in taxes or assessments, or notices of such proceedings, whether or not shown by the records of such agency or by the Public Records. Any facts, rights, interests, or claims that are not shown in the Public Records but that could be ascertained by an inspection of the Land or tbat may be asserted by persons in possession of the Land. 3. 4. 5. Easements, liens or encumbrances, or claims thereof, not shown by the Public Records. Any encroachment, encumbrance, violation, variation, or adverse circumstance affecting tbe Title that would be disclosed by an accurate and complete land survey of the Land and that are not shown by the Public 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. CL TA HOMEOWNER'S POLICY OF TITLE INSURANCE (10-22-03) ALTA HOMEOWNER'S POLICY OF TITLE INSURANCE (10-22-03) EXCLUSIONS In addition to the Exceptions in Schedule B, You are not insured against loss, costs, attorneys' fees, and expenses resulting from: I. Governmental police power, and the existence or violation of any law or government regulation. This includes ordinances, laws and regulations concerning: a. building b. zoning c. Land use d. improvements on the Land e. Land division f. environmental protection This Exclusion does not apply to violations or tbe enforcement of these matters if notice of the violation or enforcement appears in the Public Records at tbe Policy Date. This Exclusion does not limit the coverage described in Covered Risk 14, 15, 16, 17 or 24. 2. The failure of Your existing structures, or any part of them, to be constructed in accordance with applicable building codes. This Exclusion does not apply to violations of building codes if notice of the violation appears in the Public Records at the Policy Date. 3. The right to take the Land by condemning it, unless: Attachment One (11-17-06) Page 18 4. a. a notice of exercising the right appears in the Public Records at the Policy Date; or b. the taking happened before the Policy Date and is binding on You if You bought the Land without Knowing of the taking. Risks: a. tbat are created, allowed, or agreed to by You, whether or not they appear in the Public Records; b. tbat are Known to You at the Policy Date, but not to Us, unless tbey appear in the Public Records at the Policy Date; c. that result in no loss to You; or d. that first occur after the Policy Date -this does not limit the coverage described in Covered Risk 7, 8.d, 22, 23, 24 or 25. 5. Failure to pay value for Your Title. 6. Lack of a right: a. to any Land outside tbe area specifically described and referred to in paragraph 3 of Schedule A; and b. in streets, alleys, or waterways that touch the Land. This Exclusion does not limit the coverage described in Covered Risk II or 18. ATTACHMENT ONE (CONTINUED) LIMITATIONS ON COVERED RISKS Your insurance for the following Covered Risks is limited on the Owner's Coverage Statement as follows: For Covered Risk 14, 15, 16 and 18, Your Deductible Amount and Our Maximum Dollar Limit of Liability shown in Schedule A The deductible amounts and maximum dollar limits shown on Schedule A are as follows: Covered Risk 14: Covered Risk 15: Covered Risk 16: Covered Risk 18: Your Deductible Amount 1.00% of Policy Amount or $ 2 500.00 (whichever is less) 1.00% of Policy Amount or $ 5 000.00 (whichever is less) 1.00% of Policy Amount or $ 5 000.00 (whichever is less) 1.00% of Policy Amount or $ 2 500.00 (whichever is less) Our Maximum Dollar Limit of Liability $ 10 000.00 $25 000.00 ALTA EXPANDED COVERAGE RESIDENTIAL LOAN POLICY (10/13/01) EXCLUSIONS FROM COVERAGE The following matters are expressly excluded from the coverage ofthis policy and the Company will not pay loss or damage, costs, attorneys fees or expenses which arise by reason of: I. 2. 3. (a) Any law, ordinance or governmental regulation (including but not limited to building and zoning laws, ordinances, or regulations) restricting, regulating, prohibiting or relating to (i) the occupancy, use, or enjoyment of the Land; (ii) the character, dimensions or location of any improvement now or hereafter erected on the Land; (iii) a separation in ownership or a change in the dimensions or areas of the Land or any parcel of which the Land is or was a part; or (iv) environmental protection, or the effect of any violation of these laws, ordinances or governmental regulations, except to the extent that s notice of the enforcement thereof or a notice of a defect, lien or encumbrance resulting from a violation or alleged violation affecting the Land has been recorded in the Public Records at Date of Policy. This exclusion does not limit the coverage provided under Covered Risks 12, 13, 14, and 16 of this policy. (b) Any governmental police power not excluded by (a) above, except to the extent that a notice of the exercise thereof or a notice of a defect, lien or encumbrance resulting from a violation or alleged violation affecting the Land has been recorded in the Public Records at Date of Policy. This exclusion does not limit the coverage provided under Covered Risks 12, 13, 14, and 16 of this policy. Rights of eminent domain unless notice of the exercise thereof has been recorded in the Public Records at Date of Policy, but not excluding from coverage any taking which has occurred prior to Date of Policy which would be binding on the rights of a purchaser for value without Knowledge. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters: (a) created, suffered, assumed or agreed to by the Insured Claimant; (b) not Known to the Company, not recorded in the Public Records at Date of Policy, but Known to the Insured Claimant and not disclosed in writing to the Company by the Insured Claimant prior to the date the Insured Claimant became an Insured under this policy; (c) resulting In no loss or damage to the Insured Claimant; Attachment One ( 11-17 -06) Page 19 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. (d) attaching or created subsequent to Date of Policy (this paragraph does not limit the coverage provided under Covered Risks 8, 16, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24,25 and 26); or (e) resulting in loss or damage which would not have been sustained if the Insured Claimant had paid value for the Insured Mortgage. Unenforceability of the lien of the Insured Mortgage because of the inability or failure of the Insured at Date of Policy, or the inability or failure of any subsequent owner of the indebtedness, to comply with applicable doing business laws of the state in which the Land is situated. Invalidity or unenforceability of the lien of the Insured Mortgage, or claim thereof, which arises out of the transaction evidenced by the Insured Mortgage and is based upon usury, except as provided in Covered Risk 27, or any consumer credit protection or truth in lending law. Real property taxes or assessments of any governmental authority which become a lien on the Land subsequent to Date of Policy. This exclusion does not limit the coverage provided under Covered Risks 7, 8(e) and 26. Any claim of invalidity, unenforceability or lack of priority of the lien of the Insured Mortgage as to advances or modifications made after the Insured has Knowledge that the vestee shown in Schedule A is no longer the owner of the estate or interest covered by this policy. This exclusion does not limit the coverage provided in Covered Risk 8. Lack of priority of the lien of the Insured Mortgage as to each and every advance made after Date of Policy, and all interest charged thereon, over liens, encumbrances and other matters affecting the title, the existence of which are Known to the Insured at: (a) The time of the advance; or (b) The time a modification is made to the terms of the Insured Mortgage which changes the rate of interest charged, if the rate of Interest is greater as a result of the modification than it would have been before the modification. This exclusion does not limit the coverage provided in Covered Risk 8. The failure of the residential structure, or any portion thereof to have been constructed before, on or after Date of Policy in accordance with applicable building codes. This exclusion does not apply to violations of building codes if notice of the violation appears in the Public Records at Date of Policy. c (continued) NOTICE You may be entitled to receive a $20.00 discount on escrow services ifyou purchased, sold or refinanced residential property in California between May 19, 1995 and November 1, 2002. If you had more than one qualifying transaction, you may be entitled to multiple discounts. If your previous transaction involved the same property that is the subject of your current transaction, you do not have to do anything; the Company will provide the discount, provided you are paying for escrow or title services in this transaction. If your previous transaction involved property different from the property that is subject of your current transaction, you must -prior to the close of the current transaction -inform the Company of the earlier transaction, provide the address of the property involved in the previous transaction, and the date or approximate date that the escrow closed to be eligible for the discount. Unless you inform the Company of the prior transaction on property that is not the subject of this transaction, the Company has no obligation to conduct an investigation to determine if you qualify for a discount. If you provide the Company information concerning a prior transaction, the Company Is required to determine if you qualify for a discount which is subject to other terms and conditions. Attachment One ( 11-17 -06) Page20 z 0 v; ;:;: ;:; "" Ci3 >-r:t 2 8 5 z: ® SHT 1 DETAIL "D" -1" = 200' n57\ 0 SHT 2 I.;,. -f"OR BEARINGS A. lliMF"NSIONS ALONG Rll OP SF"F" R 0 <; A<¥>7 Z• -roR OR~.& DI!)T. ~E~ SJt:l. MAl-l II~ ;, O~~N !>PACE ~ ., (§)' 9 211 07AC --c fic#t6'35"E .1.1fifR=47 IUir-lif VOID DETAIL "A" NO ~CALl:: .1.1iRf MU'56'41"W DETAIL "C" ~--zoo· 208 01 CHANcES Ill!; OLD ]NEW Til. CUT O!Of ,._,_{''<~// ~::."~ 7 Pl("'P .,, .. ,. 6 ~~~,7..> 740 11fi .,,.. 10 1:.~-14-L?J " t,. \·' [L~--'~ 3561 I~' 'JI7".::g-Y, 116 < LL i-f _r.,.-r.-;1/J t.:O ~ .... ':::)' ~i. 'iii.• JJ .?i' <'3 7?' .9~ r---12. 1'7?' ~ ... 77 4'J3 ~-SI. S#,..l" 771J:'.7,P r---__.j_ J~7:t'j7~05~ .t!2 ,.. ·""" !{9 !Y _l~'·" .. 10 ~vo' ll HM~ ~IJWP 24 I .1',~/ d 'c~·z,; t!Zoi!./0.5 13 ~--9.,1,..11 ~st2~ ~~·,?:0 et, 2.,, tY'!~ z~~31t,;: ·;;-:.;~ Q_• ~, .. r~ c.:!_ 1'11:,..._,_,, .. ~ .!!> /;J.j;_ :151 /IS -~ latt(T~ff + 54 26 =a::..oa~ "' "'"' qg __1M_ " , .... ,. INA.; A-5\JCKINGHA~( LN. 0 -TRA.rALG,Ir.A LN. C -PICADILLV CT. 0 CHEL3EA CT. E -::0\lV 1 HAMt'J ON HU. f'·..rt1rHI"W444tl C.n7'#'!17' fJAM H-W27'f1"WZ158 f-/iJ1'4117il'WtlJ.III ./·~'W'Wi'?.D7 lf.~fMNI L·S23'31W WU1 M·WlC<KUW f£11 ~:=~~ Jf•-"'''Jl"'lr~/.(J{I "'" cc VIJI u NC ANC CA c c ANC 0 u City of Carlsbad Faraday Center Faraday Cashiering 001 1124401-2 09/01/2011 98 Thu, Sep 01, 2011 04 : 06 PM Receipt Ref Nbr: R1124401-2/0025 PERMITS -PERMITS Tran Ref Nbr: 112440102 0025 0036 Trans/Rcpt#: R0086191 SET #: GPA11007 Amount: Item Subtota 1 : Item Total: ITEM(S) TOTAL: Check (Chk# 080953) 1 @ $5,777.00 $5,777.00 $5,777.00 Credit Card (Auth# 00564C) Total Received: $5,777.00 $5,714.00 $63.00 $5,777.00 Have a nice day! ~******CUSTOMER COPY************* 0 City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 11111!1111111111111111111~11 Applicant: RANCHO COSTERA Description Amount GPA11007 5,777.00 5056 EL CAMINO REAL CBAD Receipt Number: R0086191 Transaction ID: R0086191 Transaction Date: 09/01/2011 Pay Type Method Description Amount Payment Check 5,777.00 Transaction Amount: 5,777.00 City ot ~ctd Faraday lA~nter Faraday Cashiering 001 1112601-3 05/06 12011 98 Fri. May 06, 2011 03:36PM Receipt Ref Nbr: R1112601-3/0017 PERMITS -PERMITS Tran Ref Nbr: 111260103 0017 0017 Trans;Rcpt#: R0084414 SET #: CT110001 Amount: Item Subtota 1 : Item Total: PERMITS -PERMITS 1 @ $9 ' 771 . 16 $9,771.16 $9,771.16 Tran Ref Nbr: 111260103 0017 0018 Trans/Rcpt#: R0084415 SET #: HDP11001 Amount: Item Subtota 1 : Item Tot a 1: PERMITS -PERMITS 1 @ $1 .7 49 . 00 $1,749.00 $1,749.00 Tran Ref Nbr: 111260103 0017 0019 Trans/Rcpt#: R0084416 SET #: MP02003C Amount: Item Subtota 1 : Item Tot a 1: PERMITS -PERMITS 1 @ $24,267.00 $24,267.00 $24,267.00 Tran Ref Nbr: 111260103 0017 0020 Trans/Rcpt#: R0084417 SET#: SUP11002 Amount: Item Subtota 1 : Item Tot a 1: PERMITS -PERMITS 1 @ $3,239.00 $3,239.00 $3,239.00 Tran Ref Nbr: 111260103 0017 0021 Trans/Rcpt#: R0084418 SET#: EIA11001 Amount: Item Subtota 1 : Item Tot a 1: PERMITS -PERMITS 1 @ $1 ' 604 . 00 $1,604.00 $1,604.00 Tran Ref Nbr: 111260103 0017 0022 Trans/Rcpt#: R0084420 SET #: HMP11003 Amount: Item Subtota 1 : Item Tot a 1: 6 ITEM(S) TOTAL: Check (Chk# 079341) Check (Chk# 001920) Total Received: Have a nice dav! 1 @ $2 ' 721 . 00 $2,721.00 $2,721.00 $43,351.16 $42,327.00 $1,024.16 $43,351.16 0 City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 1111111 illl~l ~ 11111111111~1111111111 Applicant: RANCHO COSTERA LLC Descript1on Amount CT110001 9,771.16 5056 EL CAMINO REAL CBAD Receipt Number: R0084414 Transaction ID: R0084414 Transaction Date: 05/06/2011 Pay Type Method Description Amount Payment Check 9,771.16 Transaction Amount: 9,771.16 0 0 City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 1111111111111111111111 Applicant: RANCHO COSTERA LLC Description Amount HDP11001 1,749.00 5056 EL CAMINO REAL CBAD Receipt Number: R0084415 Transaction ID: R0084415 Transaction Date: 05/06/2011 Pay Type Method Description Amount Payment Check 1,749.00 Transaction Amount: 1,749.00 0 0 City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 IIIII II~ Ill~ 1111111111111111111111 Applicant: RANCHO COSTERA LLC Description Amount MP02003C 24,267.00 5056 EL CAMINO REAL CBAD Receipt Number: R0084416 Transaction ID: R0084416 Transaction Date: 05/06/2011 Pay Type Method Description Amount Payment Check 24,267.00 Transaction Amount: 24,267.00 0 0 City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 111~11 iN 11~1 ~ IIIII I~ 111111111~ ~~ Ill Applicant: RANCHO COSTERA LLC Description Amount SUP11002 3,239.00 5056 EL CAMINO REAL CBAD Receipt Number: R0084417 Transaction ID: R0084417 Transaction Date: 05/06/2011 Pay Type Method Description Amount Payment Check 3,239.00 Transaction Amount: 3,239.00 0 0 City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 Applicant: RANCHO COSTERA LLC Description Amount EIA11001 1,604.00 5056 EL CAMINO REAL CBAD Receipt Number: R0084418 Transaction ID: R0084418 Transaction Date: 05/06/2011 Pay Type Method Description Amount Payment Check 1,604.00 Transaction Amount: 1,604.00 ' .. c 0 City of Carlsbad 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad CA 92008 11~1111111111~ liN 1111111111~1111111 Applicant: RANCHO COSTERA LLC Description Amount HMP11003 2,721.00 5056 EL CAMINO REAL CBAD Receipt Number: R0084420 Transaction ID: R0084420 Transaction Date: 05/06/2011 Pay Type Method Description Amount Payment Check 2,721.00 Transaction Amount: 2,721.00 NOTICE OF PU( _. 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, Carls- bad, California, at 6:00p.m. on Tuesday, December 4, 2012, to consider adoption of a Mitigated Nega- tive Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and approval of a General Plan Amendment and Master Plan Amendment to modify the configurations of Planning Areas, modify land uses, and modify future development standards within the previously approved Robertson Ranch Master Plan for the West Village on property generally located at north of El Camino Real south of Tamarack Avenue and west of Cannon Road in Local Facilities Management Zone 14 and more particularly de- scribed as: • • • All that portion of Lots "E" and "I" of Rancho Agua Hedionda, in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, according to partition map thereof No. 823, filed in the Office of the Coun- ty Recorder of said San Diego County, November 16, 1896; Except therefrom that portion thereof described in Deed to the City of Carlsbad recorded August 14, 2008 as File No. 2008-0435947; or Also except therefrom that portion thereof described in Deed to the City of Carlsbad recorded May 11, 2009 as File No. 2009-0247694 Whereas, on October 17, 2012 the City of Carlsbad Planning Commission voted 5-1 (Arnold) to recom- mend adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-07 IMP 02-03(C) and recommend approval of a General Plan Amendment and Master Plan Amendment to modify the configurations of Planning Areas, modify land uses, and modify future development standards within the previously approved Robertson Ranch Master Plan for the West Village and approval of a Vesting Tentative Tract Map, Hillside Development Permit, Special Use Permit, and Habitat Management Plan Permit to subdivide the property into planning areas as defined by the Master Plan as well as associated master plan mass grading and improvements including backbone streets and El Camino Real along the project frontage on 219.4 acres of land located north of El Camino Real south of Tamarack Avenue and west of Cannon Road in Local Facilities Management Zone 14. Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to attend the public hearing. Copies of the agenda bill will be available on and after November 30, 2012. If you have any questions, please contact Christer Westman in the Planning Division at (760) 602-4614 or christer.westman@carlsbadca.gov. If you challenge the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and approval of a General Plan Amendment or Master Plan Amendment 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 corre- spondence 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 11-07/MP 02-03© CASE NAME: ROBERTSON RANCH WEST VILLAGE PUBLISH: November 25, 2012 CITY OF CARLSBAD/CITY COUNCIL ~ J~ CITY OF VcARLSBAD Planning Division October 18, 2012 Planning Systems, Inc. Attn: Paul Klukas 1530 Faraday Avenue, Suite 100 Carlsbad, CA 92008 PLANNING COMMISSION NOTICE OF DECISION www.carlsbadca.gov SUBJECT: GPA 11-07 /MP 02-03(C)/CT 11-01/HDP 11-01/SUP 11-02/HMP 11-03 -ROBERTSON RANCH WEST VILLAGE At the October 17, 2012 Planning Commission meeting, your application was considered. The Commission voted 5-1 to recommend adoption/recommend approval of GPA 11-07/MP 02-03(C). The decision of the Planning Commission is advisory and will be forwarded to the City Council. The Commission also voted 5-1 to approve CT 11-01/HDP 11-01/SUP 11-02, and HMP 11-03. The decision of the Planning Commission will become final on October 27, 2012. The time within which judicial review of this decision must be sought is governed by Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1094.6, which has been made applicable in the City of Carlsbad by Carlsbad Municipal Code 1.16. Any petition or other paper seeking judicial review must be filed in the appropriate court not later than the ninetieth day following the date which this decision becomes final; however, if within ten days after the decision becomes final a request for the record of the proceedings is made accompanied by the required deposit in an amount sufficient to cover the estimated cost of preparation of such record, the time within which such petition may be filed in court is extended to not later than the thirtieth day following the date on which the record is either personally delivered or mailed to the party, or his attorney of record, if he has one. A written request for the preparation of the record of the proceedings shall be filed with the City Planner, Don Neu, Secretary of the Planning Commission, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008. If you have any questions regarding the final dispositions of your application, please contact your project planner Christer Westman at (760) 602-4614 or christer.westman@carlsbadca.gov. DON NEU, AICP City Planner DN:CW:bd c: Data Entry File enc: Planning Commission Resolutions No. 6911, 6912, 6913 and 6914 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 T 760-602-4600 F 760-602-8559 PROOF OF PUBLICATION {2010 & 2011 C.C.P.) 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: October osth, 2012 I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Jane Allshouse NORTH COUNTY TIMES Legal Advertising This space is for the County Clerk's Filing Stamp (i) PLANNING COMMISSION PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN to you, because your interest may be affected, that the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Vil- lage Drive, Carlsbad, California, at 6:00 p.m. on Wednesday, October 17, 2012, to consider the following: 1) GPA 11-07/ MP 02-0J!CV CT 11-01/ HOP 11-01/ SUP 11-021 HMP 11-03: ROBERTSON RANCH WEST VILLAGE -Request for a recommendation of adoption oLa Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting f,'rogram and a recommendation for approval for a General Plan Amendment and Master Plan Amendment to modify the configurations of Plan- ning Areas, modify land uses, and modify future development standards within the previously approved Robertson Ranch Master Plan for the West Village · and approval of a Vesting Tentative Tract Map, Hillside Development Permit, Special Use Permit, and Habitat Management Plan Permit to subdivide the property into planning areas as defined by the Master Plan as· well as associ- ated master plan mass grading and improvements including backbone streets and El Camino Real along the woject frontage on 201.37 acres of land located north of El Camino Real south of Tamara~k Avenue and west of Cannon Road in Local Facilities Management Zone 14. The project site was the subject of a previous CEQA review in the Robertson I Ranch Final Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR);which was certified by the Carlsbad City Council on November 14, 2006 (EIR 03-03, State Clear- \ inghouse #2004051 039). The City Planner has determined that the project will not result in potentially significant impacts and has issued a Notice of Intent to adoP,t a Mitigated Negative Declaration. ~--~~--~~--~ ( '"''!(~.; J ,, .;/,;_... , ~~~-_......._,'\.-., ~. \~:: '/~~~ (;' h // ~/. ~ l ~ ._, ,-:7 "'" ;.~'x'; ~~., . /~ ;;/0$'ifN~ .,,.. .. "'~--!"'-/i,~.~·lr·'jp~ ·<'' .'.' .;.~. ., .15 2) COP 11-10/ HOP 11-021 SUP '11-03/ HMP 11-04: EL CAMINO REAL SOUTHBOUND WIDENING -Request for the adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and the approval of a Coastal Development Permit, Hillside Development Permit, Special Use Permit, and Habitat Management Plan Permit for improvements to portions of the existing southbound side of El Camino Real between Kelly Drive and Crest- view Drive to its ultimate buildout condition of three southbound lanes, a bicycle lane, curb, gutter, 5 foot sidewalk, and street lights within a 63 foot southbound right-of-way for a distance of approximately 1 ,600 lineal feet in the Mello II Segment of the Local Coastal Program and within Local Facilities Management Zone 1. The City Planner has determined that the project will not result in potentially significant impacts and has issued a Notice of Intent to adopt a Mitigated Neg- ative Declaration. This project is located. within the appeal area and the decision may be ap- pealed to the California Coastal Commission. '-snn:==a . :,! . -·!·" €. . , . -~ ;:'it. .. l·" , ''''*'""' E.t'(· ·";;.,;· ··~,/~,.. '-,/' f j If you challenge these projects in CQUrt, 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. Copies of the environmental documents are available at the Planning Division at 1635 Faraday Avenue during regular business hours from 7:30 am to 5:30 pm Monday through Thursday and 8:00am to 5:00 pm Friday. Those persons wishing to speak on these proposals are cordially invited to attend the public hearing. Copies of the staff reports will be available online at hl!p://carlsbad.granicus.com/ViewPublisher.pllp?view id-6 on or after the Fri- day prior to the hearing date. If you have any questions, please call the Planning Division at (760) 602-4600. PUBLISH: October 5, 2012 CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING DIVISION net 2323277 t ' • (~~CITY OF ¥CARLSBAD 0 0 FILE COPY /D· .S. Jo:l Community & Economic Development www.carlsbadca.gov NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN to you that the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad will hold a public hearing at the Council Chambers, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, California, at 6:00 p.m. on Wednesday, October 17, 2012, to consider a request for the following: CASE NAME: PUBLISH DATE: GPA 11-07/ MP 02-03(C)/ CT 11-01/ HDP 11-01/ SUP 11-02/ HMP 11-03 - Robertson Ranch West Village October 5, 2012 DESCRIPTION: Request for a recommendation of adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and a recommendation for approval for a General Plan Amendment and Master Plan Amendment to modify the configurations of Planning Areas, modify land uses, and modify future development standards within the previously approved Robertson Ranch Master Plan for the West Village and approval of a Vesting Tentative Tract Map, Hillside Development Permit, Special Use Permit, and Habitat Management Plan Permit to subdivide the property into planning areas as defined by the Master Plan as well as associated master plan mass grading and improvements including backbone streets and El Camino Real along the project frontage on 201.37 acres of land located north of El Camino Real south of Tamarack Avenue and west of Cannon Road in Local Facilities Management Zone 14. 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://www.carlsbadca.gov/cityhall/meetings/Pages/meeting-videos.aspx 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 Christer Westman in the Planning Division at {760) 602-4614, Monday through Thursday 7:30a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Friday 8:00 a.m. to 5:00p.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. o Appeals to the City 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 ® SITE MAP • N NOT TO SCALE Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-07/MP 02-03(C)/CT 11-01 HOP 11-01/SUP 11-02/HMP 11-03 1 Road 1 1 IHybri d 1 Satellite 1 e1 \ u -~ x ... \ ~~· •i ·f. t -.11 • I ...... (~ ,.· (· -· \. ,.._ .. ,_ ·;t ··~-l · .. ~ -· . \. 1. .. ·::, ::s tze: ~)Default r. ;, f i> u mts: (ij) Deg . Decima~ L .·.:~ ~ :. ~ .. ~-...,,.,., ''·•. L: "J lJ r , .. .. ~ I '\ ~ ·n: . ~ .-.~~···:(':_ 1 I lYJ Par<cels [1] Pa r:c:el loons. ·' .. ... .• ------------------~---·--~~ •... c 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 Robertson Banch West Village GPA 1]-07/MP D2F03(C)/CT 11 Ot/Ngp 11 Ql/SUP 11-02/HMP El Camino Real Southbound Widening CDP 11-10/HDP 11-02/SUP 11-03/HMP RECEIVED BY DATE: ____________________ ___ . . ~~'~CJ~----------------~ ~------------ «~ ~ CITY OF CARLSBAD TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP EQUALIZED ASSESSMENT ROLL STATEMENT E-18 Development Services En&lneerlnl Department 1635 Faraday Avenue 760-602·2750 www .c:arlsbadca.sov Proposed Minor Subdivision No.:. ______________________ _ ,. he certify that the property owners list and labels submitted to the City of cartsbad for the above- ref~ ence p lnor subdivision re~~esent the latest available information from the equalized Signer's ntact information: Company Name: ______________________________________________________________________ __ Address:--------------------------------------------- Telephone number:----------------------------------------- Email address:--------------------------------------- '. E-16 Page7of7 R-08-09 REV 11119109 . PROOF OF PUBLICATION (2010 & 2011 C.C.P.) 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 be~n published in each regular and entire issue of sa1d newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to-wit: I certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. dido, California , da ust, 2012 Jane Allshouse NORTH COUNTY TIMES Legal Advertising This space is for the County Clerk's Filing Stamp CITY OF CARISB D I PLANAJI"JG DEF AH I MENTI Proof of Publication of NOTICE Q.E INTENT IQ ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION CASE NAM'E:~~~.'lillllg~ CASE NO: ~ 11-07/ MP ~ QI 11:Q1L .!::!QE 11:Q1L IDJ.E 1.1:QZl HMP 11-03 PROJECT LOCATION: ~y ~N2!:1!!.2!f! Camino Blll!!.~Q!~~lllli!~.I!!~BQSQi!l ~~Mana~~.H PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Request for a recommendation of approval for a · General Plan Amendment and Master Plan Amendment to establish land uses, Planning Areas, and future development standards within the Robertson Ranch West Village and approval of a Tentative Tract Map, Hillside Develop- ment Permit, Special Use Permit, and Habitat Management Plan Permit to subdivide the property into planning areas as defined by the Master Plan as well as associated master plan mass grading and improvements including backbone streets and El Camino Real along the project frontage on 201.37 acres of land located north of El Camino Real south of Tamarack Avenue and west ~f Cannon Road in Local Facilities Management Z~ne 14. PROPOSED DETERMINATION: The City of Carlsbad has conducted an en- vironmental review of the above described project pursuant to the Guidelines lor Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and lhe 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 and City Council. 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 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 signilicant effect on the environment. If persons and public agencies believe that the project may have a significant effect, they should: (1) identify the spec~ic effect; (2) explain why they believe·the effect would occur; and (3) explam why they believe the effect would be significant. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Divi-sion within 20 days of the date of this notice. The proposed project and Mitigated Negative Declaration are· subject to review and approvaVadoption by the Planning Commission and City Council. If you have any questions, please call Christer Westman in the Planning Division at (760) 602-4614. PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD &!gyg ~ ~: ~ptember .1,g. ~ PUBLISH DATE Aug~~gru:g nct2321018 . ' Fl c "' !F i lED I J OrcnelbJrg, Jr. RICOI'dtl Cou~IY Cit~ CASE NAME: CASE NO: PROJECT LOCATION: NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-07/ MP 02-03C/ CT 11-01/ HDP 11-01/ SUP 11-027 HMP 11-03 Generally located North of El Camino Real, south of Tamarack Avenue, and west of Cannon Road in Local Facilities Management Zone 14 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Request for a recommendation of approval for a General Plan Amendment and Master Plan Amendment to establish land uses, Planning Areas, and future development standards within the Robertson Ranch West Village and approval of a Tentative Tract Map, Hillside Development Permit, Special Use Permit, and Habitat Management Plan Permit to subdivide the property into planning areas as defined by the Master Plan as well as associated master plan mass grading and improvements including backbone streets and El Camino Real along the project frontage on 201.37 acres of land located north of El Camino Real south of Tamarack Avenue and west of Cannon Road in Local Facilities Management Zone 14. PROPOSED DETERMINATION: The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the Environmental Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said review, the initial study (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 and City Council. 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 of the CEQA Guidelines, in reviewing Mitigated Negative Declarations, persons and public agencies should focus on the proposed finding that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment. If persons and public agencies believe that the project may have a significant effect, they should: (1) identify the specific effect; (2) explain why they believe the effect would occur; and (3) explain why they believe the effect would be significant. Please submit comments in writing to the Planning Division within 20 days of the date of this notice. The proposed project and Mitigated Negative Declaration are subject to review and approval/adoption by the Planning Commission and City Council. If you have any questions, please call Christer Westman in the Planning Division at (760) 602-4614. PUBLIC REVIEW PERIOD PUBLISH DATE Planning Division August 23, 2012-September 12, 2012 August 23, 2012 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, CA 92008-7314 T 760-602-4600 F 760-602-8559 ® ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT FORM-INITIAL STUDY CASE NO: GPA 11-07/ MP 02-03(C)/ CT 11-01/ HDP 11-011 SUP 11-02/ HMP 11-03 1. CASE NAME: 2. LEAD AGENCY: 3. CONTACT PERSON: 4. PHONE NUMBER: 5. PROJECT LOCATION: 6. PROJECT APPLICANT/PROJECT SPONSOR'S NAME AND ADDRESS: 7. GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: 8. ZONING: DATE: ____ _ ROBERTSON RANCH WEST Vll..LAGE (RANCHO COSTERA) City of Carlsbad Planning Division 1635 Faraday Ave. Carlsbad, CA 92008 Christer Westman (760) 602-4614 North side El Camino Real between Tamarack Avenue and Cannon Road Shapell Homes 8383 Wilshire Blvd. Suite 700 Beverly Hills, CA 90211 RLM, RM, RH, L, CF, OS P-C (Planned Community) 9. PROJECT DESCRIPTION/ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING AND SURROUNDING LAND USES: Project Description The subject project involves amendments to the Robertson Ranch Master Plan and the mass grading and master development of the West Village of Robertson Ranch. The West Village constitutes the final area of development in the Robertson Ranch Master Plan area of the City of Carlsbad. The Robertson Ranch Master Plan area consists of 398.0 acres of undeveloped agricultural lands (in the West Village) and property under development (in the East Village) located on the lower slopes of the foothills that comprise the Aqua Hedionda area of the City of Carlsbad, approximately two miles from the Pacific Ocean. The Robertson Ranch site is located approximately 1.5 miles east of Interstate 5. The project site was the subject of a previous CEQA review in the Robertson Ranch Final Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR), which was certified by the Carlsbad City Council on November 14, 2006 (EIR 03-03, State Clearinghouse #2004051039). The adjacent East Village section of Robertson Ranch is presently under development. The Robertson Ranch is a master planned community which integrates residential, commercial, recreational and open space land uses. The Robertson Ranch is composed of the 178.6-acre East Village and the 219.4-acre West Village. The East Village development has been approved; it has been graded, and is presently under construction. Approximately 18.0 acres of the West Village will be developed by the City of Carlsbad as a community park and fire station. As a result, the remaining West Village under private ownership is 201.37 acres in size. The West Village site is primarily in agricultural use at the ,''"'\ .