HomeMy WebLinkAbout3190; Rancho Santa Fe Road Realignment; Rancho Santa Fe Road Realignment & Mass Grading; 1992-04-03c
--
FINAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
for thk.- %.% 1 3
Rancho Santa Fe Road Realignment and Mass Grading
SCN # 90010850
April 3, 1992
Preparcd for:
City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, California 92009-4859
Prepared by:
Cotton/Bcland/Associatcs, Inc.
619 South Vulcan Avenue, Suite 205 Encinitas, California 92024 (619) 944-4194
747 East Green Street, Suite 400 Pasadena, California 91101 (818) 304-0102
Job #628.00
r TABLE OF CONTENTS
.
Section Page
ADDENDUM ......................................... vii
ERRATA ............................................ xiii
1.0 INTRODUCTION ..................................... 1-1
2.0 EXECUTIVESUMMARY ............................... 2-1
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ............................... 3-1
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ........................... 4-1
5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS ................... 5-1
5.1 5.2 5.3 5.4
5.5
5.6
5.7
5.8 5.9 5.10 5.11 5.12
Earth ......................................... 5.1-1
Air Quality ..................................... 5.2-1 Water Resources ................................ 5.3-1 Biological Resources .............................. 5.4-1
Noise ......................................... 5.5-1
Light and Glare ................................. 5.6-1
Land Use ...................................... 5.7-1 Traffic/Circulation ............................... 5.8-1
Public Services .................................. 5.9-1 Utilities ...................................... 5.10-1
Landform Alteration/Visual Quality .................. 5.11-1 Cultural/Historic Resources ....................... 5.12-1
6.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT ............ 6-1
6.1 Realign Rancho Santa Fe Road and Defer Proposed Mass Grading .................................... 6-6
6.2 Realign Rancho Santa Fe Road With Mass Grading of Developable Land Consistent with the General Plan .................................... 6-9
6.3 Road Widening in the Existing Alignment and Defer Proposed Mass Grading ...................... 6-13
6.4 Road Widening in the Existing Alignment With Mass Grading of Developable Land Consistent with the General Plan ................................ 6-17
TABLE OF CONTENTS
(continued)
Section Page
6.5 Road Widening in the Existing Alignment With Mass Grading for Proposed Development ................... 6-21
6.6 The No Project Alternative ......................... 6-24
6.7 Summary ...................................... 6-27
7.0 OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES ........................ 7-1
7.1 Cumulative Impacts ............................... 7-1 7.2 Growth-Inducing Impacts ........................... 7-12 7.3 Impact Areas Considered But Not Found to be .......... 7-13
7.4 Short and Long Term Environmental Changes ........... 7-14 7.5 Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes ........... 7-15
Potentially Significant
8.0 REFERENCES AND PERSONS RESPONSIBLE FOR PREPARATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT .................................... 8-1
9.0 RESPONSES TO COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT EIR .......... 9-1
10.0 APPENDICES
Appendix A:
Appendix B:
Appendix C:
Appendix D:
Appendix E: Appendix F: Appendix G:
Appendix H:
Appendix I:
Notice of Preparation, Initial Study and Responses to NOP Mitigation Monitoring Checklist
Supplemental Soil and Geologic Investigation by
Geocon Incorporated Hydrology/Water Quality Report by Dudek & Associates Biological Assessment by Michael Brandman Associates Traffic Study by Wes Pringle and Associates Archaeological and Historical Survey by Roth and Associates
Cultural Resource Survey of the La Costa Town Center, City of Carlsbad, California, by Recon Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) Work Program
/- LIST OF TABLES
Page
. r
Table
2-1
3-1
5-1
5-2
5-3
5-4
5-5
5-6
5-7
5-8
5-9
5-10
5-llA
5-llB
5-12
5-13
5- 14
5-15
5-16
Summary of Findings .............................. 2-4
Proposed Land Use Acreage Changes ................. 3-12
Ambient Air Quality Standards ...................... 5.2-2
Number of Days State Emission Standards Exceeded ...... 5.2-3 at The Oceanside Monitoring Station
Number of Days Federal Emission Standards Exceeded .... 5.2-4 at The Oceanside Monitoring Station
Proposed Project Energy Consumption and ............. 5.2-6 Vehicle Miles Traveled
Proposed Project Air Pollution Emissions and Air ........ 5.2-6 Pollution Emission Factors
General Plan Energy Consumption and Vehicle Miles ...... 5.2-7 Traveled
General Plan Air Pollution Emissions and Air Pollution Emission Factors ...................... 5.2-7
Project Emissions Generated by Existing Conditions and Future Development .............................. 5.2-8
Plant Communities Before and After Project Implementation ................................ 5.4-13
Comparison of Development Potential ................. 5.7-6
Existing Conditions . Signalized Intersections ............ 5.8-4
Existing Conditions . Unsignalized Intersections .......... 5.8-5
Existing Road Segment Analysis ..................... 5.8-7
1995 Conditions . Intersections ...................... 5.8-9
1995 Road Segment Analysis ....................... 5.8-10
Intersection Geometrics ........................... 5.8-12
2010 Conditions . Intersections ..................... 5.8-13
LIST OF TABLES (Continued)
Table
5-17
5-18
5-19
5-20
5-21
5-22
5-23
5-24
6- 1
6-2
6-3
7-1
2010 Road Segment Analysis ....................... 5.8-14
Schools Serving The Project Area .................... 5.9-7
Projected Daily Water Use ........................ 5.10-3
Projected Daily Sewer Flow ........................ 5.10-7
Projected Daily Solid Waste Generation ............... 5.10-9
Projected Daily Natural Gas Demand ............... 5.10-10
Projected Daily Electrical Demand ................. 5.10-1 1
Grading Quantities .............................. 5.1 1-5
Alternatives Comparison ............................ 6-2
Approximate Grading Quantities for Each Alternative and the Proposed Project ............................... 6-5
Comparison of Automobile-Generated Air Pollution Emissions ...................................... 6-26
Rancho Santa Fe Road Realignment Cumulative Projects List ..................................... 7-2
.
r
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure
2-1
3-1
3-2
3-3
3-4
3-5
3-6
3-7
3-8
5- 1
5-2
5-3
5-4
5-5
5-6
5-7
set section 9.0 5-8
Rtspohse 5x 5-9
5-10
5-11
5-12
5-13
Page
Project Constraints ............................... 2-12
Circulation Plan .................................. 3-2
The Regional Location ............................. 3-4
The Project Location .............................. 3-5
Phase I of the Proposed Project ....................... 3-7
Phase II of the Proposed Project ...................... 3-8
Phase 111 of the Proposed Project .................... 3-10
Area of Disturbance .............................. 3-11
3-14 Anticipated Roadway Right-of-way Vacation ............
Site Topography ................................. 5.1-2
Geotechnical Map ................................ 5.1-3
The Grading Plan ................................ 5.1-7
Project Area Drainage ............................ 5.3-2
Existing Vegetation With Grading .................... 5.4-2
Regional Coastal Sage Scrub Habitat .................. 5.4-3
5.4-11 Significant Biological Resources With Grading ..........
Wetland Disturbance in San Marcos Creek ............ 5.4-14
State of California Noise and Land Use Compatibility Guidelines ........................... 5.5-2
Construction Equipment Noise Ranges ................. 5.5-4
Rock Crushing and Stockpiling Areas .................. 5.5-5
General Plan Land Use ............................ 5.7-3
Proposed Land Use .............................. 5.7-9
LIST OF FIGURES (Continued)
Figure
~eescctiw9.0 5-14
Response 3”
5-15
5-16
5-17
5-18
5-19
5-20
5-21
6- 1
6-2
6-3
9-1
9-2 A,B
9-3
Page
Open Space Per the City Comprehensive Open Space Network Map ........................ 5.7-11
Existing and Proposed Roads Within the ............... 5.8-3 Project Area
Existing Road Segment Volumes and LOS. ............. 5.8-8
and Intersection ICU and LOS
Existing Water Lines ............................. 5.10-2
Existing Sewer Lines ............................. 5.10-5
Key Observation Points ............................ 5.1 1-2
Project Site Photographs 1 and 2 .................... 5.11-3
.................... . Project Site Photographs 3 and 4 5.11-4
Sensitive Species and Proposed Land Use ............... 6-7
Sensitive Species and General Plan Land Use ........... 6-11
Hunsaker 1 Alignment ............................ 6-15
Alternative Design of the Questhaven Road/ Rancho Santa Fe Road Intersection ................... 9-25
Avoidance of Goldenstars ........................ 9.35. 36
Revised Grading Plan ............................. 9-79
Addendum
A final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for the Rancho Santa Fe Road Realignment and Mass Grading project was completed in January of 1992. An addendum has been prepared to clarify mitigation of biological resource impacts contained in the FEIR. Mitigation identified in the Final EIR is required to reduce significant environmental impacts to the Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat and the California gnatcatcher caused by the project. The Mitigation Plan described in this addendum evolved from efforts to prepare a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) as part of a City-wide Habitat Management Plan (HMP). This addendum explains the process which led to development of the Mitigation Plan in its present form and includes an explanation of that plan.
Purpose and Scope
This addendum to the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Rancho Santa Fe Road Realignment and Mass Grading (SCH # 90010850) is prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines
15164. According to the CEQA Guidelines, the purpose of an addendum to an
EIR is to comply with CEQA in situations in which the EIR requires "minor technical changes or additions that do not raise new important new issues about the project's significant effects on the environment, and where no factors are present that would require the preparation of either a subsequent or supplemental EIR (CEQA section 15164[a]. CEQA also states that "An addendum need not be circulated for public review, but can be included in or attached to the Final EIR (CEQA section 15164[b], and that 'The decision- making body shall consider the addendum with the Final EIR prior to making a decision on the project" (CEQA section 15164[c].
An addendum to the Final EIR for this project is appropriate because a
preliminary Mitigation Plan has been prepared that identified on-site and off-site mitigation areas and funding of gnatcatcher studies that would implement the mitigation criteria listed in the Final EIR. The development of the Mitigation Plan requires modification to the section describing mitigation of impacts to biological resources in the Final EIR.
At the time of the printing of the Final EIR, the City and the project applicant were seeking to develop a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) in conjunction with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) pursuant to a Memorandum of
Agreement (MOA). The California Department of Fish & Game (DFG) is also involved in the effort to develop the HCP as a result of a separate MOA. The
HCP would be a pre-listing agreement since the California Gnatcatcher has not been listed as an endangered or threatened species. Because the California
Gnatcatcher is not presently listed as an endangered species under the Federal
Endangered Species Act, an HCP is not required under Federal Law.
vii
The Final EIR anticipated that the implementation of the HCP would mitigate or reduce impacts to Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat and the California Gnatcatcher to a level of less than significant. Development of the HCP has not
proceeded at the pace anticipated by the City. The project proponent has therefore proceeded with the development of a Mitigation Plan which satisfies the mitigation requirements set forth in the final EIR and which can be implemented within the foreseeable future.
The addendum is included to fully explain the sequence of events leading to the current Mitigation Plan and the effects this has on the text of the EIR.
The Mitigation Plan
Development of the Mitigation Plan
Development of the Mitigation Plan has been ongoing since the identification of impacts to biological resources during preparation of the Draft EIR. In the Biological Resources section of the Final EIR, under LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE, there is description of the appointment of a Habitat Conservation Plan Facilitation Team (see page 5.4-17 of the Final EIR and page xiv of the Errata). The Final EIR also includes a work program and time schedule for completing a preliminary Habitat Conservation Plan (see Appendix I).
The Facilitation Team has been meeting weekly since January 7, 1992 to identify
and review candidate preservation actions that could be taken to minimize and
mitigate impacts to the Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat and the California
gnatcatcher. This identification and review process has taken longer than originally anticipated. The Facilitation Team is continuing to meet in an effort to develop a range of preservation actions that will be sufficient to meet the standards for a Habitat Conservation Plan.
The meetings are expected to require several more weeks to finally determine if a range of actions can be developed that will allow the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service to approve a pre-listing Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP). An HCP is
likely to incorporate the measures included in the Mitigation Plan described in this addendum.
In lieu of an HCP, the project proponents have designed a Mitigation Plan which can be used to implement the mitigation requirements contained in the Final EIR. An HCP is an additional plan that may require mitigation measures different from those identified in the Mitigation Plan. While the Mitigation Plan recommended in this EIR reduces impacts to Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat, and the California gnatcatcher to a level of less than significant to meet the requirements of CEQA, an HCP will meet the provisions of the Federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) if the California gnatcatcher is subsequently
listed.
viii
An Environmental Assessment (EA) or an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) will be required under the provisions of the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) if an HCP is ultimately prepared, and additional environmental review will be necessary under the provisions of CEQA. A joint IS/EA or EIR/EIS can be prepared and adopted to satisfy the provisions of both CEQA and NEPA.
Description of the Mitigation Plan
The EIR for the Rancho Santa Fe Road and Private Grading Project identifies direct impacts to Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat totalling 217 acres, as well as the direct loss of 14 pairs of California gnatcatchers. Additional indirect impacts would also result from habitat fragmentation by the project. The mitigation
required for impacts to the coastal sage scrub and California gnatcatcher are as
follows:
"If the proposed project is chosen, mitigation and/or compensation could
be accomplished by a combination of onsite open space conservation
preserves and offsite preserves which would conserve at a minimum the
existing population levels of 22 pairs of California gnatcatchers and
replace the approximately 217 acres of Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub gnatcatcher habitat being directly impacted.
Because a specific mitigation plan has not been worked out at the time of preparation of this draft document, listed below are a set of criteria which the mitigation program shall have to conform to prior to approval of the project. If a combination of onsite and offsite gnatcatcher preservation areas are chosen, each preserve area shall be able to survive in perpetuity on its own and the combined preserves shall meet the minimum requirement of preservation of 22 pairs of California gnatcatchers (at lest 8 pairs remaining onsite and 14 pairs offsite) and preserve a minimum of
217 acres of additional gnatcatcher habitat. It is recommended that a
specific mitigation program be finalized prior to approval of the project, and made available for public review, if possible."
Specific mitigation provisions presently contained in the Final EIR are described on pages 5.4-17 through 5.4-22. The following Mitigation Plan consisting of two principal components and two additional alternatives is proposed to meet these mitigation criteria, and replaces the specific provisions presently contained in the Final EIR. The first two are being proposed by The Fieldstone Company to preserve 15 to 16 gnatcatcher pairs, while the last two options can be combined
to mitigate for the remaining 6 to 7 pair.
1. On-site preservation (8-9 pair). The project as proposed would retain habitat currently occupied by eight pair of California gnatcatchers in permanent open space. Additionally, areas of currently unoccupied habitat will be retained in permanent open space. Approximately 240
ix
acres of Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat will be retained in open space on-site.
If further redesign of the project for preservation of a movement corridor results in an increase in the number of pairs retained on-site, these pairs
would be counted towards the total number of pairs preserved on-site, thus reducing the number of pairs needed for off-site preservation. For example, a preliminary assessment of potential redesign options indicates that one additional pair could be retained in open space by the incorporation of a movement corridor.
2. Off-site preservation (9 pair). The 388-acre Konyn parcel and the 80-acre Alyea site are being proposed as off-site mitigation for a portion of the direct impacts to the California gnatcatcher. The Konyn site supports 255 acres of sage scrub, approximately 104 acres which are considered good quality breeding habitat, and the remaining 151 acres of sage scrub is considered good quality foraging and dispersal habitat. A total of 7 pair of gnatcatchers currently use the site. An additional 47 acres of disturbed
grassland occurs on the property that could be restored to sage scrub vegetation. The Alyea site supports 80 acres of sage scrub and at lest two pair of gnatcatchers. Both properties adjoin each other.
3.
To mitigate the remaining 4 to 5 pair, some combination of the remaining two components will be implemented. The final options chosen will be based on that combination of measures that maximizes the biological value of the total mitigation package while retaining the economic viability
of the project.
Off-site revegetation (4 pair). The 47 acres of disturbed grassland on the Konyn site is a result of previous agricultural activities on the site.
Portions of this area have scattered remnants of sage scrub vegetation. This fact, and its location immediately adjacent to existing high quality sage scrub vegetation on gentle slopes with well drained soils that have not been disturbed below the A horizon of the soils, makes it an ideal candidate for sage scrub restoration. If this area is restored, it would provide a wide band of sage scrub adjacent to a narrow band of currently unoccupied habitat. Based on the location of the revegetation area adjacent to good quality breeding and dispersal habitat, it is assumed that up to an additional four pair of gnatcatchers could occupy site upon completion of the restoration plan.
In addition to the Konyn property, other revegetation opportunities may be available in the San Pasqual Valley on public lands currently in a
disturbed condition. The Fieldstone Company is pursuing the option of
revegetating portions of these areas as part of the mitigation program.
X
4. Other off-site acquisition or project redesign (1 pair). Based on the three components outlined above, one additional gnatcatcher pair will be needed to mitigate this project. These will be provided by one of two ways. The first option is through additional acquisition of off-site open space, either within the vicinity of the Konyn property, or within the City of Carlsbad. The second option would be to redesign the project to
preserve an additional pair on-site.
In summary, the first two components of the mitigation program will result in the protection of 17 to 18 of the pair through on-site and off-site preservation. The remaining mitigation requirements for 4 to 5 pair will be mitigated through some combination of measures 3 and 4.
xi
RANCHO SANTE FE ROAD AND PRIVATE GRADING
MITIGATION SUMMARY
1. Rancho Santa Fe Road and Mass
Grading Site
No.
Gnatcatcher
Pairs Retained
8
2. Konyn off-site mitigation parcel - existing habitat 7
- revegetated habitat I 4
3. Alvea Off-site mitigation parcel I 2
1 I 4. Additional off-site acquisition or
revegetation
~
TOTAL I 22
No.
Gnatcatcher
Pairs Impacted
14
n
0
14
Acres Coastal
Scrub Retained sage
240
255 (388
total)*
47
80
NA
622
Acres Coastal
sage Scrub Imbacted
217
NA
217
'Includes oak woodland and chaparral habitats.
-- e!
ERRATA
Prepared on April 1, 1992
The first paragraph should be modified as follows:
"Based on these data and conclusions in this EIR, the City finds that the project will result in significant impacts to .. air quality fi J which cannot be fully mitigated.
3 Implementation of the
mitigation measures outlined in this document can reduce all other impacts to less than significant levels. . . ). The remainder of the paragraph is unchanged.
Paye 2-4
The heading, "11. Significant Environmental Impacts That Can Be Avoided Or Mitigated Section 151269~) of the State CEQA Guidelines" should be placed above the Biological Resources entry in Table 2-1. The entry in the Residual Impact column for "Biological Resources" should be deleted.
The last line of the Potential Environmental Impact column for "Land Use" should be revised as follows:
"..reduced in area bv develoDment and degraded in quality by grading."
The last 5 lines of the Mitigation Measures column for "Land Use" should be revised as follows:
.. "Space Map 3 consistent
with the ODen SDace and Conservation Element, or revise gmdmg development plans to preserve open space on the City Map.
2-9
The 4th line of Potential Environmental Impact column for "Landform Alteration/Visual
Quality" should be revised as follows:
"of 3;627 8.357 cubic yards per acre; the"
... xlll
rc Page 5.4-12
The 4th line of the last paragraph should be revised as follows:
"approximately 88.4 acres to 3443 345.2 acres, and increase of 290 percent. Of the"
PaPe 5, 4- 13
The "Disturbed and "TOTAL (ACRES)" entries should be changed as shown on the attached page 5.4-13.
Page 5-4.17
The first two paragraphs on the page should be revised as follows:
.. The impacts of the proposed project on biological resources 1 are
significant but mitigable. Impacts to the Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat and the
California gnatcatcher can be mitigated to a less than significant level through the implementation of I he mitieation measures listed below. In addition to t he mitieation measures a A Habitat Conservation Plan Facilitation Team has been appointed to prepare an HCP consistent with the Memorandums of Agreement entered into by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service, Calfironia Department of Fish & Game, the City of Carlsbad and the Fieldstone Companies. The work program and time schedule for completing a
preliminary Habitat conservation Plan is included in Appendix I to this EIR.
If the H€X% mitieation measures are not implemented, the impacts to the Diegan
coastal sage scrub habitat and the California gnatcatcher would not be mitigated to
a less than significant level. Consequently the project would result in significant and
unmitigated impacts and a Statement of Overriding Considerations would be
required if the project, or any of the alternatives, is approved.
Page 5.7-6
The Gross Acres column under the General Plan Amendment (GPA) section of the table should be changed as shown on the attached page 5.7-6.
Page 5.7-8
The last sentence of the first paragraph should be deleted as an incorrect statement.
XiV
c PaPe 5. 7-12
The 4th line of the first paragraph to be revised as follows:
"..occur only with adjustment of the gmding development plans to preserve the open
space on.."
The 1st line of the second paragraph to be revised as follows:
"..aforementioned Table 54u, implementation.."
Page 5. 7-13
The 6th line of the second paragraph should be revised as follows:
"..developer(s) shall revise gradkg develoDment plans to preserve open space.."
Page 5.11-5
Page 5.11-5 in the Final EIR should be replaced with the attached pg. 5.11-5. Table 5.24 on this page in the Final EIR contains typographical errors.
The "Road and "Fieldstone" acreages should be changed as shown on the attached page
5.1 1-5.
F
The 3rd line of the second paragraph should be revised as follows:
"..fill. This equates to a grading ratio of approximately 3;636 8.357 C.Y. per acre.."
Page 5.11-6 1st Paragraph
The City's Open Space and Conservation Element was amended following the preparation of the Draft EIR. Consequently the three quoted items do not reflect the current element.
Paee 6 -2 (Table 6-11
The "Earth Resources" acreages should be changed as shown on the attached page 6-2.
The reference to gnatcatchers across the line under Biological Resources should be changed to:
"Significant but mitigated to a less than significant level with the implementation of a Mitigation Plan"
- PaPe 6-4 (Table 6-11
The "Landform Alteration" acreages should be changed as shown on the attached page 6-4.
PaPe 6-5 (Table 6-21
The "Area" acreages should be changed as shown on the attached page 6-5.
Page 6-9
The first line of the last paragraph should be changed as follows:
"Potential erosion and sedimentation from leaving a graded 348 485 acre area.."
Page 7-9
The last two sentences of the last paragraph should be changed as follows:
"Implementation of MitiPation Plan will
m&igtte reduce impacts in the City to levels of less than significant. . . Cumulative .. impacts will remain significant. ..
Page 7-11
The second and third lines of the last paragraph should be changed as follows:
II w, will be mitigable to levels of less than significant. The .. impact areas of water resources, biolopu, noise, light and glare, ...'I
Pare 7-15
Biological Resources under the heading of SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES should be stricken.
In addition, the last paragraph should be changed as follows:
"The impacts associated with &ese this impact area & discussed in detail in Section 5.2 of this EIR. 4
Page 7-15
The last line on this page should be changed as follows:
"significant 1 for the project site."
Page 9-1
The page numbering of Section 9.0 of the EIR, Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR, is incorrect. Section 9.0 presently consists of pages 9-4 through 9.75. Pages 9-2 through 9-16 have been removed and Pages 9-17 through 9-90 should be numbered 9-2 through 9-74 respectively.
The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service have reviewed the responses to their comments submitted on September 23, 1991. The Service has requested clarification of certain responses. The
following additional information is provided as requested by the U.S. Fish & Wildlife
Service.
ResDonse 5L (Dag e 5-68): The mass grading is proposed to be accomplished in advance of the actual development of the graded area for the following reasons.
a. The grading plan provides for a balanced grading of the mass grading area which will necessitate moving volumes of earth across the existing and
proposed alignments of Rancho Santa Fe Road. The grading phasing plan provides for moving this earth with a minimum of disruption to the traffic on either the existing or proposed alignments. If the mass grading were deferred until after the construction of Rancho Santa Fe Road, a major disruption of
traffic would result.
b. As noted in paragraph 3 on pg. 3-1 of the Final EIR, the grading is required
to ensure development within the Assessment District prior to roadway financing. The road construction project requires that the Assessment District be able to sell bonds to finance the construction of the road. Bond underwriters must ensure the development potential of the property included in the Assessment District. Furthermore, traditional bank financing is unavailable to construct a regional public facility when the security for that facility is unentitled land. The only binding mechanism available to ensure the development potential of the property is the issuance of a grading permit and actual grading of the area.
C. The need to construct the realigned Rancho Santa Fe Road in the near-term
is a result of the Local Facilities Management Plan requirements and the previous approval of development projects in the area. The construction activities will require staging and stockpiling areas within the mass grading area. Thus, portions of the mass grading area will have to be graded to accommodate the staging area for equipment and stockpiling of material. Further, roadbed material must be generated for the construction activity.
Preliminary investigations indicates that suitable materials are located in the areas shown on Fig. 5-11 (pg. 5.5-5) of the EIR. These areas will be disturbed as a result of the need to generate roadbed materials.
- The construction period for the road will extend over a two to three year time period.
ResDonses 5 R /5U ( PaEes 9-70/9-73): The mass grading operation will result in
manufactured slopes that would be subject to erosion and significant levels of downstream siltation absent any erosion control. The Final EIR and responses note that a variety of
mitigation measures will be implemented to reduce the level of erosion and siltation to a
less than significant level. This does not mean that erosion and siltation after
implementation of the mitigation measures will be totally eliminated, but that the residual levels of erosion and siltation will not be significant.
P e 9-721: Erosion control devices such as catchment basins are planned
to be placed within the footprint of the mass grading area. Preliminary grading plans and
erosion control plans area being reviewed by the City Engineering Department and are
subject to further refinement to insure their compliance with City ordinances. No erosion
or siltation impacts beyond those identified in the EIR are anticipated.
1): Horned lizards and orange throated whiptails were not observed during the three surveys of the project site. As noted in the response, the two
species may possibly occupy the site, but simply were not observable during the many
surveys conducted on the property. If the species are present, the construction of the road and mass grading could result in an adverse impact and contribute to cumulative impacts on a regional basis. The development of the Habitat Conservation Plan for the California Gnatcatcher would provide a reasonable level of mitigation for the species.
Resp nse
The following text should be added to the Revised Grading Plan, Figure 9-3, "Gradin? Plan prepared on April 23. 1992.
ResDonse 5DD/5EE (Papes 9-77/9-78): The ultimate development of the mass graded
area could result in indirect impacts to the Diegan Coastal Sage habitat and California
Gnatcatcher that cannot be assessed at the Program EIR level of analysis. Potential impacts related to human occupation of the area may result in indirect impacts. Examples of such indirect impacts include occupants of the area entering the native vegetation area for recreational hiking activities, pesticide and erosion runoff, residential noises, light and glare and household pets entering the native vegetation area. Fragmentation of the habitat would result from the mass grading and construction of Rancho Santa Fe Road, and ultimately La Costa Avenue and Melrose Avenue.
The effect of these indirect impacts could result in impacts to California Gnatcatchers beyond the 14 pair identified being impacted in the Final EIR. During subsequent environmental review these impacts can be more precisely identified and appropriate mitigation measures recommended.
xviii
See Section 9.0 TABLE 5-9
Response 5W & 5X PLANT COMMUNITIES BEFORE AND AFTER PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION
/c-
Impacted by
Vegetation Type Existing Project
Disturbed 88.4 62.9 (71%)
Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub 456.4 216.9 (48%)
Annual Grassland 36.4 10.7 (29%) 1 Valley Needle Grassland 26.0 14.0 (54%)
Cottonwood Willow Riparian 2.3 1.6 (70%)
Baccharis Scrub 2.6 1.3 (50%)
Southern Mixed Chaparral 149.6 37.9 (25%)
Oak Riparian 4.1 0.0 (0%)
Elderberry Woodland 2.5 0.0 (0%)
TOTAL (ACRES) 768.3 %I$??
Remaining fs3
111.7
2395
25.7
12.0
0.7
4.1
1.3
2.5
423.0
F
TABLE 5-10 COMPARISON OF DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL
386.6 274.4 1.0 225 678
1 291.8 229.8 3.2 755 1.817
GENERAL PLAN AN0 LONE OR LFMP
SUBTOTAL
COMMERCIAL
Comuni ty
C omor c i a 1
Profossional and
Ro 1 atod
Comorc i a 1
SUBTOTAL
OTHER
Opon Spaco
TOTAL
Land Use
Dosignations
~~
678.4 504.2 1,010 2,495
36.7 34.5 0.3 450.0
11.5 11.2 0.3 146.4
48.2 45.7 597.2
41.7 32.1
768.3 582.0 1,010 2.495 597.2
Gross Not Dovotopmont Estinatad Estinatod Building
Acros Arm* Intensity D.U.'s Population Sq. Ft.
Standard (000's)
I
Low-Donsity Res.
(D.U. on 1/2
acro)
Low-Modian
Oonsity Ros.
(0-4 D.U./acro)
PROPOSED PROJECT
Gross Not Dovolopnont Estinatod Estimatad Building
Acres Airma* Intonsity D.U.'s Population Sq. Ft.
19.8 17.3 1.0 17.3 43
............... 1.003.0 2.481 3533 ............ 313.7 3.2 ...........
GENERAL
PLAN TO
6PA FOR
O.U. 'S OR
KSF
........... 11.4 D.U. I 38%.:5 ...................... 331 .O 1,010 2.524
54.0 48.7 0.3
20.0 15.8 0.3
636.4
206.5
74.0 64.5 842.9 I 245.7 KSF
................ gw.$g 195.6
768.3 591.1 1.010 2.524 842.9
*** Tho City and thm drvolopor-aro in agroomont that no additional dwolling units will bo allowod over that pormittod undor tho rxisting Gmoral Plan.
Area (ac)
Road 65
Mass Fieldstone 31 I M.A.G. 72
TOTAL 448
Cut in cubic yards (cy) Fill in cubic yards (cy)
899,000 996,000
2,241,000 2,404,000 704,000 797,000
3,844,000 4,197,000
Significant but mitigable; grading on 504 acres left undeveloped for a period of 2-10 years
Significant and unmitigable;
7,908.2 Ibslday generated by development
Significant but mitigable; grading of 434 acres left undeveloped for a period of 2-10 years
Significant and unmitigable;
12,753.1 Ibs/day generated by development
Not Significant; 16,886.7 Ibs/day
generated by traffic; 0 Ibslday
generated by development
Significant and unmitigable; 7,908.2
Ibslday generated by development
Not Significant Significant but mitigable Significant but mitigable
Significant and unmitigable; possibly more than 14 pairs of Gnatcatchers lost
Significant but mitigable
Significant but mitigable
Significant but mitigable
Significant and unmitigable; possibly more than 14 pairs of Gnatcatchers lost
Significant but mitigable
Significant but mitigable
TABLE
ALTERNATIVES
FbdignFZanchoSanhFeRoad Proposed Project
Wien Randro Santa Fe hd andMass Grading for
Oeve l op men t )
No Project
I Road Widening in the Existing Alignment and Defer Proposed Mass Grading
Realign RSF W RealiiRSFWWilh
Grading
I Not Significant; grading of 46 acres in the short- term
No Impact Earth Resource (Hillside Development Ordinance)
Not Significant; grading of @ acres in the short-term
Significant but mitigabl6;graded area of && acres left undeveloped for a period of 2-10 years
Significant but mitigable; graded area of W acres left undeveloped for a period of possibly 2-10 years
Significant and unmitigable; 12,753.1 Ibslday generated by development
Air Quality Not Significant;
16,886.7 Ibslday generated by traffic; 0 Ibs/day generated by development
Significant and unmitigable;
23,394.2 Ibs/day generated by traffic; 0 Ibs/day generated by development
No Impact
I I
Water Resource Not Significant Significant but mitigable
Significant and not mitigable to California gnatcatchers; possibly 14 pairs
of Gnatcatchers lost
Significant but mitigable
Significant but mitigable
Significant but mitigable; 4 pairs of Gnatcatchers lost over short- term
No Impact Biological
Resource**
Significant and potentially mitigable; 7 pairs of Gnatcatchers lost over short- term
Significant and unmitigable; possibly more than 14 pairs of Gnatcatchers lost
Noise Significant but Significant but
Less than Significant but
Significant but mitigable
Less than significant.
Significant but mitigable
No Impact Light and Glare
xxii
TABLE61
ALTERNATIVES COMPARISON
(Continued)
I n I
Road Widening in
The Existing
Alignment and OefeN Proposed Mass Grading
Not Significant; 450,000 cubic yards graded on 46 acres
Not Significant
Landform f&ration/Visual Quality
Road Wideming in Road Hlidening in the ExiJting the Existing Alignment With Alignment Mass Gradingfor Mass Gradingfor General Plan mpod Development Development
Significant but Significant but No Impact mitigable; mitigable; 6,552,361 cubic 3,150,000 cubic yards graded on yards graded on 550 acres 448 acres
Significant but Significant but No Impact mitigable; 6 mitigable; 6 significant sites significant site destroyed destroyed
Cultural/ Historical Resource
Significant but mitigable; 6 significant sites
destroyed
i
Grading for Realign RSF W RealiRsFwwilh Rowsed Mass Gfadiih
Significant but mitigable; 4,200,000 cubic yards graded on 448 acres
Significant but mitigable;
~ I E!iisites
Not Significant; 1,500,000 cubic yards graded on ieti acres
Significant, but
mitigable; 2 significant sites
destroyed
Significant but mitigable; 6,552,361 cubic yards graded on 550 acres
Table indicates short-term impacts caused by alternatives. Long-term impacts caused by grading for either the proposed project or General Pian land USB are similar to those from the proposed project M identified in Section 5.0 of this EIR.
**Impacts to Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat and the California gnatcatcher will be reduced to a level of less than significant with approval of an HCP for the project site by the City of Carlsbad, DFG, and Fws.
TABLE 6-2 UANTITIES F R EA H ALTERNATnTE E ROPOSEDP 2& OJE APPROXIMATE GR&IR
Area Difference In Total Grading
For Roadway and Mass
Grading Between Alternative
and Project
Roadway Mass
(C.Y.1 Grading
0 -1500,000 -2,700,000
402 -1,050,000 0
504 -1,050,000 + 3,402,361
- -
Area
~ ~~
Alternative
~~
Total
Roadway
Cut and
Fill (c.Y.)
Mass Grading
Cut and Fill (c.Y.)
Total kea of
Disturbance
(Am)
~~
No Project
Road Widening in the
Existing Alignment and
Defer Proposed Mass
Gradine
~
0
450,000
0
46
-
~
0
2,700,000
(to occur at a
later date)
0
46 (4M to occur
later for 448 total)
Realign Rancho Santa Fe
Road and Defer Proposed
Mass Gradine
1300,000 2,700,000
(IO occur at a
later date)
s{w ............ to
..... .:. ........
occur later for
448 total)
m 0 0
I
-
46
5,052,361 550 Realign RSF Road With
Mass Grading For General
Plan Development
Road Widening in the
Existing Alignment With
Mass Grading for General
Plan Development
Road Widening in the
Existing Alignment With
Proposed Mass Grading
The Prowsed Proiect
450.000 6,102,361 550
46
~
2,700,000
~
402 -1,050,000 448 450.000
MR 1500,000
1 .O Introduction
1.0 INTRODUCTION
LEGAL REQUIREMENTS
This Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et. seq.) and the guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA Guidelines) published by the Resources Agency of the State of California (California Administrative Code Sections 15000 st. seq.).
This report was prepared by professional planning consultants for submittal to the City of Carlsbad which is the Lead Agency for this project.
EIR AN INFORMATION DOCUMENT
This EIR is intended to provide information to the public agencies, the general
public and the decision makers, regarding the potential environmental impacts from the proposed 448-acre mass grading and road realignment project within a
seescctioa9.0 larger 768-acre project area. Under the provisions of the California
RCSPOMC 3F Environmental Quality Act, "the purpose of an Environmental Impact Report is to identify the significant effects of a project on the environment, to identify alternatives to the project, and to indicate the manner in which such significant
effects can be mitigated or avoided." Thus, the EIR is an information document for use by decision makers, public agencies and the general public.
rc
THE EIR IN THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS
The EIR will be used by the City in assessing impacts of the proposed mass
grading and road realignment project. This EIR will serve as a program EIR
addressing impacts of the initial project proposal and subsequent General Plan Amendment. Additional environmental review will be required for follow-on projects. A General Plan Amendment to the Land Use Element, a La Costa Master Plan Amendment and a Tract Map will be proposed at a later date and
are not part of the initial action to be taken by the City and developer. During the development process of the project, alternatives and mitigation
measures identified in this EIR may be applied to the specific project or subsequent related projects by the City.
BACKGROUND
In order to define the scope of the investigation of the EIR, the City of Carlsbad distributed a Notice of Preparation to local, County and State agencies, other
1-1
public agencies, and any interested private organizations and individuals, to ---.
identify agency and public concerns regarding potential impacts of the proposed
project.
Written comments received during the 30-day public review period for the Notice of Preparation of the Draft EIR are included in Appendix I of this EIR. Technical documents, prepared as part of this EIR for the project, are also included as Appendices to this EIR. These documents were utilized as reference material in the EIR analysis and are referenced as such.
AVAILABILITY OF REPORTS
The Environmental Impact Report is available for public inspection and copying at the City of Carlsbad Community Development Department, 2075 Las Palmas Drive, Carlsbad, California 920094359. Copies are available to the public on payment of a reasonable charge for reproduction. Circulating copies are available at the City of Carlsbad Public Library and the Carlsbad Community Development Department. Documents may be reviewed during regular business
hours.
COMMENTS REQUESTED
-? Comments of all agencies and individuals are invited regarding the information contained in the EIR. Where possible, those responding to the Draft EIR should
endeavor to provide that additional information they feel is lacking in the EIR,
or indicate where the information may be found. Comments must specifically address the adequacy and sufficiency of the EIR.
Following the period for circulation and review of the EIR of 45 days from the date of the Notice of Completion, all comments and responses to them will be incorporated in a Final Environmental Impact Report prior to certification of the document by the City at a noticed public hearing.
STRUCTURE OF THIS EIR
This EIR is organized in nine sections. Section 1.0 is this introduction. Section 2.0, the Executive Summary, provides a brief project description and summarizes project impacts. A comprehensive project description is presented in Section 3.0. Section 4.0 describes the general environmental setting. Section 5.0 analyzes project impacts and outlines mitigation measures designed to reduce the impacts
to less than significant levels. Section 6.0 examines alternatives to the project, while Section 7.0 discusses cumulative impacts and growth-inducing impacts. References and persons responsible for preparation of the EIR are included in Section 8.0. References are shown in the text in parentheses, e.g., (C-3,
1-2
page 40), indicating the document or person listed in Section 8.0. Technical documents are included as appendices C through H to the EIR. The Initial Study and written comments received during the Notice of Preparation review period are also included as Appendix A. A mitigation monitoring checklist, in accordance with Section 21081.6 of the California Public Resources Code, is included in Appendix B.
1-3
,-
2.0 Executive Summary
e!!
2.0 EXECUTLVE SUMMARY
THE PROJECT
This Environmental Impact Report (EIR) analyzes the potential environmental impacts related to implementation of the proposed realignment and construction of Rancho Santa Fe Road, and mass grading of 448 acres Within an area in eastern Carlsbad. The project proposes relocation of existing Rancho Santa Fe Road easterly to the "Canyon alignment.," replacing the bridge over San Marcos Creek, and expansion of the road into a six-lane prime arterial between La Costa Avenue and Melrose Drive as called for in the Circulation Element of the General Plan. Mass grading to provide for future development is to occur on both sides of the roadway. A General Plan Amendment of the Land Use
Element will be a future action and is not a part of this project.
PROJECT LOCATION
The 768-acre project site is located in the eastern portion of the City of Carlsbad, along both sides of the existing Rancho Santa Fe Road between La Costa Avenue and Melrose Drive. Land surrounding the project site includes residential subdivisions to the south and west, San Marcos Creek to the west and north, the City of San Marcos to the north and east, and County lands to the east. Cities affected by circulation improvement of the realigned roadway include Encinitas to the south, Oceanside and Vista to the northwest, San Marcos to the
north, and Carlsbad. Interstate 5 lies approximately 3.5 miles west of the project
site.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
The City Planning Department prepared an Initial Study for the proposed project and determined the need for an EIR. Environmental issues identified by the City for assessment in this EIR consist of:
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Earth Air Quality
Water Resources
Biological Resources
Noise Light and Glare Land Use Traffic/Circulation Public Services Utilities
2-1
0 Landform Alteration/Visual Quality
0 Cultural/Historic Resources
SIGNIFICANT UNMITIGATED IMPACTS, OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVES
Based on these data and conclusions in this EIR, the City finds that the project
will result in significant impacts to air quality and biological resources (Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat and the California gnatcatcher) which cannot be fully mitigated. Impacts to Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat and the California
gnatcatcher will be mitigated to a level of less than significant with the approval
of a Habitat Conservation Plan and/or an agreement to prepare such a plan. Implementation of the mitigation measures outlined in this document can reduce
all other impacts to less than significant levels. Table 2-1 summarizes the findings of the analysis. A number of constraints to the project, such as steep slopes and sensitive biological and archaeological resources, pose obstacles to project implementation. Project constraints are shown in Figure 2-1. The Road Widening in the Existing Alignment and Defer Proposed Mass Grading
Alternative and the Realign Rancho Santa Fe Road and Defer Proposed Mass Grading Alternative are environmentally superior to the proposed project. Implementation of the proposed project will require issuance of a Statement of Overriding Considerations by the City.
SPECIAL AREAS OF CONCERN IDENTIFIED IN THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENT
The following items are just some areas of special concern associated with the project:
0 Placement of the roadway relative to existing homes in the LA Costa Vale subdivision, and the potential noise impacts to residents from construction of a prime arterial along the existing alignment.
0 Destruction of 217 acres of coastal sage scrub habitat and the resultant
loss of 14 pairs of California gnatcatchers while state and federal resource
management agencies are considering placement of the species on the
endangered species list.
0 Mass grading without development proposals.
-I
0 Grading in areas currently designated as Open Space.
, --?
2-2
ISSUES TO BE RESOLVED
The following issues are to be resolved as part of the project at a later date following environmental review:
0
0
0
0
0
0
Formulation of the project financing mechanism for roadway construction.
Amendment of the Land Use Element of the General Plan to reflect proposed land uses throughout the project area.
Amendment of the La Costa Master Plan.
The Regional transportation network of future Melrose Drive south and SA680 in San Diego County and their relationship to Rancho Santa Fe Road in terms of intersection placement and future traffic volumes.
The exact combination of mitigation measures which will be used to mitigate significant impacts to biological resources to a level of less than
significant.
The location of the future on-site school within San Marcos Unified
School District.
The configuration of the Rancho Santa Fe Road/Melrose Drive north intersection.
2-3
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS
11 &Quality
Biological Ruources (Dicgan
coastal sage scrub habitat and
the California gnatcatcher
Significant long-term incrrarcs in
pollutant Imb will occur arer
existing conditiow short-tern impacts
will occur from construction activities.
The project will destroy 217 am
(52%) of coastal sage scrub and
eliminate 14 pairs of California
gnatcatchers.
Dust control musum shall be
employed throughout the grading
and ~o~~ttruction process: activities
shall be scheduled to .void high
ozone days: the dmloper and
City shall prwide means for the
convenient we of dtcnutive
moder of tnnspmtion as
required by authorizing agencier,
commercial land use shall be
accessible by bicycle and
pedutrisn trails.
The dmloper shall perform a
combination of the following:
dmlop a viable gnatcatcher
p~cm on- and off-site large
enough to support 14 pairs. The
on- and off-aite dedications shall
follow criteria listed in Seaion 5.4;
make a contribution to a regional
conservation plan for the
gnatcatcher. The proposed
Assessment District shall fund a
California gnatcatcher life-history
study.
Signifmnt for long-
term impncts, and
cumulatively
significant for short-
term impactr.
Significant lntil a
Habita Come tion
Planand r
agreement DFG y and the City,
prepare ychablanis
amm lied.
Earth Resources Grading of 448 am of the surface
will create cut and fill slopes of 80 to
100 feet in height. and alter 60
pemnt of the existing landform; dam
instability could be caused by the
blasting pnmss and placement of fill
at the dam toe and spillway, erosion
may occur during grading and if the
site is left undeveloped for sevcral
years.
Earthwork shall follaw conditions
sct forth in Appcndiw C of thiis
EIR; the developer shall adhere to
applicable building codes to
maximize seismic safety, and
employ erosion reduction
techniques during grading;
Development shall adhere to
Hillside Development Regulations;
-1
2-4
TABLE 21 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS (Continued)
Respom 3L
See Section 9.0
!kc Section 9.0
Response 3N
MiUgrtknMtrnuer
blastiig shall follow guidelines in
landslide .rrp~ shall poauss a
dety factor of 15 or more;
grading shall comply with the
grading ordinana; the developer
shall aubmit an emion control
Plan and a planting plan to the
uaed in grading and planting;
gradiig shall occur in compliance
with the La Cortp Master Flan or
any amendments thereto. No
grsding shall occur betmen
October 1 and April l5, except
when rpecipl measures can be
taken to control siltation. Thi
shall be met to the ratisfaction of
the City Engineer.
the Woodvud-Clyde report;
city; topsoil bankingshall be
'Ibc developer shall utili straw,
hydrosecding, mulching or other
techniques to reduce erosion
during construction, with special
care taken in areas to be cleared
and grubbed; the developer ahall
install detention basins to retain
run& and sediment during
construction; grading shall be
limited to the minimum arca
neeusay to aawnpliih
development as ahm on the
appd gradig plans; site-
specific geotechnical reports ahall
be required prior to development
of specific arcas; the developer
shall obtain permission from
SDGBE to grade in easements.
Less than sipiftcant.
Earth Resourced (cont.)
2-5 c-
set Section 9
Water Rcsoum
Rtspwsc 3PP
Biological Resourns (except
Diegan coastal sage scrub
habitat and the California
gnatcatcher)
TABLE 2-1
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS (Continued)
Water quality of surface and
urban contributions; drainage will be
dted by urbanization of 448 acra
of the surface producing greater
runoff duma and velocities;
modification of the lcocg roadway
dong Stanley Mahr Rcstlv;oir cwM
eliminate spillway functioning; grading
northeast of the Medr could create
drainage into the Metvoir,
downstream flooding could be
increased by runoff produad by
udmniition.
subsurfsce bodied will be rrducad by
The project will cause the loss of 283
acnx of intact vegetation which
indudes Dicgan coastal sap scrub
(217 am); the resultant vegetation
distribution would create a
fragmented ecosystem of three
imgularly-shapcd pamls which will
cause dysfunction and possible
elimination of a healthy ecosystem.
Mitiptka Mcwrrr
'Ibe developer rh.ll: employ
edon control measures as
the culrbrd Gdig Ordiim
and retted documentr; adhere to
mwmendationr by McDIlliel
Engiattring regardig bridge
rrcommended la Appendix c, and
coartiuccion;limitspillageofroib
alto mdr; adhere to atejpecilie
geottchnial rrports during
dmlopment; retain spillway
capacity of Stanley Mahr
kmir, ensure that no
additional runoff is drained into
the ~ervoir, pnpare a
comparative hydrology study of
runoffinSan hhcos Creek
bcfon and after development;
contain and remove refuse
generated during gradmg to an
off-site dirporol site; the
developer shall maintain the
southcentral trending drainage in
a natural vegetated condition as a
best management practice
consistent with RWQCB Order
Number 9042.
The dmloper shall obtain a
section 404 permit, and a
C.D.F.G. code 160&1603
agmment; modification of the
project grading to p~em 100%
of the dense am of San Diego
goldenstars and a minimum of
75% of the sparse area of
goldenstars as defined in
Appendix E
Less than significant
Less than significant.
2-6
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS (Continued)
Impoa-
Noire
Light and Glare
Expo~~ure of residential land wu to
noise levels greater than 65 dB(A)
CNEL at the property line from
increased traffic short-term noLe
associated with construction activititl
such as blasting, crushing and hauling
of material.
InacaJeJ in light and glare vitible to
existing residential land south and
west of the project from traffic,
stationary lighting, and reflectance
from an urbanized surface coycr.
Prior to mrdation of the first
find tract/parcel map or issuance
of building permits, the developer
shall prepare and mrd a notice
that this property may be subject
to impacts from the propod or
existing Truuportlltion Corridor
and with subKquent development
in a uunner meeting the approval
of the Phoning Director and City
Attorney prior to mrdation of
the fit final tract/paml map or
issuance of building permits,
whichever is first. Construction
shall occur between 7 Ah4 and 7
PM quipment shall be
maintained according to state
standards, and placed to direct
noise away from receptors:
ctockpiiig shall be located far
from existing dmllinp; the
greatest dmtance shall be mated
between noise murccs and
receptors during construction;
hauling quipment shall have well-
maintained exhaust and muffler
llystems.
The developer shall utili
landscaping to limit traffic-
generated light intrusion into
residential anas and oncoming
traffic, and direct street lighting
away from wnsitivc receptors; low
sodium street lights shall be
considered in design review by the
aty.
Lesa than
significant.
Less than significant.
2-7
Land use
see section 9.0
Ruponre 31
schoob
TABLE 21 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS (Continued)
Areas allotted to General Plan land
uses arc not consistent with the
General Plan and La casi. Master
Plan: propod land uses will result in
greater had use intensity of the
project area than allowed by the
General Plan by adding 246.000
quare feet of non-residential fkor
area above that allotted for the area
by the Local Facilities Management
plan; open space arcas designated on
the City Cumprchensivc Open Space
Network map will be reduced in area
and degraded in quality by grading.
All schools that serve the project arc
cumntly at, or mr capacity, and the
project will add a total of
approximately 2,388 morc students to
the area.
The developer shall conform to
land uses. intensities, and acreages
on the cuLb.d General Plan
land use map, and dwelling unit
allocations in the LFMP, or
General Plan. La Costa Master
Plan, and Leal Facilities
hhagemeat pI.n; propared land
usu shall contain pidelinu to
CMUX compatibility with
surrounding land uses; the
applicant shall propme
proporc uaeadmcntr to the
Las than signifwt.
amendment to the City's Open
pryh or mise grading ~la~ to
preserve open space on the City
Wp:
'Tbe developer shall decd an
acceptable school site to the San
krca UniTied School Dutrict,
guarantee for financing and
mnstxuction of a new school, and
pay developer's feu to locol
school dis-, if any
nimburscmentr and/or schd fee
dits arc to be given. the school
agreement shall pmvidc a
mechanism to do so: derelopcr's
fees shall be paid to San Dieguito
High School D~tricc for
construction of La Casta High
school.
Less than signifiint.
2-8
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS (Continued)
Percentage incnws in use of water,
IcIvcr and did waste disporal
selvicca, large incrures in
consumption of natural gas and
electricity mr existing conditions will
ruult.
Large-ecale alteration of the existing
landscape will wur with 4.2 million
cubic yards of earth md at a ratio
-r yards per am; the
pmpapl will conflict with mral
policies in thc Conservation and Open
Spacc Elcment, and the Seenic
Highwap Element of the General
plpn, alteration of the natural
dninage channel in the project area
will detract from local aesthetics.
Six prehistoric sites located within the
project area arc vulnerable to
destruction. Fm of thcse sites arc
considered potentially important.
Water de& -at will
oQNr during development rrvkw
by the Dinricrr serving the area;
water-wing deviccr shll be
included in dl development; water
reclamation shll be wd for
irrigation of park^ and public
Lmnr wberevcr feasible; new
performance standards for #mr
service; a rrcycling program hall
be implemented by the developer
if deemed feasible; the developer
dull provide infrastructure to
meet SDGdE mndards, and
provide energy saving dcviccs
within subrequent development
whemcr feasible.
dmlopmeat will complywitb aty
Grading shall follow a11
recommendations oontaincd in
Appendix C of this EIR.
guidelines outlined in tbe L.
torts Master Plan. c.rLb.d
Grading Ordinance and Hillside
Development Regulations; the
developer hall submit an emion
control plan and a planting
program to the City and
implement a planting pIogram to
the satisfaction of the City
Engineer.
Further site sumys and sub-
surface testing by a certified
consultant are required at each
site, and mitigation offered in said
reports is to be implemented
which may include mation of an
open space casement on site; the
City shall adhere to goals and
objectins of the Hstoric
Prrscrntion Ordinance and
Historic Prtsemtion Element of
the General Plan.
Less than significant.
b than rignifiint.
2-9
TABLE 2-1 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS (Continued)
Traftic/Cirmla tion F
Public Sexvies (except schools
which arc significant and
hospitals which arc not
significant)
TMic volumes will increase, but
Rancho Santa Fe Road will operate
acceptably.
Demand for fire protection, law
enforcement. and libray ~Mccs will
increase.
Intersection gcometrics must be
created; a full intersection shall be
COM~NC~C~ at Cadencia Street; A
detailed construction plan liting
4 timing, tdfk and safety iasua~
shall be developed by the
contractors invdvcd. Thii plan
shall include a truck rerouting
plan and shall minimize detouring.
The Cities of Carlsbad and San
Ma- shall create a mechanism
to decide on the Rancho Santa Fe
Road and Melmee Drive
intersection configuration. Other
iasucs related to the intersection
configuration, as discutwd in
Appendix F, should be resolved by
Carlsbad.
An interim signal shall be
constructed by the city of
Carlsbad at the intersection of
Rancho Santa Fe Road and
Questhawn Road prior to
Signalhtion shall also be in place
at project completion.
All mitigation measures outlined
in the LFMP for Zone 11 shall be
implemented; the developer shall
construct a permanent fire station
number six, and an emergency
traffic light shall be installed at
the location of the fire station;
Neighborhood Watch shall be
established by new development;
roadway cohctnrction.
Ltss than significant.
Less than significant.
2-10
,/- TABLE 2-1
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS (Continued)
Public Services
fire and police protection to the
City amcurrent to buildout of
Zone-11; pnyment of a portion of
the Public Facility Feer by the
Moper shall go toward library
2-1 1
Road
d
I i i i i i i i I
Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR
Figure 2-1
Project Constraints
E!!