-J Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-03/ CT 11-011 HDP 11-01/ SUP 11-021 HMP 11-03 present time with a few non-habitable agricultural outbuildings surrounded by both proposed and existing residential. The West Village site is located along the north side of El Camino Real between Tamarack Avenue on the north, and Cannon Road on the southeast. The West Village site is traversed by two SDG&E utility easements which contain high voltage electrical transmission lines, poles and access roads. Those portions of the site not historically used for agriculture (primarily steep slopes, canyons and drainages) are undeveloped and contain a variety of native and non-native vegetation, including chamise chaparral and Diegan coastal sage communities. A north-south trending, low-lying riparian habitat corridor is located near the western comer of the West Village. Additionally, a "Habitat Corridor" is in the very early stages of restoration with native upland and wetland vegetation habitats on the eastern section of the West Village. The approved Robertson Ranch Master Plan divides the West Village into fifteen (15) smaller planning areas; each allocated an allowed land use, acreage, density and other land use regulations as appropriate. The proposed Master Plan Amendment includes some modifications to the original planning area boundaries and residential unit distribution, however no change to the overall allowed development intensity of the West Village is proposed. The overall allowed number of residential units is capped at 672 units in both the existing approved and the proposed amended version of the Master Plan. The proposed Master Plan Amendment identifies five (5) planning areas as single-family and two (2) planning areas as multifamily. Cumulatively, the single family neighborhoods within the West Village include 308 dwelling units. The two high-density multifamily neighborhoods include a total of 364 dwelling units, including the required lower income inclusionary housing units and a maximum of 56 units of moderate income housing. In addition to the residential component, the West Village provides a 12.0 net-acre Village Center which will accommodate commercial uses and a portion of the project's community facilities requirement. The remaining Community Facilities will be located on Planning Area 2, in the western comer of the property. The West Village also provides a public park site and a centralized community recreation area for the surrounding neighborhoods. The West Village provides approximately 88.3 acres of open space, mostly located within the wildlife corridor and on the western slopes and low-lying areas. Recreation and circulation trails are also included in an effort to encourage alternative methods of transportation. Primary vehicular access to the West Village is from El Camino Real with a meandering 6-foot sidewalk on each side of the roadway for pedestrian access. Secondary vehicular access to the West Village is provided at two locations, off of Tamarack Avenue and also via a right-in-right-out local private secondary access driveway to the Village Center. The project Master Plan Amendment (MP A) constitutes the third MP A for the Robertson Ranch Master Plan and involves only properties and planning areas within the West Village. The Master Plan Amendment includes: • Minor re-configuration of the Planning Area boundaries and unit counts; • Inclusion of a new Community Facilities site (PA 2) • Gated communities at P A 5 and P A 9110 to minimize traffic northward through the neighboring Colony neighborhood; • Elimination of the requirement for "Circuitous Routing" of roadway design; • Consolidation of Planning Areas 9 and 10 into a single planning area (P A 911 0); • Increased onsite habitat preservation; The West Village property is zoned Planned Community (P-C) and thus it is regulated by Chapter 21.38 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code (C.M.C.). The P-C Zone stipulates that development within a P-C Zone may only occur in conformance with an approved Master Plan for the site. The approved Robertson 2 c ..-.. "ww Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-07/ MP 02-03/ CT 11-011 HDP 11-011 SUP 11-02/ HMP 11-03 Ranch Master Plan divides the West Village into planning areas and the proposed Master Plan Amendment follows this same general land use pattern. Underlying Zoning designations have been adopted in the Master Plan which provide development standards and design criteria for each of the planning areas. The following is a list of the West Village planning areas, their acreages, and their development intensity pursuant to the requirements and regulations articulated in the proposed MP A. RM RD-M Medium 3 17.1 15.4 5.5 85 Residential RLM R-1-8,500 Low-Medium Density 5 9.7 9.5 3.8 36 Residential s.f. RM RD-M 6 17.7 14.4 5.9 87 RM RD-M The West Village is also required to provide 101 residential units to be sold or rented at rates affordable to lower income residents. In addition, the West Village will exceed standard inclusionary housing obligations by also providing 56 moderate-income units. A minimum of 100 of either affordable or market rate units will be developed as senior housing. No changes are proposed to these originally- approved affordability requirements of the approved Master Plan. A Master Tentative Map (MTM) is also proposed for the West Village. This MTM covers 201.37 acres and proposes 13 master lots. In future actions, some of these residential master lots will be further subdivided pursuant to the requirements of the MPA. Earthwork proposed per the MTM will total 1,460,500 cubic yards in a balanced grading operation. Per the analysis required pursuant to the Carlsbad Hillside Ordinance Sect. 21.85 of the C.M.C., earthwork quantities total 9,152 cubic yards per graded acre. The grading and development proposed on the MTM is consistent with the guidelines and requirements provided in the proposed MP A. 3 ··---------·-·---·----------------------------- c '-" Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-07/ MP 02-03/ CT 11-011 HDP 11~011 SUP 11-02/ HMP 11-03 Permits Required The project will require approval of a General Plan Amendment (GPA) to the Land Use Element of the Carlsbad General Plan. This GP A will involve modification to the boundaries of land use categories on all of the planning areas within the West Village. A Master Plan Amendment and development entitlement permits are also required. These entitlement permits include a Habitat Management Plan Permit (HMP) which is required for the impacts to native habitats necessitated by the project. The Robertson Ranch is the subject of an approved HMP hardline, adopted in 2006 by the City of Carlsbad and the Resource Agencies. This hardline design was subsequently amended through a minor amendment (in late 2006), allowing for the "Tamarack connection modifications". The Proposed MPA and MTM necessitate an "Equivalency Finding" by the City of Carlsbad (in consultation with the Resource Agencies) for the minor revisions proposed to this approved hardline. A Special Use Permit (SUP) will also be required for grading and construction adjacent to El Camino Real. This SUP will assess the project's compliance with the adopted scenic roadway standards applicable to El Camino Real. A Hillside Development Permit (HDP) will be required for the mass grading per the MTM because the proposed site contains slopes of 15% or greater and also has an elevation differential of more than 15-feet. Impacts to wetlands and waters of the U.S. and the State of California will require approval of a Nationwide Permit 29 (Residential Development) pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, issued by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. These impacts to wetlands and waters will also necessitate water quality certification issued by the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board pursuant to Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, and execution of a Streambed Alteration Agreement with the California Department of Fish and Game. The project proposes a master subdivision for 13 lots pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act. This will require approval of a major subdivision by the City. Environmental Setting and Surrounding Land Uses The majority of the West Village site has been historically used for agricultural purposes, including a wholesale palm tree nursery (which was removed in 2009) and the cultivation of field crops and flowers. No formal structures except for small agricultural outbuildings exist on-site. The eastern section of the West Village has been mass graded for a City park and fire station. In addition, the site is traversed by two SDG&E utility easements which contain high voltage electrical transmission lines, poles and access roads. Those portions of the site not appropriate for agricultural uses (primarily steep slopes and drainages) are undeveloped and contain a variety of native and non-native vegetation, including chamise chaparral and Diegan coastal sage communities on the higher slopes and canyons, with riparian habitat located within the natural drainages. Biological resources on the site include Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat and a variety of mammalian, reptilian and avian species typical for this area and the existing habitat. The biological assessment for the site indicates that a bird species of concern, the California gnatcatcher, has been located on the site. No plants or other animals of special concern have been identified on the site during the biological surveys of the site. Topographically, the site varies considerably and ranges in elevation from approximately 40 feet to 225 feet above mean sea level. Surrounding land uses vary considerably and include undeveloped/ agricultural land to the southeast, established residential subdivisions located to the north, west and south, developing residential subdivisions to the east (East Village) and the Rancho Carlsbad manufactured home subdivision located along the projects' southeast property line. The existing Calavera Hills residential neighborhood is adjacent to the eastern portion of the projects' northern boundary. 4 Previous Environmental Review ......., Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-031 CT 11-011 HDP 11-011 SUP 11-021 HMP 11-03 The project site was the subject of a previous CEQA review in the Robertson Ranch Final Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR), which was certified by the Carlsbad City Council on November 14, 2006 (EIR 03-03, State Clearinghouse #2004051039). According to Section 15168 of the State CEQA Guidelines, a Program EIR is appropriate for a series of actions that can be characterized as one large project, are related geographically, and as logical parts in the chain of contemplated actions in connection with issuance of rules, regulations or plans. Through the certification of the Program EIR, the Carlsbad City Council adopted CEQA Findings of Fact, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. The EIR is intended to be used in the review of subsequent projects within the Robertson Ranch Master Plan. The project incorporates the required EIR mitigation measures, and through the analysis of supplemental plans, reports, and studies pertaining to biological resources, geotechnical, hydrology, storm water management, and noise, a determination has been made that the project impacts are mitigated to a level of less than significant. The Roberson Ranch Master Plan EIR and additional technical studies are cited as the source documents of this environmental evaluation. 5 c ,..,..,.,_ ...,; Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-03/ CT 11-011 HDP 11-011 SUP 11-02/ HMP 11-03 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. D Aesthetics D Greenhouse Gas Emissions 0Noise D Agriculture and D Hazards/Hazardous Materials D Population and Housing Forestry Resources D Air Quality D Hydrology/Water Quality D Public Services Air Quality C8J Biological Resources D Land Use and Planning D Recreation D Cultural Resources D Mineral Resources D Transportation/Circulation C8J Geology/Soils D Mandatory Findings of 0 Utilities & Service Systems Significance 6 DETERMINATION. ......, Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-07/MP 02-03/CT 11-01/SUP 11-02/HMP 11-03 D 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. D I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. D 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. D 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. Date ~-1£/-/Z Planning Director's Signature Date 7 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS ....., Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-03/ CT 11-011 HDP 11-011 SUP 11-021 HMP 11-03 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 mitigated 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. 8 "'-"' Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-07/ MP 02-03/ CT 11-011 HDP 11-011 SUP 11-021 HMP 11-03 • An EIR .!!!!!§! 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 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. 9 Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-031 CT 11-01/ HDP 11-011 SUP 11-021 HMP 11-03 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUE TO BE ADDRESSED: Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated I. AESTHETICS-Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? D D ~ D b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including but D D D ~ not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or D D ~ D quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light and glare, D D ~ 0 which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Less Than Significant Impact. The Robertson Ranch Master Plan and FEIR included a visual quality and landform analysis for the development of the Master Plan area. The development of the site was assessed in the FEIR and found to not result in a significant aesthetic impact if mitigation was incorporated into the approvals. The majority of the development area has been previously impacted by farming and related activities in relation to its natural state. The project is located along a one mile stretch of El Camino Real. El Camino Real is identified as a "community theme corridor" within the Carlsbad Scenic Corridor Guidelines. As required by the Scenic Corridor Guidelines, specific planning considerations have been incorporated into the Robertson Ranch Master Plan to address the potential for significant visual impacts from El Camino Real. No other identified specific scenic vista, scenic resource, including but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway exists. The MPA does not propose any substantive aesthetic changes from the Master Plan document which was assessed in the FEIR and approved by the City of Carlsbad. The MPA proposes elimination of an RV storage lot and elimination of retaining walls along the El Camino Real frontage, both of which are beneficial aesthetic impacts regarding the view of the developed site from El Camino Real. The project continues to implement the goals and objectives of the Land Use and Open Space/Conservation Elements of the Carlsbad General Plan. Continued compliance with the development standards and design guidelines of the Master Plan mitigates any potential visual quality impacts of individual development projects that are implemented consistent with the Master Plan. Ultimate compliance with the development standards of the Master Plan specifically mitigates visual impacts including those associated with the views from El Camino Real. The project requires issuance of a Special Use Permit for the El Camino Real Corridor to ensure compliance with adopted scenic corridor guidelines for property fronting along El Camino Real. The grading for building pads and roadways, in accordance with the requirements of the Master Plan, will be accomplished in a manner that maintains the appearance of the natural terrain of the site, and avoids the grading and development of steep slopes and those areas of natural habitat. During construction, grading earthwork proposed will total 1,460,500 cubic yards in a balanced grading operation. This grading will result in temporary visual changes of the project site. However, the grading limits and quantities are within the projected limits that were reviewed in the FEIR and found to be not significant or otherwise mitigated. These changes associated with grading and construction of the project are temporary in nature. Thus, the portions of the project which are visible from El Camino Real are consistent with [or an aesthetic improvement to] the approved Master Plan, and they are consistent with the special conditions in the Scenic Corridor Guidelines and the General Plan Scenic Roadways and Open Space policies and guidelines. Subject to inclusion of the mitigation measures adopted in the Certified FEIR, the project will have a less than significant impact. 10 l'"" .. ·~ Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-03/ CT 11-011 HDP 11-011 SUP 11-02/ HMP 11-03 b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway? No Impact. No historic buildings are located in or adjacent to the area of the project. Much of the property is visible from El Camino Real, but although this transportation corridor is considered scenic by the City, it is not identified as a state scenic highway and is not designated by Caltrans as eligible for listing as a State Scenic Highway. A Special Use Permit for compliance with scenic corridor design criteria is however required pursuant to City of Carlsbad development review requirements. In terms of State scenic highways, only five (5) sections of highway are identified as State Scenic Highways, or candidates for designation as State Scenic Highways within San Diego County. None of these highways are located in Carlsbad. As such, none of the_proposed improvements are within the viewshed of an officially designated state scenic highway. As a result, no impacts would result. c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project, including the MPA and the MTM, contains modifications or amendments which will result in differences from the approved Robertson Ranch Master Plan and the plans addressed in the Robertson Ranch FEIR, however those differences do not substantially degrade the existing or developed visual character or quality of the site or its surroundings. During construction, temporary changes of visual character of the project area would occur. These changes involve the storage and use of construction and trenching equipment, temporary signage and vehicles, and soil stockpiles in the construction staging areas. These changes would be apparent to nearby motorists and residents. However, inasmuch as these changes are temporary, impacts would be less than significant, subject to adherence with the mitigation measures included in the Certified FEIR. d) Create a new source of substantial light and glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Less Than Significant Impact. As indicated in the FEIR, the project will introduce new light and potential sources of glare on the project site. The project will, however, be required to comply with City standards regarding building, street and recreational lighting, as well as architectural design criteria. The approved Master Plan provides basic lighting provisions that all future development on the project site will follow, including limits on street lights, pedestrian-oriented lighting, limited lights adjacent to open spaces, and restrictions on commercial lighting. No changes are proposed to these lighting regulations. As a result, the project will have a less than significant impact on the visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. During construction of the proposed project, all construction activities will occur during daytime hours. As a result, no nighttime lighting for construction activities will be required for the project. Temporary security lighting may be required in the construction staging areas where construction equipment and materials would be stored; however security lighting would be shielded away from adjacent properties and directed downward, on the construction equipment and materials. For these reasons, and subject to adherence with the mitigation measures included in the Certified FEIR, impacts associated with light and glare would be less than significant. 11 c Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-03/ CT 11-01/ HDP 11-011 SUP 11-021 HMP 11-03 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUE TO BE ADDRESSED: Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation lncofll_orated II. AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY 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 D D ~ D 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 D D D ~ a Williamson Act contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning D D D ~ of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code 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 D D D ~ forest land to non-forest use? e) Involve other changes in the existing environment, D D D ~ which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agt"i_cultural use? 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? Less Than Significant Impact. The California Department of Conservation, Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program compile Important Farmland maps pursuant to the provision of Section 65570 of the California Government Code. The map associated with the Carlsbad area is the "California Department of Conservation -San Diego County Important Farmland" exhibit dated September, 2002. According to this document, the West Village site contains land which is Farmland of Statewide Importance, Unique Farmland, and Farmland of Local Importance. The project site also contains Other Land, defined as generally non-agricultural land on the above-referenced map. 12 Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-03/ CT 11-011 HDP 11-011 SUP 11-02/ HMP 11-03 Implementation of the project would result in the conversion of the above lands to residential, commercial or open space uses, including habitat restoration. However, the Certified FEIR included a California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment (LESA) model for the proposed project. Based on the LESA analysis, the conversion of the existing farmlands to other uses, per the approved Master Plan, is not considered a significant impact. The proposed MP A and MTM do not result in significant modifications to the approved Robertson Ranch Master Plan with regard to agricultural resources. No additional farmland beyond that originally assessed will result from the proposed project. The project development limit boundaries include 4.12 acres less agricultural (row crop) area than that originally approved for impact in conjunction with the approved Master Plan project. The proposed project also allows for the inclusion of community farming as an allowed use in Planning Area 2. Such use was not an allowed use in the approved Master Plan. Thus, with this reduction in impact and addition of the potential for permanent farming use, it is concluded that a less than significant impact to Prime Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance wiii take place as a result of the proposed project. b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? No Impact. The subject property is zoned P-C (Planned-Community). The P-C Zone is not specifically an agricultural zone. The existing agricultural operations are consistent with the zoning however, because the City of Carlsbad policy does allow agriculture as an interim (non-permanent) use. The P-C zoning allows development of the site pursuant to approval of a master plan. No Williamson Act contracts encumber any portion of the subject property. Therefore, no impact would result from implementation of the project. 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 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? No Impact. California Public Resources Code section 12220(g) defines "Forest land" as "land that can support 10-percent native tree cover of any species, including hardwoods, under natural conditions, and that allows for management of one or more forest resources, including timber, aesthetics, fish and wildlife, biodiversity, water quality, recreation, and other public benefits." No native trees except for willow scrub exist on the subject site. The willow scrub vegetation will not be impacted by the project. Timberland is defined in California Government Code section 511 04(g) as "privately owned land, or land acquired for state forest purposes, which is devoted to and used for growing and harvesting timber, or for growing and harvesting timber and compatible uses, and which is capable of growing an average annual volume of wood fiber of at least 15 cubic feet per acre." No evidence exists that the property presently or historically has contained forested lands or has been used for timber harvesting. As a result of these factors, it is determined that the project will not impact forest land or timber land as defined in the referenced State of California laws. d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest uses? No Impact. The proposed project does not impact forest land as indicated in Section Il(c) above. Therefore the project will not result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest uses. 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? Less Than Significant Impact. The subject site contains land which is Farmland of Statewide Importance, Unique Farmland, and Farmland of Local Importance. The project site also contains Other Land, defined as generally non- agricultural land on the above-referenced map. Implementation of the project would result in the conversion of the above lands to residential, commercial and/or open space uses, including habitat restoration. The Certified FEIR concluded that the conversion of the existing farmlands to other uses, per the approved Master Plan, is not considered a significant impact. The proposed project does not modify the Master Plan to the degree that it results in additional conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use beyond that assessed in the Certified FEIR. Therefore, consistent with the conclusion reached in the 13 Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-03/ CT 11-011 HDP 11-011 SUP 11-02/ HMP 11-03 certified EIR, the impact assessed from conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural, urban uses is considered less than significant. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED: Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated 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 D D ~ D applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute D D ~ D substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of D D ~ D 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 D D ~ D concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial D D ~ D number of people? a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Less Than Significant Impact. The project site is located in the San Diego Air Basin which is a state non-attainment area for ozone (03) and 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 (RAQS) 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. 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) 1994, and was forwarded to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for approval. 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. 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 14 c Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-03/ CT 11-01/ HDP 11-011 SUP 11-02/ HMP 11-03 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 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 to 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 obstruct implementation of the regional plan. Thus, it is concluded that the project will result in no impact to implementation of the air quality plan for the region. The Robertson Ranch Master Plan FEIR analyzed a project that assumed 1,383 dwelling units at final buildout. The worst- case traffic impact assumptions and projections were based on this figure. Subsequent to the EIR analysis, the Master Plan was approved with a maximum of 1,154 dwelling units, which is 229 units less than the amount that the EIR had assumed would be constructed within the Robertson Ranch property. The proposed MPA does not change these approved assumed figures. Therefore at buildout, the Robertson Ranch project is projected to result in no greater mobile source and fixed source emissions than that assessed in the FEIR. Therefore, it is concluded that, subject to adherence with the air quality mitigation measures included in the Certified FEIR, impacts associated with the applicable air quality plan would be less than significant. b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? 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 2006 through December 2010 indicate that the most recent air quality violations recorded were for the state eight hour standard for ozone (a total of 18 days during the 5-year period). Long-term emissions associated with travel by residents and visitors to and from the project have been assessed in the Certified FEIR. Motor vehicles were determined to be the primary source of air emissions associated with operation of the proposed project. The Robertson Ranch project was estimated to result in a total worst-case trip generation level of 17,596 average daily trips (ADTs) based upon the aggregate trip generation produced by the project planning areas. Thus, the combined pollutant emission levels from the East and West Villages of Robertson Ranch were projected in the FEIR to exceed the thresholds established by the SDAPCD, and thus the daily mobile source emissions associated with the project at buildout would be considered significant, and mitigation measures were adopted with the Final EIR. The proposed MP A and MTM continue to maintain consistency with the assumptions in the FEIR, will be required to comply with the mitigation measures adopted in the FEIR, and will thus result in a less than significant impact to adopted air quality standards. The project would result in short-term emissions associated with grading and construction of the improvements. These emissions would emanate primarily from construction operations associated with earthwork and excavation and construction of the lift station, and to a lesser degree the open trenching operations. Emissions from trucks hauling soil and gravel (export and import) would take place during the construction of the project. Approximately 1,460,500 cubic yards of soil will be graded, which is within the earthwork analyzed in the FEIR. As assessed in the FEIR, the emissions associated with this grading construction would be minimized through standard construction measures such as watering the graded areas for dust control, covering haul vehicles and trucks, replanting disturbed areas as soon as practical, restricting vehicle speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph or less to control fugitive dust, and sweeping the streets at the end of each day if visible soil material is carried onto the streets. Therefore, subject to adherence with the air quality mitigation measures included in the Certified FEIR, impacts associated with conflict with the potential for air quality standard violations would be less than significant. 15 c Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-03/ CT 11-011 HDP 11-011 SUP 11-02/ HMP 11-03 c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria poJJutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quaJity standard? 