, --
3.0 Project Description
,/-
.e
3.0 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
THE PROJECT AND PROJECT LOCATION
The project involves realignment and improvement of Rancho Santa Fe Road and mass grading of surrounding land, as proposed by the City of Carlsbad and
Fieldstone/La Costa Associates, and as described in the Rancho Santa Fe Road
Route Adoption Report (C-1). The City has determined that a roadway realignment is necessary to accommodate construction of Rancho Santa Fe Road
as a six-lane prime arterial. Rancho Santa Fe Road is presently designated in the Circulation Element of the Carlsbad General Plan as a six-lane prime arterial, but the portion of the road between Questhaven and Melrose may ultimately be constructed to eight lanes to support the additional traffic volume generated by newly planned development in the southerly portion of the City of
San Marcos.
Realignment of the roadway will be from its present alignment to the "Canyon Alignment", which moves the portion of the road between Melrose Avenue and La Costa Avenue approximately one-quarter mile east of its present location (C-
2). The Carlsbad City Council voted in 1987 to place Rancho Santa Fe Road in the proposed alignment. The City is therefore proposing this alignment for the project. The City has determined that this alignment is consistent with the roadway location shown in Figure 3-1, the General Plan Circulation Element Map. In conjunction with road construction and to prepare for subsequent development of surrounding land according to the General Plan, there are properties adjacent to the new roadway realignment and improvements that are
proposed by Fieldstone/La Costa Associates to be mass graded.
Funding for the project will be acquired by formation of the Rancho Santa Fe Road Assessment District, which is proposed as the 2,210 acre area considered to directly benefit from roadway improvements (shown in Figure 3-3). The actual
Assessment District boundary and acreage may be adjusted when the District is formed. The project will be financed through the issuance of bonds in accordance with the Improvement Bond Act of 1915 or some other public financing mechanism. Property owners within the Assessment District will be assessed funds which will be used to pay the principal and interest of the bonds. Mass grading of 348 acres of land surrounding the roadway is required to ensure
development within the Assessment District prior to roadway financing. Although the project area encompasses the entire Assessment District, analysis in this Environmental Impact Report (EIR) will be limited to the area affected by
changes to the physical environment associated with roadway realignment, improvement and mass grading (approximately 448 acres). This action will also
necessitate a future redistribution of surrounding General Plan land uses requiring a subsequent amendment to the Land Use Element of the General Plan and the Master Plan for the La Costa southeast area.
3- I
ICOS
Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR SOURCE Citv of Carlsbad General Plan
Figure 3-1
Circulation Plan
3 -2
As a direct result of the roadway realignment, land uses designated in the Land
Use Element of the General Plan and the La Costa Master Plan which lie
adjacent to the new road realignment will have to be redistributed, requiring a
General Plan Amendment and Master Plan Amendment. The General Plan Amendment will result in changes to acreages of residential land, open space,
office and commercial acreages. However, no net change in the number of
residential dwelling units will occur. Although the General Plan Amendment and
Master Plan Amendment are not being considered at this time, potential
environmental effects of the amendments are addressed in this EIR as the project proposes a land use distribution which would be that of the amended
plans.
The Regional Location
Carlsbad is located on the coast, approximately 30 miles northwest of downtown San Diego, as shown in Figure 3-2. The City encompasses a 40 square mile area immediately north of the City of Encinitas, south of the City of Oceanside, and extends inland from the Pacific Ocean to the foothills of the Peninsular Range Mountains to the east.
The Local Vicinity
The project location, shown in Figure 3-3, consists of undeveloped land along both sides of Rancho Santa Fe Road. Boundaries coincide with those of the proposed Rancho Santa Fe Road Assessment District, and are delineated by Carlsbad city limits to the east and south, El Camino Real to the far west, undeveloped areas south of Levante Street to the southwest, the existing Rancho Santa Fe Road to the west, and the street system of Corintia Street, Xana Way, Alga Road and El Fuerte Street to the north and west. The most northerly and easterly boundaries lie adjacent to the City of San Marcos. Zone 11 of the Local
Facilities Management Plan (City of Carlsbad) also lies within these boundaries.
Rancho Santa Fe Road extends through the eastern portion of La Costa, which lies within the southeast quadrant of Carlsbad. The road is a primarily north- south road link in the circulation systems of the Cities of Carlsbad, San Marcos and Encinitas. The project covers the 2,210 acre Assessment District area, which
includes two miles of the Rancho Santa Fe road right-of-way (31 acres) and
approximately 768 acres of land comprising the project area. Approximately 21
acres of the Stanley Mahr and Denk Reservoirs located within project area
boundaries are not part of the project.
The topography of the project area is hilly, containing a series of drainages and ridges. The ridgeline in the northernmost portion of the area reaches over 990 feet in elevation, then quickly drops to the south along a 24 percent slope to the head of an intermittent drainage course (C-3). The slopes elsewhere in the project area are not as severe. Vegetative cover types include coastal sage scrub,
chaparral, grassland, oak woodland, riparian woodland, elderberry woodland, and
3-3
iae LOU- -5F -----
Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR
e!! - Figure 3-2 The Regional Locatiun
3 -4
Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR SOURCE City of Carlsbad
,- E!! Figure 3-3
The Project Location
3-5
eucalyptus. Land uses surrounding the project site include residential and vacant land to the north, west, and south, and open space to the east.
PROJECT OBJECTIVES
The City of Carlsbad is proposing to construct Rancho Santa Fe Road as a six- lane prime arterial, requiring realignment of the roadway and subsequent General Plan Amendment to redistribute the General Plan land use designations for the area surrounding Rancho Santa Fe Road. Newly planned development in the south portion of the City of San Marcos may cause the need for the ultimate construction of eight lanes between Questhaven Road and Melrose Avenue. While the proposed project will include evaluation of impacts for the ultimate eight-lane facility, grading and improvements for only six lanes is proposed under the Assessment District. Mass grading and subsequent development of land surrounding the road will generate funds required for road improvement and are
also objectives of the project.
sec section 9.0
~csponsc SN
Widening of the existing roadway will provide the prime arterial shown in the
Circulation Element of Carlsbad's General Plan. Community benefits from this
project will include reduced congestion, improved traffic flow and increased safety for travelers on the roadway. Additionally, this road realignment will provide a vital link in the region's roadway network.
PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS
The proposed realignment project will be accomplished in three phases: Phase I is to include mass grading of land owned by Fieldstone/La Costa Associates and
M.A.G. Properties surrounding the existing Rancho Santa Fe Road, including a possible school site and establishment of the subgrade for the future alignment of
Rancho Santa Fe Road as shown in Figure 3-4. Grading will be staged to
preserve existing utilities at their present locations until relocation of the roadway
in Phase 11 is completed. Although rough grading west of the existing Rancho Santa Fe Road will be initiated in Phase I, completion of the mass grading in this area will take place as part of Phase III.
Phase 11 will include the relocation of the existing facilities (roadway lighting, drainage, signage) to the completed new alignment between La Costa Avenue and a temporary detour south of Questhaven Road as shown in Figure 3-5. Construction of improvements for the new Rancho Santa Fe Road location will be accomplished during this phase. The existing Rancho Santa Fe Road will remain in place and open to traffic during Phase II along the frontage of the La Costa Vale subdivision (CT 76-3, Map No. 8583 and CT-72-20, Unit 3, Map No. 7950), and potentially from Cadencia Street southerly to the boundary of the Fieldstone and MAG. properties where it will be realigned to connect with the
proposed Rancho Santa Fe Road realignment. The realigned Rancho Santa Fe Road between La Costa Avenue and the temporary detour will be opened at the completion of Phase 11.
3-6
........... .-.....-...*.-.- :... .'...*.'.*.*.*.'..... ::::A::::::::::i:: Construction Area .......... (Generalized3
North
Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR SOURCE: Project Design Consultants
Figure 3-4
Phase I of the Proposed Project
3 -7
-,
............... ...................... ...................... a ...................... coyruc;~io~;ea
Ealatlno Owathavan
FUIUI. Ouarrhavan ROI
Eiirtlno Cadencia Slraai
1
U 1400 - 'P North scale in feet
Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR
i I
SOURCE: Project Design Consultants
Figure 3-5
Phase II of the Proposed Project
3 -8
Phase III consists of two components as shown in Figure 3-6: A) completion of
Rancho Santa Fe Road, and B) the grading construction program. In Phase IIIA, the surface of the existing Rancho Santa Fe Road (west of the new
alignment) between the northerly boundary of the La Costa Vale subdivision and the temporary detour will be graded along with completion of the mass grading of the areas west and east of the proposed Rancho Santa Fe Road realignment. This will occur after traffic is rerouted onto the new alignment of Rancho Santa
Fe Road constructed in Phase II. A segment of the existing Rancho Santa Fe
Road will be preserved to provide a possible connection between Rancho Santa
Fe Road and the existing La Costa Vale subdivision. Phase IIIB will include construction of the northern section of Rancho Santa Fe Road, between the temporary detour and Melrose Avenue (including the San Marcos Creek bridge, and extension of Questhaven Road to the new alignment of Rancho Santa Fe Road).
Grading of the project area will be accomplished by cut and fill activity on approximately 448 acres. The grading associated with the road realignment and interim grading of the areas east and west of the new road alignment within the Fieldstone ownership will consist of movement of 3.4 million cubic yards of earth cut, including grading for the road only through the MAG. ownership. Grading within the MAG. Properties will be approximately 797,000 cubic yards of cut for a total of 4.2 million cubic yards.
Figure 3-7 shows the approximate area of disturbance that will be involved in the roadway construction and realignment, which includes the grading program and locations of new intersections. This area includes the right-of-way for the new roadway, rights-of-way for the extension of existing roadways to connect with
Rancho Santa Fe Road in its new location, and grading that will be required to
create the roadbeds and to rough grade pads for future development. Intersections that will be affected by the project include, from north to south,
Rancho Santa Fe Road and Melrose Drive from the north (intersecting in the alignment as reflected on the Tentative Map and public improvement plan for the Meadowlands project, CT 85-19), La Costa Meadows Drive to the east, existing Questhaven Road to the east (proposed to be extended to meet Rancho Santa Fe Road), the existing intersection of Cadencia Street and the existing Rancho Santa Fe Road to the west, a future Melrose Avenue to the southeast (which is not considered a part of this project), and La Costa Avenue as an east to west cross-street. Two alternative configurations for the Rancho Santa Fe Road/Melrose Drive intersection include Rancho Santa Fe Road forming a 'T'
into Melrose Drive and Melrose Drive forming a 'T' into Rancho Santa Fe
Road.
Land use redistribution within the project area will result in no net change in the number of residential units currently allowed. However, as shown in Table 3-1 the acreages of several land uses designations will change as a result of subsequent General Plan Amendment. A substantial decrease in acreage of land designated as low density residential will result, accompanied by an increase
3-9
Exbhg Roadway
................ ................ r-j :::::::::::::::: const~;lst;$; ,",;e a ...............
Erlallng La Coaia
Meadow8 Drlve
Proposed 0fldea
Exlaling Ouesinaven Road
FUIUI~ oueainarmn Road
Exiatlna Cadencla Streel
- North scale in feet
SOURCE: Project Design Consultants Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR
-. .- Figure 3-6
Phase 111 of the Proposed Project
3-10
9 North
Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR SOURCE Project Design Consultants
Figure 3-7
Area of Disturbance
3-1 1
in acreages of land uses such as open space, office, commercial, and low-medium --
see seaion 9.0 density residential. Approximately 30 acres of land east of Rancho Santa Fe -= 2~ Road in the northern portion of the project area may be deannexed to San Marcos at a later date and not as a part of this project.
TABLE 3-1 PROPOSED LAND USE ACREAGE CHANGES
*Prior to development constraints
The precise financing mechanism for this project has not been determined at this time; however, the City is exploring utilization of various assessment district programs to provide funding. Grading not required for roadway relocation will
be funded by the abutting private land owners.
In order for the project to be completed, the City of Carlsbad must complete a series of discretionary actions which include:
1. Certification of the final Rancho Santa Fe Road Realignment and Mass Grading EIR;
2. A subsequent General Plan Amendment, La Costa Master Plan Amendment and Local Facilities Management Plan Amendment associated with redistribution of planned land uses;
3. Approval of the proposed Rancho Santa Fe Road Assessment District or some other funding mechanism;
3- 12
4. Approval of a grading plan for the roadway and redistribution of the associated planned land uses;
5. Issuance of engineering, grading, and Hillside Development permits for the construction of Rancho Santa Fe Road and grading for land proposed to be
developed.
Other permits which will be required include a Section 404 Permit related to the crossing of San Marcos Creek from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), and a Section 1601 Streambed Alteration Permit from the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG).
This project will require subsequent amendments to the Land Use Element of
the City of Carlsbad General Plan. In addition, the Master Plan for La Costa
and the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 11 will subsequently be
amended as a separate project, potentially necessitating further environmental review at a later date. These actions are not part of the initial action to be taken by the City and are not a part of this project, these are subsequent actions to occur at a later date. The creation of new roadways for Questhaven Road
and the southern extension of Melrose Avenue will be accomplished separately from this project, also requiring separate environmental review. Vacation of
existing Rancho Santa Fe Road roadway segments will be a part of Rancho
Santa Fe Road construction. Figure 3-8 shows roadway vacation that will occur
with Rancho Santa Fe Road construction.
f- Rancho Santa Fe Road serves traffic traveling to and from the Cities of San Marcos, Vista, and Encinitas as well as Carlsbad. Design and installation of roadway improvements will require coordination with officials of all affected Cities.
Alternatives to the proposed project include:
realign Rancho Santa Fe Road and defer proposed mass grading;
realign Rancho Santa Fe Road with mass grading of developable land consistent with the General Plan;
road widening in the existing alignment and defer proposed mass grading;
road widening in the existing alignment with mass grading of developable land consistent with the General Plan;
road widening in the existing alignment with mass grading for proposed
development;
no project.
3-13
PROJECT BOUNDARY -
PORTION OF
CHO SANTA FE ROA
TO BE VACATED
PROPOSED
NCHO SANTA FE ROAD
0 1400 - 'P North scale in feet
Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR SOURCE: Project Design Consultants, June 1990.
Figure 3-8
Anticipated Roadway R.O.W. Vacation
3-14
,-
e
4.0 Environmental Settina
4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL SE"ING
The 768-acre project area is located along the existing route of Rancho Santa Fe Road on the eastern edge City of Carlsbad. Currently, land within the project boundary is undeveloped. Rancho Santa Fe Road conveys traffic within the City of Carlsbad, and between the surrounding cities of Encinitas, Vista and San Marcos. Unincorporated land to the east also contributes traffic to the roadway. The existing two-lane road is planned as a six-lane prime arterial in the Circulation Element of the General Plan. A short section of Questhaven Road and its intersection with Rancho Santa Fe Road lie within the extreme northeast comer of the site.
Project site topography is rolling terrain underlain by resistent volcanic rock on uplands, and alluvium in canyons. Steep slopes are present on approximately 15
percent of the project site. Two stream channels dissect the surface; San Marcos Creek flows east to west through the northern project boundary, and a small tributary to Encinitas Creek flows southwest from the highest ground to meet
Batiquitos Lagoon. The surface is nearly completely covered with vegetation which includes coastal sage scrub, chaparral, and grassland vegetation on uplands, and oak woodland, Valley Oak, Sycamore, Eucalypus and riparian woodland vegetation near watercourses. Relatively little disturbance has occurred on most portions of the project site. Evidence of mining activity associated with excavations and waste-fill are present on the site.
The 18.6-acre Stanley Mahr Reservoir lies within the east-central portion of the project, and the 2.7-acre Denk Reservoir lies approximately 200 yards directly to
the south. Other characteristics of the project site include the existence of a 100-foot wide San Diego Gas and Electric easement with wood pole and lattice tower supported electric lines, a 200-foot wide San Diego Gas and Electric
easement (presently unutilized), a 150-foot wide San Diego Gas and Electric easement with steel tower supported electric lines, and two buried water pipes associated with the reservoirs.
Surrounding areas are a mixture of rural and urbanized lands, and contain
residential developments to the south, west and north, and industrial development to the northeast. Vacant land in the undeveloped County area lies to the east, and developing land within the City of San Marcos lies to the
northeast.
The geology of the project site ranges from Jurassic-aged Santiago Peak Volcanics, Cretaceous-ages granitic rock, and the Eocene-aged Del Mar Formation as bedrock underlying the majority of the project site. Terrace deposits, alluvium, landslide debris, and slopewash comprise local surficial deposits. The prominent soil association located in the area is the Exchequer, rocky-Blasingame association, with the Diablo-Altamont association existing in the northwestern portions.
4- 1
,-
5.0 Environmental Impact Analvsis
_- em
5.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
As required by CEQA, this section outlines the environmental setting, environmental impacts, and mitigation measures for those environmental factors
on which the proposed project may have significant effects.
This EIR examines all of the environmental issue areas identified as being potential impacts in the City of Carlsbad environmental checklist. Each potential impact is discussed and analyzed in the section that follows. Each impact issue area is addressed according to the following format:
0
0
0
0
Environmental Setting: A description of the environment in the vicinity of the project, as it exists before the commencement of the project;
Environmental Impact: An analysis of the impacts of the proposed project in qualitative and quantitative terms;
Level of Significance: A brief statement summarizing the level of significance for each issue area based on the analysis contained in the Environmental Impact section;
Mitigation Measures: A description of measures which could minimize significant adverse impacts. The discussion of mitigation measures shall distinguish between the measures which are proposed by the Lead Agency to be included in the project and other measures that are not included but could be reasonably expected to reduce adverse impacts if
required as conditions of approving the project.
AREAS OF POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
1.
2.
3.
4. 5. 6. 7.
8. 9.
10.
11.
12.
Earth Air Quality Water Resources Biological Resources Noise Light and Glare Land Use Traffic/Circulation
Public Services Utilities Landform Alteration/Visual Quality Cultural/Historic Resources
More detailed discussions of these impacts are found in the following sections.
5- 1
5.1 EARTH
ENVIRONMENTAL SE'ITING
The project site affected by road realignment and mass grading is approximately 448 acres of mostly undeveloped land extending north/south along Rancho Sank
Fe Road. This area lies within the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province of southern California. Local terrain is rolling, With occasional steep slopes and
canyons. Trellis drainage, parallel drainage controlled by local geology, exists
along northward, westward and southward trending canyons. Drainage is conveyed by tributaries to San Marcos Creek in the northwest portion of the site, and Encinitas Creek in the southern extent of the site. As shown in Figure 5-1, elevations of the project site range from 990 feet Mean Sea Level (MSL) on summits to 235 feet MSL in drainages, and slopes exceeding 25 percent occupy approximately 15-20 percent of the area to be graded (C-3).
Information contained within this section is provided in a site specific report prepared by Geocon, included in Appendix C of this EIR, and the United States Soil Conservation Service Soil Surveys for San Diego County.
Soil and Geologic Conditions
Six surficial soil types and three geologic formations were encountered during the Geocon investigation. The surficial deposits include undocumented fills, landslide debris, topsoils, slopewash, alluvium, and terrace deposits. Geologic formations include the Jurassic-aged Santiago Peak Volcanics, the Cretaceous- aged Bonsall Tonalite and the Eocene-aged Delmar Formation. Each of the soil types and geologic units encountered are described below, and their approximate
mapped extent is depicted on Figure 5-2.
Santiago Peak Volcanics (Jsp). The Jurassic-aged Santiago Peak Volcanics, with
the exception of the extreme northern approximately one-fourth of the site, comprise the majority of the underlying bedrock. These rocks were deposited as an alternating succession of volcanic flows, tuffs and breccias and typically have an andesite or dacite composition. Subsequently this sequence of rocks was
folded, faulted and weakly metamorphosed. Where observed in test excavations, especially in the central portions of the site, this unit is highly fractured and faulted along northwest-to-southeast zones. Fracture zones are steeply dipping, tight, and clay-filled.
5.1-1
North
I Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR SOURCE Project Design Consultants
Figure 5-1
Site Topography
5.1-2
Project Boundary
Fl Assessment District Boundary
iyd Future Roadway
1-1 Existing Roadway
Santiago Peak Volcanics
I Kgr 1 ITd( Delmar Formation
Bonsall Tonalite
-1 Qt 1 Terrace Deposits
I Qal I Alluvium
Landslide Debris
Melrose Drive )FL 0
Corintla Stree
Existing La Costa
Meadows Drive
+'Existing Questhaven Road
Future Questhaven Road
i i i i
i i i i
I I
i
SOURCE: Geccon #nCOfPQC88- Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR
Figure 5-2
Geotechnical Map
Bonsd Todite (Kgr). Cretaceous-aged granitic rock correlated to the Bonasall Tonalite exists in the approximately northern one-quarter of the site. A moderate to highly fractured and faulted structure similar to that described within the Santiago Peak Volcanics is also present. Unlike the volcanic rocks, the granitic units exhibited a more random, rectilinear, fracture pattern, with a typically weathered, coarse granular texture at shallow to moderate depths.
Delmar Formation (Td). The Eocene-aged Delmar Formation, consisting of stiff to very hard, light brown to olive silty to sandy claystones and sandstones was found to occur only in the lower drainage tributary to Encinitas Creek along the extreme southwestern edge of the site. This unit crops out only along the base of a westward facing slope of the drainage between approximate elevations 250 and 270 MSL Subsurface observation of test trenches along this slope indicated the presence of hard or dense, horizontally bedded claystones and sandstones. These beds, however, were overlain further northward by surficial terrace
deposits and landslide debris. No adverse structures or slide debris were observed, however, within the Delmar Formation along the natural slope at the site boundary with an adjacent existing subdivision. Local variations of bedding inclination within the Delmar Formation is a characteristic which could affect stability in natural or excavated slopes. The claystone members of the Delmar Formation often possess low shear strength and contain randomly oriented remolded clay seams.
Terrace Deposits (Qt). Stream-deposited dense, dark reddish-brown sands and cobble-to-boulder conglomerates were observed to overlie Santiago Peak Volcanics and Delmar Formation in trenches and borings at elevations between
approximately 360 and 420 feet MSL within the major south drainage along the
extreme southwestern boundary of the site. These sediments exhibit good to excellent bearing characteristics, however, where they rest upon highly weathered and/or altered Santiago Peak Volcanics, or Delmar Formation claystones, they have been found to comprise ancient landslide debris, or may become unstable if undercut in excavations.
Alluvium (QUI). The alluvial deposits are typically composed of loose, porous, clay-sand-gradual mixtures with boulders that have accumulated along canyon bottoms. The maximum thickness was observed at approximately 13 feet in the extreme southwest drainages, but up to 10 feet of alluvial soils were observed along San Marcos Creek at the extreme northern portion of the project site. These sediments are generally poorly consolidated and susceptible to settlement
when subjected to an increase in vertical loads as might result from the
placement of fill or structures.
Landslide Debris and Sqficial Landslide Debris (QrS and QrSfl. Two deep-seated
landslides and two areas of surficial landslides were mapped within the site.
Both the deep and shallow landslides have generally occurred near, or along, the
bottom of a southwest-draining tributary of Endtas Creek in the southwestern
portion of the site. The landslides have occurred within the weathered
5.1-4
depositional contact-zone between thin remnants of the Eocene Delmar Formation claystones, hydrothermally altered Jurassic Santiago Peak Volcanics and overlying Terrace Deposits. Surficial landslide materials, averaging
approximately 10 feet thick typically consisted of very clayey gravel to boulder gravels, or gravelly clays that have failed along the Delmar Formation remnant claystones, or within very weathered, altered, Santiago Peak Volcanics.
Slopash (Qw). Slopewash and colluvial soils occur along the canyon side- slopes, at the base of natural slopes and along the head scarps of landslides. These deposits consist of poorly consolidated sandy clays to clayey sands and are
potentially compressible.
Topoif (Unmapped). Topsoils of irregular thicknesses ranging from 1 to 2 feet blanket the majority of the site. The topsoils are characterized by dark brown to reddish-brown gravelly silty sands to sandy clays. These soils are both
moderately to highly expansive, as well as potentially compressible.
Fill Materiaf (Qafl. Several generations of engineered and undocumented fiil materials are present on the site. The largest-volume of documented fill includes the materials constituting the La Costa Dam. The La Costa Dam was designed
with a imperious clay core and a granular shell. The spillway and some section of the access roads were constructed from fiil materials that were generated on- site.
Geologic Hazards
Fe rmd Seismicity. No active earthquake fault traces exist within the project site. The closest faults to the vicinity are the Elsinore Fault and offshore faults, located approximately 25 and 20 miles to the northeast and southwest, respectively. Small magnitude earthquakes can be generated by offshore faults, while the Elsinore Fault can cause earthquakes of large magnitudes. The site could be subjected to moderate to severe ground shaking in the event of a major
earthquake along any of the active faults in the San Diego County area; however, the seismic risk at the site is not considered to be any greater than that of
surrounding developments in the City of Carlsbad area.
Liquefaction Potential. The potential for liquefaction exists in soils within the major drainages. In drainages, soils are underlain by 10 to 35 feet of alluvial soils, where the groundwater level is below 10 to 29 feet.
Landslides. Several landslide features were found within the southwestern portion of the project area. These exist were the contact zone between the Del Mar Formation, Santiago Peak Volcanics, and terrace deposits are located. Portions of landslide debris are loose and possess the potential for future movement. Remedial grading techniques may be required where proposed grading will affect landslide deposits (see Appendix C). This shall include the
5.1-5
c partial or complete removal of landslide debris material in fii areas and the construction of stabilization fills for cut slopes exposing landslide debris.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
Implementation of the proposed project wiU not result in exposure of people to
unstable soil or slope conditions, or unusual groundshaking from earthquakes. Unstable ground and slopes exist near Encinitas Creek in the southwestern portion of the grading area, and will require remedial grading, as described in Appendix C.
Impacts to earth resources resulting from this project are associated with the
proposed surface grading. No soil or geologic conditions exist which would
preclude the development of the property as planned, provided the recommendations of the study contained in Appendix C are followed. Erosion of soil may occur during grading and if the site is left undeveloped for several years. Slightly more than two-thirds of the area, approximately 448 of 768 total acres, is to be graded in three phases. As shown in Figure 5-3, most of the surface west of, and including the future Rancho Santa Fe Road will be altered by cut/fill and scarification/recompaction operations. Two large areas east of the future road alignment will be excluded from grading operations. Grading for the road realignment alone will result in 1,500,000 cubic yards of earth moved. Cut and fill slopes of 80 to 100 feet will be required, causing alteration of 60 percent of existing landform (C-3). This operation will result in total movement of approximately 8 million cubic yards (mcy) of earth (4.2 mcy of fill and 3.8 rncy of
scescction9.0 cut) (C-3). Grading proposed for the project will occur over a smaller area than
~esponses~ grading needed for build-out of the existing General Plan. The developer has submitted a revegetation study to the City to minimize erosion of exposed soil
-
(C-17).
The City has identified issues which must be resolved prior to project approval.
These include reducing grading on hilltops by taking a more sensitive approach in these areas and that tops and toes of manufactured slopes should undulate and slope gradients should vary. Slope tops should not have a hard edge, but
should be rounded to affect a natural transition (C-18).
Creation of large-scale cut and fill slopes will necessitate removal of 1.8 mcy of marginally rippable to non-rippable rock material from below the surface. This process involves "blasting" of non-rippable rock, and stockpiling of soil material throughout each construction phase in areas designated to be graded. The blasting processes may induce crustal vibrations sufficient to affect the stability of La Costa Dam and related structures located immediately east of the future road alignment. As stated in Appendix C, subappendix C, blasting operations may be performed if carefully monitored with a seismograph at several points to ensure that vibration does not exceed the limits set forth by a Registered Engineer.
5.1-6
Road
ad
SOURCE: Project Design Consultanls Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR -
Figure 5-3
Grading Plan
Noise associated With the blasting operation is further addressed in Section 5.1.5 of this EIR. Non-rippable bedrock will be used for roadbed construction.
Filling of areas adjacent to, and downstream of La Costa Dam at Stanley Mahr Reservoir may result in complications to engineered water flows, which may be detrimental to dam stability. As recommended by the report in Appendix C, fi material placed on the emergency spillway at an elevation higher than the dam
crest may cause dam overtopping by floodwaters during blockage of the spillway
culvert.
Also, filling of downstream drainage routes may cause ponding of outlet works flow at the dam toe if not properly designed, which could lead to dam instability.
Proposed large-scale grading could generate erosion of large sediment volumes
which would cause siltation downstream of the project site. Grading of steep
slopes exposes surfaces vulnerable to accelerated erosion. Approximately 15 to 20 percent of the graded area is on slopes steeper than 25 percent (C-3).
see section 9.0 It is possible that graded areas may remain undeveloped for an extended period
~esponsc~~ of time (possibly 2 to 10 years but not yet determined). Exposure of an undeveloped, graded surface may lead to severe gullying and sedimentation at downstream locations. Gullying would mostly impact slope areas and could remove large volumes of earth from prepared surfaces. A comprehensive planting program is necessary to reduce erosion. A study has been performed which concludes that revegetation of graded areas is feasible at a reasonable cost (C-17). A preliminary erosion control design has also been submitted to the City. The re-vegetation study and erosion control design are consistent With the City's Grading Ordinance and revised landscape manual, respectively (B-14).
Proposed grading must adhere to Hillside Development Regulations contained in the City Zoning Ordinance. Grading of slopes 15 percent or greater requires issuance of a Hillside Development Permit. The grading must be performed in accordance to hillside development restrictions, and the applicant must receive approval from the City for all grading to be performed in such areas.
Article 21.95.060 J1 of the Hillside Development Regulations (Chapter 21.95 of
the Zoning Ordinance) does not allow cut and fill slopes greater than 30 feet in height. Exceptions include grading for Circulation Element roads, such as Rancho Santa Fe Road. All areas of man-made slopes higher than 30 feet are designed for Rancho Santa Fe Road and are exempt from this Hillside Development Regulations restriction.
Proposed grading within San Diego Gas & Electric Company (SDG&E)
easements must be permitted by SDG&E. The applicant must therefore contact this agency and secure authorization to perform grading in their easement.
5.1-8
The Goal of the Geologic and Seismic Safety Element in the Carlsbad General -
Plan is to minimize the loss of life, injury to health, and destruction of property in the City of Carlsbad. This is to be accomplished by implementing necessary
planning and development policy recommendations that give consideration to potential geologic and seismic occurrences and their long range impact on the community. Objectives 1-4 set forth to attain this goal include establishing a project review process, developing a program to identify existing hazardous structures, sponsoring a public information program, and instituting policies and programs that document physical constraints throughout the City. This goal and these objectives are consistent with Policy 6 of the Health and Safety Hazards section of the Public Safety Element.
LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE
Based on the preceding analysis, impacts of the proposed project on earth resources are considered significant, but mitigable to a level of less than
significant.
MITIGATION MEASURES
Mitigation measures are necessary to reduce impacts to earth resources resulting
Appendix C (Geocon Report), and are listed below.
from project implementation. Specific mitigation measures are contained in -
1. All earthwork shall follow the conclusions and recommendations of the
consulting Geologic Engineer contained in Appendix C of this EIR. Grading shall be performed according to specifications contained in the report in Appendix C.
2. The developer shall follow recommendations set forth in the Woodward-
Clyde report (Appendix C of the Geocon Report) when conducting blasting and filling operations that may affect the condition of La Costa Dam.
3. The developer shall adhere to the building requirements set by the City of
Carlsbad and the Uniform Building Code to provide an acceptable level of
safety regarding seismic hazards.
see section 9.0 4.
RespoMc 3L
Grading shall occur in compliance with the La Costa Master Plan or any amendments thereto. No grading shall occur between October 1 and April 15, except when special measures can be taken to control siltation. This shall be met to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
5. The developer shall utilize straw, hydroseeding, mulching, or other suitable materials or techniques during construction activities to reduce the erosion
5.1-9
*- potential for uncovered soils. Special care shall be taken in areas to be cleared and grubbed with the top 12" of material removed.
6. The developer shall install temporary culverts, ditches, catchment basins, dams and settling ponds where needed during construction to collect excess water and sediments carried from the construction site. Sediments collected shall be disposed of on-site, unless contamhation of sediment with
hazardous material occurs, which would require disposal at a Class 11 or
Class III disposal site.
see section 9.0 7.
Respolw 3M
The project shall be in compliance with the City's Hillside Development
Ordinance and grading ordinance.
8. The City shall require an erosion control plan. This erosion control plan
will require sandbagging in unpaved street areas and the construction of approximately 15 desiltation basins on the site. The City shall verify conformance of erosion control measures by plan checks, field inspections and requiring as-built plans.
9. Landslide areas shall be remedied to create slopes with a factor of safety
1.5 or greater, or the standard set forth by the City.
~et section 9.0 10.
Response 3N
Grading shall be limited to the minimum area necessary to accomplish the proposed development as shown on the approved grading plans.
Site specific geotechnical reports will be required by the City prior to
development of specific areas within this project. Recommendations
included in these future reports should also be implemented by the
developer.
,?
11.
12. As contained in Section 11.06.130 of the City's Grading Ordinance, "the
surface of all cut slopes more than five feet in height and fill slopes more
than three feet in height shall be protected against damage by erosion by planting with grass or round cover plants." Specifications of this section shall be adhered to by the developer. Planting plans shall be submitted to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and shall be in conformance with the City's updated Landscape manual as adopted.
13. Top soil banking or reuse of scarified top soil during planting operations shall be performed by the developer at all locations where determined feasible by the City Engineer.
14. The developer shall obtain permission from San Diego Gas and Electric
Company for grading within an easement.
5.1- 10
.-
5.2 AIR QUALITY
ENVIRONMENTAL SE'ITING
rc
The 768-acre Rancho Santa Fe Road project site is located within the air pollution control region named the San Diego Air Basin. Local climate is typically dry-summer subtropical with a small temperature range, and is classified as mediterranean. Dry summers result from the influence of the Hawaiian High pressure cell anchored offshore, and wet winters are caused by the close proximity of the storm track associated with the global westerly wind system to the north. The project site has a large number of clear days throughout the year
due to its location approximately 5 miles inland from the coast. Clear skies and abundant sunlight are conducive to producing photochemical smog, as nitrogen dioxide combines with hydrocarbons in the presence of sunlight to produce ozone.
In the general vicinity of Carlsbad, average maximum temperatures reach 71.4 degrees Fahrenheit (F), while average minimum temperatures drop to 55.1 degrees (F). The average monthly temperature is 63.2 degrees (F). Rainfall occurs between October and April, averaging 10.4 inches annually. Winds generally blow from the west as daily seabreezes, with land breezes blowing offshore at night and early mornings. Wind reversal occurs during occasional Santa Ana weather conditions, in which a high pressure cell east produces strong
temperature inversions and northeast winds. Under these circumstances,
temperatures rise above normal, and humidity drops to very low levels (15
percent). Average annual humidity is normally 70 percent.
Ambient air quality is recorded at several air monitoring stations within the Air Basin. The closest station to the project site which is most representative of the local climate is at Oceanside. Data from the Oceanside monitoring station will be used to represent the air quality conditions at the Rancho Santa Fe Road
realignment location. Table 5-1 shows Federal and State ambient air quality standards. The number of days that Federal and State emission standards were exceeded at the Oceanside air monitoring station are shown in Tables 5-2 and 5-3. Ozone levels have exceeded both State and Federal air quality standards frequently, while other pollutants have fallen far below government standards. Since ozone levels are higher than standards allow, the San Diego Air Basin has been designated a "non-attainment basin" by the Environmental Protection
Agency.
5.2- 1
TABLE 51 AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
Air
Pollutant
Federal
Primarv
State
Concentration I Ozone
Carbon Monoxide
Nitrogen Dioxide
0.10 ppm, 1-hr. avg. 0.12 ppm. 1-hr. avg.
9 ppm. 8-hr. avg. 9 ppm. 8-hr. avg.
20 ppm. 1-hr. avg. 35 ppm, 1-hr. avg.
0.25 ppm. 1-hr. avg. 0.05 ppm, annual avg.
Sulfur Dioxide
Total Suspended
Particulates
(TSP)
0.05 ppm. 24-hr. avq. 0.03 ppm, annual avg.
1-hr. avg. or TSP - 100
NIA
75 uglcu. m. annual
gemtric mean
260 uglcu. m. 24-hr.
I I avg .
I
Sulfates I 25 uglcu. m. 24-hr. I NlA
avg . !
Lead 1.5 uglco. m, 30-day
avg . quarter
1.5 uglcu. m, calendar
Hydrogen Sulfide I 0.03 ppm. 1-hr. avg. I NIA
Vinyl Chloride 0.10 ppm. 24-hr. avg. NIA
Visibility
Reduc i ng
Particles
Insufficient mounts
to reduce the
prevailing visibility
to less than 10 miles
at relative hmidity
less than 70%. 1
observation.
NIA
Secondary
0.12 ppm. 1-hr avg.
9 ppm, 8-hr. avg.
35 ppm. 1-hr avg.
0.053 ppm. annual
avg .
0.53 ppm. 3-hr avg.
60 uglcu. m. annual
geunetric mean
150 uglcu. m. 24-hr.
avg .
NIA
1.5 uglcu. m,
calendar quarter
NIA
NIA
NIA
-.
Source: South Coast Air Quality Management District
-:
52-2
Year
1984
1985
1986
1987
TABLE 512 NUMBER OF DAYS STATE EMISSION STANDARDS EXCEEDED AT THE OCEANSIDE MONITORING STATION
Ozone12 I Carbon Honox i del 1
Maximum Concentration Maximum Concentration
in I
1-Hour
7
8
6
6
Days* 1-Hour
0 18
0 19
0 18
25
I
Days*
27
36
31
19
Ni trogenl3 Sulfur Oioxidel4
Maxim Concentration Maximum Concentration
in P
1-Hour
23
19
21
26
19
Number of days standard was exceeded.
I1 State Standard for Carbon Wonoxjde: 20 ppm 1-hour. 9.0 ppm 8-hour.
12 State Standard for Ozone: 0.01 ppln 1-hour.
I3 State Standard for Nitrogen Dioxide: 0.25 ppm 1-hour.
I4 State Standard for Sulfur Oioxide: 0.05 ppm 24-hour.
1 In PPM
Days* 1-Hour Days*
0 2 0
0 6 0
0 2 0
1 2 0
0 3 0
Source: San Oiego Air Pollution Control Oistrict. Sunnary Tables 1983-1988.
52-3
Year
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
TABLE 5-3 NUMBER OF DAYS FEDERAL EMISSION STANDARDS EXCEEDED AT THE OCEANSIDE MONITORING STATION
Carbon Monoxidell
Haxtmum Concentration
in PPH I 1-Hour I Days'
I
Ozonc/2
Maximum Concentration
in P
1-Hour
20
18
19
18
25 -
Days*
9
15
10
7
7
Total Suspended
Part icul atesl3 Sulfur Oioxtde/4
Maxtmum Concentration Haxtmum Concentration
In m/m3 in PP!
1-Hour Days* 1 -Hour
102 0
124
* Number of days standard was exceeded.
/1 Federal Standard for Carbon Monoxide: 35 ppm 1-hour, 9.5 ppm 8-hour.
12 Federal Standard for Ozone: 0.12 ppm 1-hour.
I3 Federal Standard for Total Suspended Particulates: 150 mg/m3 24-hours.
/4 Federal Standard for Sulfur Otoxide: 0.50 ppm 3-hour.
Source: San Dtego Air Pollution Control District. Summary Tables 1983-1988.
Days*
0
0
0
0
0 -
1
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
Realignment of the existing roadway will result in provision of a prime arterial according to the Circulation Element of the General Plan. The widened roadway
will be designed to convey larger traffic volumes. Localized air pollution will increase due to more vehicles passing through the area along the widened roadway. The existing roadway capacity is 22,230 Average Daily Trips (ADT),
and projected roadway capacity will be 66,670 ADT. The existing traffic volume on Rancho Santa Fe Road is 18,300 ADT and the volume is projected to be 55,300 ADT in 1995 (C-12). In the absence of roadway widening commuters may use other routes or other modes of transportation thus lowering the amount of emissions generated locally.
sec sectioll9.0 Widening of the roadway according to the General Plan will provide more
~esponse 30 efficient circulation and less congestion, which will cause a reduction in vehicular emissions. Table 6-3 in the Alternatives section of the EIR shows that emissions may be reduced by as much as 6,508 pounds per day by improved circulation efficiency.
Grading associated with the project will also provide for future development of
the site with portions of the site changing from undeveloped land to residential, commercial, office, park and open space as specified in the General Plan. A General Plan Amendment will eventually be proposed subsequent to this project
which will increase acreages of commercial and office land uses (see section 5.1.7, Land Use). A change in acreages of General Plan designated residential land uses will also occur, however no net change in dwelling units is proposed.
Additional vehicle trips from development within a non-attainment basin will cause further degradation of air quality in the area. Also, emissions generated
during construction, consisting of vehicle emissions and dust from grading and construction activities, will present short-term impacts on local air quality. Truck
hauling of crushed rock between the project area and Arroyo La Costa to the
southwest will occur as part of this project and produce air pollution emissions. The short-term impacts to air quality are not significant locally, but are
3~ cumulatively significant because the project site lies within a "non-attainment"
basin.
seaim9.0
Tables 5-4 and 5-5 show energy consumption and vehicle miles travelled and resultant emissions generated by build-out of the project area according to the proposed project. Tables 5-6 and 5-7 show energy consumption and vehicle miles
travelled and resultant emissions generated by build-out of the project area according to the General Plan. Both tables show air pollution emissions
generated by trips to and from future land uses, but they do not include traffic
travelling through the area along Rancho Santa Fe Road. The total emissions shown on these tables are included in Table 5-8 which shows existing automobile generated air pollution from traffic along Rancho Santa Fe Road, project air pollution emissions after General Plan build-out minus that from traffic along
5.2-5
TABIE 5-4
PROPOSED PROJECI'
ENERGY CONSUMPTION AND VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED 1 I I -
General 636.4 ksf 95.3 0.06 41.9 x.7 40.0 25,456 5.0 127.3
COmmCrdel
Office 2065 ksf 65.7 0.01 46.8 9.7 15.0 3,098 7.0 21.7
TOTAL CONSUMPTION - 030 (mer) 51.9 (mwh) sa35 (trips) 239.9 (tvm)
TABLE 54
PROPOSED PROJECT AIR POLLUTION EMISSIONS AND
AIR POLLUTION EMISSION FACTORS
Natural Gaa consUmption
E.lectric Power Generation
Vehicle Mi-
Hot Start kmnt
Abbreviations: ksf: thousand square feet; R
Soum: Emission factors data from South CC
million cubic feet; kwk kilowatt-hours; mwh: megawatt-hours; tvm: total nhicle miles
wt Air Quality Management.
5.2-6
I-
-
ENERGY CONSUMI
Natural Gas Consumption
LandUsc Units Usage Daily
Factor Usage
(cfunit) (ma
RcaidSingk 1,010.0 du 219.1 0.22
General 450.0 ksf 953 0.04
CofIUDCrcial
office 146.4 ksf 65.7 0.01
TOTAL CONSUMPTION - 0.27 (ma
TABU 56
GENERAL, PLAN
TION AND VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED
I 15.0 I 2.1% I
413 (mwh) 30$2%.0 trips 1%3 (tvm)
TABLE 5-7
GENERAL PLAN AIR POLLUTION EMISSIONS AND
AIR POLLUTION EMISSION FACI'ORS I
PROJECT AIR POLLUTION EMISSIONS Emissions 1 I I I
Vehicle Miles
Cold Start Pcmnt 51% lbs/trip 0.1827 0.0125
Hot Start Pcmnt 49% Ibs/trip 0.0291 o.oom
gm/trip 82.6 5.7
Abbreviations: bf: thousand square feet; mcf: million cubic feet; hKh: kilowatt-hours; mwh: megawatt-hours.
Soum: Emission factors data from South Coast Air Quality Management.
5.2-7
Rancho Santa Fe Road, and subsequent to development accordin to the I
proposed project minus that from traffic along Rancho Santa Fe w oad. From
emssions of all pollutants over emissions from implementation o B the General
the Table it is apparent that build-out accordmg to either plan will significantly contribute to air pollution within the basin over existing conditions. Implementation of the proposed project will cause large percenta e increases in
Plan, which is significant to a non-attainment basin. It is interesting to note that existing traffic-generated emissions are greater than those contributed by build- out of the General Plan due to better emission systems projected for automobiles in the future.
Policy 3 of the Health and Safety Hazards section of the Public Safety Element of the Carlsbad General Plan states that the City will support the work of the San Diego Air Quality Planning Team in its preparation of the San Diego Regional air quality strategy. Policy B of the Land Use Element states that the City will arrange land uses so that they preserve community identity and are orderly, functionally efficient, healthful, convenient to the public and aesthetically pleasing. Implicit within this policy is the preservation of healthful air quality. Also, Policy 7 of the Open Space and Conservation Element attempts to preserve
natural resources by "respecting the limitations of our air and water resources to absorb pollution ..." This Element contains implementation techniques to ensure airshed quality protection which include acquisition of scenic and conservation easements, adherence to the Zoning Ordinance, and providing tax incentives under the Land Conservation Act. In addition, the Circulation Element has as its primary goal to provide a balanced circulation system to serve the needs of the community based on environmental impacts.
EXISTING 4
TABLE !b8 PROJECT EMISSIONS GENERATED BY 3NDITIONS A
Existing Traffk-
Generated
Emissions
6306.6
672.7
8985
5.0
163.1
8,545.9
I) FUTURE DEVELOPM
General
Plan
63642
598.7
8083
5.0
132.0
7,908.2
Proposed
Project
9204.7
2,4013
979.6
6.2
1613
12753.1
NT (LBS/DAyI
Percent Change
From General
Plan to
Proposed
Project
+44
+301
+ 21
+24
+22
+ 61
5.2-8
P
,r
LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE
Implementation of the proposed project will cause significant, and unmitigable
impacts are not significant locally, but are cumulatively significant because the area is located within a non-attainment basin.
see section 9.0 long-term impacts to air quality within the San Diego Air Basin. Short-term
Rqooae3H
MITIGATION MEASURES
Mitigation measures which will reduce impacts to air quality within the San Diego Air Basin include:
1. The developer shall, during cleaning, grading, earth moving or excavation:
0 control fugitive dust by regular watering, paving construction roads, or other dust preventive measures, as defined; and
0 maintain equipment engines in proper tune.
2. After clearing, grading, earth moving or excavation, the developer shall:
0 seed and water until grass cover is grown;
0 spread soil binders;
0 wet the area down, sufficient enough to form a crust on the surface
with repeated soakings, as necessary, to maintain the crust and
prevent dust pick up by the wind; and
0 perform street sweeping should silt be carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares.
3. During construction the developer shall:
0 use water trucks or sprinkler systems to keep all areas where vehicles move damp enough to prevent dust raised when leaving the site;
0 wet down areas in the late morning and after work is completed for
the day; and
0 use low sulfur fuel (0.5% by weight) for construction equipment.
4. The developer shall phase and schedule construction activities to avoid high
ozone days.
5.2-9
5. Bikeways shall be provided along Rancho Santa Fe Road as required by City -4
standards; if required by the North County Transit District, bus shelters and benches and street pockets shall be installed on Rancho Santa Fe Road; bicycle storage facilities shall be provided at park and ride sites as required
by Caltrans.
6. Commercial land uses shall be accessible by bicycle and pedestrian trails from the immediate neighborhood.
5.2-10
53 WATER RESOURCES
ENVIRONMENTAL SE'ITING
Information in this section is contained in Appendix D of this EIR, as supplied by Dudek & Associates, Inc. Quantitative analysis of impacts to water resources from implementation of the proposed project is not possible due to a lack of existing runoff data, and no modeling having been performed on project impacts.
The project site is located in the watersheds of the San Marcos Creek and Encinitas Creek. As shown in Figure 5-4, surface water drains through several tributary canyons and watercourses towards the south and west. The two predominant watercourses within the project area are San Marcos Creek (a perennial stream) and Encinitas Creek (an intermittent stream). San Marcos Creek is located at the north end of the project and flows west. Encinitas Creek
is located at the south end of the project and drains to the south. Surface runoff from the project site ultimately enters either San Marcos Creek or Encinitas
Creek which meet at the Batiquitos Lagoon in the City of Carlsbad before
entering the Pacific Ocean. Existing 100-year flood flows in the San Marcos
Creek are estimated to be 13,000 cubic feet per second (cfs) and are projected to be 1,025 cfs in Encinitas Creek (B-12, C-20).
Flooding
Flooding conditions in the project vicinity and comprehensive plans for flood control and drainage management are described briefly in the Master Drainage Plan for the City of Carlsbad. Downstream areas which are subject to flooding include the La Costa Country Club Golf Course and box culverts of La Costa
Avenue near Calle Barcelona. Upstream and throughout the project area the
terrain is steep and incidents of flooding are isolated.
Major flood control or drainage facilities that exist in the project area include the Rancho Santa Fe Road crossing over San Marcos Creek and the outlet works and emergency spillway for the Stanley Mahr Reservoir.
A study by Rick Engineering (April 1988) shows that the existing crossing of Rancho Santa Fe Road over San Marcos Creek becomes completely submerged during the 100-year frequency flood. The 100-year flood used for calculating the bridge capacity is 13,000 cubic feet per second (cfs) and was obtained from a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers study.
A drainage study by Dr. Howard Chang (1990) identified the box culvert at La Costa Avenue as being unable to adequately convey 100-year flows in Encinitas
5.3-1
0 2800 + North -
Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR SOURCE U.S.G.S.. 1983
Figure 5-4
Project Area Drainage
5.3-2
Creek. Floodwaters may overtop La Costa Avenue on the east and west sides of the culvert during the 100-year flood (C-20).
Groundwater
A groundwater basin exists primarily in the two largest valleys. The San Marcos Creek Drainage Basin and a tributary to Encinitas Creek that partially originates from the Stanley Mahr Reservoir and follows a southwesterly course. Geocon Incorporated (January 1990) observed the groundwater table at 3 to 5 feet deep in the San Marcos Creek Drainage Basin and at 10 to 30 feet deep in the tributary to Encinitas Creek. This investigation also states that perched water table conditions are present within this tributary.
The project is entirely within the Batiquitos Hydrographic Subarea (HSA) of the
San Marcos Hydrographic Subunit (HSU) within the Carlsbad Hydrographic
Unit. The Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), in the Comprehensive Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) has established the following pertinent threshold limits for groundwater and surface water quality in
this HSA
Groundwater Limits:
Total Dissolved Solids - 3500 mg/l
NO3 - 0.45 mg/l (at a stream discharge into a lake)
Turbidity - 5 JTU
Inland Surface Water Limits:
Total Dissolved Solids - 500 mg/l
Phosphorus - 0.50 mg/l (at a stream discharge into a lake)
- 0.25 mg/l (in lakes)
Turbidity - 20 JTU
see seaion 9.0
~tspo~ ~PP
RWQCB Order Number 90-42 requires local agencies to implement %est management practices" to lower pollutants in storm runoff to the maximum extent practicable.
Additionally, the Basin Plan objectives state that waters shall not contain oils, greases, waxes or other materials in concentrations that result in a visible film on the surface of the water or on objects in the water that cause nuisance or that
otherwise adversely affect beneficial uses.
5.3-3
Suspended sediment load is also addressed in the Basin Plan, with the Plan's objective being to not alter the suspended sediment discharge rate of surface waters in a manner that adversely affects beneficial uses or causes a nuisance.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACI'
Realignment of Rancho Santa Fe Road and mass grading of surrounding areas
will cause impacts to water quality, drainage, and flooding characteristics of the existing watershed. Development according to the proposed project will cause lesser impacts to flooding and drainage than development of the project site according to the General Plan. This is due to larger areas of natural open space being proposed by this project than exist on the General Plan Land Use Map creating less area of impervious surfaces.
Water Quality
Erosion and sedimentation impacts during the grading and construction period would be short-term, after storm events only, and would be potentially significant.
These impacts would occur only if adequate erosion control measures are not applied during and after the earthwork stage when disturbed soil is left temporarily unprotected. The surface may remain undeveloped for an undetermined time period (possibly 2 to 10 years after grading). During these
quality in this watershed. storm events grease and oil from grading equipment could also impact water .-
Long-term erosion may occur from exposure of graded land if the area is not adequately landscaped soon after grading. These impacts are also considered significant and are addressed in more detail in Earth Resources, Section 5.1 of this EIR.
The drainage channel in the south-central portion of the project area is proposed to be filled and replaced with subsurface drainage works. The City of Carlsbad believes that maintenance of a natural drainage channel will be more effective than a pipe in contributing to the cleansing of pollutants from urban runoff and be more consistent with the RWQCBs '%est management practices."
After construction is complete, sediment transport from the site would decrease significantly to below existing levels. This decrease is due to increased impervious areas (Le. pavement, rooftops, sidewalks, etc.), use of storm drainage systems, and increased planting/landscaping. All of these conditions are associated with suburban/urban land uses and provide better protection against erosion than the existing native vegetation.
The project area encompasses approximately 3 percent of the drainage basin area tributary to the Batiquitos Lagoon. The impact of this project on the water quality of the lagoon on a long term basis will be small but potentially significant. ----.
5.3-4
c
The potential exists for groundwater seepage in areas of substantial cuts, however none was observed in the borings taken during a 1989 preliminary geotechnical investigation (Geocon Incorporated 1990). This impact is therefore considered to be insignificant.
Drainage
The interim stages of this development may create individual situations which
would impact drainage. Diversion of flows could occur during grading operations
temporarily and artificially increased flows in adjacent tributaries or watersheds. However, if the guidelines presented in the City of Carlsbad Grading Ordinance
are followed, this impact will be insignificant.