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 contribution to a cumulatively considerable potential net increase in emissions throughout the air basin. According to the CEQA Guidelines Section 15064(h)(3), the proposed project's incremental contribution to the cumulative effect is not cumulatively considerable. Any impact is assessed as less than significant. d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantia] pollutant concentrations? Less Than Significant Impact. Sensitive receptors are defined as populations that are more susceptible to the effects of air pollution than the population at large. Sensitive receptors are defined by the San Diego Air Pollution Control District as schools, day-care centers, nursing homes, retirement homes, convalescent centers, health clinics, and hospitals. The FEIR concluded that no sensitive receptors are located within or in immediate proximity to the project site. However, it noted that the Rancho Carlsbad community, a majority of which is occupied by retired and/or elderly persons, is located to the south of the site. However, development of the project was determined in the Certified FEIR to be considered to result in a less than significant impact to these neighboring residences. Further, the proposed MPA and MTM do not propose changes which would increase the pollutant levels. Therefore the impact to sensitive receptors is assessed at less than significant impact. e) Create obj~ctionable odors affecting a substantia] number of people? Less Than Significant Impact. As indicated in the Certified FEIR, the construction of the proposed project could generate fumes from the use of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), which may be considered objectionable by some people. Such exposure would be short-term or transient. In addition, the number of people exposed to such transient impacts is not considered substantial. Nonetheless, the FEIR considered this transient impact to be significant and thus the FEIR incorporated mitigation measures which would minimize impacts associated with odors created during construction. This mitigation measure requires the use of zero emission VOC paints for all architectural coatings within the proposed Master Plan development. The proposed MPA and MTM will not increase the use of VOCs on the project, and thus the assumptions in the FEIR and the Master Plan are consistent with the proposed project. Therefore, subject to adherence with the air quality mitigation measures included in the Certified FEIR, impacts associated with objectionable odors would be less than significant. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUE TO BE ADDRESSED: Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES-Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or D D ~ D 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, D ~ D D aquatic or wetland habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? 16 c) d) e) f) Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-07/ MP 02-031 CT 11-011 HDP 11-011 SUP 11-021 HMP 11-03 Have a substantial adverse effect on federally D D ~ D 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? Interfere substantially with the movement of any D ~ D D 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? Conflict with any local policies or ordinances D D D ~ protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat D D ~ D Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? 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? Less Than Significant Impact. A Biological Resources Report for the Robertson Ranch Project, dated October 5, 2004, by Merkel & Associates, was the subject of the FEIR analysis, and mitigation measures necessary in order to offset the impacts to sensitive biology for the Robertson Ranch Master Plan and associated entitlements were adopted. This biological report indicates that vegetation resources on the West Village include primarily Extensive Agricultural row crops and Intensive Agriculture (Nursery), with Diegan coastal sage scrub (DCSS) covering the non-agricultural slopes and valleys. A palm tree nursery shown near the Cannon Road/El Camino Real intersection has been removed since the time of the biological report and has been replaced with a wetlands restoration site (located in the southern section of the PA 23C Habitat Corridor), which is presently in the early stages of grow-in. The biological report also indicates that two bird species of concern, the California gnatcatcher (CAGN) and the Yellow breasted chat were located on the West Village site. A 2004 survey by Merkel and also a recent (2011) survey by Helix Biological for an endangered bird, the least Bell's Vireo (LBV) concluded the absence of LBV within the Southern willow scrub (SWS) riparian corridor habitat on the West Village. Sensitive habitats on the property as identified in the FEIR are listed as; Coastal and valley freshwater marsh (CFM), SWS and Diegan coastal sage scrub (DCSS). The proposed West Village project is very similar in scope of impacts to these sensitive habitats as that analyzed in the FEIR. In a direct comparison (results shown in Table A below) of the sensitive habitat impacts between the project analyzed in the FEIR and the presently proposed MPA and MTM project, the proposed project results in 0.82 acres less impact to CFM and 0.20 acres less impact to SWS. The project increases the impact to existing DCSS by 2.50 acres. The reductions in impacted sensitive vegetation area are seen as a beneficial impact of the proposed MPA and MTM, in comparison to that reviewed in the FEIR. The additional impacts associated with DCSS are considered significant and require mitigation. The proposed West Village project also reduces impacts to Extensive Agriculture (row crops) by 4.47 acres. This acreage will be revegetated with DCSS vegetation and will become part of the hardlined open space. A slight increase of impacted acreage of Urban/developed lands (0.19 acres) will also take place through implementation of the proposed project. Since Urban/developed lands are not considered a sensitive vegetation category, this increase in impacts is not considered a significant impact. This information is shown on Table A below, which addresses all impacts (including temporary impacts which will be revegetated with sensitive habitats) 17 c Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-031 CT 11-011 HDP 11-011 SUP 11-021 HMP 11-03 The federally threatened coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila califomica califomica) occurs within the project site, however no other federally listed species have been detected. The least Bell's vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus) has been sighted in the vicinity of the property, including within Calavera Creek on the east side of the Robertson Ranch East Village, but has not been detected within the project site. Focused gnatcatcher surveys were originally conducted for the entire Robertson Ranch property in 2001. The results of that survey concluded that three gnatcatcher pairs existed within the overall Robertson Ranch property, including two pairs within the Robertson Ranch East Village, and one pair within the West Village. The single gnatcatcher pair within the West Village was detected within one of the planning areas identified for open space conservation (P A 23B ). According to the M&A report, although the focused surveys did not determine the boundaries of the home range territories of the three pairs, it was expected that most or all of the home ranges were retained within the biological open space, including the pair within P A 23B of the project site. The project property occurs within the plan area of the City of Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan (HMP), which is the local Subarea Plan of the County of San Diego Multiple Habitat Conservation Plan (MHCP). As noted in the FEIR, the primary mitigation for impacts to HMP species under the HMP is the conservation and management of habitat for the species in the preserve system. The HMP requires that, " .. .in compliance with the Endangered Species Act requirements that the impacts of incidental take be minimized and mitigated to the maximum extent practicable, measures to avoid and reduce impacts will apply citywide on a project level basis." The FEIR adopted mitigation measures that, if implemented, would specifically minimize impacts (including indirect impacts) to gnatcatchers. Indirect impacts have the potential to occur as a result of noise generated during project construction and/or during initial clearing and grubbing within or adjacent to potentially occupied habitat. The FEIR mitigation measures include compliance with the Habitat Management Plan (HMP) policies, recording of a conservation easement over conserved habitats, long-term management of the conserved areas by a conservation entity, endowment funding oflong-term management, restmation of the Habitat Corridor (PA 23C), temporary fencing delineation of conserved areas during construction, biological monitoring of construction activities, monitoring of CAGN habitat during construction, and Burrowing owl (BO) and Brodiaea filifolia surveys prior to construction. As can be seen in Table A, the project will result in a reduced impact on sensitive wetland habitats, including CFM and SWS by 0.22 and 0.37 acres, respectively. However, the project will result in an increase in impacted DCSS area by 2.50 acres. Therefore, this increased impact to DCSS results in a potentially significant impact to sensitive biological resources. As such, a mitigation measure is necessary to mitigate this impact to a level of insignificance. Such mitigation required is in the form of revegetation of slopes created within the West Village hardline open space. These slopes are primarily in the form of cut and fill slopes constructed for roadways, but also include graded perimeter areas which are outside of the fire suppression zones, and thus are well within the open space corridors of P A 1, PA 23A, PA 23B or PA 23C. With the inclusion of this mitigation measure (Mitigation Measure BI0-1), and subject to adherence with the additional biological mitigation measures included in the Certified FEIR, impacts associated with sensitive wildlife species identified as a 18 c Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-07/ MP 02-031 CT 11-01/ HDP 11-011 SUP 11-02/ HMP 11-03 candidate, sensitive or special status species or to any sensitive habitats, or wildlife in the area are determined to be less than significant. BIO-I The project developer shall revegetate all permanent manufactured slopes conserved within the proposed HMP hardline area with Diegan coastal sage scrub (DCSS) vegetation. This revegetated area will total 12.42 acres, which will sufficiently mitigate for the 2.50 acre increased impact to sensitive DCSS vegetation. Such DCSS revegetation program shall be subject to a five-year maintenance and monitoring program, with a requirement to meet City-approved success criteria. This restoration program shall be approved by the City prior to the commencement of any clearing or grading associated with the project. The restoration program shall include site preparation guidelines, implementation monitoring, performance standards, long-term maintenance and monitoring methodology, and contingency measures with a commitment to long- term funding. b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian, aquatic or wetland habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. The City of Carlsbad has adopted a Habitat Management Plan for Natural Communities (HMP) as a subarea plan of the Multiple Habitat Conservation Plan (MHCP) for the city. This HMP designates a natural habitat preserve system and provides a regulatory framework for determining impacts and designating mitigation associated with proposed development projects. The primary objective of the HMP is to allow development while identifying and maintaining a preserve system that allows for sustained existence of animals and plants at both the local and regional levels. The HMP was approved as a joint effort with the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Any modifications to this HMP necessitate consultation and concurrence from the CDFG and USFWS. As part of the HMP process for Robertson Ranch, the property became the subject of an approved hardline, adopted in 2006 by the City of Carlsbad and the agencies described above. This hardline was originally adopted through the "Concurrence on Hardline Design for Robertson Ranch" correspondence from the USFWS and CDFG, dated Feb. 11, 2005. The hardline design was subsequently amended in 2007 through a minor amendment, allowing for the "Tamarack connection modifications". The proposed project would require an additional set of changes (described above) to the adopted hardline for the West Village. These changes will constitute a second minor amendment (or Equivalency Determination) to the hardline. A Hardline Comparative analysis has been conducted between the existing hardline and proposed hardline limits on the West Village. Table B below shows the total differences in acreage for each habitat type. In the direct comparison of the three sensitive habitat communities on the West Village, the project results in an increase in the amount of CVFM by 0.82 acres, an increase in DCSS by 0.20 acres, and also by increasing the amount of SWS by 0.04 acres. Thus, the proposed project will result in a total increase in the conservation of sensitive habitats protected by a hardline conservation easement of 1.06 acres. 19 Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-07/ MP 02-03/ CT 11-011 HDP 11-011 SUP 11-02/ HMP 11-03 Also, in accordance with the HMP planning standards for the Robertson Ranch, the decrease in DCSS impacts by 0.17 acres will allow the Robertson Ranch project to add to the permanent preservation of DCSS, and thus continue to protect more than 67 percent of the existing 71.6 acres of DCSS habitat existing on the Robertson Ranch site. Further, the proposed hardline provides for the permanent conservation and restoration of HMP "Link B" as a Wildlife Corridor inasmuch as the minimum hardline link width provided is 468 feet, with sections being over 600 and 700 feet in width. The wildlife undercrossing continues to be provided at the roadway crossing between the Planning Area 23B valley and the Planning Area 23C Habitat Corridor. The secondary habitat corridor at the western edge of the project (Drainage A) has been significantly increased due to the elimination of residential Planning Area 1. Also, a minimum 100-foot setback from wetlands will be provided except for the small drainage tributary located within PA 1 on the north edge of P A 2, and a wildlife undercrossing is provided at the roadway crossing between the Planning Area 23B valley and the Planning Area 23C Habitat Corridor. In accordance with the HMP planning standards for the Robertson Ranch, no brush management or fire suppression is proposed within the hardline. Revegetation of temporarily-impacted lands will occur as originally contemplated, except that the central Habitat Corridor is presently undergoing DCSS and wetland grow-in per a full, formal DCSS and wetland restoration program, rather than the originally-required modest erosion control program. Thus, the central Habitat Corridor on the West Village will result in a full 21.80 acres of DCSS restoration and 5.93 acres of wetland restoratitm, in addition to protection and management of the existing mature DCSS within the corridor. The overall Robertson Ranch project will permanently preserve and protect 64.9 percent of the existing 71.6 acres of DCSS habitat existing on the Robertson Ranch site, and will additionally restore 40.15 acres (21.80 acres of existing DCSS revegetation + 12.42 acres of proposed DCSS revegetation + 5.93 acres of existing wetlands creation) of primarily agricultural lands to native habitats (DCSS and Wetlands) on the West Village alone. As a result of these factors, the proposed hardline configuration would result in beneficial impacts to the biological quality and quantity of the West Village hardline preserve, and thus qualifies for a Determination of Equivalency to the HMP hardline. However, this assumption is based upon adherence with the biological mitigation measures included in the Certified FEIR, and also with mitigation measure BI0-2 articulated below. A request by the City has been made and sent to the wildlife agencies for a determination that the proposal qualifies for an HMP Equivalency Determination. A decision has not been provided by the agencies regarding the request as of this writing. With the inclusion of mitigation measure BI0-2, it is concluded that the project will result in an overall increase in protected (including revegetated) sensitive habitat, and overall increase in overall protected open spaces, and would thus avoid any direct or indirect impacts to the HMP and other adopted plans, policies or regulations of the City, the CDFG and USFWS. It is thus concluded that the impact associated with these factors is mitigated to a level of less than significant. BI0-2 Prior to issuance of a grading permit for the MTM, the developer shall process and receive approval of a HMP Equivalency Determination through the City of Carlsbad in consultation with the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) and California Department of Fish & Game (CDFG). 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? Less Than Significant Impact. Pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) maintains regulatory authority over jurisdictional wetlands, waters of the United States, and non- wetland waters under specifically identified conditions. Four separate drainages, totaling 6.78 acres, of which 5.36 acres consists of USACEjurisdictional area, within the West Village qualify as federally protected wetlands or waters as defined by Section 404. The project site contains two drainage complexes which both ultimately connect to a water of the United States (Agua Hedionda Lagoon), and therefore are both also considered waters of the U.S. These drainages include a large riparian corridor located within PA 23B, a small tributary drainage which sits within PA 1, immediately north and adjacent to P A 2 in the extreme western portion of the site, and two major ephemeral drainages which bisect the eastern half of the project. The two drainage complexes exit the property through two separate existing culverts under El Camino Real near both the westerly and the easterly ends of the project frontage. 20 c Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-07/ MP 02-03/ CT 11-01/ HDP 11-011 SUP 11-02/ HMP 11-03 The project has been specifically designed to minimize impacts to aquatic resources. The proposed project will result in the loss of approximately 0.31 acre of USACE jurisdiction lands, of which 0.14 acre consists of jurisdictional wetlands. In addition, grading will result in temporary impacts of up to 0.18 acre of USACE jurisdiction lands, including 0.05 acre of jurisdictional wetlands. These impacts are the result of access roads extending into the site from the Kelly Drive extension, the Edinburgh Drive extension, and the El Camino Real widening. Also an access road across a jurisdictional drainage to provide access to PA 9/10 (from PA 11) is necessary. Of the 6.78 acres of USACE jurisdictional waters on the site (including 5.36 acres of wetlands and 7,015 linear feet of streambed), the project will preserve 95% (6.47 acres) of the on- site jurisdictional waters, including 97% (5.22 acres) of the wetlands and 88% (6,145 linear feet) of the on-site streambeds. As compensatory mitigation for permanent impacts to 0.31 acre of USACE jurisdiction (870 linear feet of streambed), the project applicant will create 1.40 acres of riparian/wetland habitat on site, within the Habitat Corridor of PA 23C. Of this 1.40 acres of created habitat, at least 0.31 acre will consist of USACE three-parameter wetlands. The proposed 1.40-acres of mitigation will be part of a larger riparian/wetland creation area, as described within the approved 2007 Wetland Habitat Creation, Maintenance and Monitoring Program prepared by Planning Systems ("Mitigation Plan"). With the creation of 1.40 acres of wetland/riparian habitat, and the avoidance of 6.47 acres of Corps jurisdiction (including 5.22 acres of wetlands), the project will result in a net increase of at least 1.09 acres of jurisdictional waters on site. The project will mitigate temporary impacts to jurisdictional waters by restoring temporarily affected areas to pre-construction contours and re-vegetating with native species. The Certified FEIR anticipated 0.40 acres of impact to jurisdictional wetlands or waters on the West Village. These impacts were considered a significant impact, for which mitigation measures were adopted. These mitigation measures included wetland creation (no net loss of wetlands), 100-foot buffers for wetlands unless allowed in consultation with CDFG and USFWS, and compliance with HMP adjacency standards for wetlands and other protected lands. In light of the fact that the proposed project reduces the wetland/waters impacts by 0.09 acres from that assessed in the FEIR, and subject to project adherence to the mitigation measure adopted in the FEIR, the impacts to federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act are assessed at less than significant. 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? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. The West Village project is located within an area regulated by the City of Carlsbad HMP. This HMP establishes the policy impact and mitigation standards with regard to the requirements of the Federal and State Endangered Species Acts (ESA). This HMP requires the provision of HMP Link B between Core #3 and Core #4. This link is identified as a connectivity line for wildlife pursuant to the HMP. The FEIR concluded that consistency with the policies of the HMP, including the provision of Link B in a shape and width as indicated in the HMP would result in a finding of non-interference with wildlife corridors. The project analyzed in the FEIR was found to be consistent with the HMP policies as evidence by hardline documentation from the City of Carlsbad, the USFWS and CDFG, referenced in Section IV(b) above. Subject to inclusion of mitigation measure BI0-1 above, the proposed West Village MPA and MTM will be consistent with the HMP hardline policies, and thus, with the inclusion of this mitigation measure, it is concluded that the project will not interfere with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors. e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? No Impact. City of Carlsbad has an adopted heritage tree preservation policy. Heritage trees are identified trees located within the city limits which are identified as having notable historic interest or trees of an unusual species or size. The project does not impact any of these identified trees. For this reason, it is concluded that a less than significant impact would occur to any tree preservation policy or ordinance. 21 c Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-031 CT 11-011 HDP 11-01/ SUP 11-021 HMP 11-03 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? Less Than Significant Impact. The City of Carlsbad HMP designates a natural preserve system and provides a regulatory framework for determining impacts to sensitive biological resources and assigning mitigation for any impacts that do occur. No other local, regional or state habitat conservation plans specific to this site affect the property. As referenced in Section IV(d) above, the project provides for HMP Link B between Core #3 and Core #4. This link is identified as a connectivity line for wildlife pursuant to the HMP. The project however, will mitigate for impacts to vegetation communities protected by that HMP, as discussed in Section IV (a) above. The FEIR concluded that consistency with the policies of the HMP, including the provision of Link B in a shape and width as indicated in the HMP would result in a finding of non- interference with wildlife corridors. The project analyzed in the FEIR was found to be consistent with the HMP. The HMP also however contains a number of Adjacency Standards that specifically apply to projects that are located directly adjacent to sensitive habitat. A number of these Adjacency Standards are applicable to the West Village project. 1. Fire Management. The project Master Plan provides for frre suppression zones where interface exists between native habitat and residences. This fire suppression program does not provide for any vegetation thinning or frre suppression activities within the hardline. 2. Erosion Control. The project construction activities will include appropriate temporary erosion and sediment control protections so that all exposed soil in the area of the construction adjacent to sensitive habitats will be protected from erosion. This will include temporary basins, silt fences, sandbags and straw mulch rolls being placed around excavated areas and pads during the construction period. Also, all storm drains and natural drainages situated downstream from the construction will be protected by linear sediment barriers or similar erosion control devices. Weather monitoring will take place in order to avoid exposed soils during times of heavy rainfall. The streets within and around the construction site will be swept and maintained regularly during the construction period. The project will not direct any new surface drainage into Agua Hedionda Lagoon from the already existing situation. 3. Landscaping Restrictions. The FEIR included a mitigation measure which prohibits invasive plant materials in areas adjacent to sensitive habitats. Compliance with this measure will result in protection from impacts to the sensitive habitats from landscaping provided in conjunction with the project. 4. Fencing, Signs, and Lighting. Fences, signs, and lighting can assist in the protection and understanding of biological resources. However, they can also negatively impact wildlife and plants by inviting vandalism, restricting wildlife movement, and upsetting nocturnal species. The MPA includes fencing (to deter open public and pet access) and signage (to provide informational signage) requirements for all areas of protected sensitive vegetation. The FEIR included a mitigation measure which prohibits direct lighting from spillover into sensitive areas. Compliance with these measures will result in protection from impacts to the sensitive habitats from landscaping provided in conjunction with the project. 5. Predator and Exotic Species Control. Predators and exotic species will be controlled through compliance with a mitigation measure adopted in the FEIR which requires the developer to eliminate noxious plant species and fence the preserve areas so as to limit the opportunity for predator access. Compliance with these measures will result in protection from impacts to the sensitive habitats from predators and exotic species. As a result of these factors, the proposed project will maintain consistency with the HMP and will thus result in a less than significant impact to consistency with the HMP. 22 c Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-07/ MP 02-031 CT 11-011 HDP 11-011 SUP 11-02/ HMP 11-03 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUE TO BE ADDRESSED: Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated v. CULTURAL RESOURCES-Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the D D D [?3J significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the signifi-D D [?3J D cance of an archeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique pale D D D [?3J ontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred D D D [?3J outside of formal cemeteries? a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5? No Impact. In conjunction with the analysis of the Robertson Ranch Master Plan project FEIR, a Cultural Resources Survey and Evaluation for the Proposed Robertson Ranch Project, dated 2002, was prepared by Brian F. Smith and Associates (BFSA) for the subject site. The site was entirely surveyed for cultural resources. Historic maps reviewed were the 1901 USGS 30' San Luis Rey quadrangle, the 1898 USGS 15' Oceanside quadrangle, the 1942 USGS 15' Oceanside quadrangle, the 1948 USGS 7.5' San Luis Rey quadrangle, and the 1948 USGS 7.5 Encinitas quadrangle. The 1928 County tax factor aerial photographs were reviewed as well. The Native American Heritage Commission was contacted for a search of their Sacred Lands File. Interested parties identified by the Native American Heritage Commission were contacted regarding the project. Correspondence with the Native American Heritage Commission and the local Native American community occurred. No historic buildings or resources were identified as a result of these efforts. One historic structure was identified adjacent to the project site on the East Village, but this structure has since been removed. As a result of the fact that no historical resources have been recorded or were identified in the vicinity of the project, no impact to historical resources will result from implementation of the project. b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? Less Than Significant Impact. The BFSA Cultural Resources Survey and Evaluation (2002) identified eight archaeological sites within the boundaries of the West Village. These sites are identified as SDI-10,609, SDI-10,610, SDI- 10,612, SDI-16,130, SDI-16,131, SDI-16,132, SDI-16,133 and SDI-16,137. Subsequent to this 2002 survey, in 2011, during a survey update, a previously unidentified archaeological site SDI-20,409 was discovered within the boundaries of the project. Sites SDI-10,612, SDI-16,130, SDI-16,131, SDI-16,132, SDI-16,133 and SDI-16,137 were all tested for significance and determined not important under CEQA guidelines. Site SDI-10,609 and Site SDI-10,610 were subjected to an extensive data recovery program to mitigate impacts and exhaust all research potential prior to grading impacts for the Park and Habitat Corridor in 2008. In 2011, testing of site SDI-20,409 was conducted by BFSA by recordation of the surface expression of the site, surface artifact collection, excavation of shovel test pits to identify any subsurface artifact content, and excavation of one test unit. Based on the testing, it was determined that a lack of research potential and an absence of intact significant deposits or significant features, that SDI-20,409 is not significant. As a result of these surveys and test investigations, it is determined that no further significant sites under CEQA are known to exist on the site. However, CEQA Section 15064.5(f) requires provisions for identification and evaluation of accidentally discovered archaeological resources. Therefore mitigation measures have been added to the Certified FEIR 23 c Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-07/ MP 02-03/ CT 11-011 HDP 11-011 SUP 11-021 HMP 11-03 which requires the developer to enter into agreements for archaeological and Native American field monitors to observe the grading activities and to have the authority to halt grading to examine prehistoric resources if they are encountered during construction activities. As a result of the results of the above-referenced analysis and cultural testing, and subject to implementation of the mitigation measures adopted in the FEIR, the project will result in a less than significant impact to archaeological resources. c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? No Impact. The West Village project site is generally underlain by alluvium, colluvium, terrace deposits, undifferentiated igneous bedrock, Pleistocene age deposits and the Santiago Formation. Of these soil types, only the Santiago Formation has the potential to yield significant marine invertebrate faunas and it is assigned a paleontological resource sensitivity of "high". Thus the FEIR concluded that development of the West Village would have the possibility of paleontological resources being present within the soils and a mitigation measure which involves the review of the grading plans and full time attendance of a paleontologist during grading operations (cut excavations), with the authority to direct grading in order to salvage and curate resources, as necessary. Through the implementation of this mitigation measure, impacts to paleontological resources will be less than significant. No impacts to any unique geologic feature will result from the project. d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? No Impact. A review of cultural literature and testing of sites within the area of the project concludes that no known human remains are located in the area of impact. The California Health and Safety Code (Section 7050.5) states that if human remains are discovered on the project site, no further disturbance shall occur until the County Medical Examiner has made a determination of origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5097.98. As adherence to state regulations would be required, no mitigation would be necessary in the unlikely event that human remains were discovered during construction of the project. Thus, no impact to human remains is expected to result from implementation of the project. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED: Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation IncoTQorated VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS-Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving: l. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as D D C8J D 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. 11. Strong seismic ground shaking? D D C8J D iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including D rg] D D liquefaction? iv. Landslides? D D D C8J 24 b) c) d) e) Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-03/ CT 11-011 HDP 11-011 SUP 11-021 HMP 11-03 Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of D D ~ D topsoil? Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, D ~ D D 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? Be located on expansive soils, as defined in Table 18 D D ~ D -1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1997), creating substantial risks to life or property? Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the D D D ~ use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? a) 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 for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. Less Than Significant Impact. The project area is situated in the western portion of the Peninsular Ranges geomorphic province of southern California. This geomorphic province encompasses an area that extends 125 miles from the Transverse Ranges and the Los Angeles Basin, south to the Mexican border, and beyond another 775 miles to the southern tip of Baja California. The westernmost portion of the province in San Diego County, in which the site is located, generally consists of Upper Cretaceous, Tertiary and Quaternary age sedimentary rocks. The most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the California Geological Survey for the north San Diego County area, indicates that the project is considered to be in a seismically active area, as is most of southern California. This map however, indicates that the subject site is not underlain by known active faults, nor is there evidence of ground displacement in the area during the last 11,000 years. The Rose Canyon fault zone is the closest known fault, which is the onshore portion of an extensive fault zone that includes the Offshore Zone of Deformation and the Newport-Inglewood fault to the north of the subject site. This fault zone, located approximately 4.5 miles westerly of the subject site, is made of predominately right-lateral strike-slip faults that extend south-southeast through the San Diego metropolitan area. The zone extends offshore at La Jolla, and continues north- northwest generally parallel to the coastline. Portions of the Rose Canyon fault zone in the San Diego area have been recognized by the State Geologist to be considered active. Additionally, the Julian and Temecula segments of the Elsinore fault zone, about 24 miles to the northeast of the subject site are also referenced in the Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. A Supplemental to the Updated Geotechnical Investigation for Rancho Costera, dated June 6, 2011, has been conducted by Geosoils Inc. This report concludes that based on their review of published geologic maps and historic aerial photographs, as well as their site reconnaissance and test pit excavations, that although the project site is considered to be in a seismically active area, no active faults are known to be present across the project site. The closest fault is located approximately 4.5 miles westerly of the site. The Elsinore fault zone is located approximately 24 miles east of the site. The potential for rupture resulting from earthquake is considered to be low. The subject site is not within a fault-rupture hazard zone as indexed in the Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. Due to the lack of known active faults on the site, the potential for surface rupture at the site is considered low. Further, the project site is not within a fault-rupture hazard zone as determined in the geotechnical report, and as indexed in the Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42; therefore the project would not expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects. For these reasons, project impacts would be less than significant. 25 c Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-031 CT 11-011 HDP 11-011 SUP 11-021 HMP 11-03 ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? Less Than Significant Impact. Based on a Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment for California, issued by the United States Geological Survey/California Geological Survey (2003), the project is located in a zone where the horizontal peak ground acceleration having a 10 percent probability of exceedance in 50 years is 0.34g (34 percent of the acceleration of gravity). This is the seismic hazard most likely to impact the project site resulting from an earthquake. As a result of this factor, the requirements of the governing jurisdictions and applicable building codes should be considered in the project design. As indicated in the response to Issue No. VI(a)(i) above, based on a review of the referenced reports and geologic maps, as well as on a geologic field reconnaissance, the project site is not underlain by known active faults (i.e., faults that eXhibit evidence of ground displacement during the last 11,000 years). The Rose Canyon Fault is the closest major fault to the West Village site, located approximately 7 miles to the west. The maximum credible earthquake of magnitude 6.9 could produce a peak horizontal ground acceleration of 0.31g to0.36g (site acceleration), and a maximum probability event may be on the order of0.17g to 0.19g. This level of risk is within the Uniform Building Code (UBC) Building minimum design requirements. Thus, the referenced geological report by Geosoils, Inc. indicates that the project site appears generally suitable for grading and development in accordance with the approved MTM from a geotechnical perspective. This report concludes that hazards associated with ground shaking during a seismic event would be minimal. As such, impacts from strong seismic ground shaking would be less than significant. iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. Liquefaction of soils with minimal cohesion can be caused by strong vibratory motion due to earthquakes. Research and historical data indicates that loose granular soils and non-plastic silts that are saturated by a relatively shallow groundwater table are susceptible to liquefaction. Small areas of the West Village site are underlain by alluvial soils with localized zones of shallow ground water depth, however soil test pit excavations conducted in conjunction with the supplemental investigation conclude that groundwater should not significantly affect site development provided that the recommendations presented in the geotechnical report are implemented. These recommendations include dewatering in locations where utilities are placed. Groundwater mitigation is in the locations ofPA1 and the land bridge between PA 8 and PA 11. Also perched groundwater conditions, along zones of contrasting permeabilities, discontiguities, or fill lifts, may be encountered during grading and may require additional mitigation. Proposed graded slopes are generally anticipated by the report to be stable, assuming proper construction maintenance, and normal climatic conditions. The Robertson Ranch Master Plan FEIR included mitigation measures requiring slope stability construction techniques, soil expansion mitigation, and a requirement for a minimum 10 to 15 foot layer of non-liquefiable soil material (i.e., compacted fill plus alluvium above the groundwater table) be provided beneath any structure to reduce any potential for liquefaction or other failures. Based on the anticipated utility, foundation and infrastructure loads and preliminary design information as provided on the MTM and the MPA, the geotechnical supplemental report concludes that the site is suitable for the proposed project. Therefore, subject to implementation of the mitigation measures identified in the Certified FEIR, and also including the additional mitigation measure GE0-1 below, all feasible recommendations necessary will be incorporated into the design and construction of the West Village project. By following the geotechnical recommendations contained within these resources, the site is suitable for the proposed project and exposure of people or structures to seismic-related ground failure is considered less than significant. GE0-1 Grading and construction of the project shall comply with the geotechnical recommendations contained in the Supplement to the Updated Geotechnical Investigation for Rancho Costera. dated June 6, 2011, by Geosoils, Inc., in order to reduce the potential for settlement due to seismically-induced liquefaction or lateral spread. These recommendations shall include the use of dewatering, over-excavation and foundation-design. iv. Landslides? No Impact. The FEIR concludes that no landslides have been identified on the project site and that no significant impact as a result of landslides is anticipated on the project. 26 c Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-07/ MP 02-03/ CT 11-011 HDP 11-011 SUP 11-02/ HMP 11-03 b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less Than Significant Impact. Alluvial soils present within the project alignment have a high erosion hazard. However, after completion of construction activities, topographic contours (except for the location of the sewer lift station) would be returned to their original levels. The project will include appropriate BMPs, the incorporation of the geotechnical report findings, and the use of imported soils and gravel when appropriate. Temporary erosion and sediment control protections so that all exposed soil in the area of the construction will be protected from erosion. This will include silt fences, sandbags and straw mulch rolls being placed around excavated trench spoils during the construction period. Also, all storm drains and natural drainages situated downstream from the construction will be protected by linear sediment barriers or similar erosion control devices. Weather monitoring will take place in order to avoid exposed soils during times of heavy rainfall. The streets within and around the construction site will be swept and maintained regularly during the construction period. The project would have a less than significant impact on 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? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. As discussed above in Section VI(a)(iii), the project is located in an area subject to potential earth movement as the result of a significant seismic event. This earth movement includes the potential for lateral spread of the ground surface during an earthquake. Lateral spread usually takes place along weak shear zones that have formed within a liquefiable soil layer, potentially an alluvial or colluvial layer of soil. Liquefaction and/or lateral spreading potential has been identified in the alluvial areas of the project, and will necessitate some level of remediation. As indicated in the geotechnical reports for the project, this remediation will include removal and re- compaction of alluvial soils beneath areas in which structures and utilities will be constructed. Bio-swales and Best Management Practices (BMPs) to filter onsite storm water runoff within the project to comply with code are required to clarify and filter onsite storm water during rain events and to avoid infiltration in areas which could impact foundations or utilities. As a result, in order to reduce the potential for settlement due to seismically-induced liquefaction or lateral spread, mitigation measure GE0-1 (above) has been included, in conjunction with the mitigation measures adopted in the FEIR, which together require the use of construction techniques which will mitigate this impact to a level of insignificance. d) 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? Less Than Significant Impact. Alluvial soils occur in limited portions of the West Village project. The alluvial soils on the site are considered to range between very low to high pursuant to the definitions identified in Table 18-1-B of the UBC (1997). These soils will need to be addressed through remedial grading and specific foundation design (e.g., post tension slab design). A mitigation measure requiring such design is included in the FEIR. Project compliance with the mitigation measures articulated in the FEIR will mitigate this impact to a level of insignificance. 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? No Impact. The project does not include any proposed septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems. As a result, no impacts would occur from implementation of the project. 27 Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-03/ CT 11-011 HDP 11-011 SUP 11-02/ HMP 11-03 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED: Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated VII. GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS-Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or D D C8J D indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation D D D ~ adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment? Less Than Significant Impact. Global climate change is a change in the average weather of the earth that is measured by temperature, wind patterns, precipitation, and storms over a long period of time. Global temperatures are regulated by naturally occurring atmospheric gases (referred to as greenhouse gases) such as water vapor (H20), carbon dioxide (C02), nitrous oxide (N20), methane (CH4), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). The effect that each greenhouse gas (GHG) has on climate change is measured as a combination of the volume of its emissions, and its potential for contribution to global warming. Potential for contribution to global warming is defined as the role that a gas or aerosol plays in trapping heat in the atmosphere, and is expressed as a function of how much warming would be caused by the same mass of C02• Impacts of the project on GHG were not directly addressed in the 2006 Robertson Ranch Certified FEIR because the State laws (AB 32 and SB 97) requiring its analysis was not adopted by the State legislature until 2007. In 2009, the California Resources Agency adopted amendments to the CEQA Guidelines for the feasible mitigation of GHG emissions. These adopted guidelines give lead agencies the discretion to set quantitative or qualitative thresholds for the assessment and mitigation of GHG impacts. The global climate is continuously changing, as evidenced by repeated episodes of substantial warming and cooling documented in the geologic record. It is believed however, that emissions from human activities, particularly the consumption of fossil fuels for electricity production and transportation, have elevated the concentration of GHGs in the atmosphere beyond the level of naturally occurring concentrations. These greenhouse gases are global pollutants unlike the air pollutants measured for regional areas through the RAQS (Regional Air Quality Standards) or other local air quality standards. Whereas pollutants with localized air quality effects have relatively short atmospheric lifetimes (typically about 1 day), greenhouse gases have long atmospheric lifetime, persisting in the atmosphere for long enough time periods to be dispersed around the globe. The quantity of greenhouse gases that it takes to ultimately result in measurable climate change is not precisely known; however, it is clear that the quantity is enormous, and no single development project alone would measurably contribute to a noticeable change in the global average temperature, or to the global climate. Therefore, from the standpoint of CEQA, Greenhouse gases impacts to global climate change are inherently cumulative. Development of the Robertson Ranch West Village would result in a net increase in C02 and other greenhouse gas emissions due primarily to transportation, energy use and solid waste disposal from the existing situation, in which the property is used for agricultural operations. The project would increase GHG emissions by facilitating residential, commercial and community facility land uses and thereby increasing vehicle miles traveled associated with transporting people and goods to, from and within the community. Vehicular transportation is a major contributor to greenhouse gas emissions. Transportation is the direct result of population and employment growth, which generates vehicle trips to move goods, provide public services, and connect people with work, school, shopping, and other activities. Growth in vehicular travel is due in large part to urban development patterns. Over the last half century, homes have been built further from workplaces, schools have been located further from neighborhoods they serve, and other destinations, including shopping, have been isolated from where people live and work. A significant portion of development has been planned and built in a pattern that is dependent on the use of cars as the primary mode of travel. As a larger share of the 28 Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-07/ MP 02-031 CT 11-011 HDP 11-01/ SUP 11-02/ HMP 11-03 built environment has become automobile dependent, vehicle trips and distances have increased, and walking and public transit use have declined. A large share of the increase can be traced to the effects of a changing built environment, namely to longer trips and people driving alone. The West Village development is considered an "infill" development, surrounded on all four sides by urban uses, conveniently accessible to mass transit bus routes, and in close proximity to a large employment center (Carlsbad Research Center and other Carlsbad business parks). As such, the proposed project is consistent with the planning principle of encouraging higher intensity infill development within an existing urban area at transit corridor locations with bus service and employment centers. The project also will contain a village center at PA 11, including local neighborhood retail shops. As a result of these factors, the number of vehicle trips may be reduced, and the project's transportation-related GHG emissions may be less than rates produced by the same amount of population and employment growth elsewhere in the region where these features are less available. As indicated in the Master Plan, the West Village project is also planned around the Ahwahnee Principles, which encourage localized public spaces and recreation elements, and conserve sensitive environmental resources, which contribute to reduced GHG generation. The proposed MPA and MTM do not modify or otherwise affect the project's compliance with the planning principles referenced above. The GHG emissions from any individual project, including the Robertson Ranch West Village project, do not individually generate GHG emissions sufficient to measurably influence global climate change. However, the GHG emissions from individual projects contribute to cumulative GHG emissions on a global, national, and regional scale. In light of the above factors, the GHG emissions from construction and ongoing occupancy and operation of development of the West Village represents a less than significant contribution to the impact of GHG contribution to global climate change. b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? No Impact. Neither CEQA nor the CEQA Guidelines prescribe thresholds of significance or particular methodologies for performing a GHG impact analysis. This is left to the lead agency's judgment and discretion, based upon factual data and guidance from regulatory agencies and other credible sources. Until such a standard is established, each lead agency must develop their own approach to performing an analysis for projects that generate GHG emissions. No evidence exists that the proposed project will result in any inconsistency with adopted plans, policies or regulations regulating the emissions of greenhouse gases. The proposed project is consistent with the City of Carlsbad General Plan (subject to the proposed modifications), the Carlsbad Zoning Ordinance, the Carlsbad HMP (subject to the proposed modifications), and the Robertson Ranch Master Plan (subject to the proposed modifications). These plans are all consistent with SANDAG's Regional Comprehensive Plan (2004). The project will not violate any air quality standard or state guidelines, and as indicated above, will not contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality or greenhouse gas violation. Greenhouse gas-contributing emissions from developed-condition electricity consumption, solid waste disposal, and construction related power consumption would not be in conflict with adopted plans, policies or regulations. Thus, the project will result in no impact to these adopted plans, policies or regulations. Three types of analyses are used to determine whether the project could be in conflict with the State of California goals, including Assembly Bill 32 (AB 32) the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, passed in 2006, for reducing GHG emissions. The analyses include reviews of three issue areas below: 1. The potential conflicts with the California Air Resources Board (CARB) recommended actions for reduction of GHG emissions, The West Village project does not pose any conflict with the list of CARB recommended actions for reduction of GHG. These actions are listed on the Expanded List of Early Action Measures to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions in California. California Environmental Protection Agency Air Resources Board, October 2007 ~ and include measures such as energy efficiency guidelines, high speed rail, green building policies, water recycling, and similar measures intended to provide long-term reduction in GHGs. 2. The relative size of the project in comparison to the estimated GHG reduction goal of 174 MMT C02e by year 2020 and in comparison to the size of major facilities that are required to report GHG emissions (25,000 metric tons of C02e per year), and 29 c Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-031 CT 11-01/ HDP 11-01/ SUP 11-02/ HMP 11-03 Pursuant to the land uses articulated in the proposed MPA, the total West Village project operational GHG emissions would approximate 3,720 metric tons of C02 per year. The project would thus not be classified as a major source of GHG emissions. Although no specific CEQA thresholds of significance have been established, however when compared to the overall state reduction goal of approximately 174,000,000 metric tons of C02 per year, the maximum GHG emissions for the project are very small and would not conflict with the state's ability to comply with the AB 32 or other state goals. 3. The basic parameters of a project to determine whether its design is inherently energy efficient, will lead to wasteful energy use, or is neutral with regard to future energy use. The project is relatively efficient with regard to energy use as described in Section VII(a), including development of an urban infill project including high density and commercial land uses adjacent to arterial roadways, local bus access and employment proximity, convenient walking access to neighborhood shopping and other public use areas within the project, material recycling programs, protecting and enhancing the natural environment, provision of energy efficient buildings, water efficient landscaping, promoting sustainable community practices and the use of renewable resources in construction. As a result, it is concluded that greenhouse gas emissions from the West Village MPA project will be less than significant, and no mitigation is required. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED: Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated VIII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS- Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the D D ~ D environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or D D ~ D 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 D D D ~ 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 D D ~ D 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 D D D ~ 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, D D D ~ would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? 30 g) h) ·······~···-----···~--~ -------------------------c Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-03/ CT 11-011 HDP 11-01/ SUP 11-02/ HMP 11-03 Impair implementation of or physically interfere with D D D ~ an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Expose people or structures to a significant risk of D D ~ D loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to \rrbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Less Than Significant Impact. The project includes grading operations and construction activity to provide access roads, trunk utilities, and development pads for the ultimate development of 672 dwelling units and commercial, community facilities, recreational and open space planning areas. Upon completion of construction of the project, some use of hazardous cleaning products on the site will occur. Other than during the construction phase, the project will not routinely utilize hazardous substances or materials. All transport, handling, use, and disposal of cleaning substances will comply with all Federal, State and local laws regulating the management and use of such materials. Operation of the project will not result in the use of any potentially hazardous materials. A nominal amount of potentially hazardous materials (e.g., fuel, paint products, lubricants, and solvents) will be used during construction activities to develop the project. The transport, use and disposal of hazardous materials during the construction period would also be conducted in accordance with applicable State and Federal laws. Compliance with applicable laws and regulations would ensure that the impact associated with the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials would be less than significant. Subject to the project's compliance with the mitigation measures adopted in the Certified FEIR, the project will result in less than significant impacts with regard to 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? Less Than Significant Impact. As mentioned in the response to Section VII(a), the transport, use and disposal of hazardous materials during the construction period would be conducted in accordance with applicable State and Federal laws. Compliance with applicable laws and regulations would ensure that the impact associated with the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials would be less than significant. As a result of these precautions and practices, the potential for release of hazardous materials onto the subject site or neighboring sites, or into the environment in general is minimal, and thus subject to implementation of the mitigation measures adopted in the FEIR, this impact is considered less than significant. c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? No Impact. The nearest existing school to the subject sewer alignment is Kelly Elementary School, which is located at the corner of Kelly Drive and Park Drive, 1,600 linear feet (0.30 mi.) west of the westernmost section of the proposed project. This distance is in excess of one-quarter mile. Likewise, no proposed schools are within one-quarter mile of the project. Therefore, no impact would occur. 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? Less Than Significant Impact. The subject project area is not included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 56962.5. This code section includes federal superfund sites (NPL), state response sites, voluntary cleanup sites, school cleanup sites, and other hazardous sites. The project site is not listed on any county, State or Federal databases as a hazardous waste use or disposal site. Nonetheless, potentially hazardous materials currently 31 c Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-031 CT 11-011 HDP 11-011 SUP 11-021 HMP 11-03 exist on the project site. These potentially hazardous materials include above-ground storage tanks, discarded and current storage drums and buckets, and miscellaneous trash and debris. The presences of hazardous materials within the West Village requires that specific mitigations be implemented prior to and during construction to ensure proper disposal and remediation (if necessary). In addition, soil testing has been conducted for the West Village. This testing has concluded that soils contaminated with high levels of toxics as a result of the historical application of pesticides and herbicides exist in the top layers of soil in agricultural areas. Remediation measures have been adopted in the Certified FEIR, including a mitigation measure requiring that prior to approval of the MTM for the West Village, a detailed agricultural chemical residue survey will be required to fulfill the requirement of the City of Carlsbad's Standard Agricultural Area Mitigation Condition (for agricultural sites). As part of this mitigation condition, a report shall be presented to the San Diego County Department of Environmental Health Site Assessment (DEH) Voluntary Assistance Program for review and comment prior to receipt of a grading permit. Subject to adherence with the mitigation measures adopted in the FEIR, potentially hazardous materials on the site will be mitigated to a level of insignificance. 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? No Impact. The McClellan-Palomar runway is approximately 4,600 feet long, in which case it is classified as a "Commercial Service Airport" according to page 4-1, Section 4.1.1 of the McClellan Palomar Aiirport Land Use Compatibility Plan. The extreme southern end of the project alignment is located 3.5 miles from the northern property line of McClellan-Palomar. Therefore the project is not located within two miles of a public airport. The project also is not located within the Safety Zones of the adopted Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP). Further, no part of the project is located within a Noise Compatibility Zone, per Exhibit III-1 of the ALUCP. It is concluded that no impact associated with potential hazards from McClellan-Palomar Airport is anticipated. 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? No Impact. No private airstrip exists in the vicinity of the subject project. As a result, no impacts would occur. g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? No Impact. The City of Carlsbad has adopted an Emergency Operations Plan, dated June 9, 2003. This plan addresses the City of Carlsbad's planned response to extraordinary emergency situations associated with natural disasters, human events, and technological incidents, including both peacetime and wartime nuclear defense operations. It provides an overview of operational concepts and identifies components of the City's Emergency Management Organization. The plan provides procedures to respond to a variety of emergency situations such as an earthquake, tsunami, liquefaction, landslide, transportation accident, plane crash, hazardous materials incident, flood, severe weather, dam failure, wildland or urban fire, drought, energy shortage, nuclear power plant evacuation, civil unrest, workplace and school violence, or terrorism. The City does not publish emergency evacuation routes. The project would add residents on a currently vacant parcel with the development of structures and urban infrastructure. The project is located in proximity to El Camino Real, which is designated as an emergency evacuation route under the City's Emergency Operations Plan. The proposed project will widen El Camino Real to allow for improved evacuation along this route. No obstruction or impediments to El Camino Real are anticipated as a result of implementation of the project. The City of Carlsbad General Plan Public Safety Element's goals and objectives include the maintenance of close coordination between planned improvements to the circulation system within Carlsbad and the location of fire stations to ensure adequate levels of service and response times to all areas of the community, and to maintain an initial emergency travel response time of five (5) minutes. 32 c Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-03/ CT 11-01/ HDP 11-011 SUP 11-021 HMP 11-03 The City of Carlsbad Fire Department will provide all basic fire and emergency medical services to the West Village site. The project would be served by Fire Station No. 3, located at 3701 Catalina Drive and Station No. 5, located at the Public Safety Center on Faraday Avenue, east of El Camino Real. The project site is within the five-minute response time from these fire stations. In addition, Fire Station No. 3 is planned to be moved to the corner of Wind Trail Road and Cannon Road, at Robertson Ranch PA 12. This location is within Y2 mile of the project. The proposed project will not result in a significant impact to 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? Less Than Significant Impact. Natural open space will be maintained in PA's 23A, B and C. These areas either currently contain existing native vegetation or are in the process of being revegetated with native vegetation pursuant to HMP and FEIR requirements. Properties adjacent to these areas would interface with wildlands and thus would be susceptible to wildland fire. In accordance with the requirements of the City of Carlsbad Landscape Manual, and the City Fire Department requirements, fire fuel modification zones will be implemented adjacent to the open space edges. This fuel modification zone consists of a minimum 60-foot wide structural setback from the adjacent natural open space. The Robertson Ranch Master Plan articulates several configurations of this fuel modification zone depending upon whether the residential planning area abuts the open space in an uphill, downhill, manufactured, or other slope relationship. The FEIR concluded that adherence to the fuel modification zones as indicated in the Master Plan would ensure the potential fire hazard for the property remains at a less than significant level. The MPA does not propose any substantive modifications to these fuel modification relationships. Therefore, subject to provision of the fuel modification zones as stipulated in the MP A, the project will result in a less than significant impact to wildland interface. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED: Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated IX. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY - Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste D D ~ D discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or D D D ~ 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) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the D D ~ D 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? 33 d) e) f) g) h) i) j) k) I) m) n) o) p) q) c Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-03/ CT 11-011 HDP 11-011 SUP 11-021 HMP 11-03 Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the D D C8J D 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? Create or contribute runoff water, which would D D C8J D ·exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? D D C8J D Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as 0 D D C8J mapped on a Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood delineation map? Place within 100-year flood hazard area structures, 0 D D C8J which would impede or redirect flood flows? Expose people or structures to a significant risk of 0 D D C8J loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? D D C8J D Increase erosion (sediment) into receiving surface D D C8J D waters. Increase pollutant discharges (e.g., heavy metals, 0 D C8J D 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? Change receiving water quality (marine, fresh or D D C8J D wetland waters) during or following construction? Increase any pollutant to an already impaired water D D C8J D body as listed on the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) list? Increase impervious surfaces and associated ru~off? D D C8J D Impact aquatic, wetland, or riparian habitat? D D C8J D Result in the exceedance of applicable surface or 0 D C8J D groundwater receiving water quality objectives or degradation of beneficial uses? 34 Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-03/ CT 11-011 HDP 11-01/ SUP 11-021 HMP 11-03 a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed West Village project is required to comply with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), the General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction, and other applicable portions of the federal Clean Water Act, including the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, or Section 401. Also, the City of Carlsbad has adopted a Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance. This ordinance requires that all new development and redevelopment activities comply with the City's adopted storm water pollution protection requirements. The subject project is not exempt from Standard Urban Stormwater Management Plan (SUSMP) requirements and is considered a Priority Project, requiring Priority BMPs. The project applicant is also required to submit a Notice of Intent to the State Water Resources Control Board, prepare a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and implement BMPs detailed in the SWPPP to reduce construction effects and post-development effects on the downstream water bodies. Impacts to hydrology and water quality as a result of the Robertson Ranch Master Plan project (including the West Village) were analyzed in the Robertson Ranch Master Plan FEIR. Mitigation measures to reduce impacts less than significant were identified in a Preliminary Drainage Study, and have been updated in a Drainage Study for Robertson Ranch, dated April 25, 2012 and a Storm Water Management Plan for Rancho Costera, dated April30, 2012. The project developer is required to identify and implement BMPs to reduce impacts to surface water from contaminated storm water discharges. In accordance with the NPDES, the construction contractor will be required to comply with NPDES and SWPPP regarding the implementation of BMPs during construction. The project developer will install perimeter site access and sediment and/or erosion control and "in-tract" slope control in advance of site improvements. Surface run-off and stormwater collected by the proposed drainage system will be discharged ultimately into two locations. The eastern portion will discharge into the eastern Habitat Corridor P A 23C, then through an existing 8' x 8' box culvert under El Camino Real and ultimately into Agua Hedionda Lagoon. The western portion will be conveyed by a public storm drain within El Camino Real or the existing double 8' x 4' box culvert under El Camino Real to the channel approximately 150-feet east of Kelly Drive, and ultimately to the Agua Hedionda Lagoon. The greatest potential for short-term water quality impacts to the drainage basin would be expected during and immediately following the grading and construction phases of the project, when cleared and graded areas are exposed to rain and storm water runoff. During the construction period, the project BMPs will include, but are not limited to; silt fencing the perimeter, fiber rolls or gravel bag berms for protecting slopes and channels, street sweeping and vacuuming, covering soil piles to minimize sediment transport, storm drain inlet protection, diversion of runoff including check dams and slope roughing, stabilized construction entrances and exits, hydroseeding or mulching immediately after topsoil placement, and waste (including concrete waste) management. The developer will be responsible for the regular maintenance of such construction BMPs. The post construction phase begins when grading has been completed, slopes have been landscaped and irrigated and the storm drain system basins have been installed. During this phase, a combination of street and storm drain maintenance, waste handling and disposal, landscaping and grounds maintenance, and employee training BMPs will be implemented. The project is required to comply with the; (1) Carlsbad Municipal Code Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Ordinance, (2) Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction, (3) NPDES General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction Activity issued by the State Water Resources Control Board, and (4) San Diego NPDES Municipal Storm Water Permit (Order No. 2009-0009-DWQ). Compliance with these regulatory documents, including associated BMPs listed above, will ensure that the project will result in a less than significant impact on water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. 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)? No Impact. The project does not propose to directly draw any groundwater, and rather it will be served via existing public water distribution lines within the public right-of-way. As indicated in the Certified FEIR, no impacts to groundwater or groundwater recharge will occur from implementation of the project. 35 c Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-03/ CT 11-011 HDP 11-01/ SUP 11-021 HMP 11-03 c) 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? Less Than Significant Impact. Development of the West Village in accordance with the MPA and the MTM will result in a change in the topographical conditions of the area and an increase in impervious surface area. A hydrology analysis and drainage study has been performed by O'Day Consultants, which indicates that the post-construction drainage pattern will be substantively the same as the pre-construction drainage pattern. Therefore, since no change to the overall existing drainage flow patterns will result from the project, and BMPs to control erosion and siltation are being provided as part of the project, as discussed in Section VIII( a) above, it is determined that less than significant impacts would result from implementation of the project. 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? Less Than Significant Impact. As discussed in Section VIII(c) above, the project will not result in substantive alteration to existing drainage patterns, and will not substantially increase the flow rate or volume of surface runoff. Surface run-off and stormwater drainage will be collected by the proposed drainage system and will be discharged ultimately into two locations. The eastern portion (Basin H) will discharge into the eastern Habitat Corridor PA 23C, then through an existing 8' x 8' box culvert under El Camino Real and ultimately into Agua Hedionda Lagoon. The western portion (Basin G) will be conveyed by a public storm drain within El Camino Real or the existing double 8' x 4' box culvert under El Camino Real to the channel approximately 150-feet east of Kelly Drive, and ultimately to the Agua Hedionda Lagoon. Further, under existing pre-development conditions, Basin G (acreage 58.8) results in a Q of 60.56 and under post- development conditions(acreage 56.38) results in a pre-detention Q (cubic feet/second) of 62.76. Basin H (acreage 268.94) pre-development conditions results in a Q of 252.07 and post-development conditions (acreage 184.47) results in a pre- detention Q of 183.14. Therefore, as a result of these factors, and consistent with the finding of less than significant impact in the Certified FEIR, a less than significant impact is assessed. 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? Less Than Significant Impact. The drainage study concludes that post-development runoff generated on the project site will be collected and conveyed by a proposed private storm drain system and conveyed to the existing culverts under El Camino Real, and that these culverts can adequately convey the developed Q100• As a result, it is concluded that the project would ensure that impacts associated with the creation of runoff water remain less than significant. f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? Less Than Significant Impact. The project will require a standard NPDES permit. This NPDES permit will require preparation of a SWPPP to identify and implement BMPs to reduce impacts to surface water from contaminated storm water discharges. The BMPs to be implemented by the project are identified in Section VIII(a) above. Compliance with these requirements will ensure that the project would result in a less than significant impact on water quality. In addition, the project will incorporate BMPs and submit a water quality technical report as specified in the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit and in the SUSMP. In addition, the proposed project will not result in any significant increase in impervious area. Further, the project minimizes land disturbance activities during construction (e.g., clearing, grading and cut-and-fill) and the project proposes to incorporate soil stabilization BMPs on disturbed areas as soon as feasible. Thus, subject to compliance with the mitigation measures adopted in the Final EIR and with adopted City performance and design policies for pollution control, a less than significant impact is assessed. 36 c Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-031 CT 11-011 HDP 11-011 SUP 11-021 HMP 11-03 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? No Impact. The West Village project does not propose any housing within the 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on the Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or any other flood delineation map. As a result, no impact to flood hazard will result from implementation of the MPA and MTM project. h) Place within 100-year flood hazard area structures, which would impede or redirect flood flows? No Impact. The project does not propose any structures within the 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on the Federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood delineation map. As a result of this factor, it is determined that no impacts which would impede or redirect flood flows in the 100-year flood hazard area would occur from implementation of the project. i) Expose people or strnctures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? No Impact. The West Village project is not located within the inundation zone for Calavera Dam or any other flood control feature located upstream of the project as indicated in the FEIR. Further, the project does not propose the placement of any permanent structures within the 100-year flood zone. As explained herein and in Sections IX (g) and (h), the proposed project would not result in increased exposure of 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. As a result, no impacts would occur. j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? Less Than Significant Impact. The project is not situated near or immediately adjacent to an embanked water body such as a reservoir, dam or aboveground storage tank. Topographically, the lowest point on the project site is approximately 40 feet elevation, and the site is located in excess of 2 miles from the coastline. No significant potential for mudflow on the project site is anticipated. Therefore, the project has a less than significant potential impact due to seiche, tsunami or mudflow. k) Increased erosion (sediment) into receiving surface waters. Less Than Significant Impact. Upon completion of construction, the proposed project will not result in any permanent features that will increase erosion or the transportation of sediment into receiving surface waters. During construction soil will be cleared and unearthed which could result in erosion. In order to avoid erosion and transportation of downstream sediment from the project while construction is taking place, as indicated in Section VII(a), the project construction BMPs to be used shall include, but are not limited to; vegetative stabilization such as hydroseeding or mulching, physical stabilization such as dust control, geotextiles and mats, construCtion road stabilization and stabilized construction entrances, diversion of run-off using earthen dikes, temporary swales and drains, drainage runoff velocity reduction using outlet controls, check dams and slope roughening, and sediment trapping using silt fences, gravel bag barriers, inlet protection sediment traps and basins. Also, all storm drains and natural drainages situated downstream from the construction will be protected by linear sediment barriers or similar erosion control devices. Weather monitoring will take place in order to avoid exposed soils during times of heavy rainfall. The streets within and around the construction site will be swept and maintained regularly during the construction period. Upon completion of the grading operations, the opportunities for erosion will be minimized through the characteristics of the urban environment. In addition, compliance with the NPDES and SWPPP requirements as demonstrated with the BMPs identified will ensure that the project will result in a less than significant impact on erosion potential into receiving surface waters of the project. I) 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)? 37 Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-03/ CT 11-011 HDP 11-01/ SUP 11-021 HMP 11-03 Less Than Significant Impact. As previously mentioned, during construction, all graded areas will be improved or landscaped which will minimize erosion. Also, grading will not occur during the rainy season unless sufficient erosion control measures have been included in the project construction program. Thus, the project incorporates erosion control measures to minimize urban pollutants, erosion and sedimentation during construction as well as after the project has been completed. The project will also provide hydromodification features which will implement practices that will be effective in treating nonpoint source pollution. This is in an effort to protect downstream water bodies such as the Agua Hedionda Lagoon from negative hydromodification activities, including nutrients, metals, hydrocarbons, bacteria, pesticides and other constituents. The City of Carlsbad Master Drainage and Storm Water Management Plan (March 1994 ), identifies four proposed drainage facilities within or adjacent to the West Village. A major one of these facilities is identified as Facility BF. Master Plan Facility BF is a 75-inch reinforced concrete pipe (RCP) identified on the western section of the West Village that is intended to collect runoff from an existing 8' x 5' culvert under Tamarack Avenue which outlets onto the West Village from the existing development north of Tamarack A venue. This RCP would run south to a proposed sedimentation basin located immediately north of El Camino Real, then exit under El Camino Real through an existing culvert, into an enhanced natural channel off-site to Agua Hedionda Lagoon. Facility BF would necessarily impact and eliminate a large area of existing riparian willow habitat and wetlands. Facility BF does not exist at this time. As a result of the biological impacts that would result from construction of Facility BF per the Master Drainage and Storm Water Management Plan, the West Village project proposes that Facility BF not be constructed. In its place, it is proposed that the drainage be routed through its natural channel, through the riparian forest. This program would not alter the form of the existing channel nor the flow entering the channel. The area within the limits of the existing natural channel functions as a flow-based treatment control as specified in the City of Carlsbad SUMP, dated January 14, 2011 to comply with the requirements of the 2007 Municipal Permit. This flow-based facility will utilize the existing densely vegetated channel and edge vegetation of the channel to treat the runoff from the existing 8' x 5' culvert. This facility will effectively treat the low-flow storm event using the intensity of 0.2 inches per hour and specified by the Municipal Permit. It is concluded that this proposed solution is the functional equivalent of the RCP/sedimentation basin program indicated in the Management Plan. The project construction will also be required to comply with NPDES requirements of the City of Carlsbad, including the other drainage facilities identified in the Management Plan. As a result of the construction of these facilities, compliance with mitigation measures adopted in the Final EIR, including hydromodification basins, any construction impacts to water quality into receiving waters, including the Agua Hedionda Lagoon, will be less than significant. m) Changes to receiving water quality (marine, fresh or wetland waters) during or following construction? Less Than Significant Impact. During construction, all graded areas will implement water quality BMPs in order to minimize and eliminate the potential for changes to receiving downstream waters. For example, grading will not occur during the rainy season unless sufficient erosion control measures have been included in the project construction program. The project will utilize silt fences, sandbags and straw mulch rolls around excavated trench spoils during the construction period. Also, all storm drains and natural drainages situated downstream from the construction will be protected by linear sediment barriers or similar erosion control devices. Thus, the project incorporates erosion control measures to minimize urban pollutants, erosion and sedimentation during construction as well as after the project has been completed. As a result of these factors, any changes to receiving water quality during construction would be less than significant. n) Increase in any pollutant to an already impaired water body as listed on the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) list? Less Than Significant Impact. Agua Hedionda Lagoon is listed on the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) list for impaired water bodies for indicator bacteria and sedimentation/siltation. As previously indicated in the discussion regarding Sections IX (a), (f) and (1), the project will result in a less than significant impact on the water quality of Agua Hedionda Lagoon. o) Increase impervious surfaces and associated runoff? Less Than Significant Impact. ' The project will result in temporary changes to drainage during construction as the placement of equipment and materials associated with construction activities, as well as the temporary modification of permeable surfaces and soil movement within the project area would alter existing runoff patterns. However, pervious 38 Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-031 CT 11-011 HDP 11-011 SUP 11-021 HMP 11-03 surfaces will be utilized as a site design infiltration BMP. This BMP will capture, retain, and infiltrate a minimum of 80% of runoff into the ground. Therefore minimal runoff associated with the construction of new impervious surfaces would result from the project, and a less than significant impact is assessed. p) Impact aquatic, wetland, or riparian habitat? Less Than Significant Impact. The project has been specifically designed to minimize impacts to aquatic, wetland and riparian resources. The proposed project will result in the loss of approximately 0.31 acre of US ACE jurisdiction lands, of which 0.14 acre consists of jurisdictional wetlands. In addition, grading will result in temporary impacts of up to 0.18 acre of USACE jurisdiction lands, including 0.05 acre of jurisdictional wetlands. These impacts are the result of access roads extending into the site from the Kelly Drive extension, the Edinburgh Drive extension, and the El Camino Real widening. Also an access road across a jurisdictional drainage to provide access to PA 9/10 (from PA 11) is necessary. Of the 6.78 acres of USACE jurisdictional waters on the site (including 5.36 acres of wetlands and 7,015 linear feet of streambed), the project will preserve 95% (6.47 acres) of the on-site jurisdictional waters, including 97% (5.22 acres) of the wetlands and 88% (6,145 linear feet) of the on-site streambeds. As compensatory mitigation for permanent impacts to 0.31 acre of USACE jurisdiction (870 linear feet of streambed), the project applicant will create 1.40 acres of riparian/wetland habitat on site, within the Habitat Corridor of PA 23C. Of this 1.40 acres of created habitat, at least 0.31 acre will consist of USACE three-parameter wetlands. The proposed 1.40-acres of mitigation will be part of a larger riparian/wetland creation area, as described within the 2007 Wetland Habitat Creation. Maintenance and Monitoring Program prepared by Planning Systems ("Mitigation Plan"). With the creation of 1.40 acres of wetland/riparian habitat, and the avoidance of 6.47 acres of Corps jurisdiction (including 5.22 acres of wetlands), the project will result in a net increase of 1.09 acres of jurisdictional waters on site. The project will mitigate temporary impacts to jurisdictional waters by restoring temporarily affected areas to pre-construction contours andre-vegetating with native species. The Certified FEIR anticipated 0.40 acres of impact to jurisdictional wetlands or waters on the West Village. These impacts were considered a significant impact, for which mitigation measures were adopted. These mitigation measures included wetland creation (no net loss of wetlands), 100-foot buffers for wetlands unless encroachments are allowed in consultation with CDFG and USFWS, and compliance with HMP adjacency standards for wetlands and other protected lands. In light of the fact that the proposed project reduces the wetland/waters impacts by 0.09 acres from that assessed in the FEIR, and subject to project adherence to the mitigation measure adopted in the FEIR, the impacts to federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act are assessed at less than significant. q) The exceedance of applicable surface or groundwater receiving water quality objectives or degradation of beneficial uses? Less Than Significant Impact. As indicated in Sections IX( a) and IX(l) of this document, the project will not exceed the applicable surface or groundwater receiving water quality objectives, and as a result of this avoidance of downstream impacts, will not degrade beneficial uses of the Agua Hedionda Lagoon and other receiving water bodies. Thus, impacts regarding the exceedance of applicable surface or groundwater receiving water quality objectives would be considered less than significant. 39 c Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-03/ CT 11-011 HDP 11-01/ SUP 11-02/ HMP 11-03 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED: Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incomorated X. LAND USE AND PLANNING -Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? D D D ~ b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or D D ~ D 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 D [8j D D plan or natural community conservation plan? a) Physically divide an established community? No Impact. The proposed project is situated within an urbanized area, of which the surrounding uses are undeveloped/ agricultural land to the south, established residential subdivisions located to the north, west and south, developing residential subdivisions to the east (East Village) and the Rancho Carlsbad manufactured home subdivision located along the projects' southeast property line. The existing Calavera Hills residential neighborhood is adjacent to the eastern portion of the projects' northern boundary. These properties are all community neighborhoods of the northeast quadrant of the city of Carlsbad. The land uses within the West Village include 672 dwelling units, composed of 366 multifamily units and 306 detached single family units which will be distributed as follows: 51 detached single family courtyard condominium homes, 88 units on 4,000 square foot lots, 65 units on 5,000 square foot lots, 78 units on 6,000 square foot lots and 24 units on 8,500 square foot lots. Included within the multi-family units will be approximately 100 units of senior housing in Planning Area 7. Nonresid~ntial uses within the West Village will include 1.0 net acre of centralized community recreation uses, Village Center commercial.uses, and Community Facility uses. Buildout of the master plan will provide neighborhoods which will be similar to those existing in the surrounding area. Thus, the proposed project will not disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of the 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? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project includes the reconfiguration of several Master Plan Planning Areas which in turn result in an amendment to the Land Use Map of the Land Use Element of the General Plan to properly reflect those planning area boundaries. General Plan. The amendment would modify the boundaries of several of the planning areas in the Robertson Ranch West Village, as follows: • Minor re-configuration of the planning areas and adjustment of residential units in each planning area; • Replacing the Elementary School land use on PA 13 with Residential-Medium density as anticipated by the Master Plan; • Replacing an alternate RV storage lot with open space and tributary drainage and riparian habitat which had previously been slated for development in the extreme western portion of the site; • Replacing a residential land use with a Community Facilities use; • Relocation of the Community Recreation (open space) land use site to the center of the project; • An increase in open space land use in the master plan by 18.2 acres; 40 Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-07/ MP 02-03/ CT 11-01/ HDP 11-011 SUP 11-02/ HMP 11-03 These modifications to the Land Use Element of the General Plan will not result in a significant impact to land use. The Land Use Element further requires that public facilities be provided in the city adequate for the projected population. The project complies with these provisions by providing the necessary public facilities consistent with General Plan policies. The project is consistent with the Housing Element, the Open Space and Conservation Element, the Circulation Element, and all other elements of the General Plan. Robertson Ranch Master Plan. In addition to the above general plan amendments, the proposed project would amend the Robertson Ranch Master Plan in the following ways: • Minor re-configuration of the Planning Area boundaries while maintaining the original overall approved number of master plan units; • Execution of the Focused Master Plan Amendment to allow for the "Final" land uses over the West Village; • Inclusion of a new Community Facilities site in PA 2 which had previously been approved for residential land use • Elimination of the alternative RV storage lot; • Inclusion of gates for the communities in PA 5 and PA 9/10; • Consolidation of Planning Areas 9 and 10 into a single planning area (PA 9/10); • Addition of a new driveway access (right-in/right-out) at the eastern edge of the Village Center (PA 11 ); • Relocation of the PA 4 Community Recreation site to the center of the project; • Elimination of Residential-Medium density development within PA 1 and preservation of a tributary drainage and riparian habitat and surrounding area. · • Inclusion of hydro modification basins in accordance with updated water quality regulations; • An increase in hardline open space by 5.41 acres; • An increase in preserved sensitive vegetation habitats by 1.06 acres; • The inclusion of additional uses in the "Community Facilities" category including amphitheater, community garden, urban farm, farmer's market, and dog park; • Elimination of a community public trail adjacent to an existing riparian corridor along the east side of PA 1; • Minimum lot size in PA 3 of 4,000 square feet in area; • Removal of the Elementary School option on PA 13 and adoption of the "Alternative Use" land use program. These amendments to the Robertson Ranch Master Plan will not result in significant impacts to the overall objectives and provisions of the approved Master Plan. Zoning Ordinance. No change to the Carlsbad Zoning Ordinance is proposed. The inclusion of additional uses in the "Community Facilities" land use category, including amphitheater, community garden, urban farm, farmer's market, and dog park, will necessitate a master plan amendment but does not involve modification to the Zoning Ordinance. Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP). The project also is not located within the Safety Zones of the adopted Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP). Further, no part of the project is located within a Noise Compatibility Zone, per Exhibit 111-1 of the ALUCP. As a result of these factors, it is determined that the proposed project will not conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project, as indicated, and no impact on land use plans, policies or regulations is assessed. It is concluded that the proposed project will not result in significant environmental impacts from incompatibility issues with adjacent existing and planned land uses. c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. The City of Carlsbad HMP designates a natural preserve system and provides a regulatory framework for determining impacts to sensitive biological resources and assigning mitigation for any impacts that do occur. The HMP contains strict policies to discourage destruction of sensitive habitat. The HMP natural preserve system provides a regulatory framework for determining impacts to sensitive biological resources and assigning mitigation for any impacts 41 c Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-07/ MP 02-03/ CT 11-011 HDP 11-011 SUP 11-021 HMP 11-03 that do occur. The project is situated in an urbanized area and will mitigate for impacts to sensitive habitat as indicated in Section IV( a) of this environmental analysis. The project provides for HMP Link B between Core #3 and Core #4. This link is identified as a connectivity line for wildlife pursuant to the HMP. The project maintains this connectivity link. In addition, the project will mitigate for impacts to vegetation communities. protected by that HMP. The FEIR concluded that consistency with the policies of the HMP, including the provision of Link B in a shape and width as indicated in the HMP would result in a finding of non-interference with wildlife corridors. The project analyzed in the FEIR was found to be consistent with the HMP. A change to the project's connectivity corridor is proposed however. The project would nonetheless minimize and mitigate for impacts to sensitive vegetation and would not affect the functioning of the hardline open space area and thus is considered consistent with the City of Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan for Natural Communities in the City of Carlsbad. Therefore, with the implementation of the proposed mitigation measures as stated in Section IV( a) and IV(b)-Biological Resources, any potential impacts would be less than significant. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS TO BE ADDRESSED: Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated XI. MINERAL RESOURCES-Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral D D D rgJ 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 D D D ~ mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local generalplan, specific plan, or other land use plan? 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? No Impact. No known or expected mineral deposits of future value to the region and the residents of the state are located within or in the immediate vicinity of the subject project. The Certified FEIR concludes that the project site is generally underlain by the sedimentary layers of the Eocene-aged Santiago Formation and undifferentiated Jurassic to Cretaceous-age metavolcanic granitic (igneous) bedrock. Human influences, recent weathering and erosion have produced engineered fill, surficial slump deposits, colluvium and Pleistocene-age terrace deposits. These soils would be expected to have a low potential for mineral resources. Alluvial deposits also underlay the valleys on the site. The materials generally consist of light olive gray to dark brown, poorly consolidated, sands and silty sands. These alluvial soils would also be expected to have a low potential for mineral resources. Further, the West Village property. does not include any area of known mineral resources as identified in the City of Carlsbad's General Plan Update MEIR 93-01, dated March 1994, map 5.13-1. As a result of these factors, no impact to the potential for known mineral deposits that would be of future value to the region or the residents of the State is anticipated from the project. 