Development of this site will create large areas of impervious surfaces. These
impervious surfaces can increase both the volume of runoff and the peak
volumetric rate at which the runoff flows. The increase in volume of runoff is a
result of more areas, such as pavement and roof tops, that are less able to absorb stormwater. The increases in the volumetric flow rate are a result of impervious surfaces and engineered storm drainage systems that produce short concentration times, resulting in sharper peaks in the rate of runoff. This shortening of concentration time for a given watershed area is often offset by the fact that the effective slope is often reduced during development. A reduction in the effective slope lengthens the time of concentration for a given watershed. Therefore, increases in the volumetric flow rate should present less of an impact, however calculations are not currently available to compare existing flows with developed flows. From a drainage perspective the most significant impact of this development will be from increased volume of runoff.
Specific aspects of this road realignment and mass grading project could produce impacts to local drainage. Modifications to the existing access road to the Stanley Mahr Reservoir could significantly impact the capacity of the emergency spillway of the reservoir as mentioned in the geotechnical evaluation by Woodward-Clyde Consultants (November 1989) which is contained as an
Appendix to Appendix C of this EIR. The road grade, according to the Woodward-Clyde report, must be kept at its original elevation over the spillway to serve as a backup in case the corrugated metal pipes of the spillway become blocked. The design capacity of the spillway is 310 cubic feet per second (cfs),
according to the Woodward-Clyde report. The final grading plans for this project
show the capacity of the existing spillway to be accommodated. Also, the mass
graded pad area northeast of the spillway outlet has the potential to contribute water to the Stanley Mahr reservoir. Grading plans show drainage to be directed away from the reservoir, thereby minimizing any impact on the stored water
quality or quantity.
A new bridge is to be created across San Marcos Creek. The new bridge will convey the 1Wyear flood while maintaining structural integrity as stated in Appendix D.
5.3-5
Flooding
No residential development will be permitted within the 100-year floodplain, therefore no significant impacts are anticipated. Downstream areas that are subject to flooding, which include the La Costa Country Club Golf Course and the box culvert at La Costa Avenue, may be affected by development. Adding significantly to the flow upstream could cause a significant impact in the Country
Club area.
The Chang study indicates the need for creation of a protective berm on the upstream side of La Costa Avenue to contain one foot of freeboard during the 100-year flood of Encinitas Creek and to raise the elevation of the roadway on both sides of the culvert. A system of floodwater detention basins is needed, according to Chang’s study, to alleviate flooding in areas further downstream on Encinitas Creek. The creation of a protective berm to control drainage along La Costa Avenue is not a part of this project.
* section 9.0
RcspOa
LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE
Based on information provided by the hydrologic consultant, impacts of development on water resources within the project area are significant, but mitigable to a level of less than sigflicant.
MITIGATION MEASURES
The following mitigation measures, as forwarded by the hydrologic consultant, are
required to reduce impacts of the project to a level of less than significant:
1. The developer shall follow all recommendations made pertaining to erosion
control in the geotechnical evaluation by Geocon, Inc., the City of Carlsbad’s Grading, Clearing and Grubbing Policy, Grading Ordinance, and Landscape Manual.
2. The City shall establish a comprehensive maintenance program for the erosion control and drainage facilities. Many of the desiltation basins will
be temporary facilities, however a few could remain on-site after
construction is completed. A sediment removal and drainage maintenance
program should be enacted by the City for all such facilities.
3. When feasible, hauling by the developer shall be accomplished in a manner that minimizes the spillage of soil onto roads in developed areas.
4. The capacity of the spillway at the Stanley Mahr Reservoir shall be matched or exceeded by the developer in designing the new access road and
-.
5 3-6
See Section 9.0
Rcsponsc 5v
See Section 9.0
Rcspoase 3P
spillway channel. This capacity is 310 cfs per Woodward-Clyde Consultants
(November 1989).
5. The developer shall make certain and the City shall verify that the fmal grading on the area northeast of the Stanley Mahr Reservoir is performed such that no additional runoff is drained into the reservoir.
6. Refuse material such as oil, grease, and broken equipment generated during grading shall be properly contained and removed off-site to a disposal site.
7. A hydrology study for San Marcos Creek shall be prepared that computes the existing or "natural condition'' runoff for all watersheds in the subject area and compares them with runoff produced by development of proposed land uses. The developer shall implement drainage control measures which
will reduce flooding induced by the project to less than significant.
8. The developer shall adhere to recommendations by McDaniel Engineering
regarding bridge construction. The report is entitled "Structural
Calculations for Rancho Santa Fe Road Bridge Over San Marcos Creek"
prepared for the Fieldstone Company and La Costa Association, September 1990.
9. The developer shall adhere to site-specific geotechnical reports during
development.
10. The developer shall maintain the south-central trending drainage channel in a natural vegetated condition as a %est management practice" consistent with RWQCB Order Number 90-42.
Sac Section 9.0
RcspoMe 3PP
53-7
5.4 BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
/-
Information in this section of the EIR is contained in Appendix E, the Biological Resources Survey Report by Michael Brandman Associates (MBA). The project site is located on 768 acres of undeveloped land which contains relatively high quality examples of native habitats typical of the central coastal lowlands of San Diego County, including 88 acres of disturbed area. The dominant vegetation
type on the property is Diegan coastal sage scrub. Some southern mixed chaparral is also present in the northern portion of the property. Native stipa-dominated grasslands occur in swales associated with drainages, and occasionally on slopes within the Diegan coastal sage scrub community. A small oak/riparian woodland occurs in the south-trending drainage in the vicinity of the springs. Southern cottonwood/willow riparian woodland is present in San Marcos Creek along the northern boundary of the property. The distribution of the plant communities is depicted in Figure 5-5. Major habitats, plant communities, and sensitive species present on the project site are briefly discussed below.
Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub
This plant community is the dominant vegetation type on the property. It is a large segment of the few remaining examples of such vegetation in the City of Carlsbad. Figure 5-6 shows the area covered with Diegan coastal sage scrub on the project site in relation to its regional distribution. Two sub-types, Artemisia
scrub and black sage scrub are present within the Diegan coastal sage scrub.
The Artemisia scrub consists of almost pure stands of California sagebrush [Artemisia californica), and predominates in swales, bluff tops, and on low, gentle slopes of ridges to the east of Rancho Santa Fe Road. Black sage scrub consists of a mixture of California sagebrush, flat-top buckwheat iErioronum fasciculatum) and black sage [Salvia mellifera) in approximately equal
proportions, with lesser amounts of Laurel sumac {Malosma laurinal. It occurs at higher elevations and on steeper slopes along the central ridge in the east part of the property. The division between Artemisia scrub and black sage scrub is not clear cut, and the two often intermingle creating a mosaic. This vegetation type covers approximately 458 acres of the project site.
Bird species commonly found throughout this habitat on the project site include California quail [Callipepla californica), Bewick's wren [Thyomanes bewickii), California gnatcatcher (Pdioptila californica), wrentit [Chamaea fasciata), California thrasher (Toxostoma redivivum), and California towhee (Pipilo crissalis). Mammals were generally not active during the survey period but one deer was observed in the Diegan coastal sage scrub in the southeast quadrant of
the site.
5.4-1
Project Boundary
Assessrnenl District Boundary
Future Roadway
Existing La Costa Meadows Dr
"1 i
I i i i i i i i I
i I
I
I
-A
w
Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR
em Figure 5-5
Existing Vegetation with Grading
Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub
F+ Project Boundary
SOURCE: Micheal Brandrnan and Associates 1.” ? W
Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR
Figure 5-6
Regional Coastal Sage Scrub Habitat
Southern Mixed Chaparral
This community is dominated by chammise {Adenostoma fasciculatum) and mission mazanita [Xvlococcus bicolor), and covers north and west-facing slopes in the northwestern part of the property. Several other species occurring in this vegetation include San Diego mountain-mahogany, toyon, lemonade berry, red berry, scrub oak, Mojave yucca, Ramona lilac, and patches of chaparral (present
on two small knolls east of Rancho Santa Road). This vegetation type covers approximately 149.6 acres of the site.
Most of the bird species found in this habitat are typical of the Diegan sage scrub habitat as well. Although found in other habitats, the California thrasher, wrentit, and rufous-sided towhee (PiDilo eqt hrophthalmus), are typical chaparral inhabitants. Sage sparrows are also found in the coastal chaparral, as well as in
coastal sage scrub. This particular form of chaparral is limited to the northwest
region of San Diego County and has been impacted by losses due to agriculture and residential and commercial development. Because of this loss, it can be
considered declining regionally.
see Section 9.0
Ruponse 3DD
Oak Riparian Woodland
An area of oak riparian woodland, co-dominated by tall, well-developed coast live oak [Ouercus amifolia) and sycamores (Platanus racemosa), is present in the
central, south-trending drainage below a year-round spring located on the west side of the main channel. Higher in the main channel, above the spring, woodland vegetation consists of occasional clumps of coast live oak. A stand of coast live oaks also occurs on the hillside above the spring west of the main drainage. Oak riparian vegetation covers about 3.2 acres of the site.
These woodlands support a rich and diverse community of birds. On the project site this habitat is not extensive, and some of its characteristic species were not observed. Typical oak riparian woodland birds include western screech-owl lotus kennicottii), acorn woodpecker {Melanerpes formicivorous), scrub jay {Aphelocoma coerulescens), plain titmouse (Parus inornatusL and white-breasted nuthatch [Sitta carolinensis). Some of these birds would be expected with a
more thorough survey of this habitat.
"Spring" Vegetation
Two springs are present in the vicinity of the central south-trending drainage.
Species associated with the larger spring, which lies west of the main channel, include southwestern spiny rush (Juncus acutus var. sphaerocarpus), yerba mama
{Anemopsis californica), water pimpernel {Sam olus parviflorus), American rush
{Scirpus americana), and spike rush {Eleocharis SD.). A smaller spring, lower in the channel near La Costa Avenue, harbors soft flag (Twha latifolia), salt grass {Distichlis spicatal, and spike rush (Eleocharis su .). The spring vegetation occupies a fraction of an acre on the site. These plant associations are probably
5.4-4
.-
Many different species of birds will feed in this woodland when berries are present. Some of the expected birds are American crow [Corvus brachyhynchos2 American robin [Turdus mierato riush northern mockingbird {Mimus Do lyPlottos) , cedar waxwing [Bombvcilla cedrorum), and phainopepla [Phainopepla nitens). One deer was noted in the area, and the presence of numerous game trails suggests that this area is of considerable value to wildlife utilizing San Marcos Creek as a movement corridor.
Baccharis Floodplain Scrub (Mule Fat Scrub)
Baccharis floodplain scrub, dominated by broom baccharis Daccharis
Sarothroides), was noted in two areas on-site (covering about 2.6 acres). It occurs in the upper portion of the central swale draining into Encinitas Creek where broom baccharis grows densely in small interconnecting channels which cross a stipa-dominated grassland. Broom baccharis and black sage LSalvia mellifera) also predominate in the swale at the edge of the main channel in damp areas south of, and below the central grassland.
Broom baccharis scrub also occurs in association with the small southwest trending tributary to San Marcos Creek located west of Rancho Santa Fe Road and north of Cadencia Street. In this area, broom baccharis predominates within the stream channel and also in low, damp areas of the adjacent swale.
In winter flocks of birds can be expected to forage through the floodplain. These mixed flocks are dominated by white-crowned sparrow [Zonotrichia Leucouhrys); other species expected to occur are song sparrow (Melospiza melodia), Lincoln’s sparrow [Melospiza lincolnii), and golden-crowned sparrow {Zonotrichia ptricapilla).
Valley Needlegrass Grassland
Valley needlegrass grasslands, dominated by foothill stipa {Stipa lepida) and beautiful stipa {Stipa pulchra), occur occasionally on slopes within the Diegan coastal sage scrub community and also in low, damp areas, often in association
with baccharis floodplain scrub. This vegetation covers about 26 acres of the
site. Other species occurring in valley needlegrass grasslands include splendid
mariposa [Calochortus splendens), blue-eyed grass {Sisyinchium bellum), fascicled tarweed [Hemizonia fasciculata) and occasionally in damp areas, San Diego goldenstar [Muilla clevelandii).
The grasslands are not extensive enough to support species that are grassland specialists, although one homed lark {Eremouhila alpestris) was observed flying over the project site. Other species typical of grasslands that may occasionally visit the site are American pipit [Anthus rufescens), vesper sparrow JPooecetes gramineus), and Savannah sparrow [Passerculus sandwichensis).
5.4-6
Annual Grasslands
Annual (non-native) grasslands dominated by slender wild oat (Avena barbata) are also present in the study area, covering about 36.4 acres. Other species occurring frequently in non-native grasslands include rip-gut grass [Bromus diandrus), soft chess (Bromus mollis), and short-pod mustard (-a peniculata).
A heavily disturbed grassland is present in the extreme northwestern corner of the site. Species observed in this area include slender wild oat, brome grasses, short-pod mustard curly dock (Rumex crispus) , bristly ox-tongue (picris gchioides), doveweed (Eremocqus set ieerus), fascicled tarweed, and, in damp
areas near the creek, salt grass.
Disturbed Areas
This designation refers to areas that have been so badly disturbed that they probably will not recover. Included in this category are areas formerly covered by Diegan coastal sage scrub immediately east and west of Rancho Santa Fe Road and near the intersection of Rancho Santa Fe Road and La Costa Avenue where only a few broom baccharis, flat-top buckwheat and laurel sumac remain. There are about 88.4 acres of substantially disturbed vegetation on the site. Also included in this category are areas associated with the Stanley Mahr Reservoir in
planted with fountain grass (Pennisetum setaceum). the northeastern part of the site, including an earthen dam which has been .I
These areas are not productive and support little bird life. Vagrants from nearby habitats are occasional, including northern mockingbird, European starling (-1, house finch JCamodacus mexicanus), and house sparrow
passer domesticus).
Burned Area
%e Section 9.0
~cspo~
The southeast portion of a small knoll in the southeast comer of the study area covering approximately 13 acres has burned recently. Returning vegetation in
this area includes laurel sumac, fascicled tarweed and mesa bush mallow (Malacothamnus fasciculatum).
Sensitive Biological Resources
Sensitive species are: (1) plant and animal species present in the project vicinity that have been given special recognition by federal, state or local resource conservation agencies and organizations because of declining, limited or threatened populations, resulting in most cases from habitat reduction; and (2) habitat areas that are unique, of relatively limited distribution or of particular value to wildlife.
5.4-7
rc
/--
No species of plant or animal specifically designated as threatened or endangered by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service or California Department of Fish and Game have been located on the project site during this or previous surveys. Many sensitive (non-endangered) plant species were located during the present survey, and the potential exists for the occurrence of additional species.
Sensitive Plant Species Observed
Adolphia californica or California adolphia
Small populations of California adolphia occur frequently on the property. This species was observed in Diegan coastal sage scrub near intermittent drainages, and on slopes in scrub vegetation at the edge of stipa-dominated openings usually characterized by cobbly soils.
Brodiaea orcuttii or Orcutt’s brodiaea
See section 9.0
Rtsponse~~
The Brodiaea orcuttii is a candidate for Federal listing as endangered. Orcutt’s brodiaea was observed in a stipa-dominated swale on a ridge-top in the south-central portion of the site where associated species include fascicled tarweed and blue-eyed grass. Two small populations are present in this area and about five plants were observed at each site during the present study. More plants probably would have been detectable earlier in the season.
Iva hav esiana or San Diego marsh elder
A relatively large population of San Diego marsh elder was observed in a shallow, cobbled portion of San Marcos Creek west of Rancho Santa Fe Road. Five hundred to one thousand marsh elder plants are probably present in this area. The plant was not observed in the area proposed for the new, wider San Marcos Creek bridge alignment. San Diego marsh elder is a category 2
candidate for Federal Listing as threatened or endangered.
%e action 9.0
~csponsesz
Juncus acutus var. Sphaerocarpus or southwestern spiny rush
A stand of approximately forty southwestern spiny rush was observed at the edge of a perennial spring located on a slope slightly west of the central south-trending drainage, about 30 yards north of the oak/riparian woodland which occurs in this drainage. A few southwestern spiny rush also occur in rocky portions of the main channel near La Costa Avenue.
One spiny rush was observed at the head of a grassy swale located below the eastern edge of the elderberry woodland. Two or three were also noted in the cottonwood/willow riparian woodland, within the area proposed for the new bridge on Rancho Santa Fe Road.
A much larger population was located west of the small tributary which parallels
Melrose Drive and drains south into San Marcos Creek. In this area, two to
5.4-8
three hundred individuals are present in a shallow, cobbled area of the creek in --
association with San Diego marsh elder.
Muilla clevelandii or San Diego Goldenstar
scc Section 9.0 The Muilla clevelandii is a candidate for Federal listing as endangered. San
R~SPOIISC SE Diego Goldenstar was observed in the higher portions of the central,
south-trending drainage on-site where it occurs in an open, stipa-dominated grassland associated with pebbly clay soils. The goldenstar was observed in low areas near the stream, and also in somewhat drier areas at the upper edge of the grassland near tributaries to the main channel. Over one thousand goldenstars are probably present in this area. Approximately 250 are also present on a steep slope characterized by heavy clay soils in a swale immediately north of La Costa Avenue.
San Diego goldenstar also occurs on bluffs west of Rancho Santa Fe Road. In
this area, the plant was observed at three points in a stipa-dominated swale
adjacent to the baccharis floodplain scrub associated with a small tributary to San Marcos Creek. Approximately one hundred individuals are probably present at each site. The plant also occurs in depressions in clay soil on a bluff slightly to the north. As many as five hundred goldenstars may be present in this area. Approximately 1,950 goldenstars occur on the project site.
several of which are expected to be lost. The current sensitivity listing of this plant is as a Federal Candidate 2 according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. This indicates that its threat or endangerment is not clearly understood at this time due to insufficient information. In spite of this lack of information most of
the available habitat in which this plant is known to occur has been developed or is likely to be developed in the near future.
San Diego goldenstars are only known in abundance at a few sites in the county, -
Selaeinella cinerascens or ashy spike moss
Ashy spike moss was noted in openings in Diegan coastal sage scrub, and in stipa-dominated grasslands on slopes and mesa tops. It also occurs abundantly in depressions on a bluff top west of Rancho Santa Fe Road. In general, ashy spike moss occurs with some frequency throughout the study area. More than one
thousand small scattered populations are probably present throughout this site.
Sensitive plant species with the potential for occurrence, but that were not
actually found present on the site include:
0
0
0
Acanthomintha illicifolia or San Diego Thornmint
Dichondra occidentalis or Western Ponyfoot ehiodossum llusitanicum ssp. californicum or Adder’s Tongue
Fern
5.4-9
P Sensitive Animal Species Observed
Oranpe -throated whiptail and Sa n Dieeo homed lizard
,,-
Both the orange-throated whiptail (Cnemidophorus hypervt - hrus beldineii) and the
San Diego homed lizard (Phrynoso ma coronatum blainvillei) are listed as Category 2 federal candidates. Both species prefer open, sandy spaces within the coastal sage scrub plant community. These reptiles can be found foraging in floodplains, on ridgetips, along unpaved roads and trails, and in areas of sparse vegetation in arid habitats in the site vicinity. Loss of habitat and slow reproduction rates have contributed to the decline of these species. Neither of
these species were located on-site during the current survey.
Sensitive Bird Species Observed
PolioDtila californica or California Gnatcatcher
The California gnatcatcher is presently being considered for listing as endangered or threatened by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. The Diegan sage scrub habitat found on the project site is of high quality, and supports a significant population of California gnatcatchers. A total of 48 California gnatcatchers were observed, and the project site supports a minimum of 13 territories. It is suspected that if more extensive surveys were conducted during the January to March period, the results would show that the project site supports more than 13 territories, inhabited by 13 pairs.
The Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat found on the project site is of high quality and supports a significant population of California gnatcatchers. It is suspected that if more extensive surveys were conducted during the January to March period, the results might show that the project site supports more or less than 13 territories. Studies done in 1986 and 1989 revealed from 10-12 California gnatcatcher sightings on the project site. The additional survey by Sweetwater Environmental Biologists from April 9 to May 2, 1991 identified the presence of potentially nine additional pairs of California gnatcatchers on the project site.
These nine pairs combined with the two other pairs identified in the MBA
August 1990 survey (not on Fieldstone property, between La Costa Avenue and Rancho Santa Fe Road bypass) bring the total pairs of California gnatcatchers on the project site to approximately 22 pairs as shown in Figure 5-7.
The total of about 22 pairs of California gnatcatchers occupying the 458 acres of
Diegan coastal sage scrub vegetation onsite roughly corresponds to the accepted typical territory/home range size of 20 acres per pair. The precise number of pairs occupying the site may vary from season to season and year to year, but the
stated total gives a general indication of the number of pairs the site and Diegan
coastal sage scrub habitats support.
5.4-10
Note: The area of disturbance has been modified as shown in Figure 9-3 of the FEIR.
1 i i i i i i i i i i i I A
SOURCE: Michael Brandman Associates Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR
e!!! Figure 5-7
Significant Biological Resources with Grading
r cooper’s Hawk
The Cooper’s hawk is listed by the C.D.F.G. as a state Species of Special
Concern, List 2. On two surveys, July 25 and August 9, 1990, this species was observed. Potential nesting habitat for this raptor does exist on the project site. An area of oak riparian woodland occurs at the southern edge of the project site and east of Rancho Santa Fe Road. In San Diego County this raptor species is virtually restricted to oak woodlands for nesting sites. Because fall migrant Cooper’s hawks begin arriving in San Diego County in late September, these two sightings of one or two different individuals suggest breeding on or in the vicinity
of the project site.
MmoDhila belli or Sage Sparrow
The status of the sage sparrow in southern California is not well understood, but local ornithologists have indicated that it is becoming increasingly rare in coastal San Diego County. This subspecies has been described as favoring chaparral
throughout much of its range.
The sensitive bird specie that has the potential for occurring on-site, but which was not observed is the Least Bell’s Vireo.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
Direct Impacts
The project would result in a disturbance of existing vegetation cover owing to the mass grading required to achieve the project goals. As shown in Table 5-9, the amount of disturbed area within the project site would change from approximately 88.4 acres to 344.7 acres, an increase of 290 percent. Of the native vegetation types onsite, southern mixed chaparral will decrease from 149.6
%e section 9.0 acres to 111.7 acres (25 percent loss); Diegan coastal sage scrub will decrease
RcSpo- 5w from 456.4 acres to 239.5 acres (48 percent loss); annual grassland will decrease
scc section 9.0 from 36.4 acres to 25.7 acres (29 percent loss); cottonwood-willow riparian will
Response ~FF decrease from 2.3 acres to 0.7 acres (70 percent loss); and oak riparian will remain the same. Baccharis scrub will be reduced in area by 50 percent, from
2.6 to 1.3 acres and elderberry woodland and oak riparian will not be disturbed
under the present proposed design.
5.4- 12
See Seaion 9.0
ResponSe5w&5X
TABLE 5-9 PLANT COMMUNITIES BEFORE AND AFI'ER PROJECT IMPLEMENTATION
See Section 9.0
Response 5W
Annual Grassland
Valley Needle Grassland
Cottonwood Willow Riparian oak Riparian
The potential loss of 1.6 acres of cottonwood-willow riparian habitat is small but could be considered significant based on the high habitat value and relatively high loss these habitats have experienced in southern California. The loss of this small portion of habitat may indirectly effect the general viability of the riparian habitat in the project vicinity. Bridging San Marcos Creek with a new bridge that is higher than the existing bridge may allow greater movement of small to
medium-sized wildlife along the creek, constituting a positive biological impact. Figure 5-8 shows the area of wetland disturbance which will occur in San Marcos
Creek.
The loss of 14 acres of the valley needlegrass grassland habitat type probably does not represent a significant direct impact from a regional perspective. Although this habitat was historically much more widespread, the extent and distribution on the project site does not reflect a substantial botanical or wildlife
habitat resource. However, because of the added biological and aesthetic diversity this habitat supports, it should be preserved if possible.
Sensitive Species: Destruction of Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat will result in a loss of up to 14 pairs of the 22 pairs of California gnatcatchers on the site.
Figure 5-7 shows that pairs 4, 10, 16, 19, and 20 could still survive after mass
grading of the project site. Pairs 5, 14, and 21 would be impacted, but may still be able to survive simply based on habitat availability. Pairs 1-3, 6-9, 11-13, 15, 17, 18 and 22 would not have sufficient habitat to survive after mass grading.
Because this species is dependent on Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat, it will not be able to survive in adjacent suburban chaparral or other habitats. This impact is considered significant because of the size of the population of gnatcatchers on-site compared with the population in the United States
-\
5.4-13
Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR SOURCE: Project Design Consultants
See Sectlon 9.0.
Rerponae Sx
\'.> ... . ...... .... ..$q
PROJECT AREA
Figure 5-8
Wetland Disturbance in San Marcos Creek
(estimated at 668-1,335 pairs in 1980), and the accelerated conversion of Diegan -
coastal sage scrub habitat occurring throughout the bird's remaining range.
This Artemisia-dominated Diegan coastal sage scrub is also utilized by two other bird species with limited local distribution and which appear to be declining: the sage sparrow [Aimophila belli) and the rufous-crowned sparrow {Airnophila ruficepQ. Both sparrows are considered locally sensitive species, although neither are listed by any agency or group. The sage sparrow is the resident race /A. B, bellib which is an uncommon breeder in San Diego County, and even more uncommon along the immediate coast. It appears likely that the project will remove substantial habitat for both of these species. These bird species also use black sage habitat on-site. see section 9.0
-me 3"
Under the proposed grading plan, all of the San Diego goldenstar [Muilla develandii) populations south and west of the existing Rancho Santa Fe Road
alignment would be directly impacted. The population on the extreme west- central portion of the site (north of the existing SDG&E powerlines) would be impacted. Within this population, about 30-40 percent of the sparse portion of the population would be impacted. These impacts are considered sigmficant
unless substantially mitigated.
Direct impacts to certain sensitive plants are considered not siflicant. Losses of the following species are not deemed significant because of the large populations still extant on the site, or the low sensitivity of the species:
Sela~n- or ashy spike moss, Juncus acutus var. sphaerocarpus or southwestern spiny rush, Iva hvesiana or San Diego marsh elder, and Adolphia californica or California adolphia. Implementation of the project will also result in the elimination of a small population (presumed population of less than 20 individuals) of Brodiaea orcuttii or Orcutt's brodiaea. The size of the total
population of this species within the project boundary is unknown; however, based on this study, it appears to be small and of little significance.
Indirect Impacts
Indirect impacts from the proposed project arise mainly from habitat
fragmentation and downstream siltation. As native habitats are converted into urbanized uses, the remaining pieces of unmodified habitat can be seen as islands of habitat, surrounded by a "sea" of non-functional habitat for many native
species. The remaining fragmented habitat is vulnerable to disturbance from
human activities such as noise, traffic, lighting, public access, off-road activities, recreational uses, pets and other disturbances. Such disturbances can adversely affect the viability of the habitat.
see section 9.0
~esp~n~e 6~
Within the proposed project, because of the road realignment design and the associated mass grading along the central core of a roughly elongated triangle- shaped piece of land, the remaining native habitats (after project implementation) will be divided into three separate blocks of land, consisting
5.4-15
c primarily of very steep west-facing slopes. The south-central undisturbed area is primarily covered with a mixture of annual grassland and Artemisia-dominated and black sage coastal sage scrub vegetation, the latter with small pockets of native Valley Needlegrass grassland. The east-central undisturbed area is primarily covered with Artemisia-dominated and black sage coastal scrub vegetation on the upper slopes and black sage coastal sage scrub along the mid-
slopes. The very steep slopes along the west-northwest portion of the project site, east of San Marcos Creek, are covered almost entirely with southern mixed
chaparral. The majority of the sage scrub remaining after project implementation would be black sage-dominated, the type not preferred (although used to a varying degree) by California gnatcatchers.
Figures 5-5 and 5-7 will indicate that grading is proposed in two areas east of
future Rancho Santa Fe Road where it potentially forms a barrier to movement of wildlife on either side of the proposed development. These areas are northwest of Stanley Mahr Reservoir and the extreme southeast corner of the site, surrounding the burned area. Extension of roads and development into these areas potentially have a greater effect than the destruction of habitat alone because the roads would serve as barriers for local wildlife movement between
areas preserved as native habitat. If the northeast area was eliminated this impact would be reduced to below a level of significance. This change would probably have little effect on the project design. The development area in the extreme southeast of the site is substantially larger, and elimination of this proposed development would probably affect the viability of the project. Any
efforts to redistribute the development farther toward the center of the project or to reduce the potential isolation of the undeveloped area in the south- southwest part of the project would reduce the overall impacts to coastal sage scrub and wildlife using this vegetation type.
See section 9.0
~esponse~ ~AA
and 3D
See Section 9.0
RVIISC 5~
Siltation of wetland areas downstream of the project site may occur as the result
of mass graded land being left undeveloped for an undetermined period of time (possibly 2 to 10 years). The developer has submitted a preliminary erosion
control design and a revegetation study to the City of Carlsbad. These
documents outline methods used to prevent erosion and avoid siltation of downstream areas. The City has indicated that these documents are consistent with, and satisfy the City’s Grading Ordinance and Revised landscape Manual (B-
14). AS such, the erosion control measures proposed by the developer have been
concluded by the City to be effective at avoiding siltation of wetland areas and no significant impacts are anticipated. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the California Department of Fish and Game require mitigation of impacts to wetlands by the Section 404 permitting process and a Code 1600-1603 agreement. These approvals will be required by this project.
5.4-16
LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE
The impacts of the proposed project on biological resources
significant but mitigable. Impacts to the Diegan coastal sage screub habitat and
the California gnatcatcher can be mitigated to a less than significant level
Conservation Plan an HCP consistent with the
& Wildlife Servic
Carlsbad and the Fieldstone Companies. The work program and time schedule for completing a preliminary Habitat Conservation Plan is included in Appendix
are
implementation of
&
If the coastal sage scrub
habitat and the California gnatcatcher would not be mitigated to a less than
significant level. Consequently the project would result in significant and unmitigated impacts and a Statement of Overriding Considerations would be required if the project, or any of the alternatives, is approved.
MITIGATION MEASURES
California Gnatcatcher and Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub Habitat
If the proposed project design is chosen, mitigation and/or compensation could be accomplished by a combination of onsite open space conservation preserves and offsite preserves which would conserve at a minimum the existing population levels of 22 pairs of California gnatcatchers and replace the approximately 217 acres of Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub gnatcatcher habitat being directly impacted.
Because a specific mitigation plan has not been worked out at the time of
preparation of this draft document, listed below are a set of criteria which the
mitigation program has to meet. If a combination of onsite and offsite
gnatcatcher preservation areas are chosen, each preserve area shall be able to survive in perpetuity on its own and the combined preserves shall meet the minimum requirement of preservation of 22 pairs of California gnatcatchers (at least 8 pairs remaining onsite and 14 pairs offsite) and preserve a minimum of
217 acres of additional gnatcatcher habitat. It is recommended that a specific mitigation program be finalized prior to approval of the project, and made available for public review, if possible.
et Section 9.0
~espo- n
1. Onsite Dedication and Management
1
The developer, in cooperation with the City of Carlsbad, shall perform the dedication or irrevocable offer to dedicate a preserve on and/or adjacent to the -
5.4-17
L-
r'
project. Any offer to dedicate must be accompanied by a method of perpetual maintenance of the preserved habitat area. The dedication shall generally meet the following criteria:
A. Shall be made up primarily of Artemisia-dominated Diegan coastal sage scrub vegetation, the preferred habitat of the California gnatcatcher. The quality of the Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat on the mitigation site shall be equal to or better than the quality of the Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat to be disturbed by the project.
B. Shall be of a size, configuration and topography large enough to
support a minimum size of 8 pairs of California gnatcatchers in perpetuity. Criteria to be considered shall consist of the following: See Scction 9.0
Response 3u
1) Habitat areas should be connected to other habitat areas on and offsite.
2) Habitat areas should be exposed to less than 60 db (CNEL) noise level (higher noise levels might interfere with bird's vocal
communications).
3) Habitat areas should be as compact as possible, with the minimum external boundary to reduce externally caused impacts.
4) Preference should be given to slopes less than 30 percent because California gnatcatchers appear to avoid slopes greater than 30 percent steepness for nesting. (Ref.: Mock, P., Bolger, D. and
Jones, B., 1991. Technical appendix for the California Gnatcatcher Sweetwater River Habitat Conservation Plan. Unpublished report prepared by ERC Environmental and Energy Services Company for San Diego Association of Governments.)
5) Preference shall be given to Diegan coastal sage scrub vegetation
which is not dominated by black sage; if habitats are chosen
which are black sage-dominated, they shall be given only two-
thirds the value in area compared to Artemisia-dominated Diegan coastal sage scrub vegetation.
6) Preference should be given to habitats adjacent to passive or active open space or steep slopes (even if manufactured) rather than to areas adjacent to family-oriented residential areas where children and pets may invade and impact habitat areas.
C. Those portions of the mitigation site which are not Diegan coastal sage scrub shall consist of other diverse and sensitive native habitat types such as riparian wetlands or native perennial grasslands.
5.4-18
See Section 9.0
Rcsponac 3X
D. The mitigation areas shall be contiguous with the area to be disturbed -
or connected by a suitable corridor or sufficiently close to allow dispersal of birds from the disturbed area to the mitigation site.
2. Offsite Dedication and Management
The developer, in cooperation with the City of Carlsbad, shall perform the
dedication of irrevocable offer to dedicate a preserve offsite, within the north San Diego County region. The dedication shall meet the following general criteria:
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.
Shall consist primarily of Diegan coastal sage scrub, the essential
habitat of the California gnatcatcher, criteria listed above, under
Onsite Dedication and Management shall apply.
Shall be large enough to support at a minimum the number of pairs of California gnatcatchers which will be lost from the project site as a result of the project implementation (anticipated to be 14 pairs at this writing).
Shall be contiguous with a significant wildlife/open area of sufficient size to allow for multiple expansion of the mitigation area. The ultimate objective is the creation of a regional or sub-regional preserve which would include this mitigation site or be linked to it by suitable corridors.
Shall be linked through a natural corridor which can reasonably be assumed to be capable of permitting California gnatcatchers and other typical Diegan coastal sage avian species to immigrate to other suitable habitats.
1
Should include or be contiguous with other public or private native
shrub lands perpetually managed for the conservation of coastal sage scrub sensitive species, as well as other associated habitats which support a variety of native flora and fauna.
The preserve should be located as close as possible to the impact area to conserve habitat as similar as possible to the impact area.
The preserve area should be "biologically defensible" in that it should be configured and located so that it can be reasonably assured that the California gnatcatcher can survive in perpetuity.
3. Other Recommended Measures Which Are Not Adequate Mitigation Measures in Themselves
S~C Section 9.0
~esponse3~ do the following:
The proposed Assessment District, in cooperation with the City of Carlsbad, shall
5.4-19
.c
/-
A.
B.
Make a substantial contribution to the planning and implementation of effective local, sub-regional and regional conservation plans for the California gnatcatcher. Such plans will probably result in a series of subregional Diegan coastal preserves in San Diego County. The City of Carlsbad has already initiated an assessment of its critical plant and wildlife habitat resources.
Fund the California gnatcatcher directed life-history study, which identifies basic biological and physical parameters needs of the bird in the north-coastal San Diego region. This study design shall be approved by the USFWS and CDFG, and shall be carried out by a
biologist qualified to perform the study. The results shall be presented
to the City of Carlsbad and should be of a quality suitable for
publication in a recognized conservation or ornithology journal. Factors which should be investigated include:
Temtory/home range parameters:
0
0
0
Territory size and variability throughout the year.
Limiting factors in territory size.
Identification of vegetational, elevational, slope, and slope aspect variables in territory/home range utilization.
Nest selection and nesting success parameters.
Food availability and selection: Investigate variation in food availability and selection within the territory/home range area, throughout a full year.
Predatory/prey relationships: Determine likely sources of predation in wild areas and compare to areas adjacent to urban/suburban interface.
What factors are necessary for local or regional movement of
California gnatcatchers between suitable habitat types?
Minimum viable population size.
Habitat manipulation approaches.
Can existing disturbed Diegan coastal sage scrub be rehabilitated
to increase the likelihood of use by California gnatcatchers?
,.-
5.4-20
9) Can (and should) Diegan coastal sage scrub not optimal for California gnatcatchers be manipulate to increase use by California gnatcatchers?
10) What are viable habitat manipulation techniques to increase habitat use by California gnatcatchers which will not have adverse impacts on other sensitive species.
Muilla Clevelandii Mitigation
AU four populations of the goldenstar are near edges of the proposed grading
slopes; the most effective mitigation would be to "pull back" the proposed grading to avoid direct effects on these populations. It may be possible to combine preservation of the large central goldenstar population with preservation of the majority of the oak riparian woodland which occurs in the bottom of the
drainage.
If the direct effects of grading can be avoided, a specific preservation plan should
be developed which insures that the remaining populations are protected during the grading process through notes on the grading plan, signage, and/or fencing during grading, and grading design to insure that drainage over the goldenstar areas is not substantially changed during or after the grading process.
.--.. 4. The proposed project grading shall be modified to preserve 100 percent of the "dense" area San Diego goldenstars and a minimum of 75 percent of the %parse" area of San Diego goldenstars as shown in figures 9A and 9B of Appendix E of the EIR. In addition, the following measures shall be made
conditions of project approval and as conditions on the grading plan:
A. A minimum grading buffer area (no grading shall occur) of 50 feet
shall be maintained around all dense San Diego goldenstar
populations.
See Section 9.0
Response 3JJ
B. A qualified botanist shall clearly stake and fence the San Diego goldenstar preserve area prior to grading; the grading contractor shall
certify that this preserve area is not disturbed during grading.
C. Permanent signs shall be erected at the preserve sites which identify the areas as biological open space and prohibiting vegetation or soil
removal or addition.
D. The following measures shall be implemented to reduce impacts to areas immediately adjacent to the proposed development.
see section 9.0
Response 5cc
1) The population limits and a buffer shall be monumented, posted, and fenced prior to grading commencement. If necessary,
5.4-21
temporary erosion and sedimentation barriers shall be placed to protect the sites from soil spillage and runoff during grading.
The grading plans shall specifically state that no grading is to
take place until the population limits and a buffer is monumented, posted and fenced. The plans shall require a biological monitor to inspect and approve the above measure
prior to the onset of grading. In addition, the monitor shall monitor the population during grading (at specified times) and have the ability to halt grading and ensure effective mitigation
through the City Engineer.
3) By the most appropriate means, acceptable to the Planning
Director, the project shall be required to monument, sign, and if necessary, fence off the goldenstar population after grading, and ensure that these features be maintained for the life of the
project.
San Marcos Creek Riparian Habitats Mitigation
5.
See section 9.0
Ruponsc 3LL
Prior to grading that portion of the project affecting San Marcos Creek, the City of Carlsbad or the project proponent shall apply for an obtain, if required, a Clean Water Act, Section 404 permit from the US. Army Corps of Engineers and a California Fish and Game Code 1600-1603 agreement for potential impacts to San Marcos Creek from construction of the bridge works for Rancho Santa Fe Road. If necessary, all other permits and agreements shall be obtained for filling the Baccharis scrub habitat in the south-central portion of the project. Specific mitigation measures should be determined at the time there permits and agreements are being considered.
5.4-22
5.5 NOISE
ENVIRONMENT& SETTING
c
Land uses within the project area consist of the two-lane Rancho Santa Fe Road and approximately 768 acres of undeveloped land (including reservoirs and easements). Noise generation and exposure is limited to traffic noise along existing Rancho Santa Fe Road which affects residents of the La Costa Vale Subdivision west of the roadway. Noise levels reflect the volumes of traffic, speeds, percent of truck traffic, topography, and time of day relative to peak hour traffic. Greater noise levels exist during daytime commuting hours, however
noise receptor sensitivity is highest at night.
Community noise levels are measured in terms of intensity and duration. Intensity is expressed in decibels (dB) on a logarithmic scale which averages
noise levels over a 24-hour period. Noise levels at maximum human sensitivity
(middle A) are factored more heavily into sound descriptions in a process called
"A-weighting" written as dB(A). The greater importance of noise intrusions at
night are accounted for by assigning a weighting or penalty factor of 10 (an approximate doubling in perceived loudness) to the recorded noise level. Noise measures used in California are the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) and day-night level (Mn). These two measures are numerically equivalent within
05 decibels (dB) for most urban traffic noise situations.
Noise sensitivity is dependent on the types of land uses existing in close proximity to noise sources. Residential land uses are generally most sensitive to noise. Figure 5-9 summarizes the significance of various land noise levels on use types
based on standards of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, and the Environmental Protection Agency. Carlsbad City Administrative Policy Number 17 requires noise levels to be no greater than 60 dB(A) CNEL at five feet inside the proposed project's property line at six feet above finished grade level, and immediately above the highest window or door opening in a dwelling unit (C-13). This standard will have to be met as residential development occurs in the future along Rancho Santa Fe Road, as is proposed by the project. A maximum interior noise limit of 45 dB(A) CNEL is mandated by the State of California for multi-family dwellings, and is typically considered the maximum noise exposure desired for single-family dwelling units. Exterior noise exposure of 65 dB(A) CNEL is generally the noise land use compatibility guideline for new residential dwellings in California. In general, all streets with traffic exceeding l0,OOO vehicles per day have sufficient volumes to result in noise levels at the property line greater than 65 dB CNEL or MIL
5.5-1
Land Use Category
Low Density Single
Family, Duplex, Mobile Homes
Community Noise Exposure
Ldn or CNEL, dB
5560 6570758085
................. .................. ................. .................. .................
Residential- Multiple Family I ............. ............ ............. ............
Transient Lodging- Motels, Hotels I
Churches,
Hospitals, Nursing Homes
................. .................. ................. .................. .................
Auditoriums, Concert Halls, I Amphiieaters
Sports Arenas, Outdoor Spectator I Sports
~~ ~__~~
Playgrounds, Neighborhood Parks r
Gdf Courses, Riding Stables, I Water Recreation, Cemeteries
Office Buildings, Business, I Commercial and Prufessional
Industrial, Manufacturing, I Utilities, Agricutture
......... ........ Normally Conditionally NOVtlally Clearfy ........ ......... Acceptable Acceptable Unacceptable Unacceptable
Specified land use is satkfac-
bry, based on the assumption
mat any buildings involved ant
of normal conventional con-
stnrction, without MY special
noise insulation requirements.
New mbuchkn or develop-
ment should be undertaken only
after detaiied analysis of noise
reduction requirements is made
and needed noise insulation
features are included in design.
conventiond cons~ion, but
with closed windows and fresh
air supply systems or air con-
ditioning, is normally sutficbnt.
Newconstructionordevelop- Newccastmctionor
ment rshoukl gmeraity be
structionordevelopmentdoes
pd, a detaii analysis
quirements must be made
and needed noke insulation
features included in the
design.
development should genetally
dbraged. Ift~wc~n- not be undertaken.
of the noise redudion re-
Source: CottorVBelandlAssociates. Modified from U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development
Guidelines and State of California Standards.
- Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR
Figure 5-9
Noise and Land Use Compatibility Guidelines
5.5-2
The entire length of Rancho Santa Fe Road within the project area currently generates noise levels substantially greater than 65 Db(A) CNEL at the property line. Existing traffic volumes along Rancho Santa Fe Road adjacent to La Costa Vale subdivision are shown in Figure 5-15 of section 5.8 of this EIR, and reach approximately 18,300 Average Daily Trips (ADT). North of the intersection of Rancho Santa Fe Road and Melrose Avenue traffic volumes reach 27,300 ADT on Rancho Santa Fe Road. Rancho Santa Fe Road south of La Costa Avenue
conveys approximately 18,900 ADT.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
Implementation of the proposed project will result in widening of the roadway,
and realignment of the roadway to a location approximately onequarter mile
east of the La Costa Vale subdivision. Traffic-generated noise levels along
realigned Rancho Santa Fe Road will be substantial at completion of the project, and at build-out of the City. Traffic volumes along the realigned Rancho Santa
Fe Road at the completion of the project (1995) are projected to be 55,300 ADT (see Table 5-13, Traffic/Circulation Section). Proposed land uses (shown in Figure 5-11, Land Use Section) along the realigned roadway are residential along the majority of the road length. Commercial, and professional and related commercial land uses are proposed along the southern portion of the roadway just north of La Costa Avenue. Residential land uses along this section of Rancho Santa Fe Road may present significant noise impacts due to the volume of traffic projected to use the roadway.
Other noise sources associated with the project include short-term noise
generated by construction operations such as blasting and crushing of resistent rock, hauling of material off-site to the Arroyo La Costa subdivision, and construction equipment noise. Typical construction equipment noise generation is shown in Figure 5-10.
Blasting operations will be performed throughout the project site where marginally rippable to non-rippable rock exists. Noise associated with blasting equipment will be considerable, and may affect existing subdivisions west and
south of the project site. Rock crushing will occur in four main areas as shown in Figure 5-11. Equipment needed for rock crushing will also generate a considerable amount of noise and may affect adjacent subdivisions.
Trucks will be used to haul crushed material from the stockpiling locations to the Arroyo La Costa subdivision one-half mile south of La Costa Avenue on Rancho Santa Fe Road. This operation will involve trucks with a carrying capacity of 20 cubic yards hauling between 100,000 to 400,000 cubic yards of crushed rock for use as roadbed material. The volume of rock transported depends on the amount of roadbed material needed to construct the roadbed. A maximum of
20,000 truck trips may be required to complete this operation. This will occur
5.5-3
-
-
Q C
Q
-a
C % .-
C
L
c c-
no,
uw
00
OUY L3 0
avo
Q LC
-3 =
cE
€0 a
c
.- 3 0
W
-
c 0 m a E -
e 0
Equipment Noise Level (dSa1 at 50 Feet
Front Loaders
Scrapers, Graders
Concrete Mixers
Concrete Pumps
Cranes (Movable
Generators
Jack Hammers and Rock Drills
NOTE: Based on limited avallable data samples.
SOURCE: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR
Figure 5-10
Construction Equipment Noise Ranges
5.5-4
Area of Potential
C r ushing/Stoc kpiling
FIHaul Route
/---
-7 i i i i i
Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR SOURCE: Project Design Consultants
e!! Figure 5-1 1
Rock Crushing and Stockpiling Areas
5.5-5
cumulatively over a maximum of 3 to 4 four months during the 1 to 3 year construction period of Arroyo La Costa (B-10).
City of Carlsbad Administrative Policy Number 17 contains the requirement of a noise study to be submitted for discretionary applications for residential projects for five or more dwellings within 500 feet from the right-of-way of an existing or
future Circulation Element Roadway as identified on the Carlsbad General Plan. This study shall be prepared by an acoustical professional and document the projected noise level at buildout of Carlsbad's General Plan and mitigate the projected buildout noise level to a maximum of 60 dB(A) CNEL at:
0 five feet inside the proposed project's property line at six feet above
finished grade level, and;
0 above the first floor/story if usable exterior space is provided.
The property line may occur along the right-of-way of Rancho Santa Fe Road as residential development occurs along the roadway, as is proposed by this project. The Goal of the Noise Element of the Carlsbad General Plan is to achieve and maintain an environment which is free from excessive or harmful noise through
identification, control and abatement. Several policies and action programs aimed at reducing existing noise problems and averting future noise problems are contained within the Noise Element. Transportation noise is to be controlled by
noise on streets throughout Carlsbad." The following Action Programs will serve to carry out this policy by the City:
implementing Policy 2 which states "the City shall take measures to reduce traffic -
Action Program 2.1: Consider noise impacts in the design of road systems giving special consideration to those corridors in scenic or noise sensitive areas.
Action Program 23:
Action Program 23:
Keep all roadways in reasonable repair in order to
reduce surface noise.
Review traffic flow systems and synchronize signalization to avoid traffic stops which produce excessive noise and to adjust traffic flow to achieve noise levels acceptable to surrounding areas.
Action Program 2.4: Enforce the Motor Vehicle Code as it applies to
excessive noise.
Policies 1-5 within the Noise Element relate to other activities associated with project construction. These include protection of citizens' hearing by controlling and abating harmful sounds through planning and regulation, encouraging development of compatible land uses subject to noise hazards, attempting to control noise sources, considering acceptability of noise levels in approving
5.5-6
projects, and controlling noise generated through its own functions and activities, respectively. Action Program 5.1 under policy 5 is to review City operations to make sure that noise generated by construction, maintenance activities, and street sweeping has been reduced to the lowest possible level.
LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE
Impacts of noise generation from implementation of the proposed project on surrounding areas are significant, but mitigable to a level of less than significant.
MITIGATION MEASURES
Mitigation measures required to reduce noise impacts of the proposed project on surrounding areas include:
1. The City shall implement policies and action programs contained within the Noise Element of the General Plan which apply to construction of the
proposed project as discussed above.
The City and developer shall adhere to the requirements of Administrative Policy Number 17. Additionally, the acoustical analysis called for in this
policy shall be prepared with the Master Plan or Tentative Map application.
2.
3. Prior to recordation of the first final tract/parcel map or issuance of
building permits the developer shall prepare and record a notice that this
property may be subject to impacts from the proposed or existing Transportation Corridor and with subsequent development in a manner meeting the approval of the Planning Director and City Attorney prior to
recordation of the first final tract/parcel map or issuance of building permits, whichever is first.
4. Construction activities will occur during the hours of 7 AM to 7 PM or normal working hours as stated in the La Costa Master Plan or any amendments thereto.
sec !section 9.0
Rmponne 3MM
5. Stationary equipment shall be placed such that emitted noise is directed away from sensitive noise receivers such as residential areas.
6. Stockpiling and vehicle staging areas shall be located as far as practical from occupied dwellings.
7. Every effort shall be made to create the greatest distance between noise sources and receptors during construction operations.
5.5-7
8. All construction equipment, including trucks used for hauling roadbed material, shall have exhaust and muffler systems in compliance with state standards for emission and noise control.
5.5-8
5.6 LIGHT AND GLARE
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The project area consists almost exclusively of open space and the existing Rancho Santa Fe Road alignment. Light sources include automobiles and the residential uses to the west and south of the project area. The existing levels of
light radiated from the project site are very low and unobtrusive to the surrounding uses.
Increased light and glare become a problem when the ambient levels of light in
surrounding areas is greatly increased. Areas such as open space containing
wildlife habitat are especially sensitive to these increases. Also affected are areas of residential use particularly in rural settings. On a County-wide level, astronomical observations at the Palomar Observatory have been affected by the increase in light and glare throughout the County.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACI'
Increases in light and glare will impact the existing residential land uses to the south and west of the proposed roadway alignment and future development on both sides of the roadway. Urbanization of the natural surface cover increases light emission and reflectance. Additional impacts will be incurred as the roadway is widened and additional development occurs along Rancho Santa Fe Road as called for in the proposed project. Impacts will consist of increased daylight reflection and light sources at night from cars travelling along the road,
and from street and structural lighting. The existing Rancho Santa Fe Road is a
two lane road with a third climbing lane for uphill traffic. The proposed
alignment, as shown in the City of Carlsbad Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 11, classifies Rancho Santa Fe Road as a Prime Arterial which will accommodate up to 66,670 vehicle trips per day. Prime arterial roadways can also accommodate truck routes for commercial and industrial traffic which will add additional light sources. Short-term impacts will be caused by security lighting at night from storage yards during construction. This lighting should be
used to a minimum intensity, for security purposes only but not allowed to spillover into adjacent residential areas.
LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE
Based on the above analysis, impacts from light and glare will be significant but can be mitigated to a level of less than significant.
5.6-1
MITIGATION MEASURES
The following mitigation measures will serve to reduce impacts from light and
glare to levels below significant:
1. Use roadway landscaping to limit the intrusion of headlights into residential
areas.
2. Use median landscaping within specifications of the City's Landscape Manual to limit the affect of headlights to on-coming traffic.
3. All street lighting should be properly directed so as to limit excess light
from intruding into sensitive areas.
4. City design review shall consider use of low pressure sodium street lights for preservation of a "dark-sky".
5.6-2
5.7 LAND USE
ENVIRONMENTAL SETITNG
.-
The project site is located on 768 acres of vacant land on the east and west sides of the existing Rancho Santa Fe Road, between its intersection with La Costa Avenue and Melrose Avenue. Site topography is rolling to steep, and the surface is covered with chaparral. Land ownership is split between the Fieldstone Company, which owns 687 acres, and the 81-acre MAG. properties.
Existing uses includes 40 acres of transportation corridor, 21 acres of water
storage facilities, three San Diego Gas and Electric easements totalling approximately 50 acres, and approximately 657 acres of vacant land. From south to north, Rancho Santa Fe Road passes along the western edge of the project site and curves eastward passing through the central portion of the project site.
A truck by-pass diverges east from the existing roadway 150 yards north of the La Costa Avenue intersection and rejoins the existing roadway one mile further
north. Two reservoirs lie to the east of the roadway in the north-central portion of the project area. The 18.7-acre Stanley Mahr Reservoir is the furthest north,
and has a dam at its west end. Denk Reservoir is 2.6 acres in area and lies just south of Stanley Mahr Reservoir.
Land uses surrounding the project site include residential and open space. La Costa Vale subdivision, consisting of single-family detached homes, lies to the west of existing Rancho Santa Fe Road adjacent to the southern portion of the project site. Single-family residential land also lies to the south of La Costa
Avenue and south of the project site. Vacant land and open space is to the east
and west (north of La Costa Vale subdivision) of the project area. San Marcos Creek is the location of a large open space corridor passing from northeast to southwest along the northern project boundary. Industrial land uses exist northeast of the project site along La Costa Meadows Drive, and multiple-family and single-family residential land uses are located west of the Melrose Avenue/Rancho Santa Fe Road intersection in the north.
Documents addressing the planned land use of the project site include the Carlsbad General Plan, the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 11, the Zoning Ordinance, and the La Costa Master Plan. The following is a summary of planned land uses for the project site according to the aforementioned documents.
5.7-1
GENERAL PLAN
The Land Use Element of the General Plan for the City of Carlsbad and its land use map identify the type and distribution of land uses throughout the City. Goals, Policies, and implementation measures contained within the document
provide guidelines for the City's development. The project site contains the following five land use designations: Low-Density Residential, Low-Medium
Residential, Community Commercial, Professional and Related Commercial, and
Open Space. Designated land uses according to the General Plan for the project area is shown in Figure 5-12.
A brief description of the land use categories found on the project site follows as contained in the Land Use Element of the Carlsbad General Plan.
Low Density: Low density residential classification - rural, recreational or agricultural - characterized by single-family dwellings on parcels one-half acre or larger, or cluster-type and innovative housing development at an overall density not to exceed one and one-half dwelling units per gross acre. Within this classification, a variety of housing types, including townhouses, condominiums, apartments, mobile homes, and single-family units may be allowed by compliance with development standards required by applicable ordinance provisions and guidelines specified in the General Plan, which recognize the slope of the natural terrain, percentage of site remaining in natural state, access, parking, geologic
scenic qualities and other prime open space and conservation considerations. hazards, grading, utilities, fire protection, erosion control, ecological sigmficance, -
Low-Medium Density: Urban low-medium density residential areas characterized usually by single-family homes and planned residential development - 0 to 4 dwelling units per gross acre. A variety of overall housing types may be allowed as long as the overall density does not exceed 4 dwelling units per gross acre.
Community Commercial: This category designates land for commercial centers which provide a wide range of facilities for retail trade, convenience goods, services and professional office uses. In addition to supermarkets, restaurants, movie theaters and banks, it includes areas of larger retail volume than that of neighborhood commercial. Financial, insurance, real estate and personal and professional services and wholesale trade are compatible with these business centers.
Community Commercial establishments usually serve a market area up to one and one-half mile radius, containing from 5,000 to 15,000 families. Usually they are closely related to residential development and often combine with "local shopping centers". Easy access to a relatively large area and population is required. The intersection of arterial streets is a common location for these establishments, and an area of 6 to 12 acres is usually needed.
5 32
Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR
Road
id
J
Figure 5-12
General Plan Land Use
5.7-3
Professional and Related Commercial: This classification designates areas which are compatible and environmentally suited to office and professional uses, including compatible and supportive related commercial uses. This land use could be placed along major arterials without creating adverse conditions which are associated with strip development, and can be used as buffers between commercial areas and residential uses.
Open Space: Open space designated properties fall into the following five categories, as described in the text of the Land Use Element.
1) 2) 3)
4) 5)
Open Space for the preservation of natural resources Open Space uses for the managed production of resources Open Space for programmed and unprogrammed outdoor recreation Open Space for aesthetic, cultural and educational considerations Open Space for public health and safety
Open Space is identified in the General Plan on:
The Open Space and Conservation Map - Dated August 9, 1988 The Comprehensive Open Space Network Map - Dated August, 1989 The Trails Network Map - Dated August, 1990
The General Plan Land Use Map
Development of any areas identified as Open Space must be consistent with the Conservation Resource Management Plan currently being prepared by the City. Until the Plan is prepared, the City shall not approve a project which would preclude the conceptual open space areas of the Comprehensive Open Space Network Map, unless after thorough analysis, the City Council has approved such changes to the map.
Local Facilities Management Plan - Zone 11
The Local Facilities Management Plan (LFMP) for Zone 11 was created as a part of the City's Growth Management Program and Chapter 21.90 of the Carlsbad Municipal Zoning Code. Build-out projections for Zone 11 (containing
the project area) of the City are presented within the Plan.
The easterly "canyon" alignment of Rancho Santa Fe Road is used for the
preparation of build-out assumptions and facility planning in the LFMP.
Constraints to development are also identified and used in residential density calculations. Build-out projections for residential land uses are calculated by multiplying the net developable acreage of each residential land use area by the adopted Growth Management control point (the mid-point of the density range for the residential designations in the General Plan). As contained in the LFMP, projections for nonresidential land uses are derived by multiplying net
developable acreage by 0.3 or 0.4 to estimate building square footage on either
5.7-4
unapproved and unimproved vacant unconstrained land or urbanized
underdeveloped non-residential sites.
Build-out population projections for Management Zone 11 were determined by
applying a population generation rate of 2.471 persons per dwelling unit. These population projections are used throughout the Plan for the purpose of predicting demand for public facilities.
Build-out statistics for the project area according to information contained within the Zone 11 LFMP, and proposed by the developer are shown in Table 5-10. According to the Zone 11 LFMP and City General Plan, a maximum of 1,010 dwelling units are to be constructed within the project area, which will add approximately 2,495 persons to the area. A total of 597,200 square feet of non-residential building space is also projected for Zone 11 from this project.
Carlsbad Zoning Ordinance
The entire project area is zoned as a Planned Community (P-C) by the Zoning Ordinance. Planned Community Zones are described in Chapter 21.38 of the
Zoning Ordinance. The purpose of the Planned Community Zone is to:
0 Provide a method for and to encourage the orderly implementation of the General Plan and any applicable specific plans by the
comprehensive planning and development of large tracts of land under unified ownership or developmental control so that the entire tract will be developed in accord with an adopted master plan to provide an environment of stable and desirable character;
0 Provide a flexible regulatory procedure to encourage creative and imaginative planning of coordinated communities involving a
mixture of residential densities and housing types, open space,
community facilities, both public and private and where appropriate, commercial and industrial areas;
0 Allow for the coordination of planning efforts between developer
and city to provide for the orderly development of all necessary public facilities to insure their availability concurrent with need;
0 Provide a framework for the phased development of an approved master planned area to provide some assurance to the developer that later development will be acceptable to the City; provided such plans are in accordance with the approved planned community master plan.
Planned Communities require approval of a master plan by the city comcil prior to approval to any development permits. The La Costa Master Plan is the approved plan governing development of the project area. This master plan
5.7-5
Table 5-10
Land Uao
00s i gnat ions
RESIDENTIAL
Lou-Dona1 ty Ror.
(0.U. on 112
rcro)
Lou-l(.diu Oonaity Roo. (0-4 O.U./rcro)
SUBTOTAL
COnnERC I A1
community
Comor c i r 1
Proforalonrl rnd Io 1 rtod Comor c 1 I 1
SUIT01 AL
OTHER
Opon Sprco
TOTAL
COMPARISON OF DEVEI
SENERAL PLAN AN0 ZONE 11 LFMP
Oroar Not Oovoloplont Eatlmrtod Eatlertod But lding Acror Arm* Intonatty O.U.'r Copulation Sq. Ft.
(000' a) Strndrrd nn
386.6 274.4 1.0 274.4 678.0
291.8 229.8 3.2 735.4 1.817.1
678.4 504.2 1,009.8 2.495.1
36.7 34.5 0.3
11.5 11.2 0.3
410.0
146.4
48.2 45.7 597.2
41.7 32.1
748.3 582.0 1.009.8 2.495.1 597.2
PMENT POTENTIAL
SENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (SPA)
aroma Not Oovolop..nt Eatimrtod Eatimrtod Building
Acroa AroP Intonaity 0.U:s Populrtion Sq. Ft. e*
19.8 17.3 1 .o 17.3 42.7
371.7 313.7 3.2 1.003.0 2.480.5
391.5 331.0 1.021.1 2.523.2 nne
54.0 48.7 0.3
20.0 15.8 0.3
434.4
206.5
74.0 64.1 842.9
302.8 191.6
768.3 591.1 1.021.1 2.523.2 042.9 nne
OEIERAL
PLAN TO
OPA FOR
0.u:s m
KIF
0 0.U."-
245.7 KSF
Minua full and portirl conrtrrintr prr Lono 11 LFMP Brrod on 2.471 por drolllng unit from Lon. 11 LFMP
Tho City rnd tho dovolopor rro In ogrooaont that no odditionrl dwolllng mita rill bo rllouod ovrr that pormittod dr tho oxirtlng Sonoral Plan.
5.7-6
establishes the regulations for the development of the planned community within -
the P-C zone.
Planned Communities are to be larger than one hundred acres of contiguous land, and held in one ownership or under unified control unless otherwise authorized by the City Council. Contents of an adopted master plan are listed in section 21.38.050 of the Zoning Ordinance.
Hillside Development Regulations
The City Zoning Ordinance contains regulations pertaining to the development of lands categorized as having slopes in excess of fifteen percent and an elevation differential greater than fifteen feet. The hillside development regulations are intended to assure that alteration of hillside areas will not result in substantial damage or alteration of significant natural resource areas. The regulations also promote the minimizing of site disturbance through creative design and grading
techniques.
La Costa Master Plan
The project area lies within the boundaries defined by the La Costa Master Plan, and is subject to developmental regulations contained therein. This master plan
complies with the requirement for a master plan contained in the Planned
City on future land use for the La Costa community. Land use planning outlined within the La Costa Master Plan is consistent with that of the Land Use Element of the City's General Plan. The plan contains specific conditions for tentative map approval, and grading and building permit issuance. Detailed land use and
development standards are also set forth in the plan, along with discussion for
provision of open space and adequate public facilities during development.
Community Zone Ordinance, and provides the basis for further decisions by the
A
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
General Plan
Development of the project will result in conversion of 448 acres of vacant and undeveloped lands to a prime arterial surrounded by residential and commercial land uses, interspersed with large areas of open space as shown in Figure 5-13. This map was used as the basis for analysis; however, it is conceptual in design and the final design may vary in detail. Areas and locations of designated land uses on the map are not in conformance with the General Plan Land Use map. A General Plan Amendment is needed for implementation of the project to be consistent with the long-range land use planning of the area. The land use pattern will be compatible with adjacent existing and proposed residential developments provided that buffering occurs between proposed commercial land uses and existing residential land uses adjacent to existing Rancho Santa Fe Road
---c
5.7-7
right-of-way, and proposed low-density residential land uses east of future Cadencia. Also, proposed professional and related commercial land use southeast of future Rancho Santa Fe Road will need to be buffered from proposed low-density residential land uses to the northeast. Also, the La Costa Master Plan shows the area to be designated as Planned Community which requires amendment to bring the project into conformance with this plan.
Goals A, E, F, and H in the Land Use Element of the General Plan guide the City’s development decisions, and pertain specifically to this project. These state
that the City will allow development while serving to:
0 Preserve and enhance the environment, character and image of the City as a desirable residential, beach and open space-oriented community;
0 Generate the development of commercial enterprises that support local industries, population and tourist trade;
0 Protect and conserve natural resources, fragile ecological areas, unique natural assets and historically significant features of the community;
0 Encourage development only in those areas which can best support
a change in land use without impact.
Policies A, B, D, G, J, and K set forth by the City to achieve these Goals include:
0 Permitting development only after public services have been provided, arranging land uses to preserve community identity and allow orderly and convenient public benefits;
0 Locating major commercial centers in areas accessible to major transportation facilities;
0 Developing programs which would correlate rate of growth with service capabilities of the City;
0 Developing and retaining open space in all categories of land use,
and
0 Encourage the types of commercial activities which will supply the City with a broad economic base, provide for the social need and reflect all environmental constraints.
5.7-8
Road
a
7 !
I i J
Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR SOURCE: Project Design Consultants
Figure 5-13
Proposed Land Use
_-
5.7-9
c
Land Use distribution as shown on the City's Land Use map is designed to achieve the aforementioned goals. Development of a land use distribution different from that on the Land Use map is therefore considered inconsistent with the goals discussed above. Amendment of the General Plan would serve to bring the overall project into conformance with the Goals listed above as contained in the Land Use Element of the General Plan.
Open Space
Mass grading associated with the project will degrade certain areas designated as open space on the City's Comprehensive Open Space Network Map shown on Figure 5-14. Portions of the drainage channel in the south-central portion of the project area are proposed to be cleared and filled and contiguous open space corridors which include four easements crossing the area from west to east will be interrupted by grading. The drainage channel will have an underground drainage pipe installed to convey runoff.
As discussed in Section 5.3, Water Resources, of this EIR, grading, filling and
installing engineered drainage works within the drainage course will cause
adverse impacts to the open space network, Baccharis scrub, aesthetics and water quality which can be prevented by implementation of the "best management practice" of preserving the course in a natural condition. A natural drainage channel will be more effective than a pipe in contributing to the cleansing of pollutants from urban runoff and will provide the open space corridor shown on
the City map and improved aesthetics in the area.
ste section 9.0
~tsponse ~PP
The grading of open space inconsistent with the General Plan on the remaining
property owned by the developer can be mitigated by adjusting the boundary of open space depicted on the Comprehensive Open Space Network Map to include larger areas of open space to the southeast of the drainage course and to the east of the roadway south of Stanley Mahr Reservoir, as is proposed by the
project, which have greater biological value (see figures 2-1 and 6-1). The areas
proposed to be preserved as open space by the project are identified as habitat for the California Gnatcatcher and the San Diego Goldenstar, which are sensitive animal and plant species as discussed in Section 5.4 and Appendix E of this EIR.
Adjustment of the open space boundary as the result of a future General Plan
amendment to include the larger, environmentally sensitive areas, or adjustment of the grading plans to preserve General Plan designated open space will bring those areas inconsistent with the General Plan into conformance with the Land Use and Open Space and Conservation Elements of the General Plan.
Grading to occur on land owned by M.A.G. Properties will eliminate an area of open space to the east of Rancho Santa Fe Road as shown on the City of Carlsbad Comprehensive Open Space Network Map and Figure 5-13. Removing this open space area will reduce the area and environmental quality of open space on the City map. The open space area on the MAG. property does not serve as a connection to other open space areas on the map and its purpose is
5.7-10
Lwa Open Space
9 North
SOURCE: Comprehensive Open Space
Network Map. City of Carlsbad
Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR
Road
id
-_
e!! Figure 5-14
see Section 8.0 Open Space per the City Comprehensive
Open Space Network Map Response 3NN
5.7-1 1
---.
not clear, although it serves as a buffer between residential and non-residential land uses. However, grading the open space area on the M.A.G. properties is
inconsistent with the General Plan. Conformance with the General Plan can occur only with adjustment of the grading plans to preserve the open space on the MAG. properties, or through replacement of the open space in quantity and
quality equal to or greater than what currently exists on the City Map.
Local Facilities Management Plan
As displayed in the aforementioned Table 5-9, implementation of the development proposal will result in approximately 843,000 square feet of non-residential floor space added to Zone 11 (246,000 square feet above that allowed in the Local Facilities Management Plan). This will create additional demand for public facilities within the Zone, and generate greater traffic levels than projected by the City. Greater noise and air quality impacts will also result,
as discussed in sections 5.2 and 5.5 of this EIR.
Hillside Development Regulations
Hillside regulations described in the Zoning Ordinance are to ensure that alteration of hillside areas will not result in substantial damage or alteration of significant natural resource areas. A Hillside Development Permit application has been submitted and is being evaluated by the City.
LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE
In the absence of General Plan amendment, the project presents a significant impact on land use of the City. Mitigation can be implemented which will
reduce impacts of the project on land use within Carlsbad to a level of less than
significant.
MITIGATION MEASURES
Mitigation measures required to reduce impacts of project development on land
use within the City of Carlsbad include:
1. The developer shall conform to land uses and respective acreages on the General Plan land use map, and dwelling unit allocations in the
Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 11, or propose amendments to
the General Plan, La Costa Master Plan, and Local Facilities Management
Plan. The GPA shall include the Trails Feasibility Study and be reviewed
by the Open Space Committee.
See Scction 9.0
Response=
2. Land uses associated with the proposed project shall be consistent with land use guidelines as listed in the Land Use Element of the General Plan
5.7-12
to insure compatibility. These include developing and maintaining suitable A
and adequate landscaping, sign control, site and building design, parking, buffering, and other performance standards to insure that future commercial developments are compatible with surrounding residential land uses.
3. The project applicant(s) shall propose amendment to the boundary of
open space as shown on the City of Carlsbad Comprehensive Open Space Network Map and General Plan on properties owned by Fieldstone and the MAG. Properties to include larger, more environmentally sensitive areas. In the absence of such open space boundary amendment, the
developer@) shall revise grading plans to preserve open space areas/corridors shown on the City Map.
5.7-13
5.8 TRAFFIC/CIRCULATION
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Information contained in this section is taken from the traffic study done for the circulation network by Weston Pringle and Associates. More detailed information is contained in Appendix F of this EIR.
The proposed area for the Rancho Santa Fe Road realignment is located within the southeastern portion of the City of Carlsbad. Rancho Santa Fe Road is proposed for realignment over approximately two miles of length stretching primarily between La Costa Avenue on the south boundary and Melrose Drive on the north boundary. Road realignment is proposed to relocate Rancho Santa Fe Road into the canyon, east of the existing roadway. The roadway will be built to standards of a Prime Arterial, with a 126 foot right-of-way.
Rancho Santa Fe Road is generally a north-south road that forms a regional link primarily between the Cities of Carlsbad, Encinitas, and San Marcos, and land within the County of San Diego. This stretch of roadway is designated in the City of Carlsbad and the City of San Marcos General Plans as a six lane Prime Arterial.
As stated in the "Draft Rancho Santa Fe Road Route Adoption Report" by Project Design Consultants dated September 15, 1989, "Rancho Santa Fe Road extends north from the La Costa Avenue intersection along the La Costa Vale Subdivision. The road consists of two paved lanes with curb and gutter on the west side and a combination of asphalt berm and concrete curb on the east side. Approximately 400 feet north of the subdivision boundary, the truck bypass route merges back into the two-lane roadway and creates a three-lane paved road with an asphalt berm on both sides. The three lanes form a typical section with a northbound lane, a southbound lane, and a climbing lane for uphill traffic. The typical three-lane section extends north from the end of the truck bypass route past the Questhaven intersection to the San Marcos Creek. The San Marcos Creek is crossed by an existing bridge which is located between the Questhaven Road intersection and the Melrose Drive intersection. Rancho Santa Fe Road has two northbound lanes and one southbound lane across the bridge. A
preliminary study by Rick Engineering Company indicated that the existing
bridge is hydraulically inadequate and cannot pass the 100-year storm without
becoming submerged."
According to the Route Adoption Report, 'The truck bypass route is a northbound one-way road which starts at a location on Rancho Santa Fe Road approximately 300 feet north of the La Costa Avenue intersection. The truck
5.8-1
bypass is located easterly of the present Rancho Santa Fe alignment and follows the original 60 foot right-of-way as described on Road Survey 454." The truck bypass was an attempt to mitigate truck noise and a safety precaution for slow moving trucks on existing steep grades.
Figure 5-15 shows existing and future roads within the project area. Included are proposed alignments of Rancho Santa Fe Road and Questhaven Road, and the connection of Cadencia Street with Rancho Santa Fe Road.
Intersections
Intersections directly affected by the proposed realignment include where Rancho
Santa Fe Road meets: Melrose Drive (north), La Costa Meadows Drive,
Questhaven Road, future Melrose Drive (south), Cadencia Street, and La Costa
Avenue. The intersection of Melrose Drive and Corintia Street will also be affected.
Existing intersection counts were conducted by Traffic Counts Inc. at the request of Weston Pringle and Associates for the City of Carlsbad Local Facilities
Management Plan Traffic Studies for Zones 12 and 18. Intersections were analyzed utilizing the Intersection Capacity Utilization (ICU) process of intersection analyses and the 1985 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) for unsignalized intersections. Tables 5-llA and 5-llB show that no intersections
intersections of Rancho Santa Fe Road at La Costa Meadows Drive and at Questhaven Road experience delays and Level of Service (LOS) of F for certain movements, as shown in Table 5-llB. For intersection analyses it is generally
accepted that a LOS A through D represents acceptable operations, while LOS E and F represent unacceptable operation conditions. The intersection at Rancho Santa Fe Road and Melrose Drive north has a LOS of D. An explanation of
ICU and LOS is contained in Appendix F.
are currently operating at unacceptable operating conditions. The unsignalized -
The intersection of Rancho Santa Fe Road and Questhaven Road is also not
presently signalized. The intersection currently warrants signalization, however, with an existing PM peak hour approach volume on Rancho Santa Fe Road of 1,823 vehicles and 111 vehicles on Questhaven Road. Also, the intersection of
Rancho Santa Fe Road and La Costa Meadows Drive is not signalized. This
intersection warrants signalization with an existing PM peak hour approach volume on Rancho Santa Fe Road of 1,605 vehicles and 398 vehicles on La Costa Meadows Drive. The City of Carlsbad plans to create a right-in, right-out turn lane at La Costa Meadows Drive for northbound traffic along Rancho Santa
Fe Road. Peak PM LOS is rated C at both intersections. These warrants are based upon the State of California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) Peak Hour Volume Warrant (Rural Areas). The rural standard was utilized since travel speeds on Rancho Santa Fe Road are in excess of 40 miles per hour.
-.
5.8-2
./-
,e
OENK
RESERVOIR
CADENCIA mEET CONNECTION
PROPOSEDFWKHOSLWTAFE
ROIIO REALIGWT
'P North no scale
Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR SOURCE: Weston Pringle & Associates
Figure 5-15
Existing and Proposed Roads
within the Project Area 5.8-3
INTERSECTION
Rancho Santa Fe Rd. & Melrose Drive North
Rancho Santa Fe Rd. & La Costa Meadows Drive
Rancho Santa Fe Rd. & Questhaven Road
Rancho Santa Fe Rd. & La Costa Avenue
0.81D 0.77/C
0.76/C* 0.76/C*
0.67/B* 0.72/C *
0.531A 0.56lA
(1) ICU = Intersection Capacity Utilization
LOS = Level of Service
* Unsignalized intersection, See Table 3.
Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR SOURCE: Weston Pringle & Associates
Table 5-1 1A
Existing Conditions -
Signalized Intersect ions
5.8-4
INTERSECTION
LOSO'
AM PEAK l!mw!K
Rancho Santa Fe Road & La Costa Meadows Drive
Westbound Left Movement F
Westbound Right Movement A
Southbound Left Movement F
Rancho Santa Fe Road & Questhaven Road /c
Westbound Left Movement F
Westbound Right Movement A
Southbound Left Movement C
F
C
C
F
A
D
(1) Based upon 1985 Highway Capacity Manual
LOS = Level of Service
Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR SOURCE: Weston Pringle & Associates
,/- Ern Table 5-1 1 B
Existing Conditions -
Unsignalized Intersections
5.8-5
Road Segments
Road segments affected by the proposed realignment are expected to be Melrose Drive (north), Corintia Street and Rancho Santa Fe Road north of Melrose Drive (north); and Rancho Santa Fe Road between: Melrose Drive (north) and Questhaven Road; Questhaven Road and Melrose Drive (south); Melrose Drive (south) and Cadencia Street; Cadencia Street and La Costa Avenue, and Rancho Santa Fe Road south of La Costa Avenue.
Existing road segment counts were conducted by the City of Carlsbad and the
City of San Marcos and are listed in Table 5-12 (count dates are referenced in
the Table). The City of Carlsbad Peak Hour Capacity Standards of 1,800 vehicles per lane per hour were utilized to determine that all road segments are currently operating under acceptable operating conditions. Per the City of Carlsbad staff, peak hour traffic volumes represent 10% of the daily volumes. For road segment analyses it is generally accepted that a LOS A through D represents acceptable operations, while LOS E and F represent unacceptable operating conditions. 5-16 shows existing conditions at intersections and road segments. The HCM results were not included in this table. Figure
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
Year 1995 Conditions
Impacts to circulation patterns projected for the year 1995 have been derived assuming that the project is expected to be completed in 1994, as estimated by project proponents.
Road segment traffic volumes and intersection conditions for 1995 conditions are shown in Tables 5-13 and 5-14 respectively. All road segments will operate with
an LOS of A or B with three lanes in each direction. Rancho Santa Fe Road
between La Costa Avenue and Melrose Drive north will operate unacceptably (LOS of F) with the existing 2-lane road. Traffic projections for the project area
in 1995 were performed for a scenario including construction of a Melrose Drive south connector to SA-680 and without the south Melrose Drive connection to SA-680. Results were essentially the same with road segments operating with an LOS of A (except Rancho Santa Fe Road between Melrose Drive north and Questhaven Road operating with an LOS of B with the addition of Melrose
Drive south). Intersections will also operate acceptably with the lowest LOS of
C being at Rancho Santa Fe Road and Melrose Drive north. Figures included in this section reflect the absence of Melrose Drive south because the connection of Melrose Drive south to a future SA 680 alignment by 1995 seems very remote (C-19). For purposes of brevity, and considering the improbability that Melrose Drive south will be connected to SA 680, the discussion in the EIR does not address future conditions with the Melrose Drive connector. For figures reflecting the existence of future Melrose Drive south see Appendix F.
5.8-6
STREEThOCA TION
Rancho Santa Fe Road
Behveen Questhaven Rd.
and La Costa Ave.
Rancho Santa Fe Road
Behveen Melrose Drive
and Questhaven Rd.
Rancho Santa Fe Road
n/o Melrose Drive
Questhaven Road do
F Rancho Santa Fe Road
Melrose Drive Behveen
Rancho Santa Fe Rd.
and Alga Rd.
Rancho Santa Fe Road slo La Costa Avenue
c
DAILY
VOLUME
18,300a
2 1 ,600(4)
27,300'9
3,000'9
5,900'4)
18,900m
NUMBER OF LANEW PEAK HOUR VOLUME/ PEAK HOUR VOLUMES VOLUMES CAPACITY ON ALL LANE S ONE L4NE 0) pAn0 & IDS@
2ll830 915 0.51lA
2/2160
2/2730
moo
6/590
4A890
1080
1365
150
100
475
(1) Based upon City of Carlsbad LOS E. (2) LOS = Level of Sewi'ce
(3) Count conducted by City of Carlsbad, 1990.
(4) Count conducted by City of Carlsbad, 1989.
(5) Count conducted by City of San Marcos, 1989.
Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR SOURCE: Weston Pringle 81 Associates
em
0.60/A
0.76/C
O.O8/A
0.061A
0.261A
Table 5- 12
Existing Road Segment Analysis
PROPOSED MELROSE
DRIVE NORTH
Road Segments
(Level of Service)
CONNECTION
pcIoeosEDWWCHOSLINTAFE
ROAD REALIGNMENT
'P North no scale
1
Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR SOURCE: Weston Pringle & Associates
-. Figure 5-16
Existing Road Segment Volumes
and LOS, and Intersection ICU ana LOS
5.8-8
INTERSECTION
Rancho Santa Fe Road/Corintia Street
6r Melrose Drive 0.69A3 0.74lC 0.59lA 0.59lA
Rancho Santa Fe Road &
La Costa Meadows Drive/Corintia St. 0.55/A 0.48/A 0.62B 0.50/A
Rancho Santa Fe Road & Questhaven Road 0.571A 0.70B 0.57h 0.70B
Rancho Santa Fe Road & Melrose Drive 0.39lA 0.45IA 0.39/A 0.45lA
/c
Rancho Santa Fe Road & Cadencia Street/
b1A.G. Property 0.63A3 0.65A3 0.63A3 0.65A3
Rancho Santa Fe Road & La Costa Avenue 0.51lA 0.64A3 0.51lA 0.64B
(3) ICU = Intersection Capacity Utilization
LOS = Level of Service
(2) With Corintia Street opposite La Costa Meadow Drive, Melrose Drive forms "T" into Rancho Santa Fe Road.
(3) With Corintia Street opposite Rancho Santa Fe Road, Rancho Santa Fe Road forms "T" into Melrose Drive.
Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR SOURCE Weston Prinele & Associates
c em Table 5-1 3
1995 Conditions - Intersections
5.8-9
NUMBER OF LANES/
PEAK HOUR VOLUMES PEAK HOUR VOLUME VOLUMEIcApACITYO~
DAILY ON ALL LANES ONE rANE RATIO & U)sm STFEETALICATION VOLUME EXISTING PROPOSED EXISTING PROPOSED MISTING PROPOSED
Rancho Santa Fe Rd.
Behveen Questhaven Rd. and
La Costa Ave. 41,000 214 100 6/4100 2050 685 1.41/F 0.38/A
Rancho Santa Fe Rd.
Between Melrose Dr. and
Questhaven Rd. 55,300 2/5530 66530 2765 920 1.54F 0.511A
Rancho Santa Fe Rd.
N/O blelrose Dr. 45SOO 2/4500 6/4500 2250 750 1.25F. 0.42/A ?
3” a Questhaven Road E/O
Rancho Santa Fe Rd. 15,300 VI530 4/1530 765 385 0.431A 0.21/A 0
Melrose Drive
Behveen Rancho Santa Fe Rd.
and Alga Rd. 16,400 GI1640 611640 275 275 0.15lA 0.15/A
Rancho Santa Fe Road
SI0 La Costa Avenue 33,800 4I3380 GI3380 845 565 0.47/A 0.3 1/A
(1) Based upon City of Carlsbad LOS E.
(2) LOS = Level of Service
Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR SOURCE: Weston Pringle 81 Associates
Table 5-14 e!!
1995 Road Segment Analysis
San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) performed the computer simulation of regional 1995 traffic conditions. Pringle and Associates utilized the results of SANDAGs regional traffic modeling and combined them with land use
projections from the Cities of Carlsbad and San Marcos to project traffic
conditions on roads within the project area in 1995. The City of Carlsbad
instructed SANDAG to assume in the model that the following road segments
would not be constructed at this time: Melrose Drive, between Alga Road and Palomar Airport Road; the Melrose Drive southerly extension; El Fuerte Street, between Palomar Airport Road and Alga Road; and Carillo Way, between Melrose Drive and El Camino Real.
Table 5-15 shows existing intersection geometrics and geometrics proposed to accommodate projected traffic volumes in the years 1995 and 2010. As shown in Table 5-13, all intersections within the project area will operate under acceptable conditions in 1995 if these geometrics are created, as proposed by this project.
Year 2010 (Buildout) Conditions
The Cities of Carlsbad and San Marcos provided land use projections to
SANDAG to perform regional computer modeling to determine projected intersection and road segment volumes at the year of build-out, estimated to be post 2010. This date represents the time of completion of all county road systems. As shown in Table 5-16, all intersections are expected to operate under
acceptable conditions (LOS of C or D for intersections north of Questhaven Road, inclusive) when improvements listed in Table 5-15 are completed. Table 5-17 shows that all road segments will operate acceptably with three lanes in each direction for the year 2010. There are two possible scenarios for the configuration of the intersection of Rancho Santa Fe Road and Melrose Drive north, as discussed in Appendix F. One is for Rancho Santa Fe Road to "T' into Melrose Drive north and the other is for Melrose Drive north to "T into Rancho Santa Fe Road. Depending on the final configuration of the Melrose Drive north intersection with Rancho Santa Fe Road, four lanes may be needed on one road segment and at two intersections. If Rancho Santa Fe Road "Ts into Melrose Drive north four lanes will be needed on Rancho Santa Fe Road northbound between Melrose Drive north and La Costa Meadows Drive. If
Melrose Drive north 'T's into Rancho Santa Fe Road four lanes will be needed southbound on Rancho Santa Fe Road only at the Melrose Drive north intersection. Under existing road conditions (2 lanes in each direction) all of Rancho Santa Fe Road and Questhaven Road will operate with an LOS of F in
the year 2010, which is unacceptable.
According to Appendix F the majority of road construction should occur with minimal detouring and road closures. A temporary road may need to be
constructed between Questhaven Road and Melrose Drive to allow for construction of the northern portion of Rancho Santa Fe Road during phase III
of the project, as discussed in the Project Description. Truck rerouting
5.8-11
See Section 9.0 Response 2C
-.
Rancho Santa Fe Road/
Corintia Street 6r
Melrose Drive
00 Existing 1 1 00 1 FREE 1 0 1 0
1995(" 1 30 1 3 0 1 3 0 0 1 1 POST 2010"' 3 3 02 4 FREE 2 2 FREE 1 2 0 199P 1 3 *FREE 1 3 0 0 1 0 3 1 0 POST 201OnJ 1 4 FREE 2 3 0 0 1 0 3 1 FREE
Rancho Santa Fe Road Q
La Costa Meadows DrivdCorintia Street
Existing 0 1 1 1 1 000 0 1 01
1995"' 1 3023 00 1 0 1 1 0 POST 2010"' 03 1 0 3 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
1995"' 1 3 023 00 0 0 1 0 1 POST 2010"' 1 4 02 3 0 0 0 0 1 0 1
Rancho Santa Fe Road Q
Questhaven Road 1 - Existing 0 1 1 1 101 0 0 0 0 1 0
1995 03023 00 0 0 1 0 FREE
POST 2010 03 FREE 3 3 0 0 0 0 3 0 FREE
Rancho Santa Fe Road 6:
Cadencia Street
Existing 0 1 00 1 00 I OGOO
FREE - free-flowing, non-yielding turn lane onto receptor street
(1) With Corintia Street opposite La Costa Meadows Drive, Melrose Drive forms 'T into Rancho Santa Fe Road.
(2) \Vith Corintia Street opposite Rancho Santa Fe Road, Rancho Santa Fe Road forms 'T into Melrose Drive.
N Northbound
S Southbound
W Westbound
E Eastbound
L Left Turn Lane
T Through Lane
R Right Turn Lane
Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR SOURCE: Weston Pringle & Associates
e!! Table 5- 15
Intersection Geornetrics
5.8-12
- INTERSECTION
Rancho Santa Fe Road &
Cadencia StreeVhlAkC. Property
3 0 1 1 0 1 10
POST 2010 1 30 1 3 0 1 1 01 10
1995 1 301
Rancho Santa Fe Road 6r
La Costa Avenue
Esisting
1995
POST 2010
Rancho Santa Fe Road 6! Melrose Drive (South)
1995 POST 2010
1 201 20 1 20120
1 301 3 1 220220
1 3 *FREE 1 3 1 220220
0301 30000101
0 3 12 3 0 0 0 0 10 FREE
(1)
(2)
With Corintia Street opposite La Costa Meadows Drive, Melrose Drive forms 'T' into Rancho Santa Fe Road.
\Vith Corintia Street opposite Rancho Santa Fe Road, Rancho Santa Fe Road forms 'T' into Melrose Drive.
* FREE - free-flowing, non-yielding turn lane onto receptor street
N Northbound
S Southbound
W Westbound
E Eastbound
L Left Turn Lane
T Through Lane
R Right Turn Lane
Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR SOURCE: Weston Pringle & Associates
fa! Table 5-15
Intersection Geornetrics
Continued
INTERSECTION
ICU/LOSfl)@) ICUhOSfl)"
AMPM PMPEAK AMPEAK PMPEAK
Rancho Santa Fe RoadICorintia Street 8 Melrose Avenue North' 0.87D 0.83D 0.84D 0.88D
Rancho Santa Fe Road & La Costa Meadows DriveKorintia St.' 0.76lC 0.52lA 0.89D 0.54lA
Rancho Santa Fe Road & Questhaven Road' 0.70B 0.84D 0.70B 0.84D
Rancho Santa Fe Road 8 Melrose Avenue 0.65B 0.76lC 0.65B 0.76lC
Rancho Santa Fe Road 8 Cadencia Street/ MAG Property 0.75lC 0.79lC 0.75lC 0.79lC
Rancho Santa Fe Road & La Costa Avenue 0.65IB 0.75lC 0.65IB 0.75K 1
(1) 1CU = intersection Capacity Utilization
LOS = Level of,Service
(2) With Corintia Street opposite La Costa Meadow Drive, Melrose Drive fonns T" into Rancho Santa Fe Road.
(3) With Corintia Street opposite Rancho Santa Fe Road, Rancho Santa Fe Road forms '7"' into Melrose Drive.
* Utilized City of Carlsbad "Heavy Demand Procedure" for intersection capacity analysis.
Left and Right Turn Capacity - 1800 Vehicles Per Day
Through Movement Capacity - 2000 Vehicles Per Day
Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR SOURCE: Weston Pringle & Associates
Table 5-16
20 10 Conditions - Intersections
5.8-1 3
DAILY STREET/LOCATION VOLUME
Rancho Santa Fe Rd.
Between Questhaven Rd. and
La Costa Ave. 60,300
Rancho Santa Fe Rd.
Between Melrose Dr. and
Questhaven Rd. 74,600
Rancho Santa Fe Rd.
NIO Melrose Dr. 52900 -
Questhaven Road E/O
Rancho Santa Fe Rd. 50.200
Melrose D&e
Between Rancho Santa Fe Rd.
and Alga Rd. 46,100
Rancho Santa Fe Road
SfO La Costa Avenue 42,400
NUMBER OF IANEs/ PEAK HOUR VOLUMES PEAK HOURVOLUME
EXlSTINC PROPOSED EXISTING PROPOSED
ON ALL IANES ONE LANE
216030 GIGO30 3015 1005
21460 GI7460 3730 1245
2/5290 G/5290 2645 880
2/5020 46020 2510 1255
614610 Gf4610 770 770
2/4240 Gf4240 2120 705
VOLUMEKAPACITP
.RATIO & ms",
EXISTING PROPOSED
1.G8fF 0.56fA
2.07fF O.G9/B
1.47fF 0.49fA
1.39fF 0.70/B
0.43fA 0.43fA
1.18fF 0.39lA
(1) Based upon City of Carlsbad LOS E.
(2) LOS = Level of Service
SOURCE Weston Pringle & Associates Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR
Table 5-17
2010 Road Segment Analysis
would occur as the proposed road would be constructed on the old bypass route. -
A detailed construction plan, listing all timing, traffic and safety issues, should be
developed by the contractors involved."
The project also involves realigning the intersection of Melrose Drive north and Rancho Santa Fe Road. Two intersection configurations, one with Melrose Drive forming a "T' into Rancho Santa Fe Road and the other with Rancho Santa Fe Road forming a 'T' into Melrose are discussed in detail in Appendix F. Under existing traffic conditions, Melrose Drive should form a 'T' into Rancho Santa Fe Road because Melrose Drive does not intersect Highway 78 and traffic volumes are light. The future circulation pattern could possibly have Rancho Santa Fe
Road form a 'T' into Melrose Drive because Melrose Drive will access Highway
78 and may convey larger traffic volumes than Rancho Santa Fe Road.
In addition to this issue, it has been concluded the proposed intersection to
Rancho Santa Fe Road and Cadencia Street be constructed to a full signalized
intersection. Also, it is suggested that Melrose Drive south be created to provide
access to Rancho Santa Fe Road for future development. Finally, Rancho Santa
Fe Road south of La Costa Avenue will have to be widened to six lanes total to
meet the City's prime arterial standards.
LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE
Based on information contained in Appendix F (Traffic Study by Pringle and Associates) impacts of road realignment and mass grading of the proposed project on traffic/circulation will be adverse, but less than significant.
The project is designed to alleviate traffic circulation problems expected in the
near future. Eventual development in the area will increase traffic volumes on
the roadway causing adverse impacts. Implementation of the following mitigation
measures will serve to maintain adequate circulation during project development.
MITIGATION MEASURES
Mitigation measures are needed as part of the project to maintain adequate traffic/circulation. These include:
1. The City of Carlsbad shall construct intersection and road segment
geometrics as proposed for Year 1995 without the SA-680 connection
(future Melrose Drive). The City shall also retain right-of-way that will be
sufficient for creation of the intersection at Rancho Santa Fe Road and
future Melrose Drive south.
2. A detailed construction plan listing all timing, traffic and safety issues shall
be developed by the contractors involved. This plan shall include a truck rerouting plan and shall minimize detouring.
5.8-15
,-- 3. The Cities of Carlsbad and San Marcos shall create a mechanism to decide on the Rancho Santa Fe Road and Melrose Drive intersection configuration. Other issues related to the intersection configuration, as
discussed in Appendix F, should be resolved by Carlsbad.
4. An interim signal shall be constructed by the City of Carlsbad at the
intersections of Rancho Santa Fe Road and Questhaven Road prior to roadway construction. Signalization shall also be in place at project completion.
5. The intersection at Rancho Santa Fe Road and Cadencia Street shall be
constructed as a full signalized intersection.
5.8-16
5.9 PUBLIC SERVICES
Public services discussed in this section include fire protection, law enforcement,
schools, libraries and hospitals. City growth management is carefully monitored by Carlsbad. The General Plan, Growth Management Program (Local Facilities Management Plan or LFMP for Zone 11) and La Costa Master Plan all specifically address provision of public services with build-out. The provision of
public services to the City is the goal of the Public Facilities Element of the General Plan. This goal is "to provide a comprehensive public services and facilities and public building program for the citizens of the City now and in the future so that all necessary public facilities will be available concurrent with need
in connection with the development of the City pursuant to the balance of the
General Plan." This is to be achieved by adherence to City policy which states
"developers shall present evidence to the City proving that adequate public health
and safety facilities exist to serve the community." Construction of dwelling units
above that allowed by the LCMP for Zone 11 requires the developer to provide additional facilities. The City's Growth Management Plan (GMP) also contains information regarding the City's maintenance of adequate public services during build-out. In addition, development of the project area must adhere to
guidelines for public services set forth in the La Costa Master Plan.
FIRE PROTECTION
ENVIRONMENTAL SE'ITING
Fire protection services are provided to the project area by the City of Carlsbad. Currently, a temporary Fire Station number six located on Levante Street
southwest of the intersection of Rancho Santa Fe Road and La Costa Avenue
serves the project area. Station number six has one engine company with a 1,250
gallon per minute (gpm) pumper, and a three man crew (B-1). The project site falls within of the five minute response time for station number six, and fire
protection to Zones 6, 11 and 12 meets performance standards set forth by the
City (B-1).
All other fire stations in Carlsbad serve as back-up protection. Additional facilities that may provide fire protection assistance include the Cities of Encinitas, San Marcos, and Oceanside which participate in an Automatic Aid Agreement with the City of Carlsbad (B-1). San Diego County is part of a Mutual Aid Agreement with Carlsbad.
5.9-1
Widening and realignment of the roadway will enable faster vehicle movement
and improve response times and emergency vehicle access over the majority of
the project site. The proposed project will add approximately 843,000 square feet of non-residential floor space to the area (246,000 square feet over that allowed in the General Plan) and 1,010 dwelling units. This will cause an increase in the demand for fire protection facilities over that resulting from General Plan build-
out.
Conditions set forth in the Local Facilities management Plan for Zone 11 include
conditions to achieve fire protection of the project area during build-out.
Building permits are currently being issued on proof of the provision of fie station No. 6. A new permanent Fire Station No. 6 will be constructed adjacent to the realigned Rancho Santa Fe Road north of Cadencia Street concurrent with
development within Zone 11. This will require installation of a signal light or emergency access for fire equipment at this location along the roadway (B-1).
Policies one and two under the Fire Hazards section of the Public Safety Element of the Carlsbad General Plan specifically address the need to provide adequate fire protection for the citizens during build-out of the city. Policy one states that the City shall seek to reduce fire hazards to an acceptable level of risk, while Policy two states that the City will consider fie hazards as site constraints in making land use decisions. A set of Action Programs is listed by
which to implement the above Policies. 1.
Development Guidelines in the Land Use Element of the General Plan include a
reference to fire protection. It specifically states that development should be analyzed with regard to "the ability of the Fire Department to provide fire protection according to the established response standards of the City without the necessity of establishing a new station or requiring addition of major equipment
to an existing station.
LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE
Considering that the project proposes to add 843,000 square feet of non- residential floor area and 1,010 dwelling units to vacant land, impacts of project implementation on the provision of adequate fire protection to the community of Carlsbad are adverse, but less than significant. Demand for fire protection services to the project area will be increased by this development.
5.9-2
MITIGATION MEASURES
Mitigation measures suggested to further reduce impacts of the proposed project
on the provision of fire protection services include:
1. As conditions of approval of the development plans for build-out of the
land adjacent to the project site, the project applicant shall construct a permanent fie station No. 6 along the present alignment of Rancho Santa Fe Road and an access road and traffic signal from the station to Rancho
Santa Fe Road.
LAW ENFORCEMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Law enforcement services are provided by the Carlsbad Police Department from
the station at 2560 Orion Way. The police department employs 82 sworn officers and 13 to 14 active reservists, with up to 20 reservists being expected to join the force within the near future (B-2). Services provided by the Department include uniformed patrol, detective investigations, traffic investigations, and vice and narcotic operations. A Mutual Aid Agreement exists with all cities within the County, and the County is to provide manpower and additional equipment is the need arises. Seven field units are available within the City during any one shift, and there are three shifts per day. Protection has been provided by supplying approximately 1.3 officers per thousand over the last year (B-2).
The Carlsbad Police Department bases its performance on maintaining an
average response time to priority one (emergency) calls of under six-minutes
throughout the City. Priority one response time for the project area is between
6.5 and 8 minutes. A new beat with two officers has recently been added to the
eastern City area. Four additional officers will be added to this beat by City Council authorization in February or March of 1991 which will bring priority one
response times to within the six-minute target (B-2).
The City actively participates in the Neighborhood Watch Program, and development within Zone 11 can be expected to become involved in
Neighborhood Watch by forming groups the future.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
Police protection is currently adequate in most areas of the City, with the exception of the project area. Even with the addition of officers to the new beat located in eastern Carlsbad, law enforcement services will be strained by further development of the project site if development occurs more rapidly than
5.9-3
expansion of the Police Department. Roadway improvements will have the effect -
of augmenting police response times along Rancho Santa Fe Road, however.
The addition of approximately 843,000 square feet of non-residential floor space
(240,000 square feet beyond that called for in the General Plan), and 1,010
dwelling units as is proposed by this project will further increase demand for law
enforcement services to the project area.
The Crime Prevention section of the Public Safety Element of the General Plan contains Policies one and two which commit the City to "encourage and support continued research and the use of new design concepts and technological improvements for the prevention of crime," and "encourage crime prevention
through the planning process by establishing specific design criteria and standards to be used in the review of land use development." Several Action Programs are included by which to implement these Policies. These include encouraging the Police Department to participate in interdepartmental conferences to review
specific land use development proposals, and to maintain guidelines for street
and public lighting systems which conserve energy and assist in crime prevention.
Provisions exist within the Public Facilities Element of the General Plan to
ensure adequate law enforcement to the City during build-out. Policy "A" of the Land Use Element states that development will only be permitted after adequate public services have been provided. Number 11 under General Land Use Guidelines is included which is to "develop a system of public facilities adequate
for the projected population." -
LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE
Because the project proposes to add 843,000 square feet of non-residential floor space and 1,010 dwelling units to undeveloped land, impacts of project
development on provision of law enforcement services to the City are adverse,
but less than significant.
MITIGATION MEASURES
Mitigation measures suggested to further reduce impacts of project implementation include:
1. The developer shall implement a Neighborhood Watch Program within new developments as build-out occurs on the project site.
2. The City shall provide adequate police protection concurrent with build-out of Local Facilities Management Plan of Zone 11.
5.9-4
LIBRARIES
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Library facilities within the project area are provided by the City of Carlsbad. Currently, three existing facilities are either owned or leased by the City. The Main Library is a 24,600 square building owned by the City at 1200 Elm Avenue. A 4,500 square foot La Costa Branch Library is leased, and a 400 square foot Adult Learning Center is also available to the public. A total of approximately
190,OOO volumes are available to patrons (B-3). A small bookmobile also
services the south Carlsbad area (C-15).
A future 64,OOO square-foot library is planned in South Carlsbad at the intersection of El Camino Real and Alga Road. It is scheduled to be open by
June of 1992, at which time the lease to La Costa Branch Library will expire.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
Development of the proposed project will add 843,000 square feet of non-
residential floor space and 1,010 dwelling units to the project area (246,000
square feet above the General Plan). This will cause an increase in demand for
library services.
The Local Facilities Management Plan includes plans for library facility
provision. Performance standards of 800 square feet of library space per 1,OOO
population are currently being met, and are projected to be met up through the
year 2,002 (C-4). Mitigation to ensure the provision of adequate library facilities
through build-out consists of stopping development within Zone 11 if the standard is not met, and keeping a halt on development until standards are able
to be met. Financing for all library space is to be met by applying a portion of
the Public Facility Fee of 3.5 percent of building permit valuation to be collected
at the time building permits are issued for all residential, commercial and industrial developments.
LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE
Due to the addition of residential and non-residential floor space to currently vacant land, impacts of implementation of the proposed project on provision of adequate library facilities within the City are adverse, but less than significant.
5.9-5
MITIGATION MEASURES -_
Mitigation measures suggested to further reduce impacts of future development on City-wide libraries include:
1. The developer shall pay a portion of Public Facility Fees at 3.5 percent of building permit valuation at the time of building permit issuance to be used for library construction.
SCHOOLS
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The project area is served by three school districts with 11 schools as shown in Table 5-18. The school districts serving the area include the Encinitas Union Elementary School District with two elementary schools both at or over capacity,
San Dieguito High School District has two schools over capacity, and the San
Marcos Unified School District has three schools all over capacity.
Schools within the EUESD operate on a year-round schedule which has the affect of enlarging capacity (C-4). As a result, the EUESD has capacity to meet the existing and build-out demands generated within the project area (C-4). The SMUSD and SDUHSD operate on traditional school schedules. Greater capacity could potentially be utilized if these school districts implemented year-round schedules. Two new schools are planned for the SDUHSD which will serve the project area. La Costa High School is planned for the southeast area of La Costa before 1992. A junior high school is planned for Zone 12, but not for the immediate future (C-4). Construction of these schools will increase capacity by 2,500 high school students and 1,OOO Junior High School students (C-4). The SMUSD is also planning to open one new elementary school in Carlsbad. School
size and time of opening is not clear, however (C-4).
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
Development of this project area according to both the current General Plan and
the proposed project (requiring future General Plan Amendment) will contribute significantly to the added enrollment of 1203 elementary students, 386 junior high school students, and 799 high school students (C-4) for 2,388 students total. Schools which serve the area are mostly at or over capacity, however each school district has plans to create new facilities. Creation of new facilities in a timely
fashion will have to occur in order for school districts to meet demand. The
proposed project will add 843,000 square feet of non-residential floor space to
-.,
5.9-6
Table 5-18
SCHOOLS SERVING THE PROJECT AREA
clp.CitY
(YifhOut Nrrkr of
1 and District t 1-1 Portabla
Encinitas Unified Elantary School District
La Costa Heights 668
Mission Estancia 740
668 (588) none
740 (588) 2
San Dieguito Union High School District
Oak Crest Junior H.S. 1,038 1.038 (933)
San Dieguito H.S. 1.777 2,039 (1.835) 7
Oiegueno Junior H.S. 1,019 1,003 (887) 4
San Marcos Unified High School District
La Costa Ckadows 650
Elementary School
720 (500) 2
San Marcos Junior H . S . 1.200 1,200 (750) 20
Sources: Gene Fredrick EUESD. Marv Glusak SMUSO, Administration SDUHSO
5.9-7
the area (246,000 square feet above that allowed in the General Plan) and 1,010
dwelling units to currently undeveloped land. This will not cause significant increases in demand for school facilities beyond that projected at build-out, but
will cause significant increases in demand over existing conditions.
The Local Facilities Management Plan (LFMP) was prepared by the City following the City’s Growth Management Program. Included in the Plan are population projections of build-out and resultant demand for public services. The need for school facilities is analyzed and results discussed above. Results of these analyses are used in implementation programs in the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan to provide adequate school facilities as the City
approaches build-out. An 88-acre school site has been provided to the San
Dieguito High School District by the project proponent to the southeast of the
project area.
Policy A within the Land Use Element commits the City to permitting
development of land only after adequate provision for public facilities. Policy G
states that the City will develop programs which would correlate rate of growth with service capabilities of the City. As mentioned earlier, the Goal of the
Public Facilities Element of the General Plan is to provide public services and
facilities to ensure availability concurrent with demand. This is accomplished by strict dwelling unit allotment by quadrant of the City. The City may restrict building permits until it is proven by the developer that adequate school resources exist to house new students.
LEWL OF SIGNIFICANCE
Considering the amount of residential and non-residential development proposed
by this project on undeveloped land, impacts of development and road
realignment on provision of school facilities to the project area are significant,
but mitigable to a level of less than significant.
MITIGATION MEASURES
Mitigation measures needed to reduce impacts of development on provision of school facilities to the project area to a level of less than significant include:
1. Prior to the approval of a final map for any projects within the San Marcos Unified School District, an agreement shall be entered into between the District and the project proponent that shall provide for the following, unless modified or waived by the District:
See Section 9.0
Respo==m
0 The deeding of an acceptable school site to the district.
5.9-8
0 The guarantee for the financing and construction of a school for the
District. This guarantee shall be in the form of bonding, cash deposit or some other form of security as specified in said agreement.
If any reimbursements and/or school fee credits are to be given, the
school agreement shall provide a mechanism to do so.
2. The developer shall pay developer’s fees to the San Dieguito High School District for financing the construction of La Costa High School.
HOSPITALS
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
Carlsbad falls within the Tri-City Medical District along with Oceanside and Vista. Medical facilities are provided to this District by Tri-City Medical Center in Oceanside. Tri-City Medical Center is a full service facility containing 451 beds, and averages a 80 percent capacity (B-8). A home-care facility has recently been opened near Palomar Airport by Tri-City Medical Center with services to include intermittent and continuous nursing care for in-home patients, hospice care for the terminally ill, and private-duty care (B-8). An urgent-care facility is in the administrative stages of planning for the La Costa area (Alga Road and El Camino Real), and there is no estimated date of operation (B-8).
Scripps Hospital in Encinitas also provides medical care to the area. This facility has been expanded to 146 beds, and operates at 50 percent capacity (B-7). Services offered by Scripps include emergency treatment, conventional treatment community services and preventive medicine. Another type of hospital care provided in the area is psychiatric care at San Luis Rey Hospital in Encinitas. This hospital has 100 beds, and is currently serving at 50 percent capacity (B-9).
Hospital facilities serving the area are operating below capacity and have plans
to continue expansion.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
The proposed project will add 1,010 dwelling units and 843,000 square feet of
non-residential space to the area (248,000 square feet above that allowed in the General Plan). This will cause a greater demand for hospital services at build-
out than is currently projected. However, the Public Safety Element of the General Plan discusses provision of adequate public health facilities in Policy 6 of Health and Safety Hazards, and follows this with three Action Programs by which this can be implemented. Policy 1 of Emergency Services states that a
comprehensive emergency medical services system will be provided by the City,
5.9-9
and several Action Programs exist by which to carry out this Policy. The Public -
Facilities Element also contains a Goal and Policy previously mentioned which seek to provide and maintain public services as the City approaches build-out.
LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE
Based on the current availability of hospital services to Carlsbad, impacts of development according to the proposed project on the availability of hospital services to the community are not significant.
MITIGATION MEASURES
No mitigation is required since no significant impacts have been identified.
-.
5.9-10
5.10 UTILITIES
,-
This section of the document addresses the impacts of the proposed project on
utilities. Since the study area is currently mostly vacant undeveloped land, there is no demand for services to this area. As such, any changes to existing levels of service would reflect large increases in demand and would not necessarily give the reader a clear understanding of the impacts. Therefore, this assessment will compare the demands as required by the existing General Plan to the demands which will take place under the project, as well as demands caused by the project compared to existing conditions.
WATER
ENVIRONMENTAL, SETTING
The study area is served by two water districts, the Olivenhain Municipal Water
District (OMWD) and the Vallecitos Water District (VWD). The location of the two water districts as well as the existing major water facilities is shown in
Figure 5-17.
Each agency has its own master plan which contains goals and policies guiding future water service. The report prepared for the OMWD is entitled the "Water System Analysis for the Planned Development of La Costa Within the Olivenhain Municipal Water District" dated November, 1975. The report prepared for the VWD is entitled the "San Marcos County Water District, Water and Sewer Master Plan, Volume 1, August, 1986" (prior to District renaming). Although the report has not as yet been adopted, the SMCWD has stated that the report should be used as a tool in planning for future improvements.
Both districts are currently operating below capacity with adequate infrastructure to provide service through build-out as outlined in the current General Plan.
ENVIRONMENTAL, IMPACT
Implementation of the project will realign the existing Rancho Santa Fe Road and allow development of residential and commercial uses as well as providing for additional open space over what is now proposed in the current Land Use Element of the adopted General Plan. Development will cause increases in demand for water services provided by the two water districts. As shown in Table 5-19, commercial demand as proposed by the project will increase 47
5.10-1
Melroso air
Corinlla Str.
Ealstlno La COSI~
Maadow. Drlva
rooosaa Bride. a ~~~~~e~~d~
~.S.-ol~tl~ieorndvy
FuUaRo.drray
EXISUIW ~d*.y
Future Ouaslhav*n Road Fi Existing Waterlines
Boundary between Districts
11111111
ElirlinO Cadancia Slra.1
Water District
U 1400 - North scale in feet
SOURCE: City. of Carlsbad
Local Facilities Management Plan Zone 11
Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR
"1
1
5.10-2
Figure 5-17
Existing Water Lines
.--.
Factor
percent, and office demand will also increase 74 percent, and open space demand will not change. Residential water demand will, however, account for an overall decrease of 37 percent. Water demand caused by the proposed project will
result in a total of 590,600 gallons per day (kgd) over existing conditions. Overall water demand caused by the proposed project will be substantially higher than existing conditions. However, demand under the project will be approximately 30% lower than water demand under build-out conditions
according to the General Plan. This result may be somewhat misleading as water
consumption is based on land use acreage. The same number of single-family dwelling units are proposed under each development scenario. The larger area
developed under the General Plan may result in larger lots which use more water
for landscaping.
Number of Acres
TABLE 5-19
PROJECTED DAILY WATER USE
LAND USE
RESIDENTIAL
Low Density
Low-Medium Density
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL
COMMERCIAL
Community
Professional
TOTAL COMMERCIAL
pl/day Existing
peracre Use
lo00 0.0
1300 0.0
0.0
1500 0.0
1500 0.0
0.0
General
Plan
386.6
291.8
678.4
36.7
115
48.2
41.7
768.3
OPEN SPACE I 01 7683 I
Proposed
Project
19.8
353.7
3735
54.0
20.0
74.0
320.8
7683 TOTAL ALL USES I 7683
Water USC (kgd/day) I Change from General
Existing
USC
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0 -
jtential Under I Plan to Pm
General Proposed Amount
Project (k d/day)
i ;
111.0
590.6
:t
Percent
-94.9%
21.2%
-37.4%
47.1%
73.9%
535%
-295% -
Abbreviations: kgd thousand gallons per day; ac acre.
Source of generation factors: City of Carisbad, Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 11.
Both Districts have stated in their respective master plans that adequate infrastructure is currently in place and, with the exception of planned additions, no new facilities will be required to provide service through build out as outlined
in the adopted general plan. Any additional facilities that could be required
because of increased demand for water services as outlined in Table 5-19 will
need to be provided at the time of development to the satisfaction of the
respective water districts.
5.10-3
LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE
Considering the increase in water demand from existing conditions as caused by the project, impacts from the proposed project on water utilities demand will be significant but mitigable to a level of less than significant.
MITIGATION MEASURES
The following mitigation measures will serve to reduce impacts to water services to levels below significant:
1. Water demand will be assessed during the development review process
established by both the VWD and the OMWD which ensure that Zone 11 will remain in conformance with the adopted performance standard through build-out.
2. Developments shall include water saving devices in an effort to conserve
water.
3. Water reclamation shall be used where feasible for such uses as park and lawn irrigation.
SEWER
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The study area is served by two Sewer Districts, the Leucadia County Water
District (LCWD) and the Vallecitos Water District (VWD). The location of the
two water districts and the existing major sewer facilities is shown in Figure 5-18.
Development within the two districts is guided by master plans which were prepared for the two districts. The master plan for the LCWD is entitled the
Planning Study, Leucadia County Water District", September, 1985. The master
plan for the VWD is entitled the "San Marcos County Water District, Water and
Sewer Master Plan, Volume l", August, 1986.
The LCWD uses two facilities for the treatment of wastewater. These include
the Encina Water Pollution Control Facility (WPCF) and the Gafner Water
Reclamation Plant. The Gafner has a present capacity of 0.75 MGD.
The VWD utilizes two treatment plant facilities, 1) Encina WPCF, and 2)
Meadowlark Treatment Plant. Primary capacity is provided through the Encina
WPCF. The VWD currently retains a 17.78 percent ownership which represents
5.104
Mwlrose llrlr
Corlntla Strw
Existing La Costa
Meadows Drlvw
Rorst BaUIlw
huumm Dimct BO~V~
FUUeRwb*ay
ExkanoRwb*w Existino 0uesth.v.n ROI
Future Ouwathevwn ROld I=] Existing Trunk Lines
12' Reclamation
Existing Cadwncia Strwwt
U 1400 - 'P North scale in leet l
id
Line
I
I I i I
SOURCE: City of Carlsbad
Local Facilities Management Plan Zone 11
Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR
5.10-5
Figure 5-18
Existing Sewer Lines
a 4.0 MGD treatment. The Meadowlark Treatment Plant currently has the ability to treat 2.0 MGD of sewage with an ultimate capacity of 4.0. The KWs build-out demand is expected to be 0.90 MGD with a current capacity
at the Encina WPCF of 5.48 MGD (this capacity will drop to 4.75 MGD in 1992). The VWD's build-out demand is expected to be 0.13 MGD with current treatment capacity of 6.0 MGD (this capacity will increase to 6.97 MGD in 1991).
-_
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
Project implementation would result in decreases in low density residential uses as outlined in the current General Plan, but increase the amount of low-medium residential uses (total number of dwelling units will remain the same). As shown
in Table 5-20, existing sewer flow is zero, while the project will result in
approximately 496,000 gallons per day in sewer flow. The project (requiring
future General Plan Amendment) includes commercial, office, and open space designations. The reduction in low density residential would decrease demand by 95 percent, while the increase in low-medium residential would account for a 21 percent increase in demand, for an average decrease in demand of 25.1 percent. Retail uses will account for a 47 percent increase in projected sewer flow, while office uses will increase sewer flow by 74 percent. Open space uses will not generate any sewage. Overall, the project will result in a decrease in sewer flow
result may be misleading because sewage generation is based on acreage of land uses. The same number of dwelling units are planned for the General Plan and proposed development. Therefore, sewage generation may be the same for each
development scenario.
as compared to the build-out according to the General Plan by 18 percent. This -
The system is currently operating below capacity and will be adequate to serve
the area through build-out. Currently both districts have adequate capacity
treatment to accommodate both the adopted general plan and the proposed
GPA. There are currently proposed upgrades in the system as outlined in the City's Local Facilities Management Plan which will allow the system to conform to the adopted performance standards. The increases to sewer flow that will take place under the GPA will need to be assessed by the City's engineering department to determine if facilities will be able to accommodate the additional sewer flows and still conform to the performance standards.
LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE
Considering the substantial increase in sewer flow caused by the proposed project
over existing conditions, impacts from the proposed project will be significant but
mitigable to a level of less than significant.
5.10-6
TABLE 5-20
gal/day
peram
560
1120
PROJECTED DAILY S
Existing General Propmea
Use Plan Project
0.0 386.6 19.8
0.0 291.8 353.7
I Numberof-
Factor
0
LAND USE
0.0 48.2 74.0
7683 41.7 320.8
RESIDENTIAL
Low Density
Low-Medium Densitv
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL
COMMERCIAL
Community
Professional
TOTAL COMMERCIAL
OPEN SPACE
0.0 I 115 I 20.0
I I I
TOTAL ALL USES
Abbreviations: kgd thousand gallons per day; ac am.
I 7683 I 7683 I 768.3
WER FLOW
Sewer Flow (kgd/day)
1
Existing
U8C
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
tential Under:
Proiect -T--
::: 1
57.8
Change from General
Plan to Prc
Amount
(k3d/daY)
-205.4
69.3
-136.1
20.8
10.2
31.0
0.0
-105.2
3
Percent
-94.9%
21.2%
-25.1%
47.1%
73.9%
535%
0%
-175%
Source of generation factors: City of Carlsbad, Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 11.
MITIGATION MEASURES
The following mitigation measures will serve to reduce impacts to levels below
significant:
1. All new development will comply with the City's performance standards for sewer service. Any upgrades to the system will be funded by the developer or through the collection of sewer fees.
SOLID WASTE
ENVIRONMENTAL SETIlNG
Solid waste collection service would be provided to the project area by Coast Waste Management Company. Solid waste would be disposed of at the San Marcos Land Fill, which is located in southern San Marcos. The landfill has a
current life expectancy of one year. The County of San Diego, the landfill
5.10-7
operator, is proposing to construct a trash-to-energy plant at the landfill which -
will increase the landfis capacity.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
Table 5-21 shows development of the proposed project will generate 7.3 tons per day of solid waste as compared to zero for existing conditions. Development as proposed in the project (future GPA) will increase the amount of square footage over that allowed in the General Plan of both commercial and office uses.
Residential dwelling units will remain the same and General Plan open space
will increase. As shown in Table 5-21, retail waste generation will increase 45
percent, while office waste generation will increase 50 percent. Residential and open space waste generation will not increase over those from the General Plan.
Implementation of the proposed project will result in generation of 7.5 percent
more solid waste than development according to the General Plan.
As Carlsbad is one of the cities that depends on the San Marcos Landfill for
solid waste disposal, the demands on the landfill can result in developmental
constraints. The solid waste generated by this proposal is in large amounts, and will add to the cumulative impacts of development in the surrounding area on the landfill's capacity. Land available for landfills is becoming increasingly limited, and ways to expand the capacity of existing landfills is a necessity. The
capacity would reduce impacts associated with capacity. Also, the use of
recycling programs and trash compactors in homes would reduce the amount of
space taken up at the landfill which would prolong the lifespan of the landfill.
proposal to add a trash-to-energy plant to the San Marcos Landfii to increase its -
LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE
Based on consideration of the amount of solid waste generated by the proposed project as compared to existing conditions, impacts from the proposed project will be significant, but mitigable to levels of less than significant.
MITIGATION MEASURES
The following measures would serve to reduce impacts to solid waste service to
less than significant:
sec sctioo 9.0
Response 3W
1. The developer shall incorporate a source separation recycling program in all new development if deemed feasible.
5.10-8
&e Section 9.0 F Response 3w
Ibr/day per unit
9
9
TABLE 5-21 PROJEC'IED DAILY SOLID WASTE GENERATION
Jzxisting
Use
0.0 du
0.0 du
LAND USE
45
1.1
0.4
REsIDE?NrIAL
Low Density
Low-Medium Density
TOTAL RESIDEIVllAL 45 0.0 0
1.6 os 45.0%
0.6 0.2 50.0%
COMMERClAL
Community
Professional
636M
206 ksf
TOTAL COMMERCIAL
0.0
0.0
OPEN SPACE
TOTAL ALL USES
1.6
Potential Waste Generation Under I Change from General I Dwelling unit& I Factor
2.2 0.6 375% + 0.0 ac
bor Area
General
Plan
7
-
274 du
735 du
1,010 du
451 ksf
146 bf
~
597 ksf
42 ac
993 du
I OeO
Abbreviations: du: dwelling unit; ksf: thousand square feet; ac am.
Soum of generation factors: City of Carlsbad, Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 11.
Number dwelling units will be the same as under the General Plan (1,010).
NATURAL GAS AND ELECllUCITY
c
-91.6%
36.4% 1.2
0.0 I 0.0 1 0.; I 0%
6.2 6.7 75%
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
The San Diego Gas and Electric Company (SDG&E) will provide gas and
electric service to the project area. Currently no infrastructure exists in the project area due to the lack of development. Natural gas and electrical lines exist off-site to serve the adjacent development.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
The proposed project will result in the development of a currently undeveloped
area including the new Rancho Santa Fe Road alignment, residential, commercial and office uses, and a large expanse of open space. This will require natural gas and electric service for the area. As shown on Tables 5-22 and 5-23, use of electricity and natural gas will increase by 52 megawatt hours and 210,000 cubic feet per day, respectively under the proposed project as compared to existing
5.10-9
-_
Factor Dwelling Units,
Floor Area -
CfWY
per unit
219.1
135.0
Potential Natural Gas
Demand Under
Change From General
Plan to Project
95.3
65.7
0.0
0 du
0 du
Existing General Propod
Plan Project
274du 17du
7u du Wdu
0 du
Oksf
Oksf
Obf
1,010 du 1,010 du
451 ksf 636ksf
146ksf %ksf
5Wksf 842ksf
Oac I 42ac I 302pc
Existing
USC
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.060
0.099
0.159
0.043
0.010
0.053
00.00
0.212
Proposed Amount
Project (mcf/day) + -0.056 :: I 0.036
0.139 l- 0.061 I 0.018
0.014 +
Om4 I O-OU
0.213 I 0.002
Percent
-93.8%
%.6%
-12.6%
41.0%
41.1%
41.0%
ow
0.7%
5.10-10
, See Scction 9.0
Rcspon6c 3uu
Proposes
Project
17 du
993 du
TABLE 5-23 PROJECTED DAILY ELECTRICAL DEMAND
(&/day) General Plan to Project
Existing General Proposed Amount Percent
USe Plan Project (M/&Y)
0.0 4.2 0.3 -4.0 -93.8%
0.0 11.3 15.3 4.1 36.6%
LAND USE
RESIDENTIAL
Low Density
Low-Medium Density
TOTAL RESIDENTIAL
COMMERCIAL
Community
TOTAL COMMERCIAL
OPEN SPACE I I TOTALALLUSES
Factor -
M/&Y per unit
15 A
ls .4
41.9
46.8
-
Existing
USe
0 du
0 du
Dwelling Units, I Potential Electrical Demand Under I aange From Wig
0 du
0 ksf
0 ksf
0 ksf
0 ac
- Number of dwelling units will be the same as un
loor Area
General
Plan
-
274 du
735 du
1,010 du
451 ksf
146 ksf
597 ksf
42 ac
1010 du
636 bf 18.9 26.6 41.0%
41.1%
302 ac
0.0 413 51.8 10.6 205%
r the General Plan (1,010).
Abbreviations: du: dwelling unit; ksE thousand square feet; mwh: megawatt hours; ac: am.
Source of generation factors: South Coast Air Quality Management District, "Air Quality Handbook for Environmental Impacts Reports, revised
April, 1987."
conditions. There will be an overall increase in demand by the proposed roject
by 1.2 ercent for electricity and 12.6 percent for natural gas use. Overall natur af gas use will change little between the General Plan build-out and proposed development, but the proposed project will increase electricity use by 20.5%. The project developer will be required to install all necessary infrastructure to the requirements of the City of Carlsbad and SDG&E.
of 41.5 percent for electricity and 41 percent for natural as in commerci s use as compared to General Plan development, while residenti af demand will increase
LEWL OF SIGNIFICANCE
Based on the above analysis, impacts resulting from the proposed project will be adverse, but less than significant.
5.10-11
MITIGATION MEASURES
The following measures will serve to further reduce impacts from the project to levels of less than significant.
1. The developer shall be required to provide adequate infrastructure for the project and subsequent development which meet all City and SDG&E standards.
2. Whenever possible, the developer shall incorporate energy saving devices within the project and subsequent development such as major appliances and timed lightmg devices.
--
'I
5.10-12
5.11 LANDFORM ALTERATION/VISUAL QUALITY
,,-
ENVIRONMENTAL SETIlNG
The project site is characterized by irregular steep to moderate ridge-and-canyon terrain, with trellis drainage located along the northward, westward, and southward facing canyon. Approximately 293.8 acres (36%) of the study area lies
on slopes between 0-15 percent, 189.2 acres (23%) lie on slopes between 15-25 percent, 195.5 acres (24%) lie on slopes between 25-40 percent, and 136.9 acres (17%) lie on slopes greater than 40 percent. Slopes of greater than 40 percent
are located throughout the project area, with the majority being located in the
northwestern and middle eastern sections.
The Key Observation Points (KOP) are depicted in Figure 5-19. Photographs of
the site are shown in Figures 5-20 and 5-21. KOP number one is a view west
toward Rancho Santa Fe Road with residential development in the background. The KOP is the approximate midpoint of the study area and is at an approximate elevation of 660 feet. The KOP is approximately 500 feet east of the proposed
roadway realignment. KOP number two is a view west looking towards residential development adjacent to and west of Rancho Santa Fe Road. The
KOP is at an approximate elevation of 540 feet. KOP number three is a view east with industrial land uses being shown to the north (the far left corner). The KOP is in the northern portion of the study area and is at an approximate elevation of 540 feet. KOP number four is a view looking northeast towards the Denk water tower. The KOP is southwest of the water tower and is at an
approximate elevation of 500 feet.
The steep, uneven topography on the project site which includes ridge-and- canyon terrain is evident in the series of photographs. The valleys and hills currently existing on the site present an aesthetically pleasing surface from the
surrounding areas, which will be significantly altered by project grading.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
Implementation of the project will result in the extensive modification to existing
topography. The proposed project will alter the existing landscape with grading and the creation of cut/fill slopes. The proposed grading quantities are shown in Table 5-24. In order to provide adequate surface area for the construction of the proposed roadways (Rancho Santa Fe and collector streets) large volumes of earth will be displaced and reorganized into broad, flat surfaces. Grading for the
roadways will produce large sheet graded areas with cut slopes approximately 2:l
(horizontal to vertical). Other areas will be graded for future uses including
5.11-1
-.
Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR
-. Figure 5-19
Key Observation Points (KOPI
5.1 1-2
~~~
1- View looking west toward Batiquitos Lagoon.
I
2- View looking southwest towards residential development.
Rancho Santa Fe Road.EIR
Figure 5-20
Project Site Photographs 1 and 2
5.1 1-3
3- View looking southeast toward Stanley Mahr Reservoir.
4- View looking northeast toward Denk Reservoir
Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR
Figure 5-21
Project Site Photographs 3 and 4
5.11-4
TABLE 5-24 GRADING QUANTITIES
Area (ac)
Road 100
Mass Fieldstone 276 MAG. 72
TOTAL 448
Cut in cubic yards (cy) Fill in cubic yards (cy)
899,000 996,000
2,241,000 2,404,000 704,000 797,000
3,844,000 4,197,000
residential (373.5 gross acres), commercial (54 gross acres), and office (20 gross acres). In addition, one large 10-acre pad may be graded for future construction of an elementary school. Figures showing cross sections of the proposed grade
compared to the existing grade are supplied in Appendix G, Earthwork Quantity
Analysis completed by Geocon Incorporated.
ste Scction 9.0
Response 3ww
The proposed landform alteration including both Fieldstone and the MAG.
properties will result in 3,844,000 cubic yards (C.Y.) of cut, and 4,197,000 C.Y. of
fill. This equates to a grading ratio of approximately 7,676 C.Y. per acre (quantity of grading for Rancho Santa Fe Road as a circulation element roadway grading excluded), which is within the acceptable range as defined in the City's Hillside Development Regulations (0-7,999 acre is acceptable).
The area to be mass graded may remain undeveloped for several (2 to 10) years while development plans are being prepared and reviewed. This will result in
disturbed views of cleared and graded land to be present for an extended period.
As discussed in Section 5.1 of this EIR (Earth Resources), planting of exposed slopes is required under section 11.04.130 of the City's Grading Ordinance. The view offered by a recently planted man-made surface will be far less appealing
than natural terrain covered by the natural vegetation. It may take several years for planted vegetation to mature and create a full cover. During this time the
surface view will be reduced aesthetically and erosion may occur. The City of Carlsbad has indicated that the revegetation program and preliminary erosion control design submitted by the developer is adequate to prevent significant
erosion of exposed surfaces as long as it conforms with the adopted Landscape
Sce Seaion 9.0
*m 5Q
See Section 9.0
Response SR
Manual (C-17, B-13).
The drainage course in the south-central portion of the project area is proposed to be graded and filled, which will detract from local aesthetics. As discussed in Section 5.7 (Land Use), alteration of the natural drainage channel will require mitigation.
5.11-5
As proposed, the grading plan conflicts with sections of the City of Carlsbad's Open Space and Conservation Element including:
Section 111, B, Number 1: Grading for building pads and roadways should be accomplished in a manner that would maintain the appearance of natural hillsides wherever possible.
Section 111, D, Number 1: Areas that provide unique visual amenities and shape the urban form should be considered for preservation as open space. These areas include hillsides, hilltops, valleys, beaches, lagoons, lakes and other unique resources that provide visual and physical relief to the cityscape by creating natural contrasts to the built-up, man-made scene.
Section IV, C-3: The following lands are integral and necessary components of the Open Space and Conservation Resource Management Plan: Sensitive landforms such as ocean and lagoon bluffs, beach sands,
excessive slopes, landslide areas, major peaks and ridges, and floodplains.
The proposed grading plan also conflicts with the City's Scenic Highways Element which designates this section of Rancho Santa Fe Road as a scenic
highway. The extensive grading proposed for the adjacent development to the west and east of Rancho Santa Fe Road in addition to the roadway grading
experience associated with a designated visually scenic highway. Less land is available for grading under the proposed project versus the existing General Plan. Therefore, less grading of surrounding land will occur under the proposed project
as compared to the Land Use Element of the General Plan and visual impacts will be less.
create unnatural man-made slope which will detract from the pleasing visual
A
The extensive grading that occurs as a result of the proposed project will have
significant impacts to surrounding landform and visual quality. The project site is currently undeveloped vacant land and large scale grading will cause sigmficant
impacts. This would, however, not be an accurate comparison upon which to base this section because the currently adopted General Plan allows the realignment of Rancho Santa Fe Road and similar development of the project site. Also, the City of Carlsbad Local Facilities Management Plan (Zone 11) shows Rancho Santa Fe Road as having a future alignment which is consistent
with the proposed project, and notes that "The new conceptual alignment of
Rancho Santa Fe was approved by the City Council on October 20, 1987". Therefore, a comparison of the proposed project to the adopted General Plan must be done to understand and correctly evaluate the impacts.
As shown in Table 3-1 (Project Description), the General Plan shows
development to occur over 550 total acres on the project site, as compared to
448 total acres being developed under the proposed project. The direct result of
this would be greater impacts to landform alteration and visual quality in the
5.11-6
c
rc-
area. In comparison, the project proposes to include a "corridor" of open space (320.8 additional acres) adjacent to the eastern side of the roadway which would reduce the amount of grading necessary for the project and allow motorists to
view areas of open space to the east. As such, even though extensive alteration
to the existing topography will occur, impacts will be less than those of the
adopted General Plan, and will serve to provide for reduced landform alteration
and increased visual quality over long-range planned development for the area.
LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE
Based on the above analysis, impacts from the proposed project will be
significant, but can be mitigated to a level of less than significant.
MITIGATION MEASURES
The following mitigation measures will serve to reduce impacts from the proposed project:
1. All recommendations outlined in Appendix C and Appendix D of the Geocon report (Appendix C of this EIR) shall be implemented.
All General Grading Guidelines as outlined in the Carlsbad Grading Ordinance and Hillside Development Regulations shall be implemented. 2.
3. The developer shall submit an erosion control plan and a planting plan to
the City, and implement a planting program to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
5.11-7
,-
5.l2 CULTURAL/HISTORIC RESOURCES
ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
_,-
The area in the vicinity of Rancho Santa Fe Road contains prehistoric resources associated with Native American peoples that previously inhabited the area. A reconnaissance of the project area owned by Fieldstone was conducted by Roth and Associates in April of 1990. Also, site surveys were performed on the
MAG. property by Recon in June of 1990, and are included as Appendix H of
this EIR. The focus of these reconnaissances was to identify historic occupation
locations. In addition to the above mentioned fieldwork, an extensive record
search was conducted at the San Diego Museum of Man and the South Coastal
Information Center, San Diego State University to identify all previously
recorded cultural resources both on the project site and within one mile of all
project boundaries.
The survey conducted by Roth and Associates and Recon identifies seven
prehistoric sites as having been previously recorded within the project area. All sites were located and reassessed during the current reconnaissance. Assessment of the prehistoric sites was consistent with standards established by the U.S. Park
Service, Department of the Interior and the State Historic Resources
Commission. A brief description of the identified sites follows. More detailed information can be found in Appendix G of this EIR.
Sites assessed which exist on-site include:
0 SDM-W-181: This site is located in the south-central portion of the MAG. property on a southeast trending ridge finger. Artifacts located at this site include meta-volcanic and quartz flakes, cores, scrapers, and ceramics. Shell was visible on the surface of this site. An unusual "cresentric" artifact was found in the southeast portion of this site. It is apparent from the weathering on the broken portion of the cresentric that the break occurred in antiquity. Recon performed phase I and 11 testing on the site and concluded that the site lacked archaeological importance (C-21).
0 SDM-W-940: This site lies adjacent to both land ownerships. Recon found a scraper, two flakes, and shellfish fragments on-site. Vegetation obscures the surface, and surface artifact density may be greater than that observed.
0 SDM-W-942: Observed artifacts include meta-volcanic flakes, a scraper, and a core. Shellfish remains are also present on-site. The boundaries of this site are obscure and this site may be contiguous with SDM-W-
5.12-1
181. Recon concluded that this site is not an "important archaeological -
site" and that data collection has been sufficient to mitigate the loss of the resource. No further work is recommended.
0 SDM-W-941: The site is located adjacent to a spring along an unnamed
drainage. A site survey found 5+ flakes, small marine shell fragments, two cores and a large primary felsite flake. Surveyors found that trash litters made visibility of the site difficult, and found that cultural debris was intermixed with non-artifactual lithic material. Further testing will
be necessary to determine the presence or absence of an intact
subsurface component.
0 SDi-11569: The site is located on the south side of San Marcos Creek
350 meters west of Rancho Santa Fe Road on top of a knoll. Surveyors
observed 100+ pieces of debitage, 1 mano, 1 flaked stone tool, and
several other finds. The full extent of the site was not observed because
of high grass in the area. Based on a 1990 recording of the site by
ERC the site could contain more finds and further testing is
recommended for the site to determine the full extent of subsurface
component.
0 SDi-11570: The site is immediately across a small seasonal drainage
from SDi-11569. Testing of the site included the excavation of 17
with the previous site, dense grass covered much of the site and greatly obscured visibility. Further testing of this site, which extends into the
current project area, is recommended for either preservation or data recovery.
shovel test probes, site mapping and collection of surface artifacts. As -
0 RSFR # 1: The site scatter is located on the west side of Rancho Santa
Fe Road immediately north of Bajo Court. The open flat area has been
severely disrupted by construction-debris dumping and dirt road use.
Although small fragments of culturally deposited marine shell were found, it cannot be determined without subsurface testing whether or not this area is truly a site or possibly the result of site removal from another source that was dumped in this location.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
Six of seven sites are located in areas that will be impacted by grading activities, the extent of which would destroy potentially significant prehistoric resources. Site SDM-W-181 is not considered to be archaeologically important, however (C-21). Only sites SDi-11569 and SDi-11570 are located where the roadway will be placed. Other sites will be disturbed by grading to prepare the area for future development. Site SDM-W-941 is the only site located in an area which will not
be graded. The portion of the site SDi-11570 within the portion of the project --.
5.12-2
area surveyed by ERC was recommended for either preservation (i.e. project avoidance and creation of an open space easement) or, if not feasible, a data recovery plan (Appendix G). The full extent of subsurface material of the sites is not fully known at this time and further testing should be completed prior to site alteration. As such, significant impacts to prehistoric resources will occur as
a result of the proposed grading activities for the roadway realignment. If there are undiscovered resources on-site they may be damaged by grading.
The Historic Preservation Element of the General Plan recognizes that historic preservation is a valuable asset to the community, and that the city shall make a commitment to the management and preservation of the community’s legacy of sites, structures and resources. One goal is to provide for the protection, preservation, recognition and enhancement of the City‘s existing and continuing heritage. This can be accomplished by attaining objectives 1 through 4 which include:
0 Adopt a Historic Preservation Ordinance which will provide a set of
rules and regulations to preserve, protect and enhance historic resources and to encourage their utilization and enjoyment.
0 Establish a Historic Preservation Commission with specific powers and duties related to preservation concerns and to make recommendations to elected officials and staff concerning historic preservation issues.
0 Encourage and assist property owners to utilize all available incentives
for preservation of historic resources.
0 Adopt a historic resource inventory to be maintained and updated
periodically.
The Historic Preservation Ordiance and Commission have both been formed.
The preferred option in dealing with cultural resources, such as the ones identified as existing on-site, is to design the project in a manner that will avoid site impacts during construction and use.
LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE
Based on the above analysis, impacts resulting from the project are significant, but can be mitigated to a level of less than significant.
MITIGATION MEASURES
The following mitigation measures would serve to reduce impacts from the proposed project to levels below significant:
5.12-3
1. The developer shall have a certified archaeologist perform subsurface testing of the following sites prior to any site alteration in an effort to fully determine the extent of subsurface materials. A report shall be produced describing methods, results, and final mitigation. The sites are SDM-W-940, SDM-W-941, SDi-11569, SDi-11570, RSFR# 1.
2. If resources are found to be important, the developer shall have a certified
archaeologist develop a data recovery plan and research design, or the City shall create an open space easement on the site.
3. During project implementation the City shall adhere to regulations in the
Historic Preservation Ordinance which apply to cultural/historic resources of the project site.
5.12-4
6.0 Alternatives
I ,- 6.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
As required by CEQA, the following discussion considers alternatives to the proposed project, including the impacts associated with each development alternative. Through comparison of the alternatives, the advantages and
disadvantages of each over the project can be weighed and analyzed. State
CEQA Guidelines require a range of alternatives "governed by the rule of reason that requires the EIR to set fourth only those alternatives necessary to permit a reasoned choice" (Section 15126(d)). CEQA Guidelines further require that the discussion of alternatives focus on alternatives capable of either eliminating any
significant adverse environmental effects or reducing them to a level of not
sigdicant.
The alternatives considered in this section include:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Realign Rancho Santa Fe Road and defer proposed mass grading.
Realign Rancho Santa Fe Road with mass grading of developable land consistent with the General Plan.
Road widening in the existing alignment and defer proposed mass
grading.
Road widening in the existing alignment with mass grading of developable land consistent with the General Plan.
Road widening in the existing alignment and mass grading for proposed development.
No project.
The impacts of each alternative as compared to the project are further discussed in the following sections and are shown in Table 6-1. Grading required by each alternative and the project is shown in Table 6-2. In the following discussion,
resources which are significantly affected by the alternative are discussed. Impact
areas which are not significantly affected are not discussed.
6- 1
TABLE41
ALTERNATIVES COMPARlSON
pwo=JRoj.ct FbdignRmdlosantaRRDad
years
Significant and Not Significant; Significant and Not Significant; Significant and Significant and Significant and
unmitigable; 16,886.7 Ibslday unmitigable; 7,908.2 16,886.7 Ibs/day unmitigable; unmitigable; unmitigable; 12,7!53.1 Ibs/day generated by Ibs/day generated generated by 7.908.2 Ibs/day 12,753.1 Ibs/day 23,394.2 Ibs/day generated by traffic; 0 Ibs/day by development traffic; 0 Ibs/day generated by generated by generated by development generated by generated by development development traffic; 0 Ibs/day development development generated by development
Significant but Not Significant Significant but Not Significant Significant but Significant but No hpact mi t i Q a b I e mitigable mitigable mitipable
Significant and Significant and Significant and Significant but Significant and Significant and No Impact not mitigable to potentially unmitigable; mitigable; 4 pairs unmitigable; unmitigable; California mitigable; 7 pairs possibly more than of Gnatcatchers possibly more possibly more gnatcatchers; of Gnatcatchers 14 pairs of lost over short- than 14 pairs of than 14 pairs of possibly 14 pairs lost over shoit- Gnatcatchers lost term Gnatcatchers lost Gnatcatchers lost
of Gnatcatchers term lost
Significant but Significant but Significant but Significant but Significant but Significant but Significant but mitigable mitigable mitigable mitigable mitigable mitigable mitigable
Significant but Less than Significant but Less than Significant but Significant but No Impact
mitigable significant mitigable significant. mitigable mitigable
6-2
i
c
mpet-
Land Use (General Plan consistency, Hillside Dswlopment Ordinance
Traffic/Circulation
Public Senrims
Utilities
>
TABLE61
ALTERNATIVES CoMPARlSoN
(Continued)
RDadHlld.ningin
th. Wng Alignment and
DefOrRopOsed Masa Wing
Not significant in the short-term, but significant in the
RosdWhningh RoadWhingh the Existing theExMng Ninment Wth Alinmmtm MasaGmdiflgfor MaMGradifor General Pbn RopOsed Development
Not Significant Significant but No Impact mitigable Significant but mitigable Not significant in the short-term, but significant in the long-term
Not Significant; LOS of B, and 48,600 ADT generated
Significant but mitigable to schools with 2,388 additional students
Significant but mitigable; 614,000 gallons of water, 213,000 cubic feet of natural gas, and 52 megawatt hours of electricity consumed, 516,200 gallons of sewage and 7.3 tons of solid waste generated per day
Not Significant
Win RSF W FWiQllRSFWwilh
Grading
Not Significant; LOS of B, and 0 ADT generated
Not Significnnt; Not Significant; Significant; LOS LOS of B, and LOS of B, and of F, 55,300 ADT 34,000 ADT 48,600 ADT generated
I I Not Significant; LOS of B, and 0 ADT generated
Not Significant; LOS of B, and 34,400 ADT generated
with 2,388 additional students
Significant but mitigable to schools with 2,388 additional students
Significant but mitigable; 838,200 gallons of water, 212.000 cubic feet of natural gas, and 41.3 megawatts of electricity consumed, and 601,200 gallons of sewage and 6.2 tons of solid waste generated
per day
Not Significant; zero consumption of water, natural gas, and electricity, and zero sewage and solid waste generated per day
Significant but No Impact; 0 mitigablato additional schools with students 2,388 additional students
Significant but No Impact; zero mitigable; 614,OO water, natural gas gallons of water, and electricity 213,000 cubic feet consumed, and of natural gas, zero sewage and and 52 megawatts solid waste of electricity, and generated. 516.200 gallons of sewage and 7.3 tons of solid waste generated
per day
Significant but mitigable; 838,200 gallons of water, 212,000 cubic feet of natural gas, and 41.3 megawatts of electricity consumed, 601,200 gallons of sewage and 6.2 tons of solid waste generated per day
I
I bad-hTh.6htingAlig.rment
long-term
Not Significant; 0 additional students
Not Significant; zero water, natural gas, and electricity consumed, and zero sewage and solid waste generated per day
i 1
TABLE61
ALTERNATIVES COMPARISON
(Continued)
Landform Alteration/Visual
Quality
Cultural/ Historical Rosourm
Significant but mitigable; 4.200.0 00 cubic yards graded on 448
acres
Significant but mitigable; possibly 6 significant sites
Not Significant; 1,500,000 cubic yards graded on 100 acres
Significant, but mitigable; 2 significant sites destroyed
Significant but mitigable; 6,552,361 cubic yards graded on 550 acres
Significant but mitigable; 6 significant sites destroyed
Not Significant; 450,000 cubic yards graded on
46 acres
Not Significant
Significant but mitigable; 6,552,361 cubic yards graded on 550 acres
Significant but mitigable; 6 significant sitrs destroyed
Significant but mitigable; 3,150,000 cubic yards graded on 448 acres
Significant but mitigable; 6 significant site
destroyed
No Impact
Table indicates short-term impacts caused by alternatives. Long-term impacts caused by grading for either the proposld project or Gonrral Plan land urn M dmilar to tho= from the proposed project as identified in Section 5.0 of this EIR.
**Impacts to Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat and the California gnatcatcher will be reduced to a level of less than significant with approval of M HCP for the project site by the City of Carlsbad, DFG, and MIS.
6-4
TABLE 6-2
APPROXIMATE GRADING QUANTITIES FOR EACH ALTERNATIVE
AND THE PROPOSED PROJECT
Alternative
No Project
Road Widening in the
Existing Alignment and
Defer Proposed Mass
Grading
Realign Rancho Santa Fe
Road and Defer Proposed
Mass Grading
Realign RSF Road With
Mass Grading For General
Plan Development
Road Widening in the
Existing Alignment With
Mass Grading for General
Plan Development
Road Widening in the
Existing Alignment With
Proposed Mass Grading
The Proposed Project
Total Area Maw Grading Area Differcncc In Total Grading Total Area of
Cut and Grading Between Alternative (Acres)
FdI (c.Y.) and Project
Cut and Ffl (c.Y.) For Roadway and Mass Disturbance
-Y Mass
(C.Y.1
(C.Y.) Grading
0 0 0 0 -1300,000 -2,700,000 0
450,000 46 2,700,000 402 -1,050,Ooo 0 46 (402 to occur
(to occur at a
later date)
later for 448 total)
1300,000 100 2,700,000 348 0 0 100 (348 to
(to occur at a occur later for
later date) 448 total)
100 5,052,361 450 0 + 2,352,361 550
450,000 46 6,102,361 504 -1,050,Ooo + 3,402,361 550
450,000 46 2,700,000 402 -1,050,000 0 448
6-5
6.1 REALIGN RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD AND DEFER PROPOSED MASS GRADING
This alternative would realign Rancho Santa Fe Road to the east as proposed but would defer the additional proposed grading necessary for future development adjacent to the roadway. Surrounding land would not be immediately mass graded, but would be mass graded in the future and developed according to an amended Land Use Element of the General Plan. The environmental impacts caused by mass grading, as identified in Section 5.0 of this
EIR, would eventually occur but may be less severe in certain instances. Under
the proposed project, mass grading will occur immediately and graded land may
be left undeveloped for an undetermined period of time (possibly up to 2 to 10
years). By deferring mass grading, graded land may be left undeveloped for a period of time less than the 2 to 10 years projected for the proposed project. Exposure of the graded surface to erosion for a shorter period as the result of deferral of mass grading would lead to fewer impacts to earth, water resources, and aesthetics. Also, deferred grading may offer the opportunity to create site plan specific grading plans which could result in more sensitive design. This alternative may require use of a different funding mechanism for roadway improvements in the absence of grading for future development.
See Seaion 9.0
Rcspohse 5Q
Significant impacts would occur to the following impact areas:
Biological Resources
Realigning the roadway, as well as performing roadway widening will eliminate
seven pairs of California Gnatcatchers. The Gnatcatcher is currently listed as a
Category 2 candidate for consideration to being designated as an endangered
species by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. As such, any disturbance or elimination of Gnatcatchers is considered significant. Impacts to the riparian woodland will also result from bridge construction. As shown in Figure 6-1,
grading for future development will ultimately effect approximately 14 pairs of
Gnatcatchers, requiring mitigation. Long-term impacts to biology from this alternative may be the same as those from the proposed project.
See Section 9.0
Section 5PP
Cultural/Historical Resources
Realignment of the roadway will place it on the location of resource sites SDi- 11569 and SDi-11570. Both have been tested positive for resource potential
during the field survey for the proposed project. Disruption of these sites will
cause significant impacts and require mitigation. Other historic sites will not be
impacted by grading for the realigned roadway. Long-term build-out of surrounding land will destroy four more sites for a total of six archaeological sites destroyed. If there are undiscovered resources, they may be damaged by future
grading.
No other significant impacts will be caused by this alternative.
6-6
Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR SOURCE Project Design Consultants, MBA
E!!
6-7
Figure 6-1
Sensitive Species and
Proposed Land Use
Alternative Advantages Versus The Proposed Project
The Realign Rancho Santa Fe Road and Defer Proposed Mass Grading
Alternative will offer the following advantages to the proposed project:
0 reduction of impacts to biological resources and landform alteration compared to the proposed project in the short-term; long-term impacts will be the same as the proposed project;
0 reduced impacts to regional air quality over the short-term; long-term
impacts will be the same as the proposed project;
erosion and sedimentation will be significantly reduced in the short-
term; long-term impacts will be less than those of the proposed project because the graded area may remain underdeveloped for less
time than would occur under the proposed project.
0
0 reduced impacts to cultural/historical resources over the short-term;
long-term impacts will be the same as the proposed project.
0 Deferred grading may offer the opportunity to create site plan specific grading plans which could result in more sensitive design.
Alternative Disadvantages Versus The Proposed Project
This alternative will present the following disadvantages over the proposed project:
0 absence of the proposed funding mechanism for roadway construction
as grading of surrounding land, and ultimate development is delayed;
Based on the above analysis, the Realign Rancho Santa Fe Road and Defer Proposed Mass Grading alternative is considered environmentally superior to the proposed project because of reduced short-term impacts to all areas would be less than those of the proposed project. Long-term impacts to earth, water and aesthetic resources may also be reduced as graded land may not remain undeveloped for as long a time period as expected under the proposed project. Erosional processes may not have as great of an impact to the area if the time period over which they access undeveloped land is reduced. The cost of building the road would be much greater, however, than the cost of widening the existing alignment. Therefore, this alternative may not be financially feasible in the absence of development on surrounding land.
6-8
.-
6.2 REALIGN RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD WITH MASS GRADING OF
DEVELOPABLE LANI) CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN
This alternative would realign Rancho Santa Fe Road to the east as proposed by
the project, and surrounding land would be mass graded and eventually
developed according to the existing General Plan Land Use Element.
Under this alternative the realignment of Rancho Santa Fe Road would be
consistent with the City of Carlsbad's Circulation Element, and the City Council decision of 1987. The City's Circulation Element states that "Six travel lanes must be provided ..." (page 10) and the City Council's decision is for Rancho Santa Fe Road to have a realignment consistent with the proposed project.
Because surrounding development would occur consistent with the existing General Plan Land Use Element no future General Plan Amendment would be required.
This alternative would, however, cause similar or even greater impacts to biological resources and landform alteration as well as most or all of the other impacts identified as significant of the proposed project. Under this alternative, land surrounding Rancho Santa Fe Road would be mass graded and eventually developed with residential and commercial uses consistent with the General Plan Land Use Element. General Plan open space would be approximately 102 acres
less than that of the proposed project.
Significant environmental impacts will occur to the following areas from
implementation of this alternative:
Earth Resources
Mass grading of the project area will produce significant impacts to earth resources. Graded land will remain undeveloped for an undetermined period of
time (possibly up to 2 to 10 years), exposing the surface to potential erosion.
Implementation of this alternative will result in an additional 102 acres of land being graded as compared to the proposed project when considering development constraints within the Local Facilities Management Plan. Greater amounts of
erosion and sedimentation may occur as a result of a larger area to be cleared of
vegetation and graded.
Water Resources
Potential erosion and sedimentation from leaving a graded 348-acre area undeveloped for an undetermined time period (possibly 2 to 10 years) may cause
significant impacts to local water resources. Impacts to water resources from
6-9
implementation of this alternative will be greater than those from the proposed -
project. This alternative will cause the quality of surface and subsurface water bodies to be reduced by pollution contributions from the urbanization of the area. Drainage will be affected by emplacement of impervious surfaces which
will increase the runoff volumes and velocities, and shorter concentration times. Downstream areas may experience greater flooding that currently exist.
Air Quality
Significant long-term increases to regional air quality will result from this
alternative. Increases in pollutant levels by 7,908 pounds per day will occur to a
"non-attainment" basin due to increased vehicle miles generated by development of the project according to the General Plan Land Use Element. Impacts will be less than under development of the proposed project because less square footage of non-residential land uses will be created (the same number of dwelling units
will be constructed under both plans and fewer emission will result). As discussed in Section 5.2 of this EIR (Air Quality) emissions are sisnificantly greater under proposed development (12,753 pounds per day) than from General Plan development (7,908 pounds per day). However, short-term impacts due to project construction may be greater than proposed development as a larger area of grading results from this alternative.
Biological Resources
Greater impacts would occur to biological resources if the road is realigned because 7 pairs of Gnatcatchers will be lost, as opposed to 4 pairs of Gnatcatcher being lost by widening the existing alignment. This alternative would impact a larger number of Gnatcatcher pairs from mass grading the land surrounding the roadway than the proposed project, although the precise number cannot be calculated until the equivalent area of disturbance is plotted. Also, more native vegetation will be destroyed under development of the project area according to the General Plan Land Use Element. A reduction in open space by 102 acres will occur with development of General Plan land uses as compared to the proposed project. As shown in Figure 6-2, development of the area according to the General Plan will disturb a larger area and eliminate more
sensitive resources than the proposed project. Greater impacts could occur because of the difficulty in obtaining large contiguous open space areas to support viable populations of native plants and wildlife which is used as
mitigation.
Noise
Increased traffic volumes will cause large areas of low density residential development to be exposed to the 65 Db(A) CNEL noise contour, however noise levels can be mitigated to State, Federal and City standards. Noise impacts similar to those existing at La Costa Vale subdivision will occur by placement of
6-10
id
SOURCE City of Carlsbad, Local Facilities Management
Plan for Zone 11, MBA.
Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR
Figure 6-2
Sensitive Species and
General Plan Land Use 6-1 1
residential land uses adjacent to the new prime arterial. Short-term noiseimpacts
to existing development will be incurred by construction activities such as blasting and grading. Also, hauling of material along Rancho Santa Fe Road during the
construction period will cause impacts to homes in the La Costa Vale
subdivision.
Light and Glare
Increases in light and glare emitted and reflected from vehicular traffic and from developed surfaces will be caused by development of the project according to the General Plan Land Use Element. The greater area of urbanization under this alternative will increase levels of light and glare emitted to surrounding areas, as compared to the proposed project. Region-wide impacts will be incurred to the overall "dark-sky" used for astronomical observations at Palomar Observatory with this large of a development.
Schools
Development will generate a significant number of new students (2,388 total) to be contributed to the local school districts, which are presently operating over capacity. No change in the number of dwelling units will result between
development of this alternative and the proposed project causing the same
number of students to be generated under each scenario. This student
enrollment increase will cause the need for new facilities to be created and
existing facilities to be expanded. Without provision of adequate classroom
facilities, significant impacts will result.
Utilities
As shown in Table 6-1, the consumption of energy will be less than that of the
proposed project due to the creation of less non-residential floor area. Increases in water consumption and in the generation of sewage will occur from development of surrounding land according to the General Plan Land Use
Element due to the 102-acre increase in developable area as compared to the proposed project. Less solid waste will be generated by General Plan development in comparison to proposed development because less non-residential floor area will be created.
Landform Alteration/Visual Quality
As shown in Tables 6-1 and 6-2, implementation of this alternative after
removing development constraints will result in large-scale alteration of 550 acres of the existing landscape, and cause nearly complete removal of existing
vegetation and creation of man-made slopes. Less open space will remain (approximately 218.3 acres) with development of this alternative in comparison to
the proposed project. The visual quality of the area will be sigmficantly reduced as natural terrain is replaced by an urbanized surface under this alternative.
.--.
6-12
Cultural/Historic Resources
Six prehistoric sites located on the project site will be removed by development
according to this alternative. If there are undiscovered resources on-site they
may be damaged due to the large area to be graded. Less open space (218.3 acres) would result under development of the General Plan Land Use Element
as compared to the proposed project. Impacts from this alternative are equally
severe as those from development according to the proposed project because
both scenarios involve grading at resource locations.
Alternative Advantages Versus The Proposed Project
The following advantages are offered by this alternative:
0 consistency with the General Plan Land Use Element;
Alternative Disadvantages Versus The Proposed Project
The following disadvantages are offered by this alternative:
0 greater environmental impacts to many of the areas discussed above, including earth resources, water resources, biological resources, light and glare, utilities (water consumption and sewage generation), and
landform alteration/visual quality because of the larger area to be
graded;
0 loss of open space by 102 acres when compared to the proposed project;
Based on the above discussion, the Road Realignment With Mass Grading For General Plan Development alternative is not considered environmentally superior to the proposed project because less open space will be retained causing greater impacts to many resource areas.
""--
6.3 ROAD WIDENING IN THE EXISTING ALIGNMENT AND DEFER PROPOSED MASS GRADING
Under this alternative Rancho Santa Fe Road would be left in its existing alignment and ultimately widened to a six-lane Prime Arterial.
This alternative would require use of a different funding mechanism for financing of roadway improvements in the absence of grading for future development.
This alternative alignment, Hunsaker 1 as discussed in Rancho Santa Fe Road
6-13
Alignment Study, closely follows the existing alignment and is shown in Figure -
6-3 (C-14). The widened existing alignment will lie on the same location as the current alignment in the south portion of the roadway, but deviate slightly in the northern portion because the me must be realigned to meet prime arterial standards. This roadway was designed to meet the recommendations of the City Circulation Committee by developing a roadway along the existing corridor that adequately mitigated noise impacts to the La Costa Vale subdivision while providing an aesthetically pleasing scenic corridor. This alternative involves road widening, but not realignment, and grading of surrounding land which will be deferred until an unspecified time.
This alternative would reduce impacts to all areas in the short-term, but may cause approximately the same level of impacts as the proposed project over the long-term. Approximately 46 acres will be disturbed for roadway construction. Ultimate build-out would result in grading of a maximum of the 550 acres of surrounding land considering developmental constraints. Deferring mass grading may reduce impacts to earth, water, and visual resources in the long-term as well as grading may be associated with a specific development proposal and graded land may not remain undeveloped for the undetermined time period (possibly 2
to 10 years) proposed by the project. Grading plans associated with a specific site plan may provide a more environmentally sensitive design. see section 9.0
~e~ponse~~
The Circulation Element of the City’s General Plan states that Rancho Santa Fe
specifically state that the roadway must be moved to the east as proposed in the project. This alternative provides an alignment that is consistent with the intent of the Circulation and Land Use Elements of the General Plan.
Road must be converted into a prime arterial widened to six lanes, but does not -
This alternative may cause significant noise impacts to adjacent residents of the
La Costa Vale subdivision and impacts to biological resources of the project area
during its implementation.
Noise
Significant noise impacts would result from the increased average daily trips
(ADT) resulting from the widening of Rancho Santa Fe Road. As a Prime Arterial, Rancho Santa Fe Road could accommodate 66,670+ car trips a day. A total of 55,300 ADT are projected by 1995. This could increase noise levels for residents west of the road. A noise study completed in 1987 by Mestre Greve
Associates (noise consultants) found that the construction of noise walls varying
from 6 to 12 feet in height placed at a %foot offset to property lines and
landscape buffers would provide adequate noise mitigation for residents (C- 14). However, residents felt that the noise walls would not be able to provide
sufficient noise mitigation and that the 60 CNEL noise level that would be provided was not adequate ((2-14). The 60 CNEL is within standards for residential land use set by the City, State and U.S. Government. The Rancho
noise can be mitigated with the road in the existing alignment (C-14).
Santa Fe Road alignment study committee has stated that it is unlikely that all -
6-14
Project Boundary
I=] Assessment District Boundary
I i I
I I I
0 800 4%' North seal-
Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR SOURCE: Hunsaker and Associates
Figure 6-3
Hunsaker 1 Alignment
I- Construction will also contribute short-term noise to the area. The blasting process may be exceptionally loud in some areas, and hauling of cut material by truck to Arroyo La Costa development southwest of the project area may cause significant noise to residences along the haul route (see Section 5-5, Noise, of
this EIR). Noise impacts can be mitigated to meet Federal, State and City standards.
Biological Resources
Widening the existing alignment would possibly eliminate 4 pairs of Califomia
Gnatcatchers. Due to the sensitivity of this bird species, any detrimental impacts
to its population is considered significant. Also, impacts to the riparian woodland will result from bridge construction and project grading. However, no impact will occur to the San Diego Goldenstar. Short-term impacts to biological resources
from this alternative will be less than other alternatives, except No Project.
Long-term impacts to biology with the alternative may be the same as the
proposed project. Grading for future development will eventually eliminate 10
pairs of Gnatcatchers.
While this alternative would be consistent with the adopted Circulation Element
of the General Plan which states that Rancho Santa Fe Road should be improved, it does conflict with the City Council decision in 1987 which designated the Canyon alignment as the preferred alignment for future Santa Fe
Road.
No other significant impacts will be caused by this alternative.
Alternative Advantages Versus the Proposed Project
Implementation of the Road Widening in the Existing Alignment and Defer
Proposed Mass Grading alternative will present several advantages over the
proposed project. These include:
0 reduction of short-term impacts to biological resources and landform alteration from this project as compared to the proposed project with
deferred grading; long-term impacts may be the same as the proposed
project;
0 cost reduction of approximately $2,000,000 to build the road (C-14);
0 reduced short-term erosion and sedimentation and consequently fewer impacts to earth and water resources; long-term impacts to earth and water resources may be less than the proposed project because graded land may be left undeveloped for a shorter period of time than would occur under the proposed project;
0 reduction of impacts to noise receptors over the short-term; long-term
impacts will be the same as the proposed project;
6-16
0 deferred grading may offer the opportunity to create site plan specific -
grading plans which could result in more sensitive design
0 reduction in the severity of significant impacts to regional air quality over the short-term, however short-term impacts will be caused by construction activities; long-term impacts will be the same as the
proposed project.