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? No Impact. The subject site is not designated on the City of Carlsbad General Plan or the Zoning Ordinance, or in the Robertson Ranch Master Plan or the Certified FEIR as a locally important mineral resource recovery site. As a result of the fact that the City has not designated the subject property as an important mineral resource recovery site in any regulatory land use document, it is determined that implementation of the proposed project will not result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site. Since no adopted regulatory land use documents, including the City of Carlsbad General Plan or the Zoning Ordinance, and the regulatory documents identified above designate the subject site as a mineral resource recovery location, it is concluded that no impacts would occur as a result of implementation of the project. 42 c ~\ Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-031 CT 11-011 HDP 11-011 SUP 11-021 HMP 11-03 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED: Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incoroorated XII. NOISE-Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels D D ~ D 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 D D ~ D groundbourne vibration or ground bourne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise D D ~ D levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in D D ~ D ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan D D D ~ 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, D D u ~ would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? 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? Less Than Significant Impact. Presently, the primary noise source in the vicinity of the proposed project alignment is noise generated by vehicular traffic along El Camino Real, Tamarack A venue, College Boulevard and Cannon Road. The McClellan-Palomar Airport is located approximately 3.5 miles to the southeast of the project site. No part of the project is located within a Noise Compatibility Zone, per Exhibit III-I of the ALUCP. The Noise Element of the City of Carlsbad General Plan also identifies certain sound levels that are compatible with various land uses. The Carlsbad Noise Guidelines Manual, dated 1995, which is used to implement the Noise Element requirements, indicates that sound levels up to 60 dBA CNEL are compatible with residential land uses, except for areas impacted by the McClellan-Palomar Airport, which must be mitigated to a 65 dB A CNEL exterior noise level. According to City standards, interior noise levels for all residential units must be mitigated to a 45 dB A CNEL level when openings to the exterior of the residence are closed. If openings are required to be closed to meet the interior noise standard, then mechanical ventilation shall be provided. The City of Carlsbad Municipal Code (Chapter 8.48) prohibits construction activity after sunset of any day, and before 7 A.M. Monday through Friday, and before 8 A.M. on Saturday, and all day Sunday and specified holidays. The Noise Ordinance does not set a defined noise level standard for construction activities, but simply limits the hours of construction, except for certain very limited construction activities that do not create disturbing, excessive or offensive noise after sunset and before 7:00AM. The significance of construction noise produced during project construction is typically assessed in accordance with the County of San Diego Noise Ordinance. San Diego County Noise Ordinance Section 36.410 stipulates that construction noise shall not exceed 75 dBA for more than 8 hours during any 24-hour period. Construction noise 43 Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-031 CT 11-01/ HDP 11-011 SUP 11-02/ HMP 11-03 levels would diminish rapidly with distance from the project site at a rate of approximately 6 dBA per doubling of distance (70 dBA at 100 feet, etc.). Construction noise levels for nearby receptors such as residential units generated by construction equipment can vary substantially depending upon a number of factors. These factors include the number and type of equipment in operation at any given time, as well as the distance and intervening topography between the construction area and the receptors. The project includes the installation of a relatively large size pipeline (54-inch diameter) requiring a trench depth (up to 20 feet). Any given nearby location along the pipeline alignment could be subjected to construction noise for a few weeks while pipeline construction progresses toward and then past that location. General construction equipment to be used for the overall project is estimated to generate temporary short term noise levels of up to 80 dBA at a 50 foot distance. The nearest existing residential units will be approximately 110-feet east of the trench location at the closest point (northernmost point of the proposed project). This noise level drops off approximately 6 dBA per doubling of distance. Therefore, at 100 feet horizontal distance, the short term construction dBA could reach 73 dBA. Since the CNEL scale is 24-hour weighted, and work will only take place primarily within the day hours, the CNEL dB A for construction-related impacts to the closest residences will not exceed allowed limits. The FEIR noted that the Rancho Carlsbad community, a majority of which is occupied by retired and/or elderly persons, is located to the south of the site. However the Certified FEIR determined that the development of the project was considered a less than significant noise impact to these neighboring residences given the distance to noise sources. Further, the proposed MPA and MTM do not propose changes which would increase the pollutant levels. The Robertson Ranch Master Plan FEIR analyzed a project that assumed 1,383 dwelling units at final buildout. The worst- case traffic impact assumptions and projections were based on this figure. Subsequent to the EIR analysis, the Master Plan was approved with a maximum of 1,154 dwelling units, which is 229 units less than the amount that the EIR had assumed would be constructed within the Robertson Ranch property. The present MPA does not change these approved assumed figures. Further, no specific new uses, or significant modification to uses assessed in the FEIR are proposed. Therefore at buildout, the Robertson Ranch project is projected to result in no greater noise impacts than that assessed in the FEIR. Therefore, it is concluded that, subject to adherence with the noise mitigation measures included in the Certified FEIR, impacts would be less than significant. As a result of these factors, it is determined that both operational and construction noise levels generated by the project are anticipated to comply with City of Carlsbad Draft Noise Guidelines Manual land use noise levels, the City permitted construction noise levels and hours, and County of San Diego Noise Policy standards. As a result, a less than significant impact is assessed. b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundbourne vibration or groundbourne noise levels? Less Than Significant Impact. Construction of the project will generate temporary ground-borne vibration and noise levels typical of soil movement and hauling activities from operations of earthmoving equipment, tunneling machines and other large construction vehicles. However, these activities will be temporary in nature. As indicated in the FEIR, exposure of persons to ground-borne vibration or ground-borne noise levels associated with the project would have a less than significant impact. c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Less Than Significant Impact. In accordance with the findings of the Certified FEIR, the project will not result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project. The proposed MP A and MTM do not include modifications which would increase the potential for additional noise. Thus, as indicated in Section XII(a), the increase in ambient noise levels from the project is considered a less than significant impact. d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Less Than Significant Impact. As indicated in the FEIR, during construction, the project would generate temporary increases in noise levels in the immediate area of the construction activities. Construction equipment would generate noise 44 Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-03/ CT 11-011 HDP 11-011 SUP 11-021 HMP 11-03 levels during the rough grading, underground utility construction, and paving activities could range from 70 dBA to 80 dB A at a distance of 50 feet from the noise source. The proposed project is located within an urbanized area. The nearest residential units will be less than 100-feet from the construction operation. Those residential units could be exposed to construction noise levels referenced above. However, based on standard construction practices, it can be assumed that use of the construction equipment would not occur simultaneously, and the construction activities would adhere to the construction schedules and regulations as required by the City Noise Ordinance Chapter 8.48. Thus, while project construction will create temporary increases in ambient noise levels, noise would only be generated during daytime hours and any nearby residences would only be exposed to construction noise during the temporary construction period nearby any given residence. Therefore, noise generated during construction activities is not considered significant. 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? No Impact. The extreme southern end of the proposed project is located 3.5 miles from McClellan Palomar Airport. The property is located outside of the Airport Influence Zone as outlined in the McClellan-Palomar Aimort Land Use Compatibility Plan CALUCP), adopted January 25, 2010 and amended March 4, 2010, prepared by SANDAG. No section of the proposed project is situated within an identified Airport noise contour zone. The ALUCP also includes a Safety Policy Map. The subject project is not located in any of the identified safety hazard zones. As a result of the above factors, no restrictions are placed upon the subject use within this contour. Thus, the proposed project is considered compatible with the ALUCP. As a result, the project will not result in subjecting people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise. Therefore, no impact is assessed. 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? No Impact. No private airstrip exists in the vicinity of the subject project. As a result, no impacts will occur from implementation of the project. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED: Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated XIII. POPULATION AND HOUSING -Would the project: a) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly D D ~ D (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, D D D ~ necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating D D D ~ the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? 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 infrastructure)? Less Than Significant Impact. The West Village project is located within City of Carlsbad's LFMP Zone 14, located in the northeast quadrant of the city of Carlsbad. Development of the project will not induce substantial growth in the area, 45 c Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-03/ CT 11-01/ HDP 11-011 SUP 11-02/ HMP 11-03 either directly or indirectly since the Robertson Ranch property is effectively an infill site. It is entirely surrounded by development. No major infrastructure facilities are proposed for extension to serve the project. No modification to the Zone 14 Local Facilities Management Plan (LFMP) assumptions, analysis or special conditions is proposed. The proposed project does not increase the acreage or numbers of units proposed within the West Village from that approved in the original master plan. In addition, no increase in commercial square footage or other urban uses are proposed. The original Certified FEIR determined that, as a result of the fact that the project will conform to the provisions of the Carlsbad Growth Management Program (CMC Chap. 21.90) and the requirements of the approved Zone 14 LFMP, a less than significant impact to growth inducement is assessed. The proposed MPA and MTM continue to be in compliance with these requirements, and thus the project will result in a less than significant impact to growth inducement. b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact. No residential units presently exist on the Robertson Ranch West Village property. Thus, development of the project will not result in the elimination of any residential units. As a result of this factor, no impact associated with the removal of existing housing and the resulting replacement housing would occur as a result of implementation of the proposed MPA and MTM project. No impact is assessed. c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact. No people or houses will be displaced by implementation of the project. No residences exist within the West Village acreage. Therefore, no impacts associated with the construction of replacement housing would occur from the project. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED: Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated XIV. PUBLIC SERVICES 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 construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services: i) Fire protection? D D r;gJ D ii) Police protection? D D r;gJ D iii) Schools? D D r;gJ D iv) Parks? D D r;gJ D v) Other public facilities? D D r;gJ D 46 c - Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-031 CT 11-011 HDP 11-01/ SUP 11-021 HMP 11-03 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 construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services: i. Fire protection? Less Than Significant Impact. The project is located within the Zone 14 LFMP area. The City of Carlsbad Fire Department will provide all basic fire and emergency medical services to Zone 14 and the West Village site. The project would be served by Fire Station No.3, located at 3701 Catalina Drive and Station No.5, located at the Public Safety Center on Faraday Avenue, east of El Camino Real. The project site is within the five-minute response time from these fire stations. In addition, Fire Station No. 3 is planned to be moved to the corner of Wind Trail Road and Cannon Road, at Robertson Ranch PA 12. This location is within V2 mile of the project. The relocation of Fire Station No. 3 to the Wind Trail Road location will improve the response time to the subject property inasmuch as this location is closer than the existing Catalina Drive station. Thus, a less than significant impact to municipal fire facilities will result from the proposed project. ii. Police protection? Less Than Significant Impact. The Carlsbad Police Department (CPD), located at 2560 Orion Way, services the entire City of Carlsbad. Although the City has not established an official service standard for the department, CPD does maintain a general in-house guideline that is followed in order to assure adequate police service to the community. This guideline suggests a six-minute maximum response time anywhere within the city limits. As indicated in the FEIR, the West Village project will result in an increase of approximately 1 ,436 residents, which will necessitate an increase in the need for police services. This resident increase is not changed by the proposed project. Funding for police personnel comes to the Police Department from the City's General Fund. General Fund revenues are generated by a number of taxes, fees and levies, such as property taxes, sales taxes, transient occupancy taxes, vehicle license fees, development fees and other revenue sources. The conversion of undeveloped land to developed land will increase the property tax base and other taxes generated by the future owners of the West Village land. This increase in taxes will increase the revenues in the General Fund, and allow for City increase in police officers and services necessary to cover the project area. Thus, a less than significant impact to municipal police protection will result from the project. iii. Schools? Less Than Significant Impact. The project is located within the Carlsbad Unified School District (CUSD). The Certified FEIR projected that the project would generate a total of 273 students (K-12) at buildout, and that such students could be accommodated either through construction of an elementary school on the site, or the payment of developer school fees in- lieu of providing a school site. No change to the number of residents or students is proposed through implementation of the proposed project. Thus, subject to project adherence to the mitigation measures adopted in the FEIR, the impacts to school facilities are determined to be less than significant. iv. Parks? Less Than Significant Impact. The West Village project will result in an increase of approximately 1,436 residents, which (based on the 3 acres per 1,000 population) results in a·buildout demand of 4.30 acres, which will necessitate an increase in the need for parks. However, the project includes a park facility of 14.1 acres in size at PA 12. As indicated in the FEIR, provision of this park area will mitigate potential impacts to park facility services. No modification to demand or supply is proposed through implementation of the project. Thus, the impacts to park facilities are determined to be less than significant. 47 c v. Other public facilities? Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-07/ MP 02-031 CT 11-011 HDP 11-011 SUP 11-02/ HMP 11-03 Less Than Significant Impact. As indicated in the Project Description, the proposed project does not increase the number of residences or residents, or commercial area from that analyzed in the Certified FEIR. Nor will the project result in any restriction in supply of any public facilities. For these reasons, it is concluded that the project will result in less than significant impacts to the provision of or maintenance of municipal public facilities. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED: Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated XV. RECREATION a) Would the project increase the use of existing D D ~ D 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 D D D ~ require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? 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? Less Than Significant Impact. The West Village project will result in an increase of approximately 672 residences (estimated at 1,436 residents), which will provide a new demand for recreational facilities. The project, however, includes a park facility of 14.1 acres in size at PA 12. It also includes a 1.0 acre community recreation facility at PA 4, and common recreation areas within each of the proposed residential planning areas. As indicated in the FEIR, provision of these facilities will mitigate potential impacts to park facility services. No modification to demand or supply is proposed through implementation of the project. Thus, the impacts to park facilities are determined to be less than significant. 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? No Impact. The West Village project will include a 1.0 acre community recreation facility at P A 4, and also common recreation facilities within each of the proposed residential planning areas. In most planned residential neighborhoods, the individual recreation area will total at least 10,000 square feet in area, depending upon the actual number of units approved for these residential neighborhoods. For these reasons, it is concluded that no impacts to recreational facilities would occur as a result of implementation of the project. As indicated in the FEIR, these features will not result in significant impacts on the physical environment. 48 Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-031 CT 11-01/ HDP 11-011 SUP 11-02/ HMP 11-03 ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED: Potential! y Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated XVI. TRANSPORTATIONffRAFFIC -Would the project: a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy D D IZI D establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into · account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management D D ~ D program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel 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 patterns, including D D D IZI 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 D D D [81 (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? D D ~ D f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs D D D ~ regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? 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 transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? 49 c Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-03/ CT 11-011 HDP 11-011 SUP 11-02/ HMP 11-03 Less Than Significant Impact. The West Village project is projected to generate the following traffic counts: Planning Land Use Buildout Rate ADT Area 2 Community Facilities 2.0acres 50ADT/acre 100 3 SFD Residential 85 units 10ADT/unit 850 4 Community Recreation 1.0 acres 50 ADT/acre 50 5 SFD Residential 36 units 10 ADT/unit 360 6 SFD Residential 87 units 10 ADT/unit 870 7 Multi-family Residential 116 units 6 ADT/unit 696 8 Multi-family Residential 248 units 6 ADT/unit 1488 9/10 SFD Residential 74 units 10ADT/unit 740 11 Commercial 9.0 acres 700 ADT/acre 6300 11 Commercial/Community Facilities 3.0 acres 50ADT/acre 150 13 SFD Residential 26 units 10 ADT/unit 260 TOTAL 11,864 The Robertson Ranch West Village buildout is projected to generate 11,864 ADT. The FEIR estimated the traffic generated by the project to be 12,069 ADT. Therefore, the overall proposed-project ADT level is 205 ADT less than that analyzed in the FEIR. The FEIR identified a number of significant impacts associated with the implementation of the project, and the FEIR provided mitigation requirements for each of the identified impacts. The FEIR analysis of Year 2010 conditions concluded that traffic generated by the project would not result in any unacceptable levels of service on street segments and intersections, so no mitigation beyond frontage improvements to El Camino Real would be needed or was recommended at this time. The FEIR evaluation however, concluded that at Buildout conditions (Year 2030), seven intersections are expected to operate at LOS "E" or "F" without mitigation. These intersections are: 1. Vista Way/College Boulevard 2. College Blvd./Lake A venue 3. El Camino Real/Tamarack Avenue 4. El Camino Real/Kelly Drive 5. El Camino Real/Cannon Road 6. El Camino Real/Faraday A venue 7. Palomar Airport Road/Melrose Drive As a result of the above projected levels of service, the FEIR adopted mitigation measures which mitigated the impacts to traffic congestion at these intersections to a level of less than significant. Furthermore, as indicated above, the proposed project will generate fewer vehicles than that assessed in the FEIR. Therefore, assuming adherence with the traffic mitigation measures included in the Certified FEIR, impacts associated with conflict with the City of Carlsbad Growth Management Plan or any other adopted policies, would be less than significant. Therefore, development of the proposed MPA and MTM, and development of the proposed West Village project, will not significantly interfere with vehicular traffic, or with mass transit and non-motorized travel. b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? Less Than Significant Impact. As part of the FEIR analysis, a Congestion Management Program (CMP) evaluation was conducted for the Robertson Ranch, including the West Village. This analysis concluded that intersections and street segments which are affected by projected traffic from the Robertson Ranch are expected to comply with CMP level of service requirements. Also, the Robertson Ranch project's addition of traffic to the freeway system was evaluated according to Regional CMP Guidelines. Development of the Robertson Ranch was concluded to have less than significant direct impacts to freeway main lines and interchange intersections. The San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), acting as the County Congestion Management Agency, has designated three roads (Rancho Santa Fe Road, El Camino Real and Palomar Airport Road) and one highway segment (SR-78) in Carlsbad as part of the regional circulation system. The Existing and Buildout average daily traffic (ADT) and Existing LOS on these designated roads and highways in Carlsbad are: 50 c Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-031 CT 11-01/ HDP 11-011 SUP 11-02/ HMP 11-03 T. bl 8 R a e : egwna zrcu on 0 ways zn ars l C" lati R ad . c l bad Roadway 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 highways are currently operating at or better than the acceptable standard LOS. Achievement of the CMP acceptable LOS "E" standard assumes implementation of the adopted CMP strategies. Based on the design capacities of the designated roads and highway and implementation of the CMP strategies, they will function at acceptable levels of service in the short-term and at buildout of Carlsbad and surrounding communities. The buildout ADT projections above are based on the full implementation of the region's general and community plans. The proposed MPA and MTM will not result in an increase of traffic generation based on the analysis provided in Section XVI( a). Thus the project will not conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other traffic standards. c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that result in substantial safety risks? No Impact. The proposed project does not include any aviation components. As a result, no impacts to air traffic would occur from the project. d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature or incompatible uses? No Impact. The proposed project will not include hazardous design features or incompatible uses. The project circulation improvements will be designed and constructed per City standards, and thus will not result in design hazards. Thus, no potential for safety hazards would be expected to occur. e) Result in inadequate emergency access? Less Than Significant Impact. The proposed project has been designed to satisfy the emergency requirements of the Fire and Police Departments. Two full routes of access into and out of the West Village site are provided in the proposed design. The project involves the widening of El Camino Real, a prime arterial in the City's Circulation Element. The construction contractor will use standard adopted City of Carlsbad procedures to minimize traffic diversions during construction. Emergency vehicles will be able to pass through the project area without obstruction or delay. As required by the City of Carlsbad Traffic policies, any construction work within a public roadway right-of-way will be the subject of a Traffic Control and Detour Plan. Such plans allow for contractor work in public streets while maintaining a safe, uniform flow of traffic, including vehicular, bicycle and pedestrian traffic. The Traffic Control and Detour Plan identifies all existing roadway improvements, shows the location and dimensions of the construction work zone, delineates staging areas in and around the work zone as appropriate, and indicates locations of construction signs, barricades and delineators (including cones) and detours. As required by the City, this plan also indicates the duration of the construction work and traffic control, and must be approved by the City Traffic Engineer prior to beginning of construction within the roadway right-of- ways. Required compliance with this City policy is sufficient to determine that this impact is less than significant. f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? No Impact. The NCTD operates "Breeze" bus service lines along El Camino Real, adjacent to the proposed project. Bus stops along the El Camino Real frontage will be provided in conjunction with the project, as indicated in the Master Plan. This aspect of the project will serve to facilitate public transit facilities. 51 c Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-03/ CT 11-011 HDP 11-01/ SUP 11-02/ HMP 11-03 The project will also provide trail and pedestrian routes as adopted in the Robertson Ranch Master Plan. No parking or other variances are requested. The project will not conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED: Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated XVII. UTILITIES AND SERVICES SYSTEMS - Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the D D ~ D applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or D D D ~ wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which would cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm D D D ~ 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 D D ~ D project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater D D ~ D 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 D D ~ D capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and D D ~ D regulations related to solid waste? a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? Less Than Significant Impact. Under Section 402 of the Federal Clean Water Act (CW A) the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) issues NPDES permits to regulate discharges to "waters of the U.S." which include rivers, lakes, and their tributary drainages. Waste discharges include discharges of storm water and construction project discharges. A construction project resulting in the disturbance in excess of one acre requires an NPDES permit. Construction project developers are also required to prepare a SWPPP plan. As a result of the fact that the project would be required to comply with the waste discharge prohibitions and water quality objectives established by the RWQCB and the City of Carlsbad (as a co-permittee), the FEIR concluded that impacts related to this issue would be less than significant. 52 Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-031 CT 11-01/ HDP 11-011 SUP 11-021 HMP 11-03 b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which would cause significant environmental effects? No Impact. The Certified FEIR concluded that overall impacts to public facilities and service systems were not significant provided that the appropriate agency conditions for development are met, including the payment of sewer impact fees and public facilities fees. Further, a Sewer System Analysis for Robertson Ranch West, by Dexter Wilson Engineering Inc., dated December 20, 2011, has been prepared which identifies the projected sewage flows resulting from proposed urbanization of the site, and concludes that sufficient sewer service is available for the project. This sewer hydraulic analysis also identified onsite sewer lines required for implementation of the proposed project. As a result of these factors, no impact is assessed. 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? No Impact. The proposed project will be in compliance with the City of Carlsbad Master Drainage Plan. Therefore, no significant impacts will result with regard to the construction of new storm water drainage facilities. During construction, BMPs would be implemented to prevent construction-tainted runoff (containing sediments, oil, grease, etc.) into the storm drain system. The BMPs will include a variety of measures to control these pollutants, such as the use of sandbags and straw bales to block drain inlets to prevent discharge from entering the storm drain system, and other temporary protections. Once completed, the project would not increase storm water flows in the area of the project. As a result, the project will not result in the need for modification or addition of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, and therefore, no_impacts would occur. d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? Less Than Significant Impact. The Carlsbad Municipal Water District (CMWD) evaluates the water systems within their district and formulates long range plans that will provide for future improvements. The Certified FEIR concluded that overall impacts to water supplies and service systems were in compliance with the CMWD Master Plan and thus the West Village project impact to water supplies is not significant provided that the appropriate agency conditions for development are met, including the payment of sewer impact fees and public facilities fees. Further, a Water System Analysis for Robertson Ranch West, by Dexter Wilson Engineering Inc., dated December 20, 2011, has been prepared which identifies the appropriate water zones and piping apparatus necessary for development of the project. The project proposes installation of these facilities in conjunction with development. As a result, a less than significant impact is assessed. 