Alternative Disadvantages Versus The Proposed Project
This alternative will also present disadvantages to the proposed project which include:
0 increased levels of noise to nearby residences resulting from greater levels of traffic on Rancho Santa Fe Road; (noise impacts can be mitigated to City, State and Federal standards);
0 inconsistency with the proposed roadway location according to the City Council decision of 1987 regarding roadway alignment;
0 absence of the proposed funding mechanism for roadway expansion
with the deference of grading for future development which would
form an Assessment District for financing.
-I Based on the above analysis, the Road Widening in the Existing Alignment and
Defer Proposed Mass Grading alternative is considered environmentally superior
to the proposed project because short-term impacts to all impact areas would be
less than those of the proposed project. The cost of building the road would also be substantially less reducing the dependence of the City on an Assessment District to finance the project.
6.4 ROAD WIDENING IN THE EXISTING ALIGNMENT WITH MASS GRADING OF DEVELOPABLE LAND CONSISTENT WITH THE GENERAL PLAN
Under this alternative Rancho Santa Fe Road would be widened and converted
into a 6-lane prime arterial from its present 2-lane configuration, and surrounding
land would be mass graded in preparation for eventual development according to the General Plan Land Use Element. The objective of providing the City with a
prime arterial would be met with this alternative, and consistency with the General Plan Land Use Element would be maintained during development.
6- 17
l- Environmental impacts caused by grading of the roadway alone would be less under this alternative when compared to impacts caused by grading for the Canyon alignment (to biological and cultural/historical resources as discussed
under previous alternatives). However, development of a larger area of surrounding land according to the General Plan Land Use Element would cause significant environmental impacts above the level of those caused by development
according to the proposed project (addressed in detail throughout this EIR). In
addition, roadway alignment would not be consistent with the decision made by City Council in 1987 which stated that the preferred alignment of Rancho Santa Fe Road was the Canyon alignment. The short-term impacts would be greater under this alternative than if mass grading were deferred until a later date.
Long-term environmental impacts from implementation of this alternative will be similar to those caused by the previous alternative (Roadway Realignment with Mass Grading for General Plan Development). This will occur because the distribution of land uses is the same under both alternatives, and is determined by the General Plan Land Use Element and map. Significant environmental impacts will occur to the following areas:
Earth Resources
Mass grading for General Plan land uses will significantly impact earth resources. Graded land will remain undeveloped for an undetermined period of time (possibly up to 2 to 10 years), exposing the surface to potential erosion. Considering development constraints set forth in the LFMP, approximately 550 acres will be disturbed by this operation (102 over that disturbed under
development of the proposed project). The greater area to be graded and left
undeveloped may result in more erosion than will occur from the proposed
project.
Water Resources
Potential erosion and sedimentation from grading over such a large area will
cause significant impacts to local water resources. Also, larger amounts of urban pollutants will be contributed to ground and surface waters as development is completed and utilized. Greater impervious surface cover from existing conditions and in comparison with the proposed project will cause drainage to be significantly affected by larger runoff volumes and velocities, and shorter concentration times. This could cause downstream areas to experience greater
flooding than currently exists.
Air Quality
Significant, unmitigable impacts will occur to local and regional air quality as 7,908.2 pounds of pollutants per day are added to a "non-attainment" basin by implementation of this alternative. However, impacts will be less than under development of the proposed project because less square footage of
6-18
non-residential land uses will be created (the same number of dwelling units will be constructed under both plans and fewer emissions will result). As discussed in
Section 5.2 of this EIR (Air Quality) emissions are significantly greater under
proposed development (12,753 pounds per day) than from General Plan
development (7,908 pounds per day). However, short-term impacts due to project construction may be greater than proposed development as a larger area of grading results from this alternative.
Biological Resources
Widening the roadway in the existing alignment will impact 4 pairs of Gnatcatchers while roadway realignment will impact 7 pairs of Gnatcatchers. Mass grading of the surrounding land will impact more Gnatcatchers than grading for the proposed project because 102 additional acres will be cleared. The exact number of Gnatcatchers which will be eliminated by mass grading for General Plan land uses cannot be determined because the exact area of disturbance is not defined. More native vegetation will be destroyed under development of the project area according to the General Plan Land Use Element. A reduction in open space by 102 acres will occur with development of General Plan land uses as compared to the proposed project. Greater impacts could occur because of the difficulty in obtaining large contiguous open space areas to support viable populations of native plants and wildlife which is to be used as mitigation.
Noise
Increased traffic volumes will cause large areas of low density residential
development to be exposed to the 65 Db(A) CNEL noise contour, however noise levels to the La Costa Vale subdivision can be mitigated to City, State, and Federal standards. Similar noise impacts may be created by placement of residential land uses adjacent to the new prime arterial. Short-term noise impacts to existing development will be incurred by construction activities such as blasting and grading. Also, hauling of material along Rancho Santa Fe Road during the construction period will cause impacts to homes in the La Costa Vale subdivision.
Light and Glare
Light and glare emitted and reflected from developed surfaces and vehicular
traffic will cause significant impacts to surrounding areas. The greater area of urbanization under this alternative will increase levels of light and glare emitted to surrounding areas, as compared to the proposed project. Also, the 'dark-sky' needed for astronomical observations at Palomar Observatory will be diminished
with this large of a development.
6- 19
Schools
Development of this alternative will add 2,388 new students to already impacted school districts, as will the proposed project. This will cause the need for new facilities to be created and existing facilities to be expanded. Without provision of adequate classroom facilities, significant impacts will exist.
Utilities
As shown in Table 6-1, there will be less consumption of electricity and natural gas under development of General Plan land uses compared to development under the project because less non-residential floor area will be created. Consumption of water may be greater with development of General Plan land uses due to the larger area being developed. Also, generation of sewage will be greater than development under the proposed project because of the larger
developed area. Solid waste generation will be less under General Plan
development in comparison to proposed development because less non-residential
floor area will be created.
Landform Alteration/Visual Quality
As shown in Tables 6-1 and 6-2, approximately 550 acres will be disturbed and
natural vegetation will be removed. Man-made slopes will be created over much
of the project site and little natural terrain (218.3 acres) will remain. The degree
of landform alteration will be much greater than that proposed by the project reducing the visual quality of the project area. The roadway will pass through a less aesthetically pleasing corridor under this alternative in comparison to the realignment of the proposed project.
Cultural/Historic Resources
Impacts to historic resources will be significant because seven sites have been identified to exist on-site, six of which will be vulnerable to destruction from
grading. If there are undiscovered resources they may be damaged due to the
large area to be graded. Impacts from this alternative are equally severe as
those from development according to the proposed project because both scenarios involve grading at resource locations.
Alternative Advantages Versus the Proposed Project
This alternative offers the following advantages to the proposed project:
0 consistency with the General Plan Land Use Element.
6-20
Alternative Disadvantages Versus the Propsed Project
The following disadvantages are proposed by this alternative:
0 inconsistency with City Council decision regarding the location of the preferred alignment;
0 greater environmental impacts to many of the areas discussed above, including earth resources, water resources, biological resources, light and glare, utilities (water consumption and sewage generation) and landform alteration/visual quality because of the larger area to be
graded;
loss of 102 acres of open space when compared to the proposed project;
0
This alternative is clearly not superior to the proposed project when considering the disadvantages listed above.
6.5 ROAD WIDENING IN THE EXISTING ALIGNMENT WITH MASS
GRADING FOR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT
Under this alternative Rancho Santa Fe Road will remain in the existing location and surrounding land will be mass graded for development according to the proposed project as previously identified. Environmental impacts caused by this alternative are the same impacts as identified in Sections 2.0 and 5.0 of the EIR. The following discussion analyzes significant environmental impacts caused by
this alternative.
Earth Resources
Impacts to earth resources caused by this alternative would be significant. Grading would move large volumes of earth over 448 acres considering development constraints. The site may remain undeveloped for an extended period of time subjecting it to potential erosion.
Water Resources
Potential sedimentation from surface erosion may contribute large volumes of
sediment to downstream water bodies including sensitive lagoons. Increased runoff from urbanized surfaces will cause downstream water surface elevations to be higher during flooding than under current hydraulic conditions. In addition,
-.
6-21
r”’ the quality of surface and subsurface water will be degraded by contributions of urban pollutants.
Air Quality
Significant, unmitigable impacts to regional air quality would result from development of this alternative as 12,753 pounds of air pollutants per day will be contributed to the area. More vehicle trips would result from this land use scenario in comparison to development of the area under the General Plan Land
Use Element because larger areas of non-residential land uses would be created.
Short-term contributions of air pollution emissions would be caused by
construction equipment.
Biological Resources
Sensitive biological resources would be significantly impacted by this development alternative. Similar to the project, approximately 14 pairs of the California Gnatcatcher would be eliminated, 4 from road construction and 10 from mass grading. Impacts to the Gnatcatcher are considered significant due to the sensitivity of these species.
Noise
Development at this scale will contribute above-ambient noise levels to residential land uses along the roadway. Also, the increased average daily trips (ADT) resulting from widening of the roadway will contribute noise to adjacent land uses. Large areas of residential land use at existing La Costa Vale subdivision and future development along Rancho Santa Fe Road may be exposed to noise levels greater than the 65 Db(A) State standard. A noise study completed by Mestre Greve Associates (noise consultants) in 1987 found that construction of noise walls varying from 6 to 12 feet in height placed at a 25-foot offset to property lines and landscape buffers would provide adequate noise
mitigation for residents (C-14). The noise consultant concluded that noise levels would be mitigated to below 60 CNEL d(B)A, which meets City, State, and Federal standards. Residents did not concur with the conclusions of the noise
consultant that noise levels would be mitigated to within 60 CNEL d(B)A. The
Rancho Santa Fe Road alignment study committee has stated that is unlikely that all noise can be mitigated with the road in the existing alignment (C-14).
Construction will also contribute short-term noise to the area. The blasting
process may be exceptionally loud in some areas, and hauling of cut material by truck to Arroyo La Costa development southwest of the project area may cause significant noise to residences along the haul route (see Section 5-5, Noise, of this EIR). Noise impacts can be mitigated to meet Federal, State and City standards.
6-22
Light and Glare --
Development of the area according to this alternative will contribute higher levels of light and glare to surrounding areas than currently exists. Street and structure lighting, and traffic and car headlights lights will all be contributors to local "dark-sky" degradation. Sunlight reflectance from structures and moving automobiles may cause stray nuisance glare to surrounding areas in the daytime.
Impacts from light and glare will be the same as those from the proposed
project.
Schools
As with the proposed project and other alternatives, approximately 2,388 new students will be generated by development of this alternative. All schools serving
the project area are currently operating over capacity and utilize portable
classrooms. This condition will be exacerbated in the future by development of
this alternative.
Utilities
As shown in Table 6-1, development of this alternative will cause large-scale increases in demand for energy and utilities than currently exists and that will occur from General Plan build-out. The same residential water, gas and electricity consumption, and sewage and solid waste generation will occur between this development scenario and the proposed project.
Landform/Visual Quality
As shown in Tables 6-1 and 6-2, this alternative will cause landform changes degrading the visual quality of the area. Approximately 448 acres of land will be graded after considering development constraints. This large-scale grading will remove nearly all natural vegetation and create man-made slopes. More open space (320.8 acres) will remain at the conclusion of development of this alternative than is planned under the General Plan. The roadway will pass
through a less aesthetically pleasing corridor under this alternative in comparison
to the realignment of the proposed project.
Cultural/Historic Resources
Six prehistoric sites will be disturbed and possibly destroyed by development under this alternative. Any undiscovered resources will also be vulnerable to destruction. More open space would be provided, within which to preserve
historical resources.
6-23
Alternative Advantages Versus the Proposed Project
The advantage presented by this alternative over the proposed project includes
the following:
0 less impact to biological resources (4 pair of Gnatcatchers) from roadway construction; long-term impacts of mass grading will be the same as the proposed project, 10 pairs of Gnatcatchers lost;
0 less cost to build the road ($2,000,000, reference C-14);
Alternative Disadvantages Versus the Proposed Project
The following disadvantages are presented by this alternative:
0 there may be significant noise contributions to the existing La Costa Vale subdivision by maintaining the existing road alignment; noise
impacts can be mitigated to meet Federal, State and City standards;
0 inconsistent with City Council decision of 1987 designating the Canyon alignment as the preferred alignment for Rancho Santa Fe Road;
This alternative is not superior to the proposed project because ultimate impacts
to the environment will be the same. Fewer environmental impacts will be
caused by roadway construction but surrounding land will be mass graded causing the same impacts as the project. Potential noise impacts to surrounding homes and inconsistency with Council decision make this alternative less attractive than the proposed project.
6.6 THE NO PROJECT ALTERNATIVE
The No Project Alternative would leave Rancho Santa Fe Road in its current location and would not widen or otherwise improve the road. The No Project Alternative would involve no road widening, no roadway realignment and no deferred or mass grading. Also, no future General Plan Amendment will be
required. This alternative would eliminate any impacts to biological resources
and landform alteration due to the elimination of extensive grading necessary to construct Rancho Santa Fe Road further east. Significant unmitigable impacts to the California gnatcatcher have been identified as a result of the large scale
grading required to place the roadway in the proposed alignment (refer to Section 5.4, Biological Resources). These impacts would be avoided with the no
6-24
project alternative. This alternative would also save the property owners in zones -
11 and 12 the costs required to realign the roadway estimated to be approximately $50,000,000 (C-14).
This alternative would, however, allow existing impacts to remain, while creating others. The following impact areas would become significantly impacted under
the No Project Alternative:
Air Quality
The No Project Alternative will leave the existing roadway and land use
conditions in place. Air pollution emissions generated within the project area are
discussed in Section 5.2 (Air Quality) of this EIR. Significant long-term impacts
to air quality will result with or without roadway widening and realignment, due to increased emissions over time to a "non-attainment" basin. The No Project alternative will eliminate air pollution emissions generated by construction and development of proposed land uses. However, due to the poor circulation expected on the existing roadway, the No Project alternative will result in more traffic-generated air pollution emissions being contributed to the basin than with widening and realignment of the roadway of the proposed project. Table 6-1 shows a comparison of traffic-generated air pollution emissions in 1995 (year of maximum Average Daily Trips, see Appendix F) separate from project-related
emissions with and without roadway widening. Carbon monoxide and ROG
widening and realignment. Nitrogen oxides and particulates will remain the same.
emissions will decrease in amount with improved roadway capacity achieved by
4
Air pollution from automobile emissions along Rancho Santa Fe Road will be
substantially higher in 1995 than the present. This will be a result of the greater number of vehicle trips and less efficient circulation along the roadway. Without
roadway widening travel speeds will be reduced due to increased congestion, and
longer periods of stopped traffic will exist. A lower Level of Service (LOS) will
result. Automobile air pollution emissions are generally greater with slower
speeds and lower LOS.
Noise
Under this alternative the impacts to residents adjacent to the existing alignment from noise due to traffic would remain, and become worse as the number of cars
using Rancho Santa Fe Road increased. With the projected increase in traffic
volume projected for 1995, the adverse noise condition currently in existence at La Costa Vale subdivision will be exacerbated. Noise impacts can be mitigated to meet City, State and Federal standards.
6-25
TABLE 6-3 COMPARISON OF AUTOMOBILE-GENERATED
Development /
Traffic
Condition
Existing
,-
Carbon Reactive Nitrogen
Monoxide Organic Oxides
(CO) Gases (ROG) (NO)
6,806.6 672.7 8985
AIR POLLUTION EMISSIONS ri-m
1995 Without Roadway
Widening
1995 With
Roadway Widening
Air Pollution
Emission Reduction
Attributed To Road
Widening
Emissions in Pounds Per Day
16320.0 4,8103 L733.7
13303.0 1319.7 1,733.7
3,017.0 3,490.6 0.0
Particulates
(Part)
163.1
3303
3303
0.0
Under this alternative Levels of Service @,OS) would decrease as traffic volume increased. Rancho Santa Fe Road is a major link between Encinitas, Carlsbad, and San Marcos and is planned as a Prime Arterial in the Circulation Element of the Carlsbad General Plan (estimated average daily trips of 40,000 or more). The retention of the existing alignment as is (two lane road) would directly
conflict with this General Plan designation. As such, as the number of cars using the existing alignment increased from 21,600 average daily trips (ADT) under existing conditions to 55,300 in 1995, the flow of traffic @OS) would decrease causing such impacts as traffic jams, reduced ambient air quality from large numbers of cars traveling at slow speeds, increased noise levels, and reduced safety along Rancho Santa Fe Road.
In addition, the proposed project rearranges land use distribution throughout the
project area, without changing the number of dwelling units to be constructed.
After considering development constraints in the Local Facilities Management
Plan, the proposed land use distribution includes 102.5 acres more of open space
than the land use distribution for the project area outlined in the Land Use Element of the General Plan. Thus, under the No Project Alternative land use would eventually be developed according to the General Plan and the acres for open space proposed by the project would be reduced to 218.3 acres. This would ultimately lead to greater impacts on biological resources and visual quality of
the project site.
No other significant impacts will be caused by this alternative.
6-26
Alternative Advantages Versus The Proposed Project
The No Project Alternative will not result in the environmental impacts identified
for the proposed project in this EIR. The environmental impacts which will be
eliminated include:
0 severe biological impacts to sensitive species;
0 impacts to earth resources, water resources and aesthetics from leaving
graded land undeveloped for several years;
0 increases in light and glare;
0 inconsistency with the Land Use Element of the General Plan;
0 greater demand for all public services and utilities;
0 possible destruction to cultural/historic resources.
Alternative Disadvantages Versus The Proposed Project
The No Project Alternative poses several disadvantages compared to the
proposed project which include:
-.
0 noise impacts to adjacent residents would remain and possibly increase over time;
0 the existing roadway would not be adequate to handle projected levels of traffic and LOS would become unacceptable (level of F);
0 ambient air quality would decrease as 23,394 pounds of pollutants per day are added to the air as a result of poor traffic circulation;
0 safety along the existing roadway would remain poor as traffic volumes increase;
Based on the above discussion and the existence of significant environmental
impacts to air quality, noise and traffic, the No Project Alternative is not
considered environmentally superior to the proposed project.
6.7 SUMMARY
The alternatives of Road Widening in the Existing Alignment and Defer
Proposed Mass Grading, and Realign Rancho Santa Fe Road and Defer
Proposed Mass Grading are considered environmentally superior to the proposed -
6-27
0--
.zI
project because graded land may remain undeveloped for a shorter period of time by deferral of mass grading until a later date, as compared to immediate mass grading as proposed by the project. By deferring mass grading, short-term
impacts caused by erosion can be avoided entirely and no mitigation would be
required; thus impacts to earth, water and aesthetic/visual resources are minimized. Deferred grading may also offer the opportunity to create site plan specific grading plans which in turn could result in more sensitive design. If a more sensitive grading design results, less disturbance may occur to existing habitat on-site. Other environmental impacts associated with the project which would be minimized by deferral of grading include:
1.
2.
3.
4.
Reduced impacts will occur to sensitive biological resources over 'the short- term, specifically the California Gnatcatcher which is a candidate for listing as an Endangered Species. Long-term impacts to biological resources may also be reduced by more sensitive design of specific site plans.
Reduced impacts to earth resources and water resources will result over the short-term because less grading would be required to complete the road only for either alternative project. Erosion may potentially be reduced over the
long-term as more sensitive design may be provided by future site plans.
Widening of the existing Rancho Santa Fe Road would cost approximately $2,000,000 less than the proposed canyon realignment.
Less impacts will occur to other impact areas such as air quality and noise
over the short-term. Long-term impacts will be the same as those of the
proposed project.
The alignment of Rancho Santa Fe Road in the existing location is inconsistent with the City Council decision of 1987. Realigning Rancho Santa Fe Road and deferring proposed mass grading would be consistent with the City Council decision. However, impacts to biological resources and cultural/historical
resources from grading for the roadway associated with this alternative would be
greater than grading for the existing alignment.
Less grading will be required for the Realign Rancho Santa Fe Road and Defer Proposed Mass Grading, and Widening Existing Alignment and Defer Proposed Mass Grading over the short-term. The short-coming of any proposal which
eliminates development of land surrounding the roadway is that funding for
roadway widening and realignment may not be possible without the formation of the assessment district provided by the development.
In view of the severity of biological impacts associated with roadway grading for the Canyon alignment and the apparent ability to mitigate noise levels along La Costa Vale Subdivision to acceptable City, State and Federal standards, the Road
Widening in the Existing Alignment and Defer Proposed Mass Grading
alternative is considered the most environmentally superior alternative to the project.
6-28
/--
,.e
7.0 Other Environmental Issues
./-- em
7.0 OTHER ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires the discussion of the
significant cumulative and growth-inducing impacts of the proposed project. The
following discussion addresses these issues as they relate to the development of the proposed project.
7.1 CUMULATIVEIMPACTS
CEQA Guidelines define cumulative effects as "two or more individual effects that, when considered together, are considerable or which compound or increase other environmental impacts." The Guidelines further state that the individual effects can be the various changes related to a single project or the change involved in a number of other closely related past, present, and reasonable foreseeable future projects (Section 15355).
Cumulative effects associated with the development of the proposed project have
been evaluated based on information contained in Table 7-1. The Table includes
descriptions and statuses of projects occurring within the Cities of San Marcos, Carlsbad and Encinitas, and unincorporated County lands to the east. These
projects are residential projects with twelve dwelling units or more, and
commercial, office or industrial projects over 10,000 square feet in floor area.
Project status varies from being under review to under construction. Projects
currently under review may eventually be denied.
The region used to evaluate the cumulative effects consists of roughly a 30
square mile area including Carlsbad east of El Camino Real and south of Palomar Airport Road, San Marcos south of Highway 78 and west of Twin Oaks Valley Road, Encinitas north of Encinitas Boulevard, and unincorporated County
land east to Elfin Forest. Proposed projects total approximately 10,600 dwelling units and 9 million square feet of non-residential floor space. Projects proposed throughout the region will add approximately 26,000 people to the area (based on 2.47 persons per dwelling unit per SANDAG Series 7 estimate for Carlsbad).
Earth
As large-scale development occurs throughout the sub-region, more persons will be exposed to hazards from the effects of geotechnical constraints (steep slopes and soils unsuitable for supporting structural loads) and groundshaking associated
with earthquakes. Landforms will be altered significantly from existing conditions
by most projects. Cut and fill slopes will replace natural slopes, and aesthetic
7-1
PROJECT1 LOCATION
DEVELOPER
1. Rancho North of
San Eli jo Questhaven
TAWE 7-1
Mmm) UWTA FE ROAD REALIGIIWEIIT
CUUUTIVE PROJECTS LIST
DESCRIPTION
2,744 dwelling units.
resort hotel, golf course,
regional park. commercial,
industrial
2. Plessey 1370 San - 138,065 square foot storage
Harcos 81. facility on 22 acres
3. Industrial Diamond Street Industrial subdivision;
Park 16 lots of industrial
development on 28 acres
4. Industrial La Costa
Park &adous
5. BCE Specific Questhaven
P1 an
6. Cielo Azul Questhaven
Light industrial
243 acre Business Park;
139 acres of industrial, 25
acres of commercial. and 52
acres of open space (on two
non-contiguous sites)
38 single-fatly
residences on 80 acres
(2 acre minimum custom lots)
7. Farrand Lakeridge 28 single-faily
Enterprises residences on 8.3 acres
8. Fargo Rancho Santa Fe 155 single-family
Road residences on 195 acres
(includes 13 acres of
ronmcrcial)
9. Conmcrcial North of San Retai 1
Center Harcos least of
Rancho Santa Fe
STATUS
In review
In review
Approved
Under
construction
Approved
Approved
Pending
Approved
In review
1
7-2
TAME 7-1
CUUUTIVE PRNECTS LIST
(antid)
DESCRIPTION PROJECT/ LOCATION
DEVELOPER
STATUS
Approved 105 mobile home park 10. Las Brlsas Linda Vista Or.
Phase I1
In review 11. Presley Applcwilde Or. 107 single-family
resi dences
12. Emerald Hanes Las POSaS 99 single-family
nsi dences
approved
107 single-family
res 1 dences
Under
construction
13. U.S. Homes Via Vera Cruz
14. Palm
Hi ghlands
Las Posas 296 single-family
resi dences
Under
construct i on
15. Meadowlark
Estates
San Cbrcos 61.
and Rancho Santa
Fe Road
Residential Under
construction
Trash-to-
energy plant
Approved;
pend i ng penni t
i ssuance
16. North County
Resource
Recovery
Associates
San Marcos
Landf 11 1
17. University
Comnans
Northeast and
southeast
comers of
Questhaven
Road and
Rancho Santa
Fe Road
1.800 multiple
and single-family
duelling units,
30-50 acres of
conmrcial. 170
acres of open
space, and a 10
acre school on a
total of 450 acres
In review
16. Alga Hills SE corner of 240 single-family
residences on 640 Alga Road and
Alicante Road. acres
Approved
7-3
1
TAUE 7-1
CUUUTIUE PRWECTS LIST
(antlnucd)
DESCRIPTION PROJECT/
DEVELOPER
LOCATION STATUS
19. Tienda de
la Esquina
East of Rancho
Santa Fe, between
Mission Estancia
and Cmino Vera
Crur
6as station, retail
conncrclal and
office on 7.6 acres
Wi thdram,
pend 1 ng
resbuni t ted
20. Aviara North of La
Costa Avenue,
between 1-5 and
El Cmino Real.
2,800 sing 1 e- f ami 1 y
residences. a 400 room
hotel, a golf course,
school.
Under con-
struction
21. Arroyo La
Costa
Between El Camino
Real, Rancho
Santa Fe Road
north of Calk
Barcelona
Master Plan Amendment;
includes 1.076 single-
family residences
Approved
22. Rancho
Verde
Southeasterrmost
portion of
Carlsbad. east
and south of
Rancho Santa Fc
174 single-family
residences on 216 acres
Approved
23. Shelley
Carlsbad
East of Rancho
Santa Fe Road
and south of
Olivenhain
256 single-family
residences on 180 acres
Under review
To1 1 i ng 24. Rice
Property
East of Rancho
Santa Fe Road,
north of
Encinitas City
boundary
196 single-fmily
residences on 110 acres
TAME 7-1
QlllUTIK PRQlECTS LIST
(ePntinued)
DESCRIPTION LOCATION STATUS
To1 1 ing
PROJECT/
DEVELOPER
25. Park View
uest
Southeast of
Rancho Santa Fe,
south of inter-
section with
La Costa Avenue
129 single-fanily
residences on 27 acres
South of Mission
Estanci a
36 single-fanily
residences on 8 acres
To1 1 ing
Approved
26. Park View
East
27. The Fairways
Residential
Southeast of
Alicante. south
of Alga Hills,
near the end of
Bolero
131 single-fmily
residences on 41 acres
28. Pavoreal
(Vi wpoi n t
Res I dent I a 1 )
East of Aviara.
west of El Cmino
Real
101 single-fmily
residences on 80 acres
Approved
Under
construction
29. Plaza
Paseo Real
Northwest corner
or Alga Road, and
El Cmino Real
Canrncricial center; in-
cludes 146.000 square feet
of retall. 60.000 square
ftet of library space. and
a 22.000 square foot post
office .
30. The Rhoades 157 South Santa 200 student Capacity,
School Fe Road grades k-8
Approved
9/26/89
31. Residenttal Rancho Sumnit 25 lot, 111 acre
Development Dri ve major subdivision
EIR required
Approved
8/8/89
32. Residential Lone Jack Road 58 lots
Development at Lone Hill Lane
7-5
TAW 7-1
CUllUTIK PRQlEers LIST
(cmtlnucd)
DESCRIPTION PROJECT/
DEVELOPER
LOCATION STATUS
33. Residential
Development
Rancho de pbyo
Road, south of
Bunann
23 lots Approved
5/24/89
34. Uanni ngton
Homes
611 Crest Dr. 45 slngle-fanily
resi dences
Approved
7/7/89
23 single-fmily
residences on 12 acres
35. Residential
Development
800 block of
Starflower Road
In review
36. Residential
Devel opnrnt
North side of
11th. at Rancho
Santa Fe Road
35 single-fmily
res i dences
Approved
7/7/89
EIR required 37. Residential
Development
Uest end of
Rancho View
Terrace
13 single-fanily
residences on 8.5 acres
38. Residential
Development
East of Lone
Jack Road, north
of El Canino del
Norte
20 single-tmily
res i denccs
Approved
EIR required 39. Residential
Development
East of C street,
north of Cmino
del Rancho, south
of 14th street
17 single-fani ly
res i dences
Approved
5/24/89
40. Residential
Development
Rancho de Mayo
Road and Bunann
32 single-family
res i dences
41. Residential
Development
Hanchester
Avenue between
Encinitas Blvd.
and Colony
Terrace
16 single-family
residential on 19 acres
Approved
10124189
-.
TAME 7-1
CUIKATIVE PROJECTS LIST
(opntinucd)
PROJECT/
DEVELOPER
LOCAT ION DESCRIPTION STATUS
Approved 42. Residential
Development
North side of 12 single-farnily
Lone Jack Road,
east of Rancho
Santa Fe Road
residences on 9 acres
CAB con-
sideration
12/5/89
43. Residential
Develownent
Rancho de hayo 23 slngle-family
Road, south of
Bunann. by way
of Fortuna Ranch Road
residences on 60 acres
44. Uillow
Creek
South side of
Olive Road.
across from
haroo
19 single-fmily
res i dences
Approved
51nm
45. Torrey
Pacific
Group
North Rancho
Smi t Drive
27 single-family
resldences on 111 acres
In review
46. Rancho
Cielo/
Brl an
Pboney
North of Del
Deos Highway,
in central
County
543 single-fmily
residential units,
neighborhood comnercial,
recreation center, fire
station, open space and
equestrian center
In review
47. John Baker South Sugarbush
west of San
Narcos
23 single-fmily
residential units on
92.5 acres
On appeal
48. Lcico Devel-
opment
Southwest of El
Norte Parkway
and Rees Road
16 single-family
residences on 4.7 acres
Approved
91 single-fmily
residences on 27.8 acres
Approved 49. NSN Ltd. Northwest of
1-15 and
Cbntiel Road
7-7
TAUE 7-1
CUUUTIVE PRWCTS LIST
(emtlnrd)
PROJECT/ LOCATION DESCRIPTION
DEVELOPER
50. Iboney-Levine Worth of Del 87 single-fmily
and Assoc. Dcos Highway residences on 303 acres
In central County
51. Encina Wcst of San 5 buldings on 71 acres
Canpost Marcos
Plant Landfill off
of Questhaven
Road
STATUS
Ownership in
transfer
In review
-.
7-8
t
.-
quality of the surface will be diminished. Grading associated with the proposed project, when considered with that of all other projects will be considerable. Mitigation measures set forth by earth engineers will reduce impacts associated with these projects to less than significant.
Air Quality
Additional dwelling units and population from projects proposed in the area will result in additional vehicle trips within the region. Some residents living in the
region will work in North County, while others will commute to jobs in San
Diego. Pollutant levels from mobile sources will increase as a result of the
greater number of vehicle trips and longer trip lengths. Projects listed on Table
7-1 will have a significant, unmitigable impact on air quality within the San Diego Air Basin. Region-wide implementation of alternative modes of transportation
will serve to reduce impacts.
Water Resources
As land uses change from undeveloped land to residential and nonresidential
uses, surface cover will be altered. Greater impermeable surface area will be created which will contribute to greater runoff volumes. Drainage infrastructure will cause flow velocity to be increased, but slope reduction will offset this effect. Typically, drainage from developed surfaces is of greater volume and velocity, occurring over a shorter time period than drainage from undeveloped surfaces. Water quality will also be adversely affected by development. Urban runoff contains pollutants such as oils, detergents, and grease in higher quantities than natural runoff. Water contributed to lagoons downstream of development will be of poorer quality, and possibly detrimental to lagoon ecosystems. Greater erosion and sedimentation will result from grading. Lagoon sedimentation would significantly damage lagoon ecosystems. Mitigation measures will reduce impacts
from most individual projects to less than significant.
Biological Resources
Biological resources present in the region will be altered significantly by
cumulative development. Approximately 40 pairs of California gnatcatchers will
be eliminated from cumulative development. Native species will be removed and
replaced by landscaping, and endangered species will be more vulnerable to
adverse affects of encroachment by the urban environment. The ability of native species to reproduce will be diminished due to the reduction of undeveloped landscape. Sedimentation in wetland areas such as lagoons and drainage channels will increase from all projects. Project-specific mitigation, including following of the 404 permitting process, will reduce cumulative impacts to levels
of less than significant. Careful documentation of existing species throughout the
sub-region and implementation of mitigation measures provided by certified
biologists will reduce impacts. Implementation of Carlsbad's Habitat Management Plan will mitigate impacts in the City to levels of less than
see Section 9.0
Respo~~
2~ and SQQ
7-9
- significant. Cumulative impacts will remain significant and unmitigable to the
region.
Noise
As undeveloped areas are developed with urban uses, increases to ambient noise levels will result. Added vehicular traffic will contribute greatly to ambient noise levels adversely affecting persons and biota existing in the area. Construction activity noise will also increase short-term noise intrusions to localized receptors. Implementing noise ordinance standards to reduce noise levels will reduce cumulative impacts to less than significant.
Light and Glare
Light emission and reflection from the region will increase significantly with the
additional development shown in Table 7-1. Astronomical observations at Palomar Observatory will be adversely affected, and nuisance light reflection from structures and passing vehicles will increase greatly in the future. Implementation of design standards aimed at reducing the intensity of light
reflectance and emittance, and directing light away from sensitive receptors will provide mitigation for impacts from individual projects.
Land Use
1 Land uses throughout the region will change significantly from largely
undeveloped land to urbanized land. Vacant and underutilized lands will be
transformed into urbanized landscape. Development consistent with County and municipal plans will accomplish objectives pertaining to achieving orderly growth in the area. Mitigation and adherence to regional plans will reduce cumulative impacts to less than significant.
TrafEc/Circulat ion
Additional traffic generated by the overall increase in residential and non-residential development will create signifcant cumulative impacts on local
streets and regional circulation patterns which can be mitigated to levels below
sigmficant. Projects within the City of San Marcos adjacent to Rancho Santa Fe
Road will directly impact the level of service, although impacts can be mitigated
to not significant with mitigation as required in this EIR. Impacts will be
particularly noticeable during morning and evening peak commuter hours. Widening of Rancho Santa Fe Road will assist in maintaining adequate traffic flow and acceptable levels of service in the vicinity of the project. Arterial roadways may be severely impacted by traffic contributions from this
development and cumulative projects.
see Section 9.0
~espo~e2~
-.,
7- 10
rc"
f-
Public Services
Development within the region will cause demand for public services from
responsible agencies to increase. Adequate provision of services will have to be maintained during build-out of the various communities comprising the region. Regional and local plans provide conditions for service availability during build-out reducing impacts to less than significant levels.
Utilities
Consumption of natural gas, electricity and water, and generation of solid waste and sewage will increase with regional build-out. The addition of distribution lines or upgrades to existing infrastructure will be required for all utilities as communities expand. Solid waste disposal will become more difficult as space becomes less available and waste quantities increase. Significant impacts will
result if regional recycling plans are inadequate or not followed strictly. Impacts
will be less than significant with mitigation measures being implemented.
Landform Alteration/Visual Quality
Development in undeveloped areas will cause significant impacts to regional
aesthetic quality and existing landforms. Grading and placement of cut and fill slopes will alter the natural terrain and produce man-made topography. This project will serve to dramatically alter existing conditions in eastern Carlsbad. Regionally, hillsides and summits will be built upon, reducing visual resources significantly. Adherence to the mitigation measures identified by local and regional plans for individual projects will reduce impacts to less than significant.
Archaeological/Historical Resources
Previously undiscovered historic and prehistoric artifacts in presently undeveloped
areas of the region will be vulnerable to destruction during development of the
projects listed in Table 7-1. Documentation of cultural history may suffer
irreparable losses if undiscovered resources are not sufficiently protected.
Regional plans may adequately protect currently undiscovered resources, however
on-site studies and monitoring of site grading will help ensure protection of
important artifacts. Mitigation measures prescribed for individual projects will
reduce impacts to less than significant.
LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE
Cumulative environmental impacts resulting from regional development shown in Table 7-1 will be significant. Impacts to most impact areas, except air quality
and b-, e to levels of less than sigmficant. The
impact areas of water res t and glare, traffic/circulation, and aesthetics/landform alteration can be mitigated to levels of less than significant.
7-11
-
7.2 GROWTH-INDUCING IMPACI'S
This section of the EIR considers the ways development according to the proposed project could directly or indirectly encourage economic or population growth in the region. The proposed project will add 2,523 persons and 843,000 square feet of non-residential building space to Zone 11 in the City of Carlsbad. This will result in the addition of 246,000 square feet of non-residential floor area to the area over that allowed under the General Plan. There will be no net change in the number of dwelling units as a result of project approval. However, there will be an increase in residential development of the area since the project site is now vacant. Low density residential land use will decrease by approximately 367 acres while low-medium density residential will increase by 50
acres.
Currently, Zone 11 is undeveloped. Development according to the proposed project will occupy approximately 34 percent of Zone 11, and thus act as a
catalyst for indirect growth in the subregion. Added population in the area will
require access to proposed commercial and office/professional facilities.
Approximately 50 acres of commercial development and 20 acres office
development are planned as part of this project. These facilities may serve the
majority of commercial and office/professional needs of this development.
However, population added to Zone 11 will create the need for service development elsewhere in the City, resulting in indirect growth-inducing effects.
The project will also convert the existing two-lane roadway into a 6-lane prime
arterial, and realign it through currently inaccessible land. Provision of a prime
arterial itself is considered growth-accommodating rather than growth-inducing, as
it will provide circulation for City-wide build-out according the General Plan. Currently, intersection capacity is unacceptable at two intersections during peak traffic hours, and future projections indicate that the entire roadway will operate unacceptably by 2010. As discussed in the Project Description (Section 3.0 of this EIR), roadway improvements will be financed by assessing future development along the roadway. Future development of surrounding land and roadway widening are therefore objectives of the project. Both aspects of the project will serve to accommodate growth within the City and the region.
The incremental difference in growth of the project site under the proposed
project is small when compared to build-out of the site according to the General Plan. Greater non-residential building space (246,000 square feet) will be created by the project. This will not cause significant population increases or the need for expanded community services and will not be growth-inducing.
7-12
7.3 IMPACT AREAS CONSIDERED BUT NOT FOUND TO BE POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT
The following impact areas were considered in the Initial Study for the project but were found not to be potentially significant:
0 Natural Resources
0 Risk of Upset
0 Population
0 Housing
0 Energy
0 HumanHealth
0 Recreation
The Initial Study and Environmental Checklist, required by CEQA, are included
as Appendices to this EIR. Each of the above impact areas is addressed in the Initial Study.
7-13
7.4 SHORT AND LONG TERM ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES
The Land Use Element of the City of Carlsbad General Plan designates acreages
of land uses surrounding the proposed Rancho Santa Fe Road alignment. As
shown in Table 3-1 (Project Description), these areas are proposed to be changed
by General Plan Amendment. Land uses proposed by the developer are consistent with the long-term plan for the City, however, areas of each land use are not consistent with the General Plan. A large area of low density residential will be removed (366.8 acres) and 79.9 acres of low-medium density residential will be added to the area. No net change in the number of dwelling units will result from this redistribution of land uses but an increase in non-residential floor
area by 246,000 square feet will occur. Open space will also increase by 261.1
acres, community commercial will increase by 17.3 acres and professional and related commercial will increase by 8.5 acres. Rancho Santa Fe Road will be
realigned and widened to six-lanes from La Costa Avenue to Melrose Avenue.
Due to inconsistencies with the General Plan, development of the project could
sacrifice the maintenance and enhancement of long-term productivity for
short-term use of the site. However, the increase in open space area will lead to
species will maintain long-term productivity and may reduce any affects redistribution of land use may have on environmental degradation.
preservation of the sensitive areas on the project site. Preservation of sensitive -
Growth of the City is governed by the Growth Management Plan which outlines
the timely and systematic provision of adequate public facilities during build-out. Development of the project site according the City’s General Plan is not based
on a specific date in time, but on the provision of facilities to serve the site and
compliance with the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 11. Adherence
to these documents and their guidelines will ensure proper provision of pubic
facilities during development. The proposed project does not presently meet the
City‘s Land Use Plan, however with subsequent General Plan amendment the proposed project will not sacrifice long-term productivity for short-term gain.
7- 14
7.5 SIGNIFICANT IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES
The EIR identified the following impact areas that will result in significant irreversible environmental changes that can not be fully mitigated:
0 Biological Resources (Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat and the
California gnatcatcher)
The impacts associated with these impact areas are discussed in detail in Sections
5.2 and 5.4 of this EIR, respectively. Impacts to Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat and the California gnatcatcher will be reduced to a level of less than significant upon approval of a Habitat Conservation Plan for the project site.
7-15
8.0 References
8.0 REFERENCES AND PERSONS RESPONSIBLE FOR PREPARATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
A. Persons Responsible for Preparation of the EIR
1. Lead Agency City of Carlsbad 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009-4859
2. Primary Preparers of the EIR
Cotton/Beland/Associates, Inc. 747 East Green Street, Suite 400 Pasadena, CA 91101
619 South Vulcan Avenue, Suite 205 Encinitas, CA 92024
B. Persons and Organizations Contacted
1. Stewart Gary, Battalion Chief, Carlsbad Fire Department (7/31/90)
2. Captain Kellogg, Carlsbad Police Department (7/30/90)
3. Cliff Lang, Director, Carlsbad Library (7/31/90)
4. Marv Glusak, San Marcos Unified School District, Director of Pupil
Personnel Services (7/31/90)
5. Gene Fredrick, Encinitas Unified Elementary School District, Facilities
Manager (7/3 1/90)
6. Administrative Secretary, San Dieguito Unified High School District
(7/31/90)
7. Jon King, Scripps Memorial Hospital in Encinitas (7/31/90)
8. Wayne Wilson, Administrator, Tri-City Medical Center (7/3 1/90)
9. Anne Hobart, Administrator, San Luis Rey Hospital (7/31/90)
10. Mark Rowson, Engineer, Project Design Consultants (8/22/90)
8- 1
11. Doug Avis, The Villages of La Costa, 10/19/90)
12. Al Cooper, Principal, Cooper Engineering, December 11, 1990.
13. Christer Westman, Associate Planner for the City of Carlsbad.
14. Sherri Howard, Associate Engineer, City of Carlsbad.
C. Documents
1. Rancho Santa Fe Road Route Adoption Report, City of Carlsbad, September 15, 1989.
2. Rancho Santa Fe Road Assessment District EIR Project Description, Project Design Consultants
3. Environmental Impact Assessment, City of Carlsbad Planning Department, January 1, 1990.
4. Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 11, City of Carlsbad
5. Land Use Element, Carlsbad General Plan
6. Circulation Element, Carlsbad General Plan ?
7. Conservation and Open Space Element, Carlsbad General Plan
8. Geologic and Seismic Safety Element, Carlsbad General Plan
9. Noise Element, Carlsbad General Plan
10. Public Safety Element, Carlsbad General Plan
11. Public Facilities Element, Carlsbad General Plan
12. Arroyo La Costa Master Plan EIR
13. City of Carlsbad Planning Department Administrataive Policy
Number 17.
14. Final Report of the Rancho Santa Fe Road Alignment Study Committee, September 1987.
15. La Costa Master Plan, MP-149 (G), Planning Department, City of Carlsbad, July 6, 1982.
8-2
16. Memorandum from Christer Westman, Planning Department, City of Carlsbad, December 7, 1990.
17. Rancho Santa Fe Road Mass Grading Revegetation Study, Gillespie- Debrenu> and Associates, Inc., October 1990.
18. Letter from the City of Carlsbad to Project Design Consultants, December 28, 1990.
19. Memo from the City of Carlsbad Traffic Engineer to Christer Westman, February 5, 1991.
20. Drainage Study for Encinitas Creek by Howard H. Chang, September, 1990.
21. The Phase I1 Archaeological Test of Malcolm J. Rogers’ Site SDM-W-181 at La Costa Town Center in the City of Carlsbad, California by Recon, September 9, 1991.
8-3
9.0 Responses to Comments on the Draft EIR
,r-
9.0 RESPONSES TO COMMENTS ON THE DRAFI' EIR
The Draft EIR was made available for public review and comment pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines (Section 15087(c)) for a period of 45 days beginning July 15, 1991 and ending on August 30, 1991. An additional two week period extending from August 30, 1991 to September 13, 1991 was provided for public comment on the DEIR. During this review period, comments have been received in response to the Draft EIR. These responses include written comments from the public and responsible agencies. In accordance with State CEQA Guidelines, the Final EIR shall respond to comments received during the
noticed period and, "the Lead Agency shall evaluate comments on environmental issues received from persons who reviewed the Draft EIR and shall prepare a written response" (Section 15087(a)).
Comments on the Draft EIR were received from interested agencies, organizations, and individuals. Copies of each comment letter received are in this section. The individually addressed comments have been given a reference number in the left margin. Any additional information or changes that may be incorporated into the text of the Draft EIR in response to a comment are identified with this reference number adjacent to the text within the margin.
The following is a list of agencies and other interested parties that submitted comments on the Draft EIR during the noticed review period:
1. California Department of Fish and Game (August 29, 1991).
2. City of San Marcos (September 4, 1991).
3. Doug Avis, The Fieldstone Company (September 14, 1991).
4. Fred Morey, MAG. Properties (August 29, 1991).
5. United States Department of the Interior, Fish and Wildlife Service (September 23, 1991).
6. State of California, Department of Fish and Game (December 17, 1991).
9-1
t
?
u
I
).1. .I C.lknlo
Aomorandum
92009
' August 23, 1991
Draft Cnvironaenta1,Umpact Report - Rancho Sante Fe Road Alignn4Rnt and Hair Oradinp, S&n biego County - 8CH 90010850
The California nvironmental Quality Act and the Cslifornih cndongrrod Specier A t require the lord agency to appropriately condition tho projec and fully implement the rtatutory mitigation and monitoring requi omenta to offset adverro impactr to the Collowlnq resourcea hich nay be impacted by this project.
1.
2.
3.
atened a eciec of lant and animalr. If he n apel on or ro ee r e# ot ani it: tr Zitat orsentfa! ti its 2ntinued oxlstoneo, the a licant must obtain ruthorization from the Departmont of Pi and Game (DPo) purruant to rirh and Game Code Section 2011
khat thoro rhoul be no net loar of wetland acreage ot wmtl nd habitmt valuor, ither on or off project site, due to projo t
Wotland6. Compl once with the DFG'e Wetland Policy require
development. A itigation and monitoring plan sub oct to D
including, but no necrrrrrily limited to, freshwater marsh, riparian woodland, 4 ask woodland, and riparian acrub vsgotation.
Watmrcourres. Th DFG oppores the olimination of watercoursRo and/or their conv rion into subeurfsce drains. All watercouraer, wha or intermittent or perennial, rust be retoined and prov ed with retback buffers a propriati to prrrotve the ripa an and aquatic habitat vafuer. Earthen chrnnelr ahould b interconnected with adjacent large open space areas to in ease their effectivenesu a5 wildlife corridorr in urba surraundinqa. The DFG has direct jurisdiction undo Cirh and Game Code sections 1601-03 in rogard to any pro sed activities that would divert or obstruct the natu 1 flow or change the bed, channel, or bank of an rivor, atc in, or lake. We recommend early conruits t ion inc modification of the pro 05Cd project may ha required to avoid impact6 to firh and wildrife cerources.
b approval rhould required for loss of renritive 2 sbitatr,
I
Response U: Comment noted. The Final EIR contains mitigation measures and a mitigation monitoring program which will reduce environmental impacts to levels of less than significant, with the exception of impacts to air quality, and Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat and the California gnatcatcher. As stated in the EIR however, significant impacts to Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat and the California gnatcatcher will be mitigated to levels of less than significant with the approval of a Habitat Conservation Plan for the pro* site. Please note that the EIR iS a "Program EIR" in which impacts identified and mitigation required iS at the level of speciricity of the project. Subsequent environmental review may be required when specific development plans are submitted to the City.
Response 1B Within San Diego County, a number of efforts have been initiated to address tht long-term concern over the loss of Scrub Habitat and Species of Concern generally. The City, for example, has entered into a Memoranda of Agreements ("MOAS") with the US. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) and State Department of Fish and Game (DIG) for the development of a multi-species, City-wide Habitat Management Program ("HMP"), and, as part of that program, for the development of a Habitat Conservation Plan ("HCP") for the conservation of Scrub Habitat and Species of Concern.
The MOAS contemplate that the species covered will be addressed as if they were listed as "endangered" under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) and the California Endangered Species Act (CESA), and that appropriate mitigation will be provided.
As part of the early phases of the HMP, it is contemplated that the Rancho Santa Fe Road project would be addressed as an "interim project" and considered for approval by the City, DFG and FWS under the HCP. It should be noted that more than one HCP may be prepared at various phases of the HMP. The work program and timeline for the adoption of the project HCP have been included as Appendix J.
The draft EIR sets forth adequate mitigation measures and criteria to assure provision of adequate mitigation for anticipated impacts of the project on Scrub Habitat, the gnatcatcher, and other Species of Concern which would reduce the impacts to these resources to a level of less than significant. In general, these mitigation measures include the acquisition of 217 acres of habitat which does, or will, support at least 14 pairs of gnatcatchers.
It is the intent of the City that the more detailed plan implementing thew mitigation measures will be prepared in concert with DFG and FWS as an HCP,
so that agreements may be concluded with these agencies and The Fieldstone Company (TFC) to provide such mitigation, and to assure the City and TFC that, in the event the gnatcatcher or other Species of Concern were to be listed as endangered under either ESA or CESA, that the project could proceed.
In order for the Secretary of Interior to approve the HCP and to conclude these agreements, it will be necessary to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Secretary that, among other things: 1) to the maximum extent practicable, the impacts of the taking will be minimized and mitigated; and 2) the taking will not appreciably reduce the likelihood of the survival and recovery of the species in the wild.
In addition, as suggested by the FWS in Comment SKK, certain issues must be addressed as part of the HCP. In this regard, as set forth above. the City has concluded that: 1) mitigation which meets the criteria and is in accord with the mitigation measures set forth in the draft EIR will not appreciably reduce the likelihood of the survival and recovery of the gnatcatcher and other Species of Concern in the wild; and 2) based on the best available information, the project, including the boundaries and extent of the grading proposed, minimizes to the maximum extent practicable, the impacts on Scrub Habitat and the Species of Concern, while providing the approximately 3,800 residential units and 60 acres of commercial development within the entire 2,210 acre Assessment District which are necessary to provide the approximately S6O,OOO,ooO which will be necessary to finance the roadway infrastructure improvements in this area.
The foregoing is generally consistent with FWS comment SI1 and contemplates a process substantially as suggested by FWS; however, the standards suggested by FWS for the HCP are slightly different than the standards required to be observed by ESA with respect to HCPs and the issuance of Section 10 (a) permits. It is anticipated that the standards set forth in ESA will guide the process. As to the sequencing mechanism suggested in that comment (SI), the City assumes that. while all of the recommended steps may be articulated at the same time, they will be reviewed and approved individually in a sequential manner (i.e., as they are developed). The City also concurs with FWS that the articulation of this process will allow the City to finalize and certify the EIR at this time, but would be followed by the development of a more detailed HCP or mitigation plan which would include the steps requested by the FWS in Comment 511.
If it were not possible to develop an HCP which is approved by FWS and DFG in accordance with the MOAS within a reasonable time, the City could develop a mitigation plan which complies with the mitigation standards and measures set forth above which would reduce anticipated impacts to a level of less than significant. Further, even if the impacts to these resources were not mitigated to a level of less than significant pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, the City could determine and find that, based on, among other things, public health and safety concerns, the remaining unavoidable significant impacts had been reduced to an acceptable level when balanced against these concerns, and that the project could proceed.
Of course, in order to obtain the joinder of FWS in the agreements as contemplated by the MOAs, the Secretary of Interior would be required to fmd that the impacts to any endangered species had been minimized and mitigated to the maximum extent practicable. The HCP process will provide the opportunity
to accomplish this objective, all as intended and contemplated by the City. Fws, and DFG in the MOAs.
Response 1C: Comment noted. The project will caw loss of approximately 1.6 acres of cottonwood-willow riparian woodland in San Marcos Creek by bridge consmaion and 13 acres of Baccharis scrub habitat by mass grading, Mitigation measure number 5 on page 5.4-19 (Biological Resources) of the Final EIR contains mitigation measures and a mitigation monitoring program which requires the developer to apply for and obtain, if required, a Clean Water Act, Section 404 permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and a California Fish and Game Code 1W1603 agreement for potential impacts to San Marcor Creek and for impacts to Baccharis scrub. Specific mitigation measures will be determined at the time these perznits and agreements are being considered. Such mitigation will reduce impacts to wetland biological resources to levels of less than significant.
Response 1D: Comment noted. As discussed on page 5.7-10 of the FEIR. the project proposes to convert the drainage channel in the south-central portion of the project area into a subsurface drain. Mitigation measure number 10 on page 53-7 (Water Resources) of the FEIR requires the preservation of the natural drainage channel
as a "best management practice" to preserve the quality of stormwater runoff. By preserving the channel, impacts to watermums are minimized and are idenlified as being less than significant.
1. Projectr coordinabor 1. City of C~rlrbad
Paqa Two AUgUrt 23, 1991
0 to filing tho Notice 1
If you havo any I Ro ional Wanagtr, Ro
f Determination.
uertions, pleaae contact RC. Fred Worthlay, on 5, Beprrtmrnt of Firh and Oarne, I
Response 1E: This comment docs not pertain to the adequacy of Be EIR and is not further addressed.
Response 1F The FEIR fully addresses impacts to endangered or threatened species of plant and animals, wetlands and watercourses. The City of Catlsbad will provide interested state agencies with the FEIR when the document is ecrtikd.
i
i
? h) A
2A
28
2c
Ci8 of San Coarcos
105 w RICHMAR AVENUE SAN MARCOS. CALIFORNIA saxe1m
6191744-4020 FAX 6191744-7543
August 29, 1991
M chael Holzmi ler Planning Director 2075 Las Falmas Drive -.s 0 '.. Carlsbad, CA 92009-1576 -C LL b . -- ~
RE: Comments - DEIR for the Rancho Santa Fe Road Realignment City of Carlshad - SC11 #90010850
Dear Michael:
~hs City of san Marcos. Planning Division greatly appreciates the opportunity to comment on the DEIR noted above. The following are the concerns and comments of the City of San Marcos:
The DEIR states (3-6) that although it may ultimately be necessary to provide eight lanes on RSF, the project will grade and construct only six lanes. It is inferred by the DEIR that any need to provide more than six lanes is a result of "newly planned development in the south portion of the City of San Marcos." The traffic analysis elsewhere states that six lanes will satisfy traffic demands in 2010.
concern: 1. Traffic generation from proposed projects within the City of San Marcos is now anticipated to be lower than what has been anticipated from existing General Plan levels. The DEIR statement and inference that a burdening of RSF abovc a six-lane demand is a San Marcos responsibility is incorrect
and misleading. The regional nature of this corridor services travel demand from a wide area. 2. If there is a possibility that eight lanes are necessary, the roadway grading, right-of-way, drajnage design, and especially the planned bridge structure should anticipate that need. 3. The DEIR discuss+-s the number of lanes in tho scqment between Qriest haven Rmd and Me 1 rose. Avenue only i 11 terms of through lanes (six VR. eight.). This is an owrsinplif ieatim. As th? regional corridors cross in this segment, there will be a very high turning demand at the available intersections. The identified need for t.rip1e left- turn lanes, free right lanes, and a considerahle weaving demand affect capacity, right-of-way, and design.
1.th of Ranchota Fe RoaL
Response U: The statement made on page 3-6 of the EIR is correct. Development projcctc within San Marcos are in close proximity to the study area and have been determined to contribute significant traffic volumes to the roadway in the near future.
Response ZB Comment noted and the City of Carlsbad has anticipated the need for ultimate construction of an eight-lane roadway on a portion of Rancho Santa Fe Road. The proposed project is acquisition of right-of-way needed to aeeomtnodate ultimate build-out of eight lanes on Rancho Santa Fe Road between Questhaven Road and Melrose Drive and construction of infrastructure (@in& paving, signage, drainage design and the planned bridge structure) for a six-lane roadway initially. Subsequent to this project, the roadway and infrastructure may be expanded to aeconunodate the eight-lane roadway on Rancho Santa Fe Rod between Questhaven Road and Mclrose Drive. Analysis of impacts has been performed assuming that the roadway will have an ultimate right-of-way width of 126 feet from La Costa Avenue to Questhaven and a 150 right-of-way from Questhaven Road to Melrose Drive. Figure 5-3 of the EIR has been modified to include labeling of the ultimate right-of-way width of Rancho Santa Fe Road as being 126 feet from La Costa Avenue to Questhaven Road, and 150 feet from Questhaven Road to Melrose Drive, inclusive.
Response ZC: Table 5-14 on pages 5.8-12 and 5.8-13 of the EIR contains intersection geometrics and the required number of lanes at each intersection. The discussion of the EIR refers to Table 5-14 and therefore addresses specific road geometry information. A footnote has been added to Table 5-14 in the FEIR which clarifies the abbreviations used in the heading which indicate lane directions and turning movements.
CITY COUNCIL
Lee 8. Thibadeau. Mayor Mark Lowher, ,Vice Mayor Mike Preston Pia Harris F. H. Smith
Holzmiller
Page two August 29, 1991
2D The DEIR states on 3-9 that approximately 30 acres of land east of Rancho Sante Fe Road (spelling error in text) may be deannexed to San Marcos at a later date and not as a part of this project.
2E
.e h)
h)
2F
2c
We believe that it would be timely to resolve the city boundary matter as part of this project. With such an
anomaly existing, it immediately becomes most difficult to effectively plan, or efficiently administer land use and circulation issues. An example of the conflicts which will persist unless the issue is immediately resolved is
density residential usage, whereas San Marcos would propose commercial at this site. Such determinations are necessary even to ascertain the operations of the adjacent intersection.
Fe Road / M-ose Drive / -ows Drive
On Page 5.8-2 Of the DEIR it is stated that "the City of Carlsbad plans to create a right-in, right-out turn lane at La Costa Meadows Drive for northbound traffic along Rancho Santa Fe Road." Elsewhere in the document, discussions and capacity calculations are presented which have the intersection signalized and aligned with a new Corintia Street. There is also analysis which takes the
proposed Corintia Street further north and into alignment with.a Rancho Santa Fe Road at a reconfigured Melrose Drive intersection.
The "Issues to be Resolved" section (pg. 2-2) does not list this confused issue, yet the "Summary of Findings" (2-11) states that "the cities of Carlsbad and San Marcos shall create a mechanism to decide on the Rancho Santa Fe Road and Melrose Drive intersection configuration." Other areas of the report do little to clarify the proposed project (Table 5-14, Page 5.8-15, Appendix F Page 14).
Concern: That the alignments and configurations of the intersections are critical to an analysis of area circulation and land use proposals. The matter should be made clear and resolved as part of the project EIR.
demonstrated by Figure 5-12 in the DEIR. This shows low
Intersecrion.
4. Bu-ina CondWpnSL On page 5.8-11, a statement is made that "all intersections are
expected to operate under acceptable conditions when improvements listed in Table 5-14 are completed." The variables associated with the differing intersection alignments make it very difficult to validate this statement. Several of the operational assumptions of
Response 2D: Comment noted and the misspelling has been correcled in the text of the FER Ovcrall. this comment does not address the adequaey of the EIR, but suggests resolution of the City boundary location between San Marcor and Carlsbad. As stated on page 3-12 in the Project Description of the ElR, deannexation of land from Carkbad to San Marcos may accur "at a later date but not as a part of thir project."
Response 2E: As stated in the Project Description of the EIR @age 3-9). the intersection of Rancho Santa Fe Road/Melrose Drive will be affected by the project. The proposed project includes the choice among two allernathe intersection configurations discussed in Section 5.8, Traffic/Circulation. and Appcndx F of the EIR. Presently, the statement made on page 5.8-2 of the EIR is correct. As stated, "Ihe City of Carlsbad plans to mate a right-in, right-out turn lane at La Costa Meadows Drive for northbound traflic along Rancho Santa Fe Road." Realignment of La Costa Meadows Drive according to the dtcmtivcs presented in the lralfic analysis may accur in the future, however.
Responr 2F: Please see 2E Response. As a Program EIR for subsequent development, including detailed intersection conIigurations (stated on page 1-1, Introduction), the analysis is as specific as the corresponding level of specificity of the overall program. The EIR contains analysis of both altcmative oonfigurolions of the Rancho Santa Fe Road/Melrose Drive interscctioa No decision has been made as to the ultimate configuration of the Rancho Santa Fe Road/Melrose Drin intersection by the City of Carlsbad.
This issue has been added to the "IsJucs to be Resolved" subsection of Section 2.0, Executive Summary. in the EIR.
Response 2G The City of Carlsbad considers the assumptions used in the traffic study for Rancho Santa Fe Road to be appropriate, although the operational assumptions used in analysis of tralfic impacts to Rancho Santa Fe Road by the Cities of Carlsbad and San Marcos may differ. Based on studies performed by both Cities, there may be more than one solution to the roadway capacity problem on Rancho Santa Fe Road and specifically at the intersection of Questhaven Road. The design of the intersection (geomelrics necessary to provide acceptable operating conditions along the roadways) needs to be completed and made
I
acceptable by the Cities of Carisbad and San Marcos. Additionally, (be City of Carkbad employs a Growlh Management Monitoring Program to hurc that all of the performance standards called for in the City's Growth Management Plan
are being met.
The City of San Marcos has a preliminary alternative design for the Questhavtn/Rancho Sanla Fe Road intersection as shown in Figure 9-1. The City of Carlsbad Traffic Engineer feels that the alternative intersection design proposed by San Marcos is a viable design alternative. The City of Carkbad will consider this alternative intersection design for the project when the City is ready
to design the intersection.
Holzmiller August 29, 1991 Page three
2H
? h) P
21
Appendix F do not appear realistic (ie: Lane Capacity assumption is listed as 1800 vehicles per day for a turn lane, 2,000 per day for a through lane in Table 12. Hourly capacity is probably what was intended, but is much too high when dealing with poor intersection spacing, weaving, high truck percentage, et al). A new (August, 1991) capacity analysis for the corridor has recently been completed by the firm of Linscott, Lab, and Greenspan for the City of San Marcos which documents that the intersection will not be able to operate under acceptable conditions, even with the improvements in place as listed in Table 5-14.
concern: That the DEIR has understated the operational problems which will be experienced at the Melrose Drive, Questhaven Road, and La Costa Avenue intersections on Rancho Santa-Fe Road in the post 2010 condition.
5. Analysis of otller Area Con-- CEQA Section 15145 states that "an agency must use its best efforts to find out and disclose all that it reasonably can." There is no discussion of the adjacent projects in the City of San Marcos contained in the DEIR. The contiguous project "University Commons" has proposed improvements which will directly impact level of service on Rancho Santa Fe Road, such as a commercial driveway, and a parallel alternative route to Rancho Santa Fe Road. These related factors should be addressed.
There are existing physical factors in the vicinity which should be addressed in the DEIR. These include existing driveways into the Rancho Santa Fe Industrial Park, a frontage road parallel to Rancho Santa Fe Road south of La Costa Meadows Drive, and the impacts to safety along the remaining two-lane portion of Rancho Santa Fe Road north of Melrose Drive (within the City of San Marcos).
mcernr That insufficient effort has been made to discover, disclose, analyze, and make mitigation recommendations on related factors in the project vicinity.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please feel free to contact me at 591-1111 X 3236.
Sincerely,
Mike Poland Principal Planner
copies: Rick Gittings Charlie Schaffer Mike Mistrot Jerry Backoff
4Tb-J
Response ZH Section 7.0, Cumulative Impacts, of the EIR contains discussion of cumulative impacts caused by projects listed in Table 7-1. Cumulative Projects List. There are 17 projects listed as being in the City of San Marq including the University Commons project. The region used to evaluate the cumulative effects in the EIR consists of roughly a 30 square mile area The subsections of the Cumulative Impacts section addressing biological resources and transportation have been modified to include more specific information related to proposed improvements of surrounding projects.
Figure 9-1. Alternative Design of the Questhaven/Rancho Santa Fe Road Intersection
Response 21: Please see 2F response. As a program EIR for subsequent development, the document includes analysis of general traffic and circulation issues. The speciTic design of project circulation in the Vicinity of the driveways and frontage road referred to in this letter is not complete. The specific issues identifed in the comment letter cannot be addressed until design plans are available. Preliminary plans for the project indicate that the existing bridge and frontage will remain in place and the driveways into Rancho Sanu Fe Industrial Park may have ~oecss rerouted to La Costa Meadows Drive. Final road design will also provide adequate lane transitions or dropouts into the existing 2-lane Rancho Sank Fe Road south of Melrose Drive in San Mareos.
.-
Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR
Figure 9-1
Alternative Design of the Questhaven Road/ Rancho Santa Fe Road Intersection
9-25
t
ThE
\ RECEIVED SEP 1 4 1991
Mr. Christer Westman City of Carlsbad Planning Department 2075 Las Palmas Drive Carlsbad, CA 92009
SUBJECT: Rancho Santa Fe Road Draft EIR - Public Review Cauoenta
Dear Christer:
Thank you for the opportunity to review the above EIR. In addition to the detailed comments offered on the following pages, we have three major concerns that should be expressed at the outset.
30 1. As you know, the property owners of Zones 11 and 12, as co-sponsors of this project with the City of Carlsbad, originally proposed that a General Plan Amendment be processed concurrently as part of the overall project. However, the City chose to defer the GPA until a later time. As a result, several of the impacts identified in the draft EIR are a result of conflicts with the current General Plan, and can only be mitigated to acceptable levels through a separate GPA. We feel that these conflicts and the overall analysis could have been greatly simplified had the GPA been processed concurrently with the road widening project, as we had previously proposed.
2. our second concern involves the status of the California gnatcatcher and the ultimate mitigation plan for its habitat which will be required of the Rancho Santa Fe Road Project.
Regarding that mitigation requirement, in the past few weeks The Fieldstone Company has joined the City of carlsbad in entering into separate agreements with both the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Game. The purpose of these agreements is the development of Habitat Conservation Plans for a number of projects envisioned by the City for the immediate future. One of those projects is also the project reviewed in this report, Rancho Santa Fe Road. In turn, this EIR calls out a number of acceptable mitigation measures, but makes no specific recommendations. It is our understanding that the lead agency, The City, recognizes that the final mitigation plan will be a product of the processes called out in these agreements, which will involve a broad-based working group
3A
3c
Response 3k The comment is from the Fieldstone Company. which is the major landowner and coapplicant for the proposed project.
Response 3B This comment docs not address the adequacy of the EIR. but discusus the results of postponing proecssing of a General Plan Amendment concurrently witb this project. As stated on pages 2-8 (Executive Summary) and 5.7-13 (Land Use) of the EIR, impacts caused by inconsistency with General Plan land use designations can be mitigated through a General Plan Amendment.
Response X: Comment noted. Please see 1B Response. Copies of the agreements between the Lead Agency, developer and State and Federal resource agencies are attached at the end of this comment letter. This comment docs not address the adequacy of the EIR.
Mr. Christer Westman August 29, 1991 Page Two
consisting of representatives of varied interests. Also, it is obvious that the final mitigation must be acceptable to the two resource agencies mentioned above as they are a party to the agreements. Copies of these agreements are attached.
Regarding the overall analysis of the project site as it relates to the gnatcatcher, the project area has been the subject of numerous focused surveys for the California gnatcatcher over the last several years. The project applicant has provided the City with detailed information from these surveys regarding the location of gnatcatchers on the site, as well as a more focused assessment of the species composition of the Diegan coastal sage scrub found to be used by the gnatcatcher. These studies were conducted because of the concern that portions of the site may not be suitable for the gnatcatcher because they contain significant amounts of black sage (Salvia melliferal.
3D On one hand, the City's consultant has incorporated the locational data we provided into the impact analysis, which resulted in an increase in the total number of pairs using the site from 13 to 22. On the other hand, however, the analysis has failed to recognize the value of the black sage dominated areas occurring within the project limits. The pair locations provided to the City's consultant included significant portions of the site dominated by black sage.
While The Fieldstone Company (TFC) concurs that some areas of southern California in which black sage is the dominant plant species do not appear to support the California gnatcatcher, the data presented by TFC and incorporated into the text of the EIR do appear to support the conclusion that areas containing a mosaic of black sage and California sagebrush (Arternesia californica) as found on the project site does provide valuable habitat for the gnatcatcher. We have provided specific comments later in this letter (Section 5.4) that address where we feel this inconsistency could lead to inappropriate impact analyses and mitigation requirements.
3. our final major concern involves the environmentally preferred alternative (Road Widening in Current Alignment and Defer Mass Grading). We have provided a number of comments on this alternative later in this letter (Section 6, Alternatives), which question whether it can even be built under the City's current standards and requirements, and whether enough analysis has been undertaken to consider it a viable alternative.
Our questions in this regard involve public health and safety issues (such as centerline radii requirements, bridging of San Marcos Creek, sight distance criteria, etc.); the possibility of having to condemn certain buildings at the La Costa Meadows
3E
Response 3D The EIR has been modified to recognize the fact that California gnatcatchers utilize black sage dominated Diegan coastal sage habitat. Paragraph 1 on page 5.4-16 of the EIR has been supplemented to state that black sage dominated Coastal sage scrub habitat is used "to a varying degree" by the gnatcatcher. As discussed in 3AA and 3CC responses, relatively little information is available regarding the extent of the California gnatcatcher's use of black sage dominated Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat. Previous studies cited in Appendix B to the EIR indicate that Artemisia-dominated Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat is preferred by the California gnatcatcher.
Response 3E Environmental impacts resulting from construction of Rancho Santa Fe Road in the existing alignment have been satisfactorily addressed in the EIR. The analysis offered in Section 6.0, Alternatives. of the EIR is not presented at the same level of detail as the proposed project. Section 15126 (d) of the CEQA Guidelines requires that "the significant effects of the alternative shall be discussed but in less detail than the significant effects of the project as proposed." The discussions of alternatives which include widening the existing alignment are based on a grading plan produced by the City of Carlsbad which showed the roadway in its existing alignment, and adequately satisfy CEQA requirements. Therefore, if any of the alternatives evaluated in Section 6.0 of the EIR are substituted in place of the proposed project. it may be necessary to prepare either a new or a supplemental EIR, to insure that impacts of the alternative selected are addressed at an adequate level of detail.
7
Mr. Christer Westman August 29, 1991
Page Three
industrial development: additional grading impacts (which appear to be greater than for the proposed project); and additional biological impacts which have not been fully addressed in the EIR. Because of their technical nature, we suggest that the comments provided in Section 6, Alternatives, also be reviewed by the City's Engineering Department.
As stated above, in addition to the foregoing concerns, we do have additional comments which are offered below.
'9
SECTION 1.0 - INTRODUCTION
3F PAGE 1-1, THIRD PARAGRAPH: The Rancho Santa Fe Road Assessment District actually comprises 2210 acres, as noted on page 3-1, not 768 as stated here.
SEmION 2.0 - EXECUTIVE SUMARY
$ 3G PAGE 2-2, FIRST PARAGRAPH: We suggest adding the following excerpt from page 6-28 following the next to the last sentence: "Howe~ver, the short-coming of any proposal which elMnates develomnt of land surrounding the roadway is that funding for roadway wideninq and realignme nt may not be possible without the formation of the assessment district provided by the developmant.t'
3H PAGE 2-4, TABLE 2-1, AIR QUALITY: Per page 5.2-8, LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE, only long-term impacts are found to be significant and unmitigable. We believe the mitigation measures identified for short-term impacts will reduce them to a level of insignificance, and feel that this should be stated in the sumnary table.
31 PAGE 2-8, TABLE 2-1, LAND USE IMPACTS: We suggest that the conclusion, "open space areas will be reduced in area" be deleted since it conflicts with the statement on page 3-9 that the proposed project (including the subsequent GPA) will be accompanied by "an increase in acreages of land uses such as open space...", as well as Table 3-1 on page 3-12, which shows that open space will increase by 279 acres over the existing General Plan.
31 PAGE 2-11, TABLE 2-1, TRAPFIC/CIRCULATION: We suggest that the statement regarding Questhaven Road operating at unacceptable levels be deleted. Per Table 5-16 on page 5.8-14, Questhaven Road will be operating at LOS B at buildout with improvements. Perhaps this table was misread in preparing Sumnary Table 2-1.
Response 3F: Comment noted. The text of paragraph three on page 1-1 (Introduction) of the EIR has been modified to state that the project area encompasses 768 acres. On page 3-1 of the Project Description of the EIR the area of the Asscrsmcnt District is correctly stated as being 2,210 acres.
Response 36: The Executive Summary summarizes findings made elsewhere in the Em. As such, it is an abbreviated form of following sections. The excerpt included in the letter is also included in the EIR as an issue related to the more detailed discussion of alternatives which include deferral of grading presented in Won 6.0, Alternatives, of the EIR. It does not have bearing on the seldon of environmentally superior alternatives and does not belong in the paragraph cited.
Response 3H: Comment noted. The text on page 53-5 and under "LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE" on page 5.2-9 of the EIR (Air Quality) has been modified to reflect that short-term impacts to air quality are not signircant locally. but am cumulatively significant due to the project's location within a non-attainment basin. The text in the "Residual Impact" column within the "Unavoidable Significant Environmental Impacts" section of Table 2-1 (page 24 of the EIR) has also been modified to reflect this change.
Response 31: Comment noted. For cldication, the text within the "Potential Environmental Impact" column on page 2-8 of the EIR has been modified to distinguish that the reduction of open space area will occur within areas presently designated on the City's Comprehensive Opem Space Network Map. This conclusion is consistent with the impact identified on page 5.7-10 (Land Use) of the EIR. The change made to the Summary of Findings Table does not change the conclusions reached in the EIR.
Response 3J: Comment noted and the reference to Questhaven Road operation UMcCcptably at build-out has been removed from the Trafk/Circulation impact section of the Summary of Findings Table in the EIR.
3K
31
? N CD
3M
3N
30
Mr. Christer Westman August 29, 1991 Page Four
SECTIOS 3.0 - PROJECT DESCRIFL'ION
PAGE 3-13, FIRST PARAGRAPH: We suggest adding the following sentence to the end of this paragraph: "The existing bridge owtr San Marcos Creek will be retained for use as a pedestrian/bicycle link in the City's proposed Trail System."
SECTIOS 5.0 - ENVIRONMENTAL IHPACI! ANALYSIS
SECTIOS 5.1 - KARm
PAGE 5.1-9, MITIGATION MEASURE NO. 4: We suggest that this mitigation measure be rewritten to be consistent with the City's current grading ordinance requirements. The window between April 15 and October 15 identified in the old La Costa Master Plan is unnecessarily restrictive. If imposed on this project, these restrictions would unnecessarily prolong the overall length of the construction period, with attendant impacts on public health and safety. The City's new grading ordinance provisions require extensive erosion control measures to be implemented during and post-grading. Because of these measures, and the fact that the project area is not in the Coastal Zone, we feel that grading for this project should be permitted year-round.
PAGE 5.1-10, MITIGATION MEASURE NO. 7: We suggest that this measure merely require compliance with the Hillside Development Ordinance, and grading ordinance, and eliminate any reference to the need for a variance.
PAGE 5.1-10, MITIGATION MEASURE NO 10: We suggest that this measure be eliminated or rewordedto merely require compliance with approved grading plans.
SECTION 5.2 - AIR QUALITY
PAQE 5.2-5, FIRST PARA^: We suggest that reference should also be made to Table 6-3 on page 6-26, which shows that air pollutant emissions with or without the proposed project will increase substantially by 1995, but that the proposed road widening project will actually reduce total air pollution emissions in 1995 by 6500 pounds per day below that which would occur without the project.
Response 3K: The City has not determined that the existing bridge will be retained as a pedestrian crossing and the statement included in the comment letter will not be included in the EIR.
Response 3L: The text of mitigation measure number 4 on page 5.1-9 (Earth Resources) and on page 2-5 of the EIR has been modified to state that the applicant shall adhere to the grading restrictions set forth in the La Costa Master Plan or any amendments thereto. No grading shall OcNr between October 1 and April 15. except when special measures can be taken to control siltation. This shall be met to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The La Costa Master Plan supersedes the City Grading Ordinance for projects located within the Master Plan area, such as this project, and any grading to be done must adhere to its restrictions. However, the more restrictive of the two documents will take precedence.
Response 3M:
The last sentence of mitigation measure number 7 on page 5.1-10 (Earth Resources) of the EIR has been deleted to require compliance with City regulations during grading, without the option of a variance.
Response 3N Mitigation measure number 10 on pages 2-5 (Executive Summary) and 5.1-10 (Earth Resources) of the EIR and B-2 of Appendix B to the EIR has been modified to include the provision "as shown on approved grading plans."
Response 30: A new paragraph (number 2) has been added to page 5.2-5 of the EIR (Air Quality) which indicates that roadway widening proposed by the City of Carlsbad consistent with the Circulation Element of the General Plan will improve circulation efficiency and cause resultant reductions in air pollution emissions. Inclusion of this statement clarifies the benefit of roadway widening, but does not change conclusions in the EIR regarding development of land uscs surrounding the roadway of the proposed project. The EIR concludes that the proposed development is more intensive than development of the area according to the General Plan and will generate an additional 4,845 pounds per day (a 61 percent increase) of air pollution emissions over that what would be produced by land uses consistent with the General Plan. Proposed land usc intensity is greater than that planned by the City because 245.700 square feet of non-residential building space will be added to the project area over that called for in the Land Use Element of the General Plan.
I I
Mr. Christer Westman August 29, 1991 Page Five
SECTION 5.3 - WATER RESOURCES
3P PAGE 5.3-6 C 5.3-7, MITIGATION MEASURE NO. 8: Please provide the name of the specific McDaniel Engineering document referred to in this measure.
SECTION 5.4 - BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
30 We have a concern that some aspects of the biology study have come to the wrong conclusions based on the body of the study. while we do have other comments which are presented below, our major questions involve two basic issues: 1) the number of gnatcatcher pairs that will actually be impacted by the project, and how these impacts should be appropriately mitigated; and 2) the use of black sage dominated habitat by the California gnatcatcher.
Because our comments on these issues involve several pages of the EIR, we have grouped them together under individual headings.
GNATCATCHER IHPACI'S AND MITIGATION
3R PAGE 5.4-10, SECOND P"JRAPE: The use of the number of California gnatcatchers (48) is misleading in that this included a significant number of fledglings. If fledglings are included in population estimates, significant fluctuations in the population size would result throughout the year, with a peak in the population size during May and June, when up to 50 percent of the population could be fledglings that would not survive to the following breeding season. Based on the data currently available, we feel that the paragraph at the bottom of page 5.4-10 most accurately represents the gnatcatcher population onsite, and should form the basis for any mitigation program ("22 pairs of California gnatcatchers occupying 458 acres of Diegan coastal sage scrub'1).
3s PAGE 5.4-13, SECOND PARAGRAPH: While direct impacts to the use areas outlined could result in the loss of up to 14 pair of gnatcatchers, the direct loss of all available habitat is less than 50 percent. It would not be an unreasonable assumption for at least some of the impacted birds to be redistributed within the remaining open space onsite, perhaps resulting in the long-term loss of as few as 10 pairs (and the onsite retention of as many as 12 pairs).
PAGE 5.4-15, THIRD C FOURTH PARAGRAPHS: Based on the statement on page 5.4-10 that "22 pairs of gnatcatchers on 458 acres of coastal sage scrub currently occupy the project site", it is our understanding that adequate mitigation would consist of conserving the same number of pairs (22) on the same amount of acreage (458
3T
Response 3P Mitigation measure number 8 on page 53-7 of Section 53. Water Resources, of the EIR has been modified to include the name of the report cited.
Response 34: Conclusions presented in the Biological Assessment of the project in Appendix E of the EIR are correct and consistent with information contained in the body of study. The study accurately states the number of California gnatcatcher pairs that will be impacted by the project, cites the criteria to be achieved by a program of mitigation measures which will reduce impacts to biological resourced (except Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat and the California gnatcatcher) to levels of less than significant, and correctly analyzes the usc of black sage dominated habitat by the gnatcatcher. lmpaas to Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat and the California gnatcatcher are significant and not fully mitigated until the time at which an HCP for the project is approved by the City.
Response 312: The number of gnatcatchers observed on-site is accurate and remains in the EIR text on page 5.4-10 in the Biological Resources section. The population of gnatcatchers estimated to occur on-site is 22, as stated in paragraph 4 on page 5.4-10 of the EIR. Of this 22 bird pair, 14 pairs may be impacted by development (as stated on page 5.4-13 paragraph 2). Mitigation criteria included under 1.B. on page 5.4-16 states that mitigation must be accomplished for chis number to reduce impacts on biology to less than significant.
Response 3s The EIR indicates the Ivorst-casc" scenario which has been estimated as being the loss of 14 pairs of California gnatcatchers on-site for biological rcsourca from implementation of the proposed project.
Response 3T: The interpretation of the text under "MITIGATION MEASURES' on page 5.4- 15 of the EIR is correct, and the text of paragraph has been modified to reflect that the 8 pairs of gnatcatchers remain on the project site.
Mr. Christer Westman August 29, 1991
Page Six
acres) through a combination of onsite preservation (241 acres) and offsite mitigation (217 acres).
Also, in the fourth paragraph, 8 pairs "offsite" should be changed
to 8 pairs "onsite".
PAGE 5.4-16, FIRST PARAGRAPH: Since this discussion refers to onsite dedication, we feel that the minimum number of pairs to be supported onsite should be 8, not 14. Also, it is our understanding that these are general criteria which are keyed to the overall objective of retaining 22 pairs of gnatcatchers on 458 acres of coastal sage scrub (on and offsite).
PAGE 5.4-16, PIFI'fI PARAGRAPH (l.B.4): Data compiled for Rancho San Diego indicate that most nesting occurs in slopes between 10 and 30 percent, but that nesting also occurs in slopes between 30 and 40 percent. We feel that this should be reflected here, in that these general criteria will be probably used to define acceptable offsite mitigation areas. (Ref: Mock, P., Bolger, D. and Jones, B. 1991. Technical appendix for the California gnatcatcher Sweetwater River Habitat Conservation Plan. Unpublished report prepared by ERC Environmental and Energy Services Company for San Diego Association of Governments.)
3u
3v
? w a
3w
3x
3Y
~ 32
I 3AA
PAGE 5.4-16, TENTH PARAGRAPH (2): We suggest that the offsite preserve should be "within the U.S. range of the California Gnatcatcher". rather than "within the north San Diego County region".
PAGE 5.4-17, FIRST PARAGRAPH (2.B): We suggest that this be reworded to allow more flexibility, depending on the number of pairs that can be retained within the project area. In other words, if 22 pairs of gnatcatchers is the goal, then 14 pairs offsite may be too high if more than 8 pairs can be retained onsite.
PAGE 5.4-17, LAST PARAWH (3.B): Please modify the first sentence to read, Varticipate with others in the funding...".
BLACK SAGE VKRSUS -1SIA-DOMINATED SAGE SCRUB HABITAT
PAGE 5.4-1, SECOND PARAGRAPH: The reference to Artemisia scrub as being pure stands of California sage brush is inaccurate. Much of the area identified as such on the EIR maps is actually a mix of black sage and California sage brush.
PAGE 5.4-14, THIRD PARAGRAPH: The statement that black sage is not preferred by the gnatcatcher is misleading. More recent data, including information provided for use in this EIR, indicate that
Response 3U The statement made in the comment letter is correct. Item B under mitigation measure number 1 has been changed to reflect that 8 pairs of California gnatcatchers are to be preserved on-site. The understanding expressed in this comment of the overall mitigation objective is correct. The objective of mitigation is to preserve a total of 22 pairs of California gnatcatchers by a combination of on- and off-site mitigation.
Response 3V: The recommendation constituting mitigation criteria 1.8.4 on page 5.4-16 in the Biological Resources section of the EIR (5.4) is based on information provided by Dr. Jonathan Atwood (personal communication) from his observations of California gnatcatcher nests range wide. The information provided in the comment reflects additional information. Criteria 1.B.4 has been modified as follows: Preference should be given to slopes less than 30 percent because California gnatcatchers appear to avoid slopes greater than 30 percent steepness for nesting (Ref: Mock, P., Bolger, D. and Jones, B., 1991. Technical appendix for the California gnatcatcher Sweetwater River Habitat Conservation Plan. Unpublished report prepared by ERC Environmental and Energy SCMces Company for San Diego Association of Governments).
Response 3W: The stipulation contained within mitigation criteria 2 on page 5.4-16 (Biological Resources) of the EIR applies because the goal of the mitigation criteria is to preserve habitat as close as possible to the project site. Thus the primary efforts for mitigation shall focus on maintaining gnatcatcher habitat on-site or on adjacent land and the area covered by the HCP, including the San Dieguito River Valley. No changes have been made to the text of the EIR as the result
of this comment. Please see 1B response.
Response 3X Mitigation criteria 2.B on page 5.4-19 of the EIR has been modified as follows: Shall be large enough to support at a minimum the number of pairs of California gnatcatchers which will be lost from the project site as a result of the project implementation (anticipated to be 14 pairs at this writing).
Response 3Y: The first sentence of mitigation criteria number 3.B. on page 5.4-17 of the En\ has been modified as the result of this comment to read, '"he proposed Assessment District, ....".
1 /t
Response 32: The information contained in paragraph 2 on page 5.4-1 (Biological Resources) of the EIR is correct and no change has been made lo the text of the EIR as the result of thin comment. There are three areas on the project site which consist of different compositions of Diegan coastal sage saub vegetation, Relatively pure stands of Artemesiadominated Diegan coastal sage scrub vegetation lie on lower elevations with gentler slopcs. black sage-dominated Diegan coastal sage scrub vegetation lies on steep slopes to the east and a transitional area exists between the two which contains a mixed scrub consisting of both vegetation types. The transition zone containing mixed scrub is not extensive, P diliieult to map and is not shown in Figures in the EIR. The mixed saub oocupies small areas of what is shown to be the two dominant types of Diegan coastal sage saub vegetation in the EIR Figures.
Response 3M: The last sentence of paragraph 1 on page 54-16 (Biological Resources) of UIC EIR has been supplemented with the statement "(although used to a varying degree)" to indicate that some use of black sage by the gnatcatcher occurs. No statement regarding the preference of gnatcatchers for a specific type of sage vegetation exists within the Environmental Setting subsection of the EIR and it has not been modified.
Mr. Christer Westman August 29, 1991 Page Seven
gnatcatchers will, in fact, use black sage dominated sage scrub if it is part of a mosaic of sage scrub vegetation. This should also be clarified in the earlier Existing Conditions discussion.
PAGE 5.4-15, LAST PARAGRAPH (1.A): Much of the site is black sage dominated and yet supports gnatcatchers, therefore what criteria will be used, and by whom, to determine if the quality of the replacement habitat is "equal to or better" than that being disturbed by the project?
PAGE 5.4-16, SIXTH PARAGRAPH (l.B.5): We do not agree with the arbitrary assignment of "two-thirds value" to black sage dominated coastal sage scrub. Much of the onsite habitat that will be disturbed is black sage dominated. Why can't this be replaced by the same type habitat (i.e. black sage dominated) at full value? We refer back to our previous conunents that the overall objective of the mitigation program should be the retention of 22 pairs of gnatcatchers on 458 acres of coastal sage scrub (on and offsite).
Additional comments on this section of the EIR follow:
PAGE 5.4-4, SECOND PARAGRAPH: It is stated that chaparral is considered sensitive in San Diego. We are unaware of any jurisdiction or conservation group identifying mixed chaparral as sensitive, and would ask that this be clarified. Southern maritime chaparral is considered a sensitive habitat often found in the immediate vicinity of the coast within Carlsbad. None of the characteristic plant species associated with this habitat were found within the southern mixed chaparral onsite.
PAGE 5.4-6, SECOND PARAG": Baccharis flood plain scrub is a wetland vegetation type dominated by rnulefat (Baccharis glutinosa) not broom baccharis (Baccharis sarothroides). The area identified as broom baccharis would more correctly be identified as Diegan coastal sage scrub.
PAQE 5.4-12, FOURTH PARAGRAPH: The percent loss of Diegan coastal sage scrub should read 47 percent, not 52 percent. The remaining cottonwood willow riparian should read 0.7 acres, not 1.6 acres.
PAGE 5.4-12, LAST PARAGRAPH: With regard to bridging San Marcos Creek, in our opinion, the current crossing of the Creek could be maintained as a pedestrian and bike crossing that would have a minimal impact on wildlife movement along San Marcos Creek. This would, in fact, be an improvement over current conditions of heavy traffic volumes on the existing bridge.
PAGE 5.4-13, POURTR: PARAGRAPH: The sage sparrow and rufous-crowned sparrow also utilize black sage onsite.
3 BB
3cc
3DD
? W W
3EE
3FF
3GG
3"
Response 3BB As shown on page B-1 of Appendix B to the EIR, the Mitigation MoNtorhg Program, the City of Carlsbad in consultation with a qualified biologist is responsible for setting the criteria and making the determination of quality of
habitat dedicated to the City.
Response XC:
Comment noted, but the mitigation criteria is correct and no change has been
made to the text of the EIR as the result of this comment. The overall mitigation objective is to retain 22 pairs of gnatcatchers on 458 acres of coastal sage scrub habitat on or off-site. The stipulation included within mitigation criteria l.B.S. which establishes a credit of two-thirds the area for black-sage
dominated habitat dedication is intended IO guarantee a "good faith" effort from the developer to dedicate habitat preferred by the gnatcatcher (Artemisia-
dominated Diegan coastal sage scrub vegetation). The goal of the mitigation measure is to provide the optimal habitat and IO assure the maximum probability that California gnatcatchers will ~Mve after project implementation. Relatively
little is known about the California gnatcatcher's use of black-sage dominated
Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub relative to its use of Artemisia-dominated CSS.
Response 3DD The last sentence of paragraph two on page 5.44 has been replaced with the following: "This particular form of chaparral is limited to the northwest region of
San Diego County and has been impacted by losses due to agriculture and residential and commercial development. Because of this loss. it cnn be considered declining regionally."
Response 3EE: Comment noted. This vegetation type appears to be a co-mingling of elements
of Baccharis Floodplain Scrub and Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub vegetation types. The characterization in the Draft EIR is adequate and would not be more accurate with the comment added.
Response 3FF:
The percentage loss of Diegan Coastal sage scrub indicated in the text of the EIR on page 5.4-12, Biological Resources, has been modified to read as 47 percent and the remaining acreage of cottonwood-willow riparian woodland haa been corrected to read 0.7 acres.
Response 3GC: Comment noted. No changes have been made to the EIR however.
Rapoar 3": The text in the paragraph 4 of page 5.4-15 has been modified to include black- sage dominated areas as well as the Artemisia-dominated Dicgan Coastal Sage Scrub.
? W P
.-
0 200 '?' North tceie in'ieet
Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR
Figure 9-2a
Avoidance of Goldenstars
9-35
.
0 200 *North -
Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR
-. Figure 9-2b
Avoidance of Goldenstars
9-36
3 II
311
3KK
3 LL le W v
3MM
3"
Mr. Christer Westman August 29, 1991 Page Eight
PAGE 5.4-13, LAST PARAGRAPH: Please see the above comment about retaining the existing bridge over San Marcos Creek as a pedestrian/bicycle trail link.
PAGE 5.4-19, SECOND PARAGRAPH (4): Although current grading plans for the project meet these mitigation requirements, in our opinion, they go beyond the norm for mitigating impacts to this particular species (San Diego goldenstar), and should not be interpreted as setting a precedent for future mitigation of this species. Also, when referring to "dense" and "sparse" populations of this species, reference should be made to Exhibits 9-A and 9-B of the Biological Resources Survey Report (Appendix E of the EIR).
PAGE 5-1-19, LAST PARAGRAPE: Inasmuch as considerable work south of San Marcos Creek is scheduled to occur prior to the time that the creek itself will be affected, we suggest that the first sentence be changed to add the following: "Prior to grading that rtion of the project affecting San Harcos Creek...". This will Elow phasing of the project over time as well as earlier initiation of those portions of the project not involved in the 404/1601 process.
PAGE 5.4-19, LAST PARAGRAPH: We suggest that the next to last sentence be changed by deleting the word "Similar...", and substituting "If necessary, all other.. .'I.
SECTION 5.5 - NOISE
PAGE 5.5-7, MITIGATION MEASURE NO. 4: Instead of referring to the old La Costa Master Plan as the basis for this measure, we feel that reference should merely be made to the City's applicable ordinance and codes.
SECTION 5.7 - LAND USE
PAGE 5.7-10 L 5.7-11, OPEN SPACE: We feel that this analysis of open space impacts is confusing and somewhat misleading, as is the labeling of the associated figures (5-12 and 5-13). In our opinion, the analysis would be much clearer had it pointed out that Figure 5-13 represents open space Per the City's current Open Space Map (which can be changed by following the criteria provided by the previous Interim Open Space Ordinance described on page 5.7-4, as well as the newly adopted Open space Element), and that Figure 5-12 represents proposed land uses if the project, and a subsequent GPA, are implemented. Comparison of these two figures clearly shows that the proposed project (Figure 5-12) contains much more open space than called for on the City's existing map (Figure 5-13),
Response 311: Please see 3GG Response. No changes have been made to the EIR as a result of this comment.
Response JJJ: Comment noted and Figures 9A and 9B have been referred to in the text on page 5.4-21 in the Biological Resources section of the EIR. Figures 9A and 9B in Appendix E to the EIR have been revised and replacement Figures are included here as Figures 9-2A and 9-2B. The content of the specific mitigation criteria remains unaltered. The City of Carlsbad as Lead Agency determines
whether or not this mitigation criteria should serve as a precedent for future mitigation of this species within the City.
Response 3- Mitigation measure number 5 on page 5.419 of the EIR has been modired (0 indicate that the condition is to apply only prior to grading of San Marm Creek.
Response 3LL4 The last sentence of mitigation measure number 5 on page 5.4-19 of the EIR bas been modified to indicate that pennits for filing the southcentral trending drainage shall be obtained only if necessary.
Response 3MM. Please see 3L Response. The La Costa Master Plan supersedes other City ordinances for projects ocmrring within the Master Plan area, however the more restrictive of the regulations shall apply. The text of mitigation measure number 4 on page 5.5-7 in the Noise section of the EIR has been modified to state that the project shall adhere to the existing Master Plan or any amendments thereto.
Response 3": Comment noted. The title of Figure 5-13 has been changed to "Open Space Per the City Comprehensive Open Space Network Map" in response to the second comment on page nine of the letter. The information on Figures 5-12 and 5-13
is correct. At this time no amendments have been made or proposed to the General Plan or the Comprehensive Open Space Network Map, as is discussed in the EIR. As stated in the last paragraph of page 5.7-10 and mitigation measures numbers 3 and 4 on page 5.7-13 of the Land Use section of the EIR, Fieldstone may submit an amendment to the General Plan and Comprehensive Open Space Network Map to achieve conformance.
The issue discussed in the Land Use section of the EIR is whether the proposed project conforms to the General Plan Land Use Element and the City Comprehensive Open Space Map, which it does not. The EIR acknowledges on Table 3-1 on page 3-12 (Project Description) that the proposed project includes 279.1 acres in the open space land use designation, as compared to 41.7 acres in the open space land use designation according to the General Plan prior to development constraints. In paragraph 4 on page 5.7-10, the EIR also includes the fact that open space areas which may be added to the City Map are of greater environmental quality that currently designated open space areas.
Mr. Christer Westman August 29, 1991 Page Nine
and, as described in the last paragraph on page 5.7-10, contains better quality habitat than called for on the City's map.
In addition, it should be noted that there are no restrictions in either the existing Land Use or Open Space and Conservation Elements which specifically prohibit grading in Open Space, as long as all of the applicable permits have been issued. The General Plan clearly gives deference to the environmental review process to determine what restrictions, if any, are required to ensure the conservation of significant resources.
PAGE 5.7-10, SECOND PARAM UNDm OPEN SPACE C PAGE 5.7-13, MITIGATION MEASURE NO. 4: Please explain which applicable regulatory agency advocates "Best Management Practice", and provide a definition and additional information as to its implementation. Additionally, we do not feel that it is the intent of the City's Interim Open Space Ordinance (or the newly adopted Open Space Element) to retain a degraded natural drainage channel, which this is, merely to preserve an open space corridor shown on the City's map. Instead, as noted above, we suggest that the proposed open space changes for this "natural drainage" be evaluated per the criteria provided on page 5.7-4, and a determination be made as to whether the newly proposed open space is not, in fact, larger and of better quality than that shown on the City map.
FIGURE 5-13: To avoid confusion over the terms "planned" or llproposed", particularly as it relates to Figure 5-12, we feel that this figure should be relabeled "Open Space per the City's Comprehensive Open Space Network Map".
PAGE 5.7-12, SECOND PARAGRAPH AND PAGE 5.7-13, THIRD PARAGRAPH (2): As noted on page 5.7-12, the short, linear open space area shown on Figure 5-13 within the M.A.G. property, "does not serve as a connection to other open space areas...". We agree with this statement in that this linkage was part of an earlier proposed trail system which has now been superseded by the City's more recent (1990) conceptual Citywide Trail System. The more recent system shows no such linkage in this area, and therefore the purpose for which it was originally intended no longer exists.
We also agree that replacement of this open space should be undertaken in conformance with the City's previous Interim Open Space Ordinance (and current Open Space Element). However, in the interest of comprehensive open space planning for this area, we do not feel that it should necessarily take the form of an open space buffer around the M.A.G. property, as recomnended on page 5.7-13, but instead should be integrated into the overall open space plan for the entire project area (see "Project Boundary" in Figures 5-12 and 5-13) in a way that would best achieve the objectives of the Interim Open Space Ordinance and the Open Space Element.
300
3PP
?
3QQ
3RR
Response 300: Typically, there are no provisions prohibiting grading within areas designated as open space in the General Plan because grading for certain land uscs consistent with the objectives of the Open Space Element may be allowed. The proposed project does not include specific development plans (Le. tentative maps); however, land uses proposed by the developer include residential, commercial and office professional. These land uses are not included as permitted uses and structures in the Open Space zone (Section 2133.020 of the City of Carlsbad Zoning Ordinance) and gradin dated with ground preparation would violate the intent and purpose of the &en Space zone. In addition, the City of Carlsbad will have to issue a grading permit to allow grading to mr. As an administrative action, the City may issue the permit if it fmds that proposed land uses are permitted within the Open Space zone as defined in the Zoning Ordinance. Section 2133.020 permits *transportation rights-of-way" within the 0- S open space zone.
Paragraph 4 on page 5.7-10 and mitigation measure number 3 on page 5.7-13 of the EIR contain information which will serve to conserve significant resources under the open space designation and conform to the adopted Open Space and Conservation Element of the General Plaa
Response 3PP: The Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) has issued Order Number 90-42 which requires local agencies to implement "Best Management Prdces" to lower pollutants in storm water to the maximum extent practicable. It is the City's position consistent with these "best management practices" that a natural drainage channel will be more effective than a pipe in contributing to the cleansing of pollutants from urban runoff. The issue is therefore a water quality issue rather than a land use issue and text has been modified on pages 2-6 (Executive Summary), 53-3, 5.3-4, 53-7 (Water Resources) and 5.7-10 (Land Use) of the EIR to refer to the RWQCB Order Number 90-42 and its relationship to the City's position on preserving natural drainage channels as a
"best management practice."
Preservation of the south-central trending drainage course is not a land use issue and the suggestion to evaluate the open space for inclusion to the Comprehensive Open Space Network Map h not relevant. The EIR does state in paragraph 4 on page 5.7-10 of the EIR that the open space proposed by the developer is of superior biological value to the existing open space shown on the City map.
Response 3QQ. Please see 3NN response. Comment noted and the title to Figure 5-13 has been changed accordingly.
I
Response JRR: Comment noted, however the open space is shown on the City Comprehensive Open Space Network Map and by necessity is included in the EIR. Replacement of this open space must be done in conformance with the Interim Open Space Ordinance. The last sentence of mitigation measure number 2 on page 5.7-13 (Land Use) of the EIR has been deleted because the same provision is contained in the following mitigation measure and further reference to htahhg the open space conidor of the MAG. property is redundant.
Mr. Christer Westman August 29, 1991
Page Ten
PAaE 5.7-13, SECOND PARAGRAPE (1): To maintain consistency with the Summary Table (page 2-81, we suggest that the words @'or should" be added before the phrase "propose amendments to the General Plan.. .'I.
35s
3TT
7 8 3uu
3vv
3ww
3xx
SErnON 5.9 - PUBLIC woRI[s
PAGE 5.9-8, MITIGATION MBASURE NO. 1: The project which is the subject of this EIR does not propose a specific development, therefore we believe any specific mitigation as it relates to providing school sites is premature. However, if the City believes that the subject should nevertheless be addressed, the mitigation should be more flexible, and we suggest the following modification:
"Prior to the approval of a final map for any projects within the San Marcos Unified School District. an aareement shall be -. . - - - - - entered into between the District and. the Groject proponent that shall provide for the following, unless modified or waived by the Diatrict . . . 'I.
SECTION 5.10 - UTILITIES
PAGE 5.10-8, SECOND PARAGRAPH AND 5.10-9, TABLE 5-20: It appears to us that the data in the last two columns of this table, which show an increase of 2.2 percent in residential solid waste generation over buildout under the General Plan, are erroneous.
The first column applies a generation rate of 9 lbs/unit/day, and the third and fourth columns indicate that 1010 units would be built under either the General Plan or the proposed project. Wouldn't either of these scenarios produce exactly the same result with no net difference (9 x lolo)?
PAGE 5.10-8, MITIGATION MEASURE NO. 2: We believe this mitigation is not applicable to the proposed project which does not include any residential construction and should be deleted.
SECTION 5.11 - LANDFORM ALTERATIoN/VISUAL QUALITY
PAGE 5.11-5, FIRST PARAGRAPH: The statement, "one large 10-acre pad will be graded" for an elementary school should be changed to %mum be graded".
PAGE 5.11-5, SECOND PARAGRAPH: We suggest changing the first sentence to read, "The proposed landform alteration, including both Fieldstone and the M.A.G. properties,...".
Response 3SS
Comment noted and the word "or" has been inserted before the phrase "propose amendments to" in the text of mitigation measure number 1 on page 5.7-13 (Land Use) of the EIR.
Response The projea ultimately propo~cs to develop land uses as sbowa in Table 5-9 and
Figure 5-12 of the Land Use section of the EIR. Therefore. provision of school facilities is necessary and mitigation measure number 1 on page 5.M (Public
Services) of the EIR is appropriate. Mitigation measure number one ha been modified as suggested by this comment, however.
Response 3uU: Comment noted and Tables 5-21 and 5-23 on pages 5 1K9 and 5.1@11, respectively, of the EIR have been modilied to refle. percentage increases in solid waste production and electrical consumption have
also be reduced to 7.5 and 20.5 percent, respectively.
Response 3W: Comment noted and mitigation measure number 2 on page 5.10-8 (Utilities) of
the EIR has been deleted.
Response 3W. Comment noted and the text of page 5.11-5 (Landform Alteration/Visual Quality) of the EIR has been modified accordingly.
Response 3XX
Comment noted and the text of paragraph 1 on page 5.11-5 of the EIR has bcen modified accordingly.
US change. The resulting
i
Mr. Christer Westman August 29, 1991 Page Eleven
SECTION 6 - ALTERNATIVES TO !l!EE PROPOSED PROJECT
SECTION 6.3: ROAD WIDENING IN THE EXISTING ALI- AND DEFER PROPOSED MASS GRADING: We have evaluated the differences between the impacts which would be caused by the proposed Rancho Santa Fe Road alignment as defined in the Project Description of the EIR and the environmentally preferred alignment, which consists of widening the existing Rancho Santa Fe Road alignment to a six-lane
configuration.
The purpose of the evaluation was to define the feasibility of constructing the Road Widening in the Existing Alignment Alternative in accordance with the study labeled "Hunsaker No. 1 Alignment (dated July 1, 1987, and presented in the EIR as Figure 6-3 on page 6-15). Our general comments after this review are as follows:
Design Criteria
1. It should be noted the Hunsaker No. 1 Alignment (Figure 6-3 ) was prepared in 1987. Since that time, the City has modified
their street design criteria for this type roadway.
2. This study appears to utilize centerline radii of 1,800 feet, which do not meet the City of Carlsbad's current design standards for a six-lane prime arterial roadway, unless superelevation is provided. The Proposed Project Alignment, as presentedinthe EIR, was modified early in its conceptual stages to increase centerline radii to the standard 2,400 feet without superelevation in several locations. In particular, the long curve at the north end of the alignment was of concern to the City Engineer during the conceptualization of the Proposed Project Alignment.
3YY
le P 322
3AAA 3. From a cursory review of the 200-foot scale exhibit of the Hunsaker No. 1 Alignment which we obtained from Cotton Beland Associates, it appears that the Widen Existing Alignment profile does not address the City's hydraulic criteria for allowing the 100-year storm to pass under the bridge at San Marcos Creek. The Hunsaker No. 1 Alignment appears to utilize the existing bridge, which is too low to allow the 100-year storm to pass under the bridge without flooding the bridge and the proposed roadway.
4. Several vertical curves along the La Costa Vale subdivision frontage do not appear to meet current City sight distance criteria. It appears that it would be difficult to adjust this profile to meet the current City standards without causing potentially significant impacts to adjacent homes, or without realigning the road or constructing retaining walls along the
roadway in this area.
3BBB
Response 3yY: The alternatives analysis focuses on those capable of eliminating any significant adverse environmental effects or reducing them to a level of insignificance, as required by CEQA. Section 15126 of CEQA states that the alternatives discussion shall focus on environmentally superior alternatives, "even if these alternatives would impede to some degree the attainment of the project objectives, or would be more costly." CEQA further states that "... the significant effects of the alternative shall be discussed but less detail than the significant effects of the project as proposed." The alternatives discussion is conceptual in nature and does not have to address a specific site grading plan. The general location of the roadway in the Hunsaker I diagram (Figure 6-3 of the EIR) waa used as the basis of discussion for alternatives involving the existing alignment. This general alignment provides an environmentally superior alignment, regardless of whether or not Carlsbad has modified the street design criteria for a prime arterial. Since the alternatives discussion is conceptual in nature, if an alternative is selected instead of the proposed project, it may be necessary to prepare a supplemental EIR to insure that impacts of the alternative selected an addressed at an adequate level of detail.
Response 3ZZ Please see 3YY response. If the City of Carlsbad selects the dling alignment as the roadway location for the project, the roadway design will have to meet current engineering standards.
Response 3MA: Please see 3W response. The diagram of the existing alignment shorn the bridge to be constructed in approximately the same lacation 85 the exisling bridge, but it does not stipulate that the existing bridge is to be in place at project completion. The City of Carlsbad will have to construct a bridge that oonveys the buildsut volume of traffic on Rancho Santa Fc Road and the 100. year flood within San Marcos Creek.