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? Less Than Significant Impact. The trunk sewer system from the West Village to the Encina Water Pollution Control Facility (EWPCF) is complete and functional. Major on-site trunk lines and facilities will be constructed as development occurs to ensure that conformance with the Growth Management performance standard is maintained throughout the buildout of the project. Additionally, pursuant to adopted City policy, all development is required to pay appropriate sewer connection fees. The FEIR concluded that mitigation measures identified in the FEIR would reduce the environmental impact associated with construction of on-site sewer structure to a level of less than significant. Assuming compliance with these mitigation measures concludes that the impact from the proposed MPA and MTM is less than significant. f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? Less Than Significant Impact. The Certified FEIR concluded that the Robertson Ranch project would be adequately served by existing landfills, which have adequate capacity. Thus, the proposed project is anticipated to result in a less than significant contribution to the waste flow, and would be serviced by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs. As a result of the fact that the proposed project does not result in a significant intensification of the project reviewed in the FEIR, a less than significant impact related to this issue is anticipated. 53 c Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-07/ MP 02-03/ CT 11-01/ HDP 11-011 SUP 11-021 HMP 11-03 g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Less Than Significant Impact. The project will be required to comply with applicable elements of AB 1327, Chapter 18 (California Solid Waste Reuse and Recycling Access Act of 1991) and other applicable local, state and federal solid waste disposal standards; therefore impacts associated with this issue are less than significant. ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES TO BE ADDRESSED: Potentially Potentially Less Than No Significant Significant Significant Impact Impact Unless Impact Mitigation Incorporated XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the D cg) D D 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 D D cg) D 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 D D cg) D will cause the substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? 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? Potentially Significant Unless Mitigation Incorporated. The following discussion demonstrates how, with mitigation, the proposed project would result in less than significant impacts with respect to the potential for substantially degrading the quality of the environment; substantially reducing the habitat of a fish or wildlife species; causing a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels; threatening to eliminate a plant or animal community; reduce the number or restrict the range of an endangered, or rare or threatened species; or eliminate important examples of major periods of California history or prehistory. Potential to degrade the quality of the environment. The project would not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment. As indicated in the foregoing environmental analysis; No Impact, a Less Than Significant Impact, or a Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated is assessed to occur for each and every environmental issue addressed as a result of implementation of the project. In cases where the impact is assessed at Potentially Significant Impact Unless Mitigation Incorporated, mitigation measures are included in the project's MMRP, which will minimize impacts to a level of insignificance. 54 c Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-03/ CT 11-011 HDP 11-011 SUP 11-02/ HMP 11-03 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, or reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal. Natural habitat resources on the West Village include primarily Extensive Agricultural row crops and Intensive Agriculture (Nursery), with Diegan coastal sage scrub (DCSS) covering the non-agricultural slopes and valleys. A palm tree nursery shown near the Cannon Road/El Camino Real intersection has been removed since the time of the biological report and has been replaced with a wetlands restoration site (located in the southern section of the PA 23C Habitat Corridor), which is presently in the early stages of grow-in. The biological report also indicates that two bird species of concern, the California gnatcatcher (CAGN) and the Yellow breasted chat were located on the West Village site. A 2004 survey by Merkel and also a more recent (2011) survey by Helix Biological for an endangered bird, the least Bell's Vireo (LBV) concluded the absence of LBV within the Southern willow scrub (SWS) riparian corridor habitat on the West Village. Southern willow flycatcher has not been observed on or near the West Village property. Sensitive habitats on the property as identified in the FEIR are listed as; Coastal and valley freshwater marsh (CFM), SWS and Diegan coastal sage scrub (DCSS). The proposed West Village project is very similar in scope of impacts to these sensitive habitats as that analyzed in the FEIR. In a direct comparison (results shown in Table A below) of the sensitive habitat impacts between the project analyzed in the FEIR and the presently proposed MPA and MTM project, the proposed project results in 0.82 acres less impact to CFM and 0.20 acres less impact to SWS. The project increases impacts to DCSS by 2.50 acres. The reductions in impacted wetlands area are seen as a beneficial impact of the proposed MPA and MTM, in comparison to that reviewed in the FEIR. The 2.50 acres of additional impact to DCSS constitutes a significant biological impact, which is mitigated through adoption of Mitigation Measure BI0-1, in conjunction with implementation of the mitigation measures adopted in the FEIR. The federally threatened coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila califomica californica) occurs within the project site, however no other federally listed species have been detected. The least Bell's vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus) has been sighted in the vicinity of the property, including within Calavera Creek on the east side of the Robertson Ranch East Village, but has not been detected within the project site. Focused gnatcatcher surveys were originally conducted for the entire Robertson Ranch property in 2001. The results of that survey concluded that three gnatcatcher pairs existed within the overall Robertson Ranch property, including two pairs within the Robertson Ranch East Village, and one pair within the West Village. The single gnatcatcher pair within the West Village was detected within one of the planning areas identified for open space conservation (P A 23B ). According to the M&A report, although the focused surveys did not determine the boundaries of the home range territories of the three pairs, it was expected that most or all of the home ranges were retained within the biological open space, including the pair within PA 23B of the project site. The project property occurs within the plan area of the City of Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan (HMP), which is the local Subarea Plan of the County of San Diego Multiple Habitat Conservation Plan (MHCP). The HMP plan is, by definition, a regional plan. As noted in the FEIR, the primary mitigation for impacts to HMP species under the HMP is the conservation and management of habitat for the species in the preserve system. The HMP requires that, " .. .in compliance with the Endangered Species Act requirements that the impacts of incidental take be minimized and mitigated to the maximum extent practicable, measures to avoid and reduce impacts will apply citywide on a project level basis." The FEIR adopted mitigation measures that, if implemented, would specifically minimize impacts (including indirect impacts) to gnatcatchers. Indirect impacts have the potential to occur as a result of noise generated during project construction and/or during initial clearing and grubbing within or adjacent to potentially occupied habitat. The FEIR mitigation measures include compliance with the Habitat Management Plan (HMP) policies, recording of a conservation easement over conserved habitats, long-term management of the conserved areas by a conservation entity, endowment funding of long- term management, restoration of the Habitat Corridor (P A 23C), temporary fencing delineation of conserved areas during construction, biological monitoring of construction activities, monitoring of CAGN habitat during construction, and Burrowing owl (BO) and Brodiaea filifolia surveys prior to construction. In light of the proposed project's reduced or mitigated impact on sensitive habitats, and subject to adherence with the biological mitigation measure included in the Certified FEIR, impacts associated with sensitive wildlife species identified as a candidate, sensitive or special status species or to any sensitive habitats, or wildlife in the area are determined to be less than significant as long as the mitigation measure articulated in Section IV(a) and IV(b) is adopted as part of this CEQA document and project approvals. 55 c Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-07/ MP 02-03/ CT 11-011 HDP 11-01/ SUP 11-021 HMP 11-03 Have the potential to substantially eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. The site has been entirely surveyed for cultural resources. The Native American Heritage Commission has been contacted for a search of their Sacred Lands File. Interested parties identified by the Native American Heritage Commission were contacted regarding the project. Correspondence with the Native American Heritage Commission and the local Native American community occurred. No historic buildings or resources were identified as a result of these efforts. One historic structure was identified adjacent to project site on the East Village, but this structure has since been removed. As a result of the fact that no historical resources have been recorded or were identified in the vicinity of the project, no impact to historical resources will result from implementation of the project. Eight prehistorical archaeological sites have been identified within the boundaries of the West Village. Sites SDI-10,612, SDI-16,130, SDI-16,131, SDI-16,132, SDI-16,133 and SDI-16,137 were all tested for significance and determined not important under CEQA guidelines. Site SDI-10,609 and Site SDI-10,610 were subjected to an extensive data recovery program to mitigate impacts and exhaust all research potential prior to grading impacts for the Park and Habitat Corridor in 2008. In 2011, testing of site SDI-20,409 was also conducted by recordation of the surface expression of the site, surface artifact collection, excavation of shovel test pits to identify any subsurface artifact content, and excavation of one test unit. Based on the testing, it was determined that a lack of research potential and an absence of intact significant deposits or significant features, that SDI-20,409 is not significant. As a result of these surveys and test investigations, it is determined that no further significant sites under CEQA are known to exist on the site. However, CEQA Section 15064.5(t) requires provisions for identification and evaluation of accidentally discovered archaeological resources. Therefore mitigation measures have been added to the Certified FEIR which require the developer to enter into agreements for archaeological and Native American field monitors to observe the grading activities and to have the authority to halt grading to examine prehistoric resources if they are accidentally encountered during construction activities. As a result of the results of the above-referenced analysis and cultural testing, and subject to implementation of the mitigation measures adopted in the FEIR, the project will result in a less than significant impact to archaeological resources. b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects?) Less than Significant Impact. Cumulative impacts are defined as two or more individual effects that, when considered together, are considerable or that compound or increase the severity of other environmental impacts, even when the environmental impacts may be individually limited. The cumulative impact from several projects can be quantified as the change in the environment that results from the incremental impact of the proposed development when added to the impacts of other closely related past, present, and reasonably foreseeable or probable future developments. Cumulative impacts can result from individually minor, but collectively significant, developments taking place over a particular window of time. CEQA Guidelines, Section 15130(a) and (b) states: (a) Cumulative impacts shall be discussed when the project's incremental effect is cumulatively considerable. (b) The discussion of cumulative impacts shall reflect the severity of the impacts and their likelihood of occurrence, but the discussion need not provide as great detail as is provided of the effects attributable to the project. The discussion should be guided by the standards of practicality and reasonableness. Cumulative Effects -Surrounding Development Projects: 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 these projections, region-wide standards, etc., are established to reduce the cumulative impacts of development in the region. All 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, and development standards, have all been adopted in an effort to ensure that future urbanizing and development occurring within the City will not result in a cumulatively significant impact. 56 ,_,,,,-~---,·--~----~----------------------- c Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-07/ MP 02-03/ CT 11-011 HDP 11-011 SUP 11-02/ HMP 11-03 This cumulative impact analysis utilizes the regional growth projections method, which assumes buildout of both local and regional general plans as well as population forecasts for San Diego County and region as a whole. In addition, a number of specific cumulative projects in the vicinity of the proposed project are included in this cumulative analysis. These cumulative projects are described below. 1. Cantarini Ranch -Cantarini Ranch is a residential development consisting of 105 single-family homes and 80 multifamily homes on 156 acres. The site is located east of College Boulevard Reach A, one-half mile south of the intersection of College Boulevard and Cannon Road, east of the Rancho Carlsbad Mobile Home Park and south of the Holly Springs property. 2, Carlsbad Oaks North-Carlsbad Oaks North is a 219 acre industrial park designed to include 23 industrial use lots and 3 open space lots. The project is located in eastern Carlsbad, four miles south of the Robertson Ranch project, just north of Palomar Airport Road. The Carlsbad Oaks North project site is bordered by the City of Vista on the north and east. 3. Carlsbad High School Project-The Carlsbad High School Project involves the construction of a 2,400 student high school in two phases. The project is located on the northeast corner of Cannon Road and College Boulevard. The first phase of the project is presently under construction. 4. Legoland Hotel -Legoland Hotel California proposes to construct a 250-room resort hotel in central Carlsbad. The project is located on the north side of Palomar Airport Road between Legoland Drive and Hidden Valley Drive. 5, Poinsettia Place -Poinsettia Place is a residential development consisting of 90 condominiums on 20.4 acres located in south-central Carlsbad, on the south side of Cassia Road and Poinsettia Lane, approximately one-half mile west of El Camino Real. 6. Westfield Mall Expansion-The Westfield Mall Expansion involves the redevelopment of an existing Regional Shopping Center. It is located on approximately 97 acres at the City's northern boundary along the west side of El Camino Real. The project currently has 1,151,092 square feet (sf) of gross leasable area (GLA). The Project involves the demolition, reconfiguration, and/or reconstruction of approximately 179,631 GLA sf of existing square footage, and the development of up to approximately net 35,417 GLA sf, for a total of approximately 1,186,509 GLA sf of developed regional mall. 7. Holly Springs -The Holly Springs project involves the construction of 42 single-family homes on approximately 119 acres. Approximately 59 acres will be open space with an additional 20-acre open space remainder parcel. The property is located east of College Boulevard Reach A, approximately 800 feet south of the intersection of College Boulevard and Cannon Road. 8. Bressi Ranch Master Planned Community -The Bressi Ranch Master Planned Community includes development of 125 acres of industrial uses, 523 detached dwelling units, 100 attached dwelling units, 100 assisted living units, 10 acres of community commercial uses arid 10 acres of community facilities. The project is located on the southeast corner of Palomar Airport Road and El Camino Real intersection. 9. Palomar Commons (Lowe's Center) -Palomar Commons (Lowe's Center) proposes a big box regional retail building area of 185,244 square feet, located in the central area of Carlsbad. A Lowe's home improvement store will account for 153.974 square feet, while the remaining area is proposed as general retail stores and restaurant land uses. The project is located within LFMP Zone 5 in the industrial corridor surrounding McClellan-Palomar Airport on the southwest intersection of El Camino Real and Palomar Airport Road. 10. Dos Colinas -The Dos Colinas project is a Continuing Care Retirement Community of 309 units including detached cottages, as well as independent and assisted living units, on 55.7 acres located approximately 1 mile southeast of the proposed project, on the west side of future College Boulevard Reach A. College Boulevard Reach A has not yet been constructed. 57 c Cumulative Effects -Aesthetics Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-03/ CT 11-011 HDP 11-011 SUP 11-02/ HMP 11-03 All of the projects identified in the cumulative list, taken together, would contribute to aesthetic changes in the environment of the scenic area in and around the proposed project. These projects, when taken cumulatively, will modify the appearance of the area. Cumulative development will result in the continued alteration of the visual setting and topography of the area. Local planning policies and development standards, including specific policies related to visual resources and grading, will reduce potential aesthetic impacts of individual developments. Cumulatively, since individual development proposals will conform to the goals, policies, and recommendations of the General Plan, the cumulative impact is considered less than significant. Individual development proposals will be assessed by the City to determine consistency with the applicable development regulations and design guidelines. No significant cumulative impact to aesthetics of the area will occur as a result of the impacts from the cumulative projects. Cumulative Effects -Air Quality As a result of their long-term nature, any emissions from plant and project operations for pollutants for which the San Diego air basin is not in attainment with state and federal standards are considered to be cumulatively significant. The San Diego Air Basin is in transitional-attainment status of federal standards for 03. The Basin is either in attainment or unclassified for federal standards of CO, S02, N02, PM10, and lead. The SDAB is also in attainment of state air quality standards for all pollutants with the exception of 03 and PM10. Development forecasted for the region will generate increased emission levels from transportation and stationary sources. Potential cumulative air quality impacts will be partially reduced through implementation and achievement of emission levels identified in the Regional Air Quality Strategies (RAQS) and General Plan air quality elements of local jurisdictions. Based on the expected reductions in emissions due to implementation of these plans, vehicle emissions are anticipated to gradually decrease dependent on the type of pollutant. However, combined emissions from the project site and other developed areas in the basin are expected to continue to generate emissions associated with these developments, which have the potential to exceed threshold levels. Nonetheless, as with the proposed project, each of the cumulative projects would be required to mitigate impacts. As such, with the implementation of Mitigation Measures as described in the CEQA documents for the projects, the proposed project will not contribute significant cumulative air quality impacts beyond those which would result from the projects individually. Cumulative Effects -Biological Resources The increase in urbanization of currently vacant land will impact existing natural habitats and biological resources. The City's HMP anticipates future development within the City, and addresses biological impacts on a cumulative level by implementing a habitat plan that will ensure preservation of important biological resources and maintenance of habitat connectivity. The various cumulative projects include substantial open space in conformance with the City's General Plan and HMP which will ensure biological preservation within the City. Wildlife corridors will be established in accordance with HMP hardline preserve areas that will connect open space on the respective properties in order to preserve a maximum amount of confluent habitat for local biological resources. This corridor will ultimately adjoin with the large open space areas of the Carlsbad Highlands Mitigation Bank, Calavera Heights Mitigation Site, and Lake Calavera City Mitigation Bank to the north, and with the Dawson-Los Monos Reserve to the east. The project would contribute to the long-term cumulative enhancement of the HMP through extension of Link B though open space easements and biological conservation areas. The cumulative impact to biological resources will be mitigated to a level less than significant through implementation of the HMP. The City of Carlsbad is a participant in the MHCP Program and has adopted a Habitat Management Plan (HMP) pursuant to Section lO(a) of the Federal ESA. The MHCP considers biological resource conservation on a sub-regional scale and therefore serves as an appropriate format for analysis of cumulative impacts. The City's HMP provides the local implementation guidelines for compliance with the MHCP policies. As such, the HMP provides the mitigation policy guidelines which address the effects of both individual and cumulative development. Therefore, if a· project is determined to be consistent with the HMP, or in conjunction with the adoption of mitigation measures is found to be consistent with the HMP, then, by definition, its cumulative effects are not significant. The project's compliance with the mitigation measures identified in the Certified FEIR will ensure that the impacts to biological resources are mitigated to a level less than significant. 58 Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-03/ CT 11-01/ HDP 11-01/ SUP 11-021 HMP 11-03 Further, the HMP provides regional mitigation for cumulative biological resource impacts. If a project is determined to be consistent with the MHCP (and the City of Carlsbad's associated subarea plan -the HMP) and it provides appropriate mitigation to ensure less than significant impacts, then its cumulative effects would by definition, be in compliance with the "take" authorizations of the HMP. Thus, as long as all cumulative projects are found to be consistent with the MHCP and the HMP, no significant cumulative effects on biological resources would result from implementation of these projects. Cumulative Effects -Cultural Resources Cumulative development is expected to impact existing cultural resources in the region. The project's compliance with the mitigation measures identified in the Certified FEIR will ensure that the project-specific impact to significant cultural resources is mitigated to a level less than significant. On a broader scope, archaeological and cultural resources are protected through Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, other federal and state laws, and local ordinances, including the City's Cultural Resource Guidelines. Future cumulative development within the region would be subject to review under CEQA and compliance with federal, state, and local regulations protecting cultural resources. Impacts to cultural resources as a result of development in the region would be reduced to a level less than significant through implementation of mitigation measures on a project-by-project basis. Geologic formations within the project site have the potential to contain paleontological resources. Any earthwork involving these formations has the potential to impact paleontological resources. Mitigation will reduce the impact to paleontological resources to a level less than significant. Implementation of paleontological studies, monitoring during construction, and recovery of important fossils would reduce the cumulative impact to paleontological resources to a level less than significant. Cumulative Effects -Geology and Soils Construction of the cumulative projects identified in the cumulative projects list identified in this document will all take place in a relatively seismically active area. However, the area including the cumulative projects is not underlain by known active faults, nor is there evidence of ground displacement in the area during the last 11 ,000 years. Generally acknowledged geological information indicates that the potential for rupture resulting from earthquake is considered to be low. Construction of the proposed cumulative projects would not exacerbate any of these geotechnical hazards. Tectonic movement, which is independent of human influence, solely affects these conditions. Due to the lack of known active faults on the site, the potential for surface rupture at the site is considered low. For these reasons, project impacts would be less than significant. The potential for structural or infrastructural damage from seismic ground shaking or liquefaction will be mitigated by ensuring the projects are constructed to the 2010 California Building Code (CBC) standards for the southern California area. All projects in the cumulative projects list are subject to these standards. Construction to this standard will minimize impacts to the project from design-basis earthquakes and be protective of life and property. More specifically, the structures and facilities associated with the cumulative projects will be designed and constructed to withstand strong earthquake- shaking as specified in the 2007 Uniform Building Code (UBC) for Seismic Zone 4. Construction to this standard will minimize impacts to the projects from ground shaking from earthquake and tremors, and will thus be protective of life and properties. Cumulative development of the properties would result in an increase in population and development that would be exposed to hazardous geological conditions. Geologic arid soils conditions are typically site specific and can be addressed through appropriate engineering practices. Cumulative impacts to geologic resources would be considered significant if the proposed project would be impacted by geologic hazards(s) and if the impact could combine with offsite geologic hazards to be cumulatively considerable. The proposed project's incremental effects are not cumulatively considerable. Geologic conditions in the Southern California region will essentially be the same regardless of the amount of development and the cumulative geologic impact is considered less than significant. No significant cumulative impact to geology/soils will occur. Cumulative Effects-Greenhouse Gases (GHG) CEQA lead agencies must assess whether the emissions from the proposed project are "cumulatively considerable" even though the project's GHG emissions may be individually limited. Individual lead agencies may undertake a project-by- project analysis, consistent with available guidance and current CEQA practice. 59 ····--·~--------~---~----------------------------c Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-031 CT 11-011 HDP 11-011 SUP 11-02/ HMP 11-03 Even a very large individual project cannot generate enough greenhouse gas emissions to measurable influence climate change. It is a project's incremental contribution combined with the cumulative increase of all other sources of GHG that together form anthropogenic climate change impacts. However, the theory that an increase of one molecule of an air pollutant constitutes a significant increase cannot be the basis of a de-facto significance threshold. An individual project contributes to cumulative GHG emissions through construction, increased vehicular travel, and increased energy consumption. Each project can reduce its own GHG emissions through project-level review and mitigation, including energy efficiency features, green building programs, water recycling, and similar measures. However, the cumulative impact of GHG emissions, and therefore climate change, cannot be mitigated on a piecemeal, case-by-case basis. It is the regional development pattern, land use, and transportation policies that determine the cumulative impact in which a project participates. The proposed project would incrementally increase greenhouse gas emissions. However, the proposed project would minimize energy consumption, including transportation energy, water conservation and solid-waste reduction through the siting, orientation, and design of the residential units. The proposed project would not increase density on the project site as compared to the project assessed in the FEIR. As such, the proposed project would not increase the emissions from the project, and thus would be consistent with the goals of AB 32, which requires achievement by 2020 of a statewide GHG emissions limit equivalent to 1990 emissions. In addition, as with all projects in California, the proposed project would be required to be consistent with the requirements of AB 32. As a result, the proposed project would not contribute to significant cumulative greenhouse gas emissions impacts. Cumulative Effects -Hazards and Hazardous Materials The development of the projects within the cumulative projects list has the potential to result in impacts related to hazards/hazardous materials. However, these impacts, in conjunction with the mitigation measures identified in the FEIR, would be reduced to a level less than significant. As such, the proposed project is not anticipated to contribute to a significant cumulative impact related to hazards and hazardous materials. No significant cumulative impact to hazardous materials arid hazards will occur. Further, existing federal, state and local laws address the handling of hazardous materials and the transportation and use of hazardous materials. Any risk of a fire and/or explosion would be reduced through compliance with these applicable codes, regulations, and industry design/construction standards. Compliance with these laws and regulations will ensure that hazardous materials at the cumulative projects are safely managed. As a result, assuming compliance with worker safety and hazardous materials regulations, no significant impact to hazards and hazardous materials will result from the cumulative development of these projects. Cumulative Effects· Hydrology and Water Quality The proposed project is required to comply with the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), the General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction, and other applicable portions of the federal Clean Water Act, including the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, or Section 401. Also, the City of Carlsbad has adopted a Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance. This ordinance requires that all new development and redevelopment activities comply with the City's adopted storm water pollution protection requirements. Development of cumulative projects within the cumulative projects list has the potential to increase the amount of erosion due to the alteration of drainage patterns and increased amounts of impervious surfaces. However, proposed project drainage control and hydromodification features identified in this document will ensure that the impact is less than significant. Cumulative projects will be subject to the same local. state, and federal regulations with respect to hydrology and water quality, and appropriate best management practices will be implemented to ensure no significant impact occurs. Also, improvements identified in the City's Master Drainage Plan would adequately control hydrology within the watershed. Regional pollution control facilities, including the proposed onsite water quality facilities will ensure that there are no significant cumulative impacts associated with water quality/hydrology. The project's compliance with the mitigation measures identified in the Certified FEIR, and the other cumulative project's compliance with mitigation measures associated with those projects, will ensure that the project-specific impact to significant cultural resources is mitigated to a level less than significant. 60 c Cumulative Effects -Land Use and Planning Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-03/ CT 11-01/ HDP ll-011 SUP 11-021 HMP ll-03 Cumulative impacts analysis to land use are defined as impacts that result from incremental changes in land use that would cumulatively result in substantial disruption within an established community, or cumulatively result in conflicts with adopted land use or zoning plans and policies. The project site is surrounded by a range of existing land uses (i.e., Rancho Carlsbad Mobile Home Park, Rancho Carlsbad golf course, the Colony single family neighborhood, the Robertson Ranch East Village, as well as planned urban uses (i.e. Cantarini Ranch, Holly Springs, Carlsbad High School located at the northeast corner of College Boulevard and Cannon Road, and the extension of College Boulevard Reach "A".) Land uses in the City will significantly change during buildout of the area. Achievement of orderly growth will be dependent upon development in the future occurring in a manner consistent with the City's General Plan, Growth Management Plan, and development regulations. Because the City has adopted these plans, and will continue to implement these plans, which will, in turn, avoid significant land use impacts, no cumulative impact will occur. The proposed development has been determined to be compatible with the existing surrounding land uses as well as approved and anticipated land uses. The previous Certified FEIR for the project determined that no significant project impact would occur to existing land use plans and policies, including the Carlsbad General Plan; Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan, and specific regulatory and environmental documents adopted by the City. The project-level land use impact is considered less than significant. Therefore, the project will not contribute to a significant cumulative impact to land use. No significant cumulative impact to land use will occur, Cumulative land use impacts could occur if the development of the proposed project and other related planned future cumulative projects which are presently inconsistent with applicable plans and policies were to develop together. However, it is anticipated that the appropriate amendments to the land use and planning policy documents will be processed and completed prior to development of the projects. The project will not result in a significant population/housing impact. The population growth associated with the proposed project is within' projected population levels as contemplated in the City's Growth Management Plan. Cumulative projects would not displace people as a result of removing residential units nor will the projects add people beyond the levels contemplated in existing plans as a result of the development of new residential units. No cumulative population/housing impact is anticipated. Cumulative Effects -Noise In general, noise impacts associated with the majority of the cumulative projects identified in the cumulative impacts list are long-term effects related to traffic generated by the several planned developments. These cumulative traffic impacts generally increase over time, as buildout of the City of Carlsbad and the surrounding region nears completion. Therefore it is anticipated that as cumulative projects develop, mitigation to address their noise impacts will be employed for each project, in order to protect sensitive receptors and to comply with City policy. Construction noise of the cumulative projects is also a source of noise. Were the projects to develop cumulatively, it is not anticipated that those cumulative impacts would reach a level of significance. The time frame for construction of the proposed individual projects is generally relatively short, and it is therefore not anticipated that ambient noise levels will increase substantially beyond current levels before completion of project construction. Although specific environmental analyses for many of these cumulative projects have not been completed at the time of the MND, standard mitigation measures exist to ensure compliance with the City of Carlsbad allowable noise levels and thus to reduce noise impacts to a less-than significant level. In consideration of these requirements, it is not anticipated that the project, in conjunction with cumulative projects, would result in significant noise impacts. Cumulative Effects -Traffic and Circulation The City of Carlsbad Growth Management Plan (CMC 21.90) disallows approval of any development which is projected to result in any road segment or intersection in the zone nor any road segment or intersection out of the zone which is impacted by development in the zone to be projected to exceed a service level C during off-peak hours, or service level D during peak hours. Impacted means where twenty percent or more of the traffic generated by the Local Facility Management Zone will use the road segment or intersection. The determination of compliance with these Growth Management Standards is to evaluate impacted road segments and intersections that are impacted by at least 20% of the traffic projected to be generated by the Local Facilities Management Plan (LFMP) Zone in which the project(s) is located, based on the assumed phasing of development and roadway/traffic improvements. Computer travel forecasts used for the 61 c Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-07/ MP 02-03/ CT 11-011 HDP 11-011 SUP 11-021 HMP 11-03 analysis of existing, short-term and long-term (assumed buildout) have been evaluated using surrounding traffic volume estimates using the SANDAG Regional Transportation Model for the City of Carlsbad, Traffic impact analyses are inherently cumulative. The cumulative impacts analysis for traffic and circulation considers the intersections and road segments to which proposed projects could contribute to a cumulative impact. Since the time frame for construction of these projects is relatively short and may or may not occur simultaneously, it is not anticipated that a substantial increase in current traffic levels resulting from cumulative development will occur prior to completion of construction of these projects. Therefore, temporary traffic impacts associated with these projects will cease prior to any substantial cumulative traffic impacts being realized on local roadways and intersections. Therefore construction-related impacts to roadways and intersections are considered to be less than significant. The proposed project traffic impacts and cumulative traffic impacts are evaluated in the North County SANDAG Series 11 Model for Years 2020 and 2030. These traffic models contain planned and existing developments land use information throughout San Diego County. In particular, the City of the Carlsbad requested that the cumulative projects listed above be included in the model runs. The following is a brief description of each cumulative project included in the model runs. In the year 2010 SANDAG run, all intersections will operate at a LOS D or better without the project and would continue to operate at the same LOS with the addition of project traffic. Based on the established significance criteria per the CEQA Guidelines and the City of Carlsbad, no significant traffic impact is identified in Year 2020 at these intersections. Additionally, under the Year 2020 without project conditions, all street segments are projected to operate at LOS A, with the exception of southbound College Boulevard to Faraday Avenue during the AM peak hour, which is expected to operate at LOS B. With the addition of the project traffic, all street segments would continue to operate at a LOS B or better and thus no significant traffic impact is identified in Year 2020 at these street segments. In the year 2030 SANDAG run, all intersections included in the traffic study area are calculated to operate at LOS D or better, without the project, and would continue to operate at the same LOS with the addition of the project traffic. Based on the established significance criteria, no significant project related impacts to intersections would occur. Additionally, under Year 2030 without project conditions, all of the study area street segments are projected to operate at LOS C or better. These street segments would continue to operate at LOS C or better under the Year 2030 with project conditions. As a result of these factors, the proposed project will not contribute to a significant cumulative impact to traffic/circulation. Cumulative Effects -Public Utilities and Service Systems Cumulative development will increase the population of the City, resulting in an increased demand on public services and utilities. However, the City of Carlsbad has established the requirements for preparation of, and amendments to, the LFMP as part of the City's Growth Management Program in order to anticipate and prepare for this future growth and any potential strain on services. Conformance with and periodic review of the LFMP for each respective zone will ensure the adequate provision of public services and utilities. Therefore, no significant cumulative impact to public services and utilities will occur. c) Does the project have environmental effects, which wiD cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Less Than Significant Impact. Potential adverse effects on the human population have been evaluated in preceding sections of this checklist. The incorporation of design measures identified in the project description, applicable City of Carlsbad policies and standards, and applicable state and federal guidelines, will ensure that no substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly, will result from the project. Impacts of the proposed project would be less than significant. 62 c XVIII. EARLIER ANALYSES Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-03/ CT 11-011 HDP 11-011 SUP 11-02/ HMP 11-03 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. 63 ''"~---~-----~-~--------------------------- c _ . ...,. ...,/ Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-07/ MP 02-03/ CT 11-011 HDP 11-011 SUP 11-021 HMP 11-03 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 Department 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 Department. March 1994. 2. Capital Improvement Program, City of Carlsbad, Finance Department, 2008-2013. 3. State of California CEQA Guidelines, State of California Natural Resources Agency. July 27, 2007. 4. Vesting Master Tentative Map for Rancho Costera, O'Day Consultants, July 9, 2011. 5. Sewer Master Plan, City of Carlsbad, March, 2003. 6. Scenic Corridor Guidelines. City of Carlsbad. July 1, 1988. 7. Robertson Ranch Master Plan. City of Carlsbad. Adopted November 14, 2006. Amended December 2, 2008 and January 26, 2010. 8. Robertson Ranch Master Plan Final Environmental Impact Report, BRG, City of Carlsbad, April, 2006. 9. Concurrence on Hardline Design for Robertson Ranch, US Fish & Wildlife Service and California Dept. Fish & Game, February 11, 2005. 10. Year 2011 Least Bell's Vireo Survey Report for Robertson Ranch West Village Planning Area 1, Helix Environmental Planning, August 2, 2011. 11. Cultural Resources Survey and Evaluation for the Proposed Robertson Ranch Project, Brian F. Smith and Associates, San Diego, CA, June 2002, Updated October 10, 2011. 12. Regulatory Guidance Letter, US Army Corps of Engineers, RGL 08-02. June 26, 2008. 13. Habitat Management Plan for Natural Communities in the City of Carlsbad. City of Carlsbad. Final Approval November, 2004. 14. Robertson Ranch Wetland Habitat Creation, Maintenance and Monitoring Program, Planning Systems, January 5, 2007. 15. California Probabilistic Seismic Hazard Assessment, United States Geological Survey. October, 2003. 16. Supplemental to the Updated Geotechnical Investigation for Rancho Costera (formerly Robertson Ranch West Village), GeoSoils, Inc. June 6, 2011. 17. Preliminary Geotechnical Review of "Vesting Master Tentative Map for Rancho Costera, GeoSoils, Inc, May 24, 2012. 18. Uniform Building Code-Volume 1 (1997); Table 18-1-B. 19. Expanded List of Early Action Measures to Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions in California, California Environmental Protection Agency Air Resources Board, October 2007~ 20. City of Carlsbad Emergency Operations Plan. June 9, 2003. 64 Rev. 01102/07 .,..,... ~ ._.., ..., Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-07/ MP 02-03/ CT 11-01/ HDP 11-011 SUP 11-02/ HMP 11-03 21. McClellan Palomar AiJ.:port Land Use Compatibility Plan-, Carlsbad, California. (March 4, 2010.) Approved by the San Diego County Regional Airport Authority. 22. Preliminary Drainage Study for Robertson Ranch West Village, O'Day Consultants, April 25, 2012 23. Preliminary Storm Water Management Plan for Robertson Ranch West Village, O'Day Consultants, April 30, 2012. 24. Carlsbad Municipal Code Title 21; Zoning Ordinance. City of Carlsbad. Updated through November, 2009. 25. Draft Noise Guidelines Manual, City of Carlsbad. 1998 26. San Diego County Regulatory Ordinances, San Diego County Noise Ordinance, Section 36.409-410, County of San Diego. Amended November 19, 2008. 27. Zone 14 Local Facilites Management Plan. Planning Systems, City of Carlsbad. November 14, 2006. 28. Sewer System Analysis for Robertson Ranch West, Dexter Wilson Engineering Inc., December 20, 2011. 29. Water System Analysis for Robertson Ranch West, Dexter Wilson Engineering Inc., December 20, 2011. 30. Carlsbad General Plan-Circulation Element, City of Carlsbad Planning Department. March, 1994. 65 Rev. 01/02/07 c ,...... ...., Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-071 MP 02-031 CT 11-011 HDP 11-011 SUP 11-02/ HMP 11-03 LIST OF MITIGATING MEASURES CIF APPLICABLE) The project site was the subject of a previous CEQA review in the Robertson Ranch Final Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR), which was certified by the Carlsbad City Council on November 14, 2006. According to Section 15168 of the State CEQA Guidelines, a Program EIR is appropriate for a series of actions that can be characterized as one large project, are related geographically, and as logical parts in the chain of contemplated actions in connection with issuance of rules, regulations or plans. Thus, the EIR is intended to be used in the review of subsequent projects within the Robertson Ranch Master Plan. The proposed project however requests modifications to the project. Through the analysis of the required modified plans, reports, and studies pertaining to biological resources, geotechnical, hydrology, storm water management, and noise, the modifications could have the potential to result in significant impacts. These impacts have been assessed in this Mitigated Negative Declaration and mitigation measures are required. These mitigation measures are listed below. These mitigation measures however, also assume project compliance with the mitigation measures adopted in the EIR. A determination has been made that with the implementation of the EIR mitigation measures, plus the additional mitigation measures articulated below, no additional significant impacts beyond those identified and mitigated for by the EIR will result from this project. The EIR mitigation measures are considered part of the project and thus it is not necessary to consider them to be mitigation measures of this Mitigated Negative Declaration. To mitigate new potentially significant project impacts, the following mitigation measures shall be applied to the development of the proposed project: Biological Resources BI0-1 The project developer shall revegetate all permanent manufactured slopes conserved within the proposed HMP hardline area with Diegan coastal sage scrub (DCSS) vegetation. This revegetated area will total 12.42 acres, which will sufficiently mitigate for the 2.50 acre increased impact to sensitive DCSS vegetation. Such DCSS revegetation program shall be subject to a five-year maintenance and monitoring program, with a requirement to meet City- approved success criteria. This restoration program shall be approved by the City prior to the commencement of any clearing or grading associated with the project. The restoration program shall include site preparation guidelines, implementation monitoring, performance standards, long-term maintenance and monitoring methodology, and contingency measures with a commitment to long-term funding. BI0-2 Prior to issuance of a grading permit for the MTM, the developer shall process and receive approval of a HMP Equivalency Determination through the City of Carlsbad in consultation with the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) and California Department of Fish & Game (CDFG). Geology and Soils GE0-1 Grading and construction of the project shall comply with the geotechnical recommendations contained in the Supplement to the Updated Geotechnical Investigation for Rancho Costera, dated June 6, 2011, by Geosoils, Inc., in order to reduce the potential for settlement due to seismically-induced liquefaction or lateral spread. These recommendations shall include the use of dewatering, over-excavation and foundation-design. 66 Rev. 01/02/07 ....., Robertson Ranch West Village GPA 11-07/MP 02-03/CT 11-01/SUP 11-02/HMP 11-03 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 67 Rev. 01/02/07 Page 1 of 1 PROJECT NAME: Robertson Ranch West Village FILE NUMBERS: GPA 11-07/ MP 02-03/ CT 11-01/ HOP 11-01/ SUP 11-02/ HMP 11-03 APPROVALDATE:~T~B=D~----------------------- The following environmental mitigation measures were incorporated into the Conditions of Approval for this project in order to mitigate identified environmental impacts to a level of insignificance. A completed and signed checklist for each mitigation measure indicates that this mitigation measure has been complied with and implemented, and fulfills the City's monitoring requirements with respect to Assembly Bill 3180 (Public Resources Code Section 21081.6). Mitigation Measure Monitoring Type The project developer shall revegetate all permanent Ongoing manufactured slopes conserved within the proposed HMP hardline area with Diegan coastal sage scrub (DCSS) vegetation. This revegetated area will total 12.42 acres, which will sufficiently mitigate for the 2.50 acre increased impact to sensitive DCSS vegetation. Such DCSS revegetation program shall be subject to a five-year maintenance and monitoring program, with a requirement to meet City-approved success criteria. This restoration program shall be approved by the City prior to the commencement of any clearing or grading associated with the project. The restoration program shall include site preparation guidelines, implementation monitoring, performance standards, long-term maintenance and monitoring methodology, and contingency measures with a commitment to long-term funding. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for the MTM, the developer Project shall process and receive approval of a HMP Equivalency Determination through the City of Carlsbad in consultation with the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) and California Department of Fish & Game _{CDFG). Grading and construction of the project shall comply with the Project geotechnical recom!l1endations contained in the Supplement to the Updated Geotechnical Investigation for Rancho Costera, dated June 6, 2011, by Geosoils, Inc., in order to reduce the potential for settlement due to seismically-induced liquefaction or lateral spread. These recommendations shall include the use of dewatering, over-excavation and foundation-design. Explanation of Headings: Type= Project, ongoing, cumulative. Monitoring Dept.= Department, or Agency, responsible for monitoring a particular mitigation measure. Shown on Plans =When mitigation measure is shown on plans, this column will be initialed and dated. Monitoring Division Planning Planning Engineering Verified Implementation= When mitigation measure has been implemented, this column will be initialed and dated. Remarks= Area for describing status of ongoing mitigation measure, or for other information. RD -Appendix P. Shown on Verified Remarks Plans Implementation 0 u 0 0 ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION FORM (To be Completed by Applicant) Date Filed: -------------(To be completed by City) Application Number(s): ---------------------------- General Information 1. Name of project: Robertson Ranch West Vi11age -Rancho Costera 2. Name of developer or project sponsor: __ Ra_n_c_h_o_c_o_s_t..::.e.=r..::.a_LLC--=. _________ _ Address: ___ 8_3_8_3_w_i_1_s_h_i_r~~-B_1_v_d_._t_7_o_o _________________ _ City, State, Zip Code: __ B_e_v_e_r_1..:..y_H_i_1_1_s-'-,_C_:A_9_0_2_1_1 _____________ _ PhoneNumber: _...;;..(_32_3_)~9_8_8_-_7_5_1_8 _________________________________ _ 3. Name of person to be contacted concerning this project: Pau1 K1ukas -P1anning Systems Address: __ ..:..1..:..5..:..3..:..0_F~a..:..r..:..a..:..d..:....:..ay~A=v..:....:..e..:..·~'-=-1..:..0..:..0 ______________________ _ City, State, Zip Code: ---=C=a=-r=-1=sba=d=..z...• ....:CA==-....:9:..:2:..:0:..:0:..:8:..__ ______________ _ PhoneNumber: -~(7~6~0~)~9~3~1~-~0~7~8~0 ____________________________________ __ 4. Address of Project: 5056 E1 Camino Rea1 Assessor's Parcel Number: __ ..:..2.::.0.::.8_-.::.0.::.1.::.0_--=4-=-0_-..:..o..:..o __________________ _ 5. List and describe any other related permits and other public approvals required for this project, including those required by city, regional, state and federal agencies: Sect. 404 and 401 C1ean Water Act; Section 1600 Fish & Game Code 6. Existing General Plan Land Use Designation: FLM, RM, RH, L, E, os 7. Existing zoning district: ___ P_--=c ___________________________________ _ 8. Existing land use(s): __ :..:A2qr=i::::::cu:=1..::t=ur=a=1 ___________________________ __ 9. Proposed use of site (Project for which this form is filed): P1anned mised use community Project Description 10. Site size: 219.4 acres 11. Proposed Building square footage: ___:N_;/_A __________________ _ 12: Number of floors of construction: __ .:;N:!../.=A:..__ __________________________ _ 13. Amount of off-street parking provided: __ ....;;N....:./_A=------------------ 14. Associated projects: _:..:NL./:..:A:..._. __________________________ _ P-1(0) Page 2 of4 Revised 07/10 0 0 15. If residential, include the number of units and schedule of unit sizes: ----------- N/A. Master P1an and Master Subdivision on1y. 16. If commercial, indicate the type, whether neighborhood, city or regionally oriented, square footage of sales area, and loading facilities: ----------------------- N/A. Master PLan wi11 have commercia1 uses. 17. If industrial, indicate type, estimated employment per shift, and loading facilities: _____ _ NA 18. If institutional, indicate the major function, estimated employment per shift, estimated occupancy, loading facilities, and community benefits to be derived from the project: --------- N/A 19. If the project involves a variance, conditional use or rezoning applications, state this and indicate clearly why the application is required: --------------------- No variance, conditiona1 use permit or rezoning required. P-1(0) Page 3 of4 Revised 07/10 c Are the following items applicable to the project or its effects? Discuss all items checked yes (attach additional sheets as necessary). Yes No 20. Change in existing features of any bays, tidelands, beaches, or hills, or substantial D D alteration of ground contours. 21. Change in scenic views or vistas from existing residential areas or public lands or 0 D roads. 22. Change in pattern, scale or character of general area of project. 0 0 23. Significant amounts of solid waste or litter. D D 24. Change in dust, ash, smoke, fumes or odors in vicinity. 0 D 25. Change in ocean, bay, lake, stream or ground water quality or quantity, or 0 D alteration of existing drainage patterns. 26. Substantial change in existing noise or vibration levels in the vicinity. 0 D 27. Site on filled land or on slope of 10 percent or more. D 0 28. Use of disposal of potentially hazardous materials, such as toxic substances, 0 D flammables or explosives. 29. Substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, 0 0 etc.). 30. Substantially increase fossil fuel consumption (electricity, oil, natural gas, etc.). 0 0 31. Relationship to a larger project or series of projects. 0 0 Environmental Setting Attach sheets that include a response to the following questions: 32. Describe the project site as it exists before the project, including information on topography, soil stability, plants and animals, and any cultural, historical or scenic aspects. Describe any existing structures on the site, and the use of the structures. Attach photographs of the site. Snapshots or Polaroid photos will be accepted. 33. Describe the surrounding properties, including information on plants and animals and any cultural, historical or scenic aspects. Indicate the type of land use (residential, commercial, etc.), intensity of land use (one-family, apartment houses, shops, department stores, etc.), and scale of development (height, frontage, set-back, rear yard, etc.). Attach photographs of the vicinity. Snapshots or polaroid photos will be accepted. Certification I hereby certify that the statements furnished above and in the attached exhibits present the data and information required for this initial evaluation to the best of my ability, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief. Date: ------------Signature: ---------------- For: P-1(0) Page4 of4 Revised 07/10 0 Robertson Ranch West Village-Rancho Costera CEQA Checklist Additional Information Sheet 0 Note: A Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared and certified for the Robertson Ranch Master Plan. This EIR was prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the CEQA Guidelines, and the Environmental Protection Procedures (Title 19) of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. The Program EIR addressed the environmental impacts associated with the Robertson Ranch Master Plan, and its ultimate buildout. The EIR analysis concluded that all significant impacts would be mitigated to below a level of significance with the exception of significant direct and cumulative impacts to Traffic/Circulation and Air Quality (Long Term Mobile Emissions). Direct impacts, also referred to as primary effects, are those caused by the project and that occur at the same time and place. In contrast, cumulative impacts refer to two or more individual impacts that, when considered together, are considerable or that compound or increase other environmental impacts. As long as the proposed project is required to comply with the mitigation measures adopted in the certified EIR, he proposed project is not anticipated to result in significant environmental impacts beyond those identified in the EIR. 20. Change in existing features of any bays, tidelands, beaches, or hills, or substantial alteration of ground contours. Yes. The project will result in a change in ground contours of the West Village property. Approximately 1.4 million cubic yards of earthwork is proposed. The grading is anticipated to be conducted in a balanced grading operation. The proposed earthwork and grading is within the parameters analyzed in the Program EIR. As a result, no significant impact beyond those identified and mitigated in the EIR, will result. 21. Change in scenic views or vistas from existing residential areas or public lands or roads. Yes. The views into the project site from El Camino Real and surrounding environs will change from that which is visible under existing conditions. The EIR identifies El Camino Real is a scenic highway. Subject to the project's compliance with the mitigation measures adopted in the Program EIR, the proposed project is within the parameters analyzed in the EIR, and thus, no significant impact beyond those identified and mitigated in the EIR, will result. 22. Change in pattern, scale or character of general area of project. Yes. The subject site is utilized almost exclusively for agricultural production at this time. The proposed project will result in a change in pattern and character of the general area of the project. This change will be to residential and commercial [urban] land uses. Subject to the project's compliance with the mitigation measures adopted in the Program EIR, the proposed project is within the parameters analyzed in the EIR, and thus, no significant impact beyond those identified and mitigated in the EIR, will result. 23. Significant amounts of solid waste or litter. No. The project will not result in the creation of significant amounts of solid waste or litter. 24. Change in dust, ash, smoke, fumes or odors in vicinity. No. The project will not result in a change or substantial increase in dust, ash, smoke, fumes or odors in the vicinity of the project. 25. Change in ocean, bay, lake, stream or ground water quality or quantity, or alteration of existing drainage patterns. Yes. The project will alter the existing drainage patterns on the West Village property. However, the modification of these drainage patterns is not substantially different from that analyzed in the Program 0 0 EIR. Subject to the project's compliance with the mitigation measures adopted in the EIR, the proposed project will not result in significant impacts to drainage patterns beyond those impacts analyzed and mitigated in the EIR. 26. Substantial change in existing noise or vibration levels in the vicinity. No. The project will not result in a substantial change in existing noise or vibration levels in the vicinity of the project. 27. Site on filled land or on slope of lO percent or more. Yes. The subject property contains natural slopes of over 10% in gradient. The proposed grading of these slopes and filled land was analyzed in the EIR and determined to not result in significant environmental impacts beyond those 28. Use or disposal of potentially hazardous materials, such as toxic substances, flammables or explosives. Yes. Construction of the proposed project will involve the use of hazardous materials, although the hazardous materials use is not expected to be greater or more dangerous than that projected and analyzed in the Program EIR. As a result, subject to the project's compliance with the mitigation measures adopted in the Program EIR, the proposed project will not result in a significantly greater impact to hazards or hazardous materials. 29. Substantial change in demand for municipal services (police, fire, water, sewage, etc.). Yes. The proposed project will result in the urbanization of a presently agricultural site. This urbanization will result in a significantly increased demand for municipal services, including police, fire, water, sewage and other urban infrastructure and services. This demand however, will not be greater than that analyzed in the Program EIR, and thus, subject to the project's compliance with the mitigation measures adopted in the EIR, the proposed project will not result in a significantly greater impact to municipal services. 30. Substantially increase fossil fuel consumption (electricity, oil, natural gas, etc.). No. The project will not substantially increase fossil fuel consumption. 31. Relationship to a larger project or series of projects. No. The project is not related to a larger project or series of projects. 32. Describe the project site as it exists before the project, including information on topography, soil stability, plants and animals, and any cultural historical or scenic aspects. Describe any existing structures on the site, and the use of the structures. Attach photographs of the site. The Robertson Ranch West Village is situated on 219.4 acres located in the northeast quadrant of the city of Carlsbad in northern San Diego County. The project site is located north of El Camino Real, east of Tamarack Avenue and west of Cannon Road. The majority of the project site is currently used for agricultural purposes, including the cultivation of field crops and flowers. No substantive structures are located on the site. Wetland restoration activities are also underway within a portion of the project site. In addition to agricultural cropland, the site contains a variety of native vegetation, including chamise chaparral and Diegan coastal sage scrub plant communities, located on the higher slopes and canyons of the site. Riparian vegetation is located within the natural drainage on the western portion of the property. 0 0 Topographically, the site varies considerably and ranges in elevation from approximately 40 feet MSL to 225 feet MSL The topography of the West Village is dominated by high terraces and canyons crosscut by drainages and is underlain by sedimentary layers of the Eocene-aged Santiago Formation and metavolcanic bedrock. No active faults are known to exist on the project site or in the immediate vicinity of the project site. 33. Describe the surrounding properties, including information on plants and animals and any cultural, historical or scenic aspects. Indicate the type ofland use (residential, commercial, etc.), intensity of land use (one-family, apartment houses, shops, department stores, etc.), and scale of development (height, frontage, setback, rear yard, etc.). Attach photographs of the vicinity. Land uses surrounding the West Village vary considerably and include established residential neighborhoods and the Robertson Ranch East Village development which is presently under construction to the east. The northern boundary of the subject property is generally defined by The Colony, and existing single-family residential development. Existing access to the site is off of El Camino Real, via dirt roads and informal agricultural trails and roads. The proposed project will involve the ultimate buildout construction of 688 residential units in densities between 3.5 dulac to 32 dulac. Also the development will allow for construction of a neighborhood commercial development, a community facilities site, an RV storage lot, and a substantial amount of conserved open space. The proposed project involves an amendment to the Robertson Ranch Master Plan, and a master subdivision map. No structures are proposed at this time. Urban development of the site will follow-up with entitlement processing for future site development plans. ROBERTSO NCH WEST VILLAGE-"RAN • 0 COSTERA" PHOTOGRAPHS (5-6-11) View southwest onto West Village from East Village (under construction) View west onto West Village from East Village (under construction) View north onto West Village from El Camino Real at Lisa St. View northwest onto West Village from El Camino Real at Lisa St. View onto West Village from El Camino Real/ Tamarack Ave. intersection. View southeast onto West Village from near north property boundary near Glasgow St. stub. View south onto West Village from near north property boundary near Glasgow St. stub.