Response 3BBB As noted in 3W response, the Alternatives discussion in the EIR does not have to be presented at the same level of detail as the analysis of the proposed project. The information used as a basis for the Alternatives discussion (the Hunsaker I diagram) also does not have to be at the same level of detail as that for the proposed project. The Alternatives discussion analyzes the conceptual alignment of the roadway and not the specific engineering design of the road. The final engineering design for the roadway selected as the proposed pro* will have to meet up-to-date City standards.
Mr. Christer Westman August 29, 1991 Page Twelve
5. The Widen Existing Alignment Alternative would not allow Rancho Santa Fe Road to be extended "straight through" at the intersection with Melrose Avenue North, unless existing developed properties in the La Costa Meadows Industrial Development were condemned and existing buildings possibly destroyed. This comment is based on the assumption that the Widen Existing Alignment would need to meet the same City geometric design standards that were utilized in the design of the Proposed Project Alternative.
If the Widen Existing Alignment Alternative could not be designed to allow Rancho Santa Fe Road to be extended "straight through," this would conflict with the Melrose Avenue North and Rancho Santa Fe Road intersection as shown on the City of Carlsbad approved Meadowlands project, Tentative Map No. 85-19, and the recently published University Commons EIR as prepared by the City of San Marcos.
3ccc
It should be noted that the Proposed Project Alignment for Rancho Santa Fe Road was shifted westerly to meet the City's geometric standards and to allow the Cities of San Marcos and ? Carlsbad the flexibility of extending either Melrose Avenue or P Rancho Santa Fe Road "straight through". h,
3DDD 1. Grading associated with the Widen Existing Alignment Alternative, in conjunction with the respective alignments for La Costa Avenue and Melrose Avenue South as depicted on the Hunsaker exhibit, appear to impact an even larger overall area than the Proposed Project Alignment and its associated grading. The Draft EIR for Rancho Santa Fe Road seems to combine the Hunsaker alignment with the Proposed Project associated grading, which may or may not be feasible. The associated grading which would result from grading the limits of the land outlined by the various roads on the Hunsaker exhibit seems to increase the project's overall area of disturbance, when considered in conjunction with the Proposed Project Alignment grading limits.
Biological Resources
3EEE 1. If the Widen Existing Alignment profile were to be adjusted to raise the bridge elevation, thereby causing the replacement ofthe bridge, additional biological impacts tothe creek could be severe, adjacent properties could be significantly impacted by the roadway August 29, 1991 Page Thirteen
grading, and the phasing of the bridge construction could be virtually impossible, unless additional short-term bridging of the creek for detouring were constructed. Obviously, any other
Response xcc: The Rancho Santa Fe Road/Melrose Drive intersection configuration has not been determined at this time. As discussed in Section 5.8, Traflic/Circulation in the EIR, Rancho Santa Fe Road may form a "I* into Melrosc Drive, or Melrosc Drive may form a "I" into Rancho Santa Fe Road. The City of carlsbad will have to consider this information in its decision regarding intersection configuration.
Response 3DDD The EIR uses information provided by the developer's engineering consultant, Project Design Consultants, in a letter dated June 26. 1990 to estimate the volume of grading required for a "road only" alterative. The grading quantity is not as significant as the area of disturbance in determining environmental impacts. A large portion of the area of disturbance for the existing roadway alignment has been previously disturbed. Environmental impacts will be caused by grading of the previously undisturbed land. So although the area of disturbance for the existing alignment may actually be greater than that for the proposed realignment, lesser environmental impacts may be incurred with its construction.
Response 3EEE The comment is noted and this point is included in the EIR in the second paragraph on page 6-16 (Alternatives). Conclusions in the alternatives ady& of the EIR are not changed by this fact. The additional impacts to biological resources would be incurred Over a relatively small area of cotton-willow riparian habitat. The impacts to the California gnatcatcher prevented by choosing the existing alignment outweigh the incremental impacts to cotton-willow riparian habitat from bridge construction on the existing alignment.
The detouring and bridge construction on the preliminary design shown on the figure attached to the comment letter may be one option. It may be feasible to implement a more environmentally sensitive detouring plan. Such a plan may include utilization of the existing bridge while construction of either northbound or southbound lanes of the new bridge are constructed, followed by utilization of the new lanes during destruction of the existing bridge and construction of the remainder of the new bridge occurs.
,I
Mr. Crister Westman August 29, 1991 Page Thirteen
bridging of the creek for detouring would also cause further environmental impacts to the San Marcos Creek biological resources (see Exhibit 11.
2. The alignment for La Costa Avenue as reflected on the Hunsaker Study passes directly through the drainage channel, oak tree cluster and Goldenstar resources which the EIR project biologist and City have indicated need to be preserved if the Proposed Project Alignment were implemented. The Hunsaker Study alignment for La Costa Avenue would appear to cause additional significant impacts to each of these resources.
coets
1. We estimate the costs for a traffic control plan alone in conjunction with this alternative to exceed $2,000,000. More over, the difficulty in accommodating this alignment with the required detouring presents significant liability issues. The time necessary to accomplish this also adds to the cost. The amount and nature of the grading required to adjust the existing road profile and the traffic control mechanisms and costs, should therefore be thoroughly evaluated before a conclusion can be drawn that this alternative could be implemented.
2. If the Widen Existing Alignment Alternative were to be modified to resolve the issues outlined above, it is likely that the $2 million cost saving as identified in the Draft EIR may no longer be valid. In fact, costs associated with resolving these issues could increase the cost of the Widen Existing Alignment Alternative such that it might be higher than the Proposed Project Alternative. Obviously, this would need to be further evaluated to quantify the cost impacts after the alignment was modified.
Thank you again for the opportunity to provide the foregoing comments. If you have any questions or need clarification on any of the points raised, please let me know.
Sincerely,
3FFF
3GGG
? P W
3HHH
%UG AVIS
Enclosures
c: Cotton/Beland/Associates. Inc. Lloyd Hubbs, City Engineer Michael Holzmiller, Planning Director Sherry Howard, Engineering Department
Responac 3FFF: The Alternatives analysis in the EIR addresses the alignment of Rancho Santa
Fe Road and surrounding land uses. Figure 6-3 is used in the EIR to display to the general location of the widened existing roadway. ThC conceptual alignments of future La Costa Avenue and Melrose Drive are also included on the map. However, the location of La Costa Avenue is not the focus of alternatives
analyzing widening of the existing alignment. As stated in a letter from the City Engineer dated March 4, 1991. the alignment of La Costa Avenue has not been determined by the City. Therefore, the alignment of La Costa shown on Figure 6-3 is preliminary and subject to change based on environmental dew.
Response XCC: Comment noted but the purpose of the EIR is to address environmental, rather
than financial or legal issues associated proposed project. No further response is
necessary.
Response 3HHH Comment noted. Please see 3GGG response.
RUG 28 '91 ?0:29 PROJECT DESIGN CONSULTRNTS P.Z
mi: 1 *a 2602
EXHIBIT- 1
9-44
JULY 15, 1991
HEMORANDUX OF AGREEMENT
REGARDIM CITY OF CARLBEAD COASTAL
SAGE SCRUB HABITAT PROGRAM
THIS MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT ("MOA") is entered into as
of , 1991, by and among the city of Carlsbad
(*@City1'), the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (irFW~"), and
the Fieldstone Company ( f8Fieldstone1u) .
This Memorandum of Agreement is based on the following -
facts:
WHEREAS, the natural habitat of the California
Gnatcatcher (PolioDtila Californicg) (88Gnatcatchert@) is Pacific
Coastal Sage Scrub ("Scrub Habitat") which extends from Baja
California, Mexico north to beyond Los Angeles County, California,
and also provides habitat for other species of concern ("Species of
Concern") ; and
-
WHEREAS, significant Scrub Habitat exists within the
City, some of which is the subject of a number of development
proposals which could impact the Scrub Habitat and Species of *.r
Concern; and
cO-er&d WHEREAS, FWS is -. +- with respect to
wildlife and wildlife habitat, includingthe Species of Concern and
Scrub Habitat; and
WHEREAS, within the scope and constraints of each of
c their individual statutory mandates and authority, the parties
9-45
desire to cooperate in the development of a Habitat Conservation -
Plan Program ("HCP Program@#) which would provide for: (i) the
preparation of a Habitat Conservation Plan (I*HCP") for Coastal Sage
scrub Habitat: and, (ii) the incidental take of Scrub Habitat and
the Species of Concern in connection with certain activities
("Interim Activities") take place prior to the
completion of ram is approved by the parties in
accordance with the applicable statutes and regulations and is
consistent with the long-term conservation of Scrub Habitat and the
Species of Concern; and
WHEREAS, the Rancho Santa Fe Road project, as described
in the draft Environmental Impact Report No. 91-1, prepared by the
City ("Road Projectm8), is an Interim Activity which the City
desires to be considered expeditiously and in a timely manner in ---r
order to protect the safety of the public; and
WHEREAS, other Interim Activities which could be
considered for inclusion of the HCP Program include: Larwin Park,
the Calavera Municipal Golf Course, and other municipal projects
during the interim period which are necessary to meet the public
facility requirements of the City's Growth Management Program; and
WHEREAS, in connection with Interim Activities included
within the HCP Program, it is contemplated that any "take" of the
Gnatcatcher or other Species of Concern will be mitigated by, for
example, the acquisition and conservation of additional Scrub
Habitat within and outside of the City; the restoration and
creation of additional Scrub Habitat; the funding of further
-.
9-46
studies and research and local implementation plan development:
and, the reintroduction of Gnatcatchers and other Species of
Concern in areas which they do not currently inhabit; and
cc-
WHEREAS, in connection with any such Interim Activities,
the parties desire to receive assurances that upon approval of any
such Interim Activities hereunder by the parties, such activities
will be carried out, together with related conservation measures,
in accordance with the terms and conditions of such approvals; and
WHEREAS, the City has undertaken the development of a
Citywide Habitat Management Program (%MP") , as part of the General
Plan process, which will establish goals, objectives, policies an&
management guidelines generally for wildlife and various wildlife
habitats which include all of the major vegetation communities
found within the City of Carlsbad, including, but not limited to,
Scrub Habitat, and it is anticipated that upon approval of the HCP
Program, the Plan will become part of the Citywide HMP and their
preparation will be coordinated; and
cc
WHEREAS, it is acknowledged that there may be other
planning and conservation efforts which are undertaken with respect
to the Species of Concern and Scrub Habitat within areas adjacent
to the City and within the region and that it may be desirable that
the HCP Program be coordinated with such parallel efforts; and
WHEREAS, the parties recognize that the public agencies
which are parties hereto have duties and restrictions under
applicable laws and regulations which
be delegated and that nothing herein
ed and cannot
abrogate any P
9-47
-,
such duties or restrictions.
THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed and understood that:
1. preD aration and Imp lementation of a H CP Proar am.
a. The parties shall use their best efforts to
cooperate in order to allow the City (and
Fieldstone to the extent that it includes
Fieldstone Lands) to complete a draft HCP
Program for Scrub Habitat within the City
(together with appropriate environmental
documents), generally in accordance with the
outline in Attachment A hereto, for formal-
consideration by the City and FWS in their
respective regulatory capacities: and
b. Complete formal consideration by the City and -
FWS of any requests for the issuance of
permits, the granting of approvals or the
execution of any agreements in connection with
the HCP Program for Scrub Habitat mior to
Januarv 1. 1992 : and
c. Complete a draft lona-tern\ Scrub Habitat HCP
and related State/Federal joint environmental
impact report/statement for public review
Prior t o Januarv 1. 1 993.
2. Jnterim Activities
In order to avoid unnecessary disruption of business and
provide for public health and safety, the City desires that the HCP
9-48
Program provides that certain Interim Activities be contemplated
and permitted. It is contemplated that said Interim Activities may
result in the "incidental take" of individuals and habitat of the
Species of concern, for which appropriate mitigation will be
provided, provided that such "take'@ is approved by the City and FWS
under the same standards that would be applicable if such speci
were listed as #@endangered@' under the Federal and
Species Acts ("ESAs"). The Interim Activities whi ay be
considered include, among others:
a. The Rancho Santa Fe Road Project;
b. The 22 acre Larwin Park community park project-
located on Carlsbad Village Drive, east of El
Camino Real;
c. The 252 acre Calavera Lake Municipal Golf
Course project (the "Golf Course#' project), in
the northeast corner of the City;
d. Other municipal projects during this period
which are necessary to meet public facility
requirements of the City's Growth Management
Plan, as described in the City's Capital
Improvement Program budget;
The Rancho Santa Fe Road Project (the "Road Project")
comprises the restoration and expansion of Rancho Santa Fe Road
through the southern portion of the City with significant impacts
on Coastal Sage Scrub Habitat. As an element of this Memorandum of
Agreement and the HCP Program, the City and Fieldstone are
/"
9-49
proposing the establishment of a "mitigation pool" a portion of
which will be used to offset the impacts of this project. The
Mitigation Pool will include a 388 acre site in the San Pasqua1
Valley together with 423 acres of land within the tlRancheros@q
Project site and San Marcos Canyon within the La costa Villages.
The biologists on the Facilitation Team (as defined below) in
consultation with the biologists (and representatives) of the city,
DFG, FWs, the San Dieguito River Valley Joint Powers Agency ("San
Dieguito JPA") and Fieldstone Will immediately proceed to develop
an approach to include this effort as an element of the Scrub
Habitat HCP: (i) to maximize the value of the Mitigation POOL
through protective, enhancement and management measures; and, (ii)
to determine the amount of mitigation credit available in
connection with the Road Project. To the extent that the
mitigation credit exceeds that necessary for the Road Project, the
HCP Program will allocate the credit to the "Rancheros@@, the
"Northwest" projects within the La Costa Villages Project and to
the Larwin Park, the Calavera Lake Municipal Golf Course Project,
and the City Program generally. In addition, other areas may be
identified and considered by the City for inclusion in the
Mitigation Pool.
e. Consideration of an Interim Grading Ordinance
to protect Scrub Habitat while the long-term
HCP is being prepared; and
f. Consideration of an Interim Ordinance to
provide for an impact fee relating to the loss
9-50
of Scrub Habitat while the long-term HCP is
being prepared.
The HCP Program, if approved, shall be considered a
"prelisting Habitat Conservation Plan" under the Federal ESA and
shall be accompanied by an implementation agreement ( .
This Agreement shall provide assurances to the parties that: (i)
the terms and conditions with respect to Interim Activities
approved as part of the HCP Program shall be performed and observed
(including the provision of required mitigation) : and, (ii) if a
Species of Concern covered by
listed as @'endangered", FWS shall,
requested by a party, but subject to certain exceptions for
Wnforseen circumstances? issue a permit (s) allowing the co Y (kbding a fer'.a-eb, %as, diSc1-d
- nincidental takingn of the species consistent with the
Program under Section lO(a) of the Federal ESA. If the species is
listed as ''threatened" under the Federal ESA, the FWS may instead
issue a "special rule" under Section 4(d)
with the foregoing. It is acknowledged that
of such permits, as provided above, there is no approval bb'&S for
any incidental take of the Species of Concern under the Federal
ESAs .
3. Facilitation Team
The City will establish a Facilitation Team composed of
the signatories to this agreement, biological and other necessary
consultants, a representative from the HMP Advisory Group, and the
HMP Project Facilitator. The responsibility of the Facilitation
/I
9-5 7
Team would be the expeditious preparation of a HCP for css to
address the pro] ects and mitigation discussed in this document.
The HCP would be coordinated with the HMP, and be integrated with
that document upon completion.
-
In addition, as part of the Facilitation Team, the City,
in consultation with the FWS may engage biologists and other
consultants and experts.
4. Tecual SuDDort and Envirmental Re view
The City, with the assistance of the Facilitation Team,
and in coordination with the parties shall:
a. Prepare necessary mapping and biological data:-
and
b. Prepare drafts of any required environmental
documents in connection with the review and -
approval of the HCP Program. It is
anticipated that these documents will be
prepared as joint documents under the
California Environmental Quality Act (VEQA")
and the National Environmental Policy Act
("NEPA") and shall be prepared in full
compliance with all applicable laws and
regulations. The City shall be the lead
FWS shall be
NEPA. To the
extent that the document is a federal
document, it shall be in a form satisfactory
1
9-52
to FWS. In connection with the Road Project
Interim Activity, the EIR now being prepared
on the State level may be utilized as a
"scoping'' document for a subsequent federal
environmental document.
5. Fundina
The City shall bear the cost of preparing the HCP and the
P
environmental 1 bear the cost of
participation by of the mitigation for
approvals incidental to the Road Project, it is anticipated that
Fieldstone may pay a portion of the City's costs in connection with-
the preparation of the HCP Program.
6. Coordination with Citv HIQ
The City shall coordinate the activities relating to the
HMP with the HCP Program. For this purpose, the City will have
representatives involved in the HMP process participate in the HCP
Program and its related activities, and shall keep the Citywide
Advisory Committee advised of decisions and activities regarding
the HCP Program.
Coordinat 7. ion with 0 ther Related A ctivities
It is intended that this Memorandum of Agreement may
provide a basis to facilitate coordination of the HCP Program with
other parallel planning and conservation activities which may be
initiated outside the geographic boundaries of the City. The
...
signatories shall undertake to coordinate, with any such parallel
activity, the activities contemplated by this MOA, to the extent
r
9-53
feasible and prudent.
In this regard, it is acknowledged that the city may
enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with DFG which will
complement and be consistent with this MOA in providing for
compliance with State law with regard to conservation of Scrub
Habitat, the Gnatcatcher and other Species of Concern:
Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, it is
anticipated that SANDAG may consult with the City with respect to
regional impacts and concerns: provide liaison with other local
agencies addressing similar issues: and, at the request of the City
and subject to arrangements regarding the reimbursement of costs,-
provide mapping assistance.
8. Miscellaneous Provisions
a. Teetion. While this MOA is intended to -
provide the basis for cooperative actions, any
party may terminate its participation at any
time by written notice to the other parties.
b. Yo ADDro val/Commitment . It is acknowledged
that FWS and the other public agencies which
are party to this MOA are authorized to commit
to aspects of a program or plan only after a
formal decision-making process in accordance
with existing laws and regulations.
Accordingly, the participation and statements
of representatives of the FWS and the other
public agencies during the process under this
-..
9-54
MOA are only in an advisory
capacity and shall not bind or be viewed as-
the official position of their agencies except
when provided pursuant to formal actions of
the respective agency.
C. 1 Parties. Other parties may join
this MOA at a later time, if appropriate.
These could include DFG, the San Diego
Association of Governments, the San Dieguito
River Valley Joint Powers Authority, other
cities, the County of San Diego, and possibly-
others.
d. Yo Federal Ad visorv Committee . The objective
of the MOA is to provide a process for the
development of a draft HCP Program which may
be submitted to the FWS, the City and other
agencies for review, and to provide a basis
for undertaking the Interim Activities. It is
a scoping process as contemplated by the
National Environmental Policy Act and does not
provide for or contemplate the establishment
of an advisory committee as contemplated by
the Federal Advisory Committee Act.
9-55
Executed by the parties on the dates set forth below:
I1 Fws 0 United States Fish and Wildlife
Service
.# 7c-c '\up. T-, 3 , ,.,4 --.. ... *- '
1.
ACi'-~Regional Directo?, Region 1
Date:
By:
Date:
CITY
By:
Date:
, tiit ? 6 199J
Laguna -Nlguel Field Off ice
FIELDSTONE" The Fieldstone
4 4 .' I
Company
By: @
/ /
:, Y
. _.
9-56
CARL8BAD COASTAL 8AGE 8CRUB HABITAT
CONSERVATION PIAN PROGRAM
I. Signature of Memorandum of Understanding
I1 0 Further biological study regarding Gnatcatcher and
Coastal Sage Scrub
111.
IV. Complete draft HCP Program
Complete Proposal for Road Project Interim Activity
Agreement and
V, AApproval P Program
Interim Activity)
VI. Complete draf P, Implementation Agreement, and
VII. and HCP by City, FWS and DFG .
9-57
MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT
REGARDING CITY OF CARLSBAD COASTAL SAGE SCRUB HABITAT PROGRAM
THIS MEMORANDUM OF AGREEMENT is entered into as of
August 1, 1991, by and among the City of Carlsbad ("City"),
the California Department of Fish and Game ("DFG") and The
Fieldstone Company ("Fieldstone").
RECITALS
This Memorandum of Agreement is based on the
following facts:
WHEREAS, the City, the United States Fish and
Wildlife Service and Fieldstone have executed a Memorandum of
Agreement ("MOA") regarding the preparation of a habitat
conservation program ("HCP Program") and plan ("HCP")
conservation of Pacific Coastal Sage Scrub, habitat of the
California Gnatcatcher (PolioDtila californica)
for the
("Gnatcatcher") and other species of concern ("Species of
Concern") within the City as part of the City's Habitat
Management Program ( "HMP" ) ; - -.
9-58
F WHEREAS, DFG is a trustee agency with respect to
wildlife and wildlife habitat, including the Species of
Concern and Scrub Habitat and important biological habitat as
outlined in Section 1802 of the California Fish and Game
Code :
WHEREAS, the Secretary for Resources is exploring
the development of a program for Natural Communities
Conservation Planning and legislation has been proposed which
could establish State policies, laws and regulations with
respect thereto and to the development of habitat
conservation programs and plans; and
WHEREAS, DFG is supportive of and desires to
cooperate with the City, USFWS and Fieldstone in consulting
with respect to the preparation of the HCP Program and HCP,
consistent with and in accordance with State laws and
regulations, including but not limited to the California
Endangered Species Act ("CESA") and the California
Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA");
THEREFORE, it is mutually agreed and understood as
follows :
1. DFG will join in the MOA to the extent that it
will cooperate in consulting with the City, USFWS and
Fieldstone in the preparation of the HCP Program in
accordance with the time schedule set forth in the MOA and
r
9-59
subject to and consistent with available resources,
authority, and legal responsibilities:
its
a.
and wildlife habitat; and,
As a trustee agency with respect to wildlife
b, Under CESA, CEQA and laws and regulations
enacted and promulgated in the future including,
but not limited to, any such laws and regulations
with respect to Natural Communities Conservation
Planning.
2. Without limiting the generality of the
foregoing, in connection with the preparation of the HCP
Program, upon the request of the City and subject to
compliance with CEQA, DFG shall consider:
a. As a trustee agency for wildlife and wildlife
habitat, entering into implementation agreements
which provides for the conservation of the Species
of Concern and Coastal Sage Scrub Habitat;
h
b. The issuance of a Endangered Species Management
Permit under and in accordance with Section 2081 of
CESA with respect to any species addressed by the
HCP Program or Plan which are regulated by CESA..
9-60
.-
c.
species identified in the Natural Communities
Conservation Plan process.
Implementing a conservation program for
3. Miscellaneous Provisions.
a. Termination. While this MOA is intended to
provide the basis for cooperative actions, any party may
terminate its participation at any time by written
notice to the other parties.
b. No Amroval/Commitment. It is acknowledged
that the City and DFG are authorized to commit to
aspects of a program or plan only after a formal
decision-making process in accordance with applicable
laws and regulations. Accordingly, the participation
and statements of representatives of these agencies
during the process hereunder and under the MOA are only
in an individual advisory capacity and shall not bind or
be viewed as the official position of their agencies
except when provided pursuant to formal actions of the
respective agency.
9-6 7
Executed by the parties on the dates set forth
below.
"CITY" City of C
by :
Date:
"FIELDSTONE" The Fieldstone Company
"DFG" California Department of Fish and Game
by: Hd A- SA
Date: 8- 2-q1
9-62
4A
? 0 W
48
Aqua 29,1991
FRED J. MOREY I I GOVERNMENTAL CONSULTANT
I I
To:
t
I
draft. SlmOarly, tbdr have ban provided wUh 8 copy d thlt re8p0
I I
Response 4A: The MAG. properties are the other landowner in the project area. MAG. properties has not participated in the coordination of project planning and environmental review of this project, as the Fieldstone Company bas done. "'his comment also acknowledges the extension of the 45-day public review period of the Draft EIR for an additional two week by the City of Carlsbad.
Response 4B This comment does not address the adequacy of the EIR. The policy of the City of carlsbad regarding General Plan Amendment is not an issue which needs to be further addressed. Impacts identified in the EIR which result from inconsistency with local plans can be mitigated below significance by amendments of these plans. Road financing feasibility is not an issue to be addresacd in the EIR.
2618 A$DUL STREET = CARLSEAD, CA 92OOQ TELEPHONE BUS: 181 031-7610 I RW.: 1619) 436-1637 I FAX: (8101 753-153
? QI P
4c
4D
4E
ll.
m.
N.
Response 4c: Please see 1B response. The Fieldstone Company, the City of Carlsbad, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and the California Department of Fish and Game are involved in a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) regarding development of coastal sage scrub habitat affecting the California gnatcatcher. Although one and a portion of a second gnatcatcher pair home range is located on MAG. property. no open space areas are proposed on the MAG. properties and this developer is not involved in the MOA. The project applicants have proposed land use changes in the proposed project as a response to impacts identified for the San Diego Goldenstar and the California gnatcatcher, but wen after these changes, onsite impacts to the gnatcatcher would remain signircant but mitigable through use of the measures described on pages 5.4-17 through 5.4- 20 of the EIR (also see 1B response).
Please see 3RR response. As this comment relates to General Plan Amendment, please see 48 response. No further discussion is necessary.
Response 4E: Comment noted. The cultural sulvey report of the MAG. property has been provided to the City and the EIR has been modified to reflect findings in the report.
Response 4D
EXCERPT FROM FIELDSTONE E.I.R. COMMENTS
RE: MAC *OPEN SPACE*
recont (1990) conc tual Citywide Trail Syoten. The more ,oynton mhowo no oh linkage in thiu nroa, and theretoro purpooo lor which i warn orlqin~lly intonclod no lOng8r aximtr. alao agree that rep acaaent oC this opon spaco ehoulrl bo undertiikon in confornanco wi h the City’s previous Intorim Opon 6 Ordinance (and cur ant Open Speoe Element). Ilouovor, in interoat of compreh nnivo open mpaco plonninq Cor thio area, v
rec:ent tho Ha
iaco the
I do
5A
56
5c
5D
5E
5F
United States Department of the Interior
FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE
FISH AND WILDLIFE
SOUTHERN CILtI?ORNIA ?IH9 STATION Laguna Niguel Office Federal Building, 24000 Avila Road Lagllna Niguel, California 92656
September 23, 1991
Mr. Christer Westman
City of Carlsbad - Planning Department
2075 Las Palmas
Carlsbad, California 92009
Re: Draft Environmental Impact Report for Rancho Santa Po Road
realignment and mass grading, City of Carlsbad
Dear Mr. Westman:
The U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) has reviewed the referenced Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) received in our office August 23,
1991, and provides the following comments. The proposed realignment and
widening of Rancho Santa Fe Road and the mass grading of approximately 350 additional acres to facilitate future development was also the subject of a meeting with representatives of the Fieldstone Company, nenshaw and
Associates, the City of Carlsbad, and the Service on September 10, 1991.
The project involves cutting and filling approximately 448 acres within a 768 acre project area.
Rancho Santa Fe Road as a 6 lane road in order to reduce congestion, improve
traffic flow, and increase safety. A8 proposed, this project would have
significant adverse impacts on a variety of sensitive habitats including
coastal sage scrub and riparian woodland. identified nor are they adequately evaluated in the DEIR.
associated with these habitats include the California gnatcatcher (poliootile californial, a species now proposed for Federal listing as endangered. Several plants which are candidates €or Federal listing are also €ound on the project site.
Services's responsibilities include administering certain portions of the
Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended (Act), including Sections I and 9
of the Act. Section 9 of the Act prohibits the taking of any federally listed endangered or threatened species. "Taking" includes destruction or modification of habitat such that death, injury, or disruption of reproductive
behavior results.
with the Service on proposed actions which may affect threatened or endangered
species.
Similarly, Federal agencies are required to confer with the Service if the agency determines that its action is likely to jeopardize the continued
The stated objectives of the project are to reconstruct
These impacts are not completely
The species
Section 7 of the Act requires Federal agencies to consult
Response SA: Comment noted.
Response SB Also included as part of the project is the formation of a f2lbacre Rancho Santa Fe Road Assessment District. Financing of roadway improvements will be provided by generating funds within the Assessment District. Text in sentences four and five has been added to paragraph 3 on page 3-1 of the EIR which clearly states the relationship between the formation of the Assessment District, development within the District requiring mass grading on 348 acres adjacent to the roadway and funding of roadway improvements (grading for the roadway will involve grading of 100 acres for a total of 448 acres). Mass grading is required to assure development of the surrounding 348 acres which can be assessed for funds to finance widening and realignment of Rancho Santa Fe Road.
As stated in paragraph 3 of page 3-6 of the EIR, "Widening of the existing roadway will provide the prime arterial shown in the Circulation Element of Carlsbad's General Plan."
Response SC As identified on Daees 2-4 throueh 2-8 of the EIR. wtentially sinnificant adverse environmental ikpgcts will occu; to 11 impacts are&, including biological resources, however, except for air quality and Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat and the California gnatcatcher. all of these impacts can be mitigated to less than significant levels. Impacts to air quality and to Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat and the California gnatcatcher are identified as being significant and not mitigable prior to approval of an HCP for the project site. Impacts to Diegan coastal sage scrub and the California gnatcatcher are mitigable to a levels of less than significant with approval of the project-specific HCP. Pages 5.4-12 and 13 quantify impacts which will occur to coastal sage scrub and riparian woodland, as well as several other vegetation and animal species.
Response SD The statement that "impacts are not completely identified nor ... adequately evaluated in the EIR" is based on conclusions made in the body of the comment letter. In response to comments contained in this letter, the EIR has been modified and the FEIR adequately identifies and evaluates environmental impacts. At the time the DEIR was issued to the public for review and comment (July 15, 1991) the California gnatcatcher was not proposed for Federal listing as endangered. As discussed in 1B Response, the City and developer have approached development within gnatcatcher habitat as if the bird were already listed as endangered. The City of Carlsbad has initiated the formation of a Citywide Habitat Management Program (HMP) to preserve remaining sensitive habitat. While completion of the HMP is still ongoing, an HCP is being prepared for the Rancho Santa Fe Road project as an interim project. Both the City of Carlsbad and the Fieldstone Company have entered into a MOA with this agency (USFWS) and the California Department of Fish and Game to provide protection for the gnatcatcher and its habitat under an HCP.
Impam to Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat and the California ptcatcher arc significant and unmitigable until an HCP is approved for the prow site. Upon approval of the HCP as described in the EIR, impacts (0 coastal sage scrub llad the California gnatcatcher will be reduced to lcveb of leu than sigdkmt.
Response SE: Tea has been added as the first sentence under the respedvc subheadings to pages 5.4-8 and 5.4-9 of the EIR to indicate that the Brodiaca orcuttii and Muill. clevelandu are candidates for Federal listing as endangered. The EIR identirk the existence of these species on-site and discusses impads to both candidate vegetation species on page 5.4-15. The FEIR concludes that the impads arc Icu than significant to Brodiaea orcuttii due to small the population of BrodiPea orcuttii and signifcant to the Muilla clcvelandii unless substantiaUy mitigated. It should be noted that the area to be mass graded for the project has been reduced and grading near areas containing Muh clwelandii has been "pulled back" on plans submitted IO the City in order to achieve 100 percent preservation of the dense populations of the species and 75 percent of the sparse populations of the species (see Figure 9-1A and 9-1B attached to comment letter number 3). Mitigation measure number 4 on page 5.4-21 of the EIR requires preservation of 100 percent of dense areas of Muilla clevelandii vegetation and 75 percent preservation of spane areas of the species. Other specirc mitigation measurea prodding assurance of preservation of the species follow in the EIR Y measurea 4A, 4B, 4C and 4D. See 5CC response for more information regarding preservation of the Muilla clevelandii during grading.
Implementation of mitigation measures contained in the EIR will reduce impacts to Muilla clevelandii to less than significant. No significant impacts to Brodiaca orcuttii were identified and no mitigation is required.
Response SF: Comment noted. No federally listed endangered or threatened species occur on the project site. Please see lB, 5D and 5E responses.
wr. Ouistsr west.an 2
existence of any proposed species or result in the deStNCtiOn or adverse modification of proposed critical habitat. discussions between the Service and the Federal agency designed to identify and resolve potential conflicts between an action and proposed species or proposed critical habitat at an early point in the decision making process.
AS you may know, the U. S. Department of Interior has recently proposed to
list the California gnatcatcher as endangered. This project, as proposed,
will have significant adverse impacts on the California gnatcatcher, therefore
any Federal agency involved in the permitting, licensing, funding, financing,
or any other aspect of this project may be required to confer with the
Service.
The Service is also required to provide comments on projects which will require a Federal permit to impact the Nation’s waters. Any proposal to alter
stream beds or wetlands may require a permit from the U. S. Amy Corps of
Engineers (Corps), pursuant to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, and therefore may be reviewed by the Service. The proposed construction of a bridge over San Marcos Creek and the potential filling of baccharis scrub may require a permit from the Corps.
AS part of the Corps process, all projects must undergo an alternatives
analysis to demonstrate that the least environmentally damaging practicable
alternative has been selected. Guideliner have been developed (Section 404(b)(O Guidelines) to direct the permit application evaluation process. These Guidelines identify the circumstances under which discharges of fill
material into waters of the United States, including wetlands, are prohibited.
The prohibitive conditions include the existence of less environmentally
damaging practicable alternatives and failure to take all appropriate measures
to minimize potential harm to the aquatic ecosystea.
Conferences are informal
5G
5H
51
? m 0
5J
5K
5L
The Guidelines also require analysia of cumulative and secondary effects
associated with the discharge.
project have been determined, mitigation efforts must be addressed in the following sequence: (1) avoiding the impacts; (2) minimizing the impacts; (3) rectifying the impacts; (4) reducing or eliminating the impacts over time; and
(5) compensating for the impacts by replacing or providing substitute resources or environments. the previous steps have been addressed.
From the information provided in the DEIR, it appears that implementation of
the proposed project will have significant adverse environmental impacts. In
order for the final deciaion making document to adequately assess and evaluate these impacts, we recommend that the following issues be addressed in the final Environmental Impact Report (EIR):
1)
Once all potential impacts associated with a
Compensation can only be considered after all of
The objectives and purpose of the proposed project should be more clearly and fully explained in the Project Objectives portion of Section
3.0 - Project Description. Specifically, the connection between the road construction and the mass grading, the need for pecforming the mass
grading so far in advance of developlent, and the degree to which the City Council‘s decision of 1987 restricts alignment options should be
Response SG: Comment noted. Pleasc see 1B and 5D responses. Impacts to Diegan sage scrub and the California gnatcatcher will be significant and unmitigable until an HCP for the project site is approved by the City. Upon approval of the HCP, impacts will be mitigated to a level of less than significant with the implementation of mitigation measures contained on pages 5.4-15 lhrougb 5.4-17 of the EIR.
Response 5H: Comment noted. Mitigation measure number 5 on page 5.4-22 of the EIR refem to impacts from construction of the bridge and states that a USACE Seaion 404 permit is required for impacts to San Marcos Creek from bridge construction. In reference to the potential filling of Baccharis scrub habitat, it is stated on page 5.7-10, paragraph 3, of the EIR that maintenance of a natural drainage ehonncl in the south-central portion of the project site containing Baccharis scrub BS a
”best management practice” is preferable to filling the south-central drainage course. Maintenance of the natural drainage channel is required as a mitigation measure (# 10 on page 5.3-7) in Water Resources (Section 5.3) of the EIR.
Response SI: As stated on page 5.4-22 of the EIR, the project proponents will be required to obtain a Section 404 permit from the US. Army Corps of Engineers for the bridge over San Marm Creek. In preparing the permit application, the Section
404 Guidelines referred to in the Service’s comment will be followed, and, if necessary, an alternatives analysis using the Corps’ Guidelines will be conducted at that time.
Responw SJ: Comment noted, please see 51 and SR responses.
Response SK: Information contained in the EIR states that the project will have siflicant environmental impacts. Air quality and the Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat and the California gnatcatcher will incur potentially significant and unmitigable impacts. Impacts to Diegan coastal sage scrub and the California gnatcatcher are mitigable to a level of less than significant with approval of an HCP for the project site. With the exception of air quality and Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat and the California gnatcatcher, environmental impacts caused by the project will be reduced to levels of less than significant with the implementation of mitigation measures. Please see 5D response.
5M cleirly articulated in this section of the final EIR.- If the City’s
i
i i
Response SL The Project Descriotion has &en modified to include a discussion of the relatioihip of ma& grading to roadway widening and realignment. Please sce 5B response.. The City Council directed the City to realign the road to the Canyon alignment in 1987 and the City has therefore proposed the Canyon alignment as the proposed project and other options were not considered.
Response SM Within the EIR there is full examination of two alternatives which are environmentally superior to the proposed project. The alternatives identified as being environmentally superior to the proposed project include the scenarios which defer mass grading until specific development plans are available.
ltr. Qlrister westran 3
objective is solely the improvement of circulation and safety conditions on Rancho Santa Fe Road, then the Alternatives section of the DEIR
should be revised to more fully examine those alternatives that achieve
the circulation and safety goals while reducing impacts. should be made to analyze the feasibility of those,alternatives that eliminate or reduce the impacts associated with the mass grading.
the circulation and safety goals are perceived to be inextricably tied
to the mass grading, future development should be included as an
objective of the project. In addition, the alternatives analysis should be revised to examine alternative projects that satisfy the revised objectives and offer reduced environmental impacts. Also, the statement on page 7-12 which reads "...[the improved road] is considered growth- accommodating rather than growth-inducing, as it will provide
circulation for City-wide build out ..." should be clarified and reconciled with the tie between the road improvements and the mass grading for development.
Special effort
If 5N
50
5P
5Q
? 5R v 0
5s
2)
3)
41
The DEIR estimates that the cleared and graded surfaces surrounding the
road alignment may remain undeveloped for up to two to three years. In our meeting of September 10, it was stated that the time between grading and development may be ten years or longer.
revised to provide a more realistic estimate of time between grading and project build out and should enumerate the factors that control and
therefore may change those time estimatea.
Section 5.1 - Earth identifies erosion of cleared or graded surfaces and concomitant sedimentation and siltation as impacts associated with
performing the mass grading well in advance of development. Several
measures are proposed to mitigate these impacts; however, it is clear that some erosion and offsite silt and sediment deposition will occur despite the proposed measures. The biological impacts of sediment deposition on adjacent habitat, sedimentation and siltation in natural
drainages and watercourses, and sediment and silt input to Batiquitos
Lagoon are not discussed.
these potentially significant impacts to biological resources. Specifically, the final EIR should address the following issues:
a)
b)
The final EIR should be
The final EIR should identify and assess
the efficacy of the proposed erosion and sedimentation control
measures; the location and character of the biological resources that will be adversely affected by erosion and sedimentation not
contained by the proposed control measures; and, c) the location and character of the biological resources that
will be adversely affected, and the remedial actions to be taken, should the proposed control measures fail.
The potential erosion and sedimentation control measures described in
Section 5.1 include ditches, catchment basins, dams, and settling ponds.
The location of these features relative to the grading footprint should be specified and the impacts to biological resources from both the construction and operation (ie. alteration of natural drainage patterns,
ponding, etc.) of these features should be assessed.
Response SN: The Project Description has been clarified in the last sentence of paragraph two on page 3-6 under "Project Objectives" to make the text clear that future development of land surrounding Rancho Santa Fe Road is an objective of the project.
Response 50: Please see 5M response. The Alternatives analysis of the EIR includes an adeauate discussion of alternatives which meet the clarified project objectives (see'5N response) and are environmentally superior to the projkcd project.
Response SP: The second sentence on page 7-12, paragraph three is based on the General Plan Land Use and Circulation Elements which show the roadway as an ultimat~ 6- lane prime arterial surrounded by residential development. 'Text has been added to this paragraph to clarify the relationship between roadway improvements and subsequent development of surrounding land. As verified in the project tralTc analysis, existing levels of growth in Carlsbad have already reached levels which overburden the roadway and improvements will accommodate both existing pod and that of General Plan build-out.
Response SQ: Portions of the graded areas may remain undeveloped for an extended period of time. Development of the graded area would begin as soon as possible after the completion of the grading operation and construction of the realigned Rancho Santa Fe Road. Factors that will control the amount of time required to complete the development of the graded area include the time necessary to complete the planning and processing of the development plans, construction of infrastructure, availability of financing and the market demand for the typc of housing to be constructed.
Development of the graded area would be accomplished in phases. Thus, some portions of the graded area would be developed within a 2-3 year time period. Development of the entire area may take as long as ten years. The text of the EIR on pages 5.1-8 (paragraph 5), 5.11-5 (paragraph 3). 6-6 (paragraph 1) and 6- 14 (paragraph 2) has been clarified to reflect that development would begin within a 2-3 year time period and that complete development may take as long as ten years.
Response SR: The impacts caused by erosion and sedimentation identified in Earth (Section 5.1) and Landform Alteration/Visual Quality (Section 5.11) of the EIR are considered significant prior to mitigation. Mitigation requires erosion control measures to be implemented which are in conformance with the City’s Grading Ordinance and revised Landscape Manual. The developer has submitted a revegetation study and a preliminary erosion control design to the City which have been determined to conform to the Grading Ordinance and revised Landscape Manual. Residual impacts after implementation of this mitigation are less than significant and indirect impacts to biological resources (sedimentation of
wetlands) are also less than significant. Text has been added to page 5.4-16 of the EIR which addresses sedimentation to watercoums and lagoons.
Responses to individual items included in the comment letter and additions to the EIR follow.
a Text has been added to Earth (page 5.1-8). Landform Alteration/Visual Quality (page 5.1 1-5) and Biological Resources (page 5.4-16) of the EIR which indicates the consistency of the documents with City Ordinances and therefore the effectiveness of the proposed erosion and sedimentation control measures. The proposed measures and erosion control plans are designed to withstand the 1Wyear stom and are adequate to prevent failure of mitigation.
b.& c. Biological resources that may be adversely affected by erosion and siltation caused by the proposed project include the native habitats along 1.8 miles of San Marcos Creek between the project boundaries and Batiquitos Lagoon. For approximately one-half of this distance, the creek flows along a gorge immediately west of the project site. Beyond that, the creek flows within the La Costa golf course. under La Costa Avenue and into the lagoon. The native habitats within the gorge consist of very narrow, rocky streambed habitats, with mixtures of Coastal Sage Scrub and Coastal Mixed Chaparral above the waterline. Within the La Costa development, the habitat consists of golf course and an artificial channel, with occasional volunteer remnants of the original stream vegetation.
The additional drainage from the project, an unnamed north branch of Encinitas Creek, flows about 2 miles from the project site to Batiquitw Lagoon. Habitat along this drainage is extremely variable, ranging from a man-made channel to a fairly luxuriant willow-nparb woodland east of and adjacent to El Camino Real.
Around Batiquitos Lagoon, substantial sedimentation has taken place, particularly in the eastern end of the waterbody. However, most of this sedimentation has resulted from uncontrolled flows from the graded areas immediately around the lagoon, as the water flows across the slopes to the lagoon. It is unlikely that there will be any measurable increase in sedimentation from the project adversely affecting the streamside habitats or the lagoon if proper grading controls are required.
Responsc 5s: Erosion control design plans submitted to the City are preliminary and do specify the placement of catchment devices. By their preliminary nature, the plans are also subject to modification by the City. As such, inclusion of the locations of catchment basins at the preliminary design stage is not appropriate for the EIR. Please see SR response.
? v
t
5T
SU
5v
? 5w u bJ
nr. Christer llastran 4
The quantity of cut and fill is specified on page 5.1-6 as 4.2 and 3.8 million cubic yards, respectively. The final EIR should discuss the fate of the excess material and any impacts to biological resources
associated with its disposition.
and fill are reversed - the excavation is quantifted as 3.8 million
cubic yards and the fill is quantified as 4.2 million cubic yards.
contradiction should be resolved and, if the second specification is correct, the source and nature of the additional fill required should be identified.
Section 5.3 - Water Resources discusses offsite erosion resulting from alteration of natural drainage patterns and increased flow voluneo expected as development occurs and impervious surfaces are introduced. Impacts to biological resources resulting from alteration of natural drainage patterns and increased impervious surface, such as erosion of
adjacent habitat, redirection of water away from existing drainages, and
increased contaminant levels associated with urban runoff, are not
discussed. The final EIR should identify and assess these potentially significant impacts to biological resources.
Section 5.3 also indicates that the frequency of flooding of some areas
downstream, including the La Costa Country Club area, may be increased as a result of this project. A berm along a portion of La Costa Avenue and floodwater detention basins are cited as measures which may alleviate this flooding.
are proposed as a part of this project and, if so, should identify and
assess any related impacts to biological resources.
In reviewing the text and figures of Section 5.4 - Biological Resources and Appendix E - Biological Assessment the following discrepancies and omissions were found in the quantification of existing habitats and
proposed habitat losses:
On page 5.11-5 the quantities of cut
This .
The final EIR should clarify if these features
a)
b)
C)
d)
Figure 5.5 shows oak riparian woodland within the grading footprint but on page 5.4-12 it is stated that the acreage of oak riparian woodland on the site will not be reduced by grading and Appendix E quantifies the loss of this habitat
type as 0 acres;
the loss of cottonwood-willow riparian woodland resulting from construction of the bridge over San Marcos creek is alternately reported on page 5.4-12 as 0.7 rurd 1.6 acres, is
reported as 0.7 acres on page 5.4-13, and is reported as 1.6
acres in Appendix E;
on page 5.4-12 it is stated that baccharis scrub lost but on page 5.4-19 is stated that permits will be obtained €or filling the baccharis scrub habitat in the south- central portion of the project, Figure 5.5 shows baccharis
scrub within the grading footprint, and Appendix E identifies a loss of 1.3 acres of baccharis scrub; the acreage of burned area is not provided; and
will not be
Responw SLf Comment noted. The auantities of cut and fill material needed to mass grade the project area are stakd in reverse in paragraph (hree on page 5.1-6 of the EIR and they have been corrected to read "4.2 million cubic yards of fill and 3.8 million cubic yards of cut.. No importation of fill will occur. Fill material will be generated from the project site. The quantity of fill materd resulla from the effect of rock crushing. The excavated solid bedrock will occupy a larger volume once it is crushed into finer parlkIes.
Response 5u. Impacts to water resources are identified in the EIR as being signilkant prior to mitination and residual imuacts after mitigation are less than siflicant. As succ indirect impacts to b;ological resourks from alterations to water qdty and drainage are also lcss than significant. In paragraph two in the "Dmhge" subsection on page 53-5, the EIR states that the shortening of water concentration and increase in runoff volume from emplacement of impervious surfaces will be offset by reduction of effective slope during development. The EIR is a "Program EIR" for subsequent development of the area (see paragraph four of page 1-1 of the EIR) which includes analysis at the level of specificity as the proposed project. The proposed project docs not include specific development plans at this time. Subsequent environmental review of specific development plans will be required as plans are submitted and made available. As a result, quantification of drainage volumes from ultimate development are not available. As required by mitigation measure number 7 on page 53-7 of the EIR. more specific information concerning runoff volumes, drainage modifications and water quality impacts will be available for future environmental review.
Please see 5R response for information regarding impacts to biological resourcu resulting from alteration of natural drainage patterns associated with the proposed project.
Response SV: The text of paragraph two on page 53-6 of the EIR has been modilied to state that the improvements recommended as part of the Chang report are not proposed by the project. Implementation of flood attenuation technology in the Encinitas Creek drainage basin is being required as mitigation in the Resolution for Approval (Phase I improvements, item m) for impacts cawed by the Arroyo La Costa project in the Local Facilities Management Plan Zone 11 (adjacent to and immediately downstream from the proposed project). Mitigation measure number 7 on page 53-7 of the EIR has also been modified to indude a condition that the developer shall install all improvements required to mitigate impacts to flooding from the proposed project.
Response SW: Comment noted. Responses to the specific items in this comment arc as follows:
a. Figure 5-5 has been modified to show Oak Riparian to be located out of the grading footprint. The developer has modified grading to preserve the woodland.
The loss of Cotton-Willow riparian woodland has been corrected on pages 5.4-12 and 5.4-13 of the EIR to be 1.6 acres, as is documented in Appendix E.
The area of Baccharis saub to be disturbed by grading (1.3 acres) is correct as stated in the Biological Resources don of the EIR. According to the grading footprint shown in Figure 5-7 of Ihe EIR, 111 2.6 acres of Baccharis Scrub habitat would be graded. The City, however, has imposed the condition that the south-ccntral trending drainage containing Baccharis scrub be preserved as a "best management practice" to presewe water quality in the area. This is stated as mitigation in Scction 5.3. Water Resources. of the EIR. Implementation of this mitigation measure will reduce the area of Baccharis saub impacted to approximately 1.3 acres.
The burned area occupies approximately 13 acres and this information has been included on page 5.4-7 of the EIR.
The quantity of valley needlegrass grassland area disturbed by the project has been included in Table 5-9 on page 5.4-13 of the FEIR. Table 5-9 has been added to section 5.4 of the EIR and contains information regarding areas of plant communities disturbed and preserved by the proposed project.
b.
c.
d.
e.
'I
Ilr. Qvister westran 5
e) page 5.4-13 mentions that most of the valley needlegrass
grassland will be eliminated but does not quantify this
acreage while Appendix E reports the loss of 14 acres, or 54 percent, of this habitat type.
The final EIR should utilize a clear and consistent method of locating,
categorizing, and quantifying existing habitats, proposed habitat
losses, and habitats to be preserved. The use of corresponding acreage tables and figures throughout the Section 5.4 is highly recommended.
5x
5Y 9) As noted in items 8b and 8c above, the quality, location and
configuration of existing riparian woodland and baccharis scrub to be
adversely affected by the proposed project is unclear. The final EIR should provide a complete and detailed description of proposed impacts to wetlands on the site.
conditions along the San Marcos Creek corridor should clearly describe
the impacts associated with bridge construction to the habitat within and adjacent to the footprint of the bridge. Once the impacts to riparian woodland, baccharis scrub, or any other types of wetland habitats are more clearly described and quantified, all efforts should be made to mitigate these impacts. Development of appropriate mitigation measures should address avoidance, minimization,
rectification, reduction over time, and compensation in a sequential
manner as mandated by the Section 404(b)(l) Guidelines. If creation or
enhancement, as proposed in the DEIR, are still necessary following the sequential development of mitigation measures, a detailed plan should be included in the final EIR to offset the quantitative and qualitative
losses of habitat function and value. following:
The discussion of existing and proposed
This plan should include the
5z 10) Neither Section 5.4 nor Appendix E identifies San Diego marsh elder (Iyp paveoiane) as a Category 2 candidate for Federal listing as threatened or endangered. This olpission should be corrected in the final EIR.
a detailed map depicting the locations of the mitigation sites relative to the project site; complete and detailed descriptions of the existing conditions
at each mitigation site;
complete and detailed descriptions of the proposed activities
at each site including scrape down or grading plans and revegetation plans;
the criteria against which the success of the mitigation
program will be measured;
a monitoring program to determine if the success criteria have been satisfied;
an analysis of the likelihood for success of the activities proposed; and, remedial measures to be implemented if the mitigation effort
does not satisfy the success criteria.
Response 5X: Please see 5W response. Table 1 from Appendix E has been included as Table 5-9 in Section 5.4 of the EIR to clarify the area of respective plant communities on the project site prior to and after disturbance. Figure 5-8. Wetland Disturbance in San Marcos Creek, has also been added to section 5.4 of the EIR to further clarify the major wetland impacts associated with the projen
Response SY: The quality, location and conliguration of the existing riparian woodland and Baccharis scrub to be adversely affected by the proposed project has been made clear in Figures 5-7 (Significant Biological Resources With Grading) and 5-8 (Wetland Disturbance) in the FEIR. The areas and locations of these habitat types to be destroyed by the project are contained accurately in the EIR and the EIR provides a complete and detailed description of the proposed impacts to wetlands on-site in paragraph one on page 5.4-13 and in the 5R response. A figure depicting the area of disturbance to San Marcos Creek from bridge construction, Wetland Disturbance (Figure 5-8). has been added (0 the EIR (0 further clarify impacts to habitat within and adjacent to the footprint of the bridge.
Mitigation Measure number 5 on page 5.4-22 of the FEIR states that !kction 404 and 1600-1603 permits must be applied for and obtained for the bridge across San Marcos Creek and the Baccharis scrub habitat. At the time of application, the Corps' Section 404 Guidelines and the State Fish and Game 1600-1603 requirements will be followed precisely. If creation or enhancement is determined to be neassary, a detailed plan (or plans) will be prepared to the satisfaction of the permitting agencies. These plans would contain, at a minimum, the items listed by the SeMce in this mmment.
Response Si5 San Diego marsh elder has been identified as a Category 2 candidate for Federal listing as threatened or endangered on page 5.4-8 of the FEIR.
Response SM: The Brodiaea ocuttii plant is very widespread in San Bernardino, Riverside, and San Diego Counties in the United States and in northern Baja California (the CNPS indicates that this species is found in 27 USGS topographic quadrangle maps). The plant is normally restricted to areas near streams, vernal pools. and seeps (it appears to have an aflinity to heavy, clayey soils), in a wide variety of vegetation types.
Since this species requires much the same habitats as Muilla clevelandii, and flowers during the same period, it is assumed that the field reconnaissance period for Brodiaea is a reasonable assessment for its approximate population size. based on the population size information obtained for Muilla
5AA 11) Both Section 5.4 and Appendix E state that the population of Orcutt's brodiaea (Brodiaea orcutti i), a category 2 candidate for Federal listing
m. alrister IlastBan 6
as threatened or endangered, on the project site is unknown but appears to be insignificant. However, Appendix E also cites a report prepared in 1986 by WESTEC which reportedly indicated that 100 to 200 individuals of this species were on the site at that time.
the difference in the estimated significance of the brodiaea population
to either elimination of the plants by disturbance or to the fact that
the survey conducted for preparation of Appendix E was performed too late in the year. In order to assess the significance of impacts to this species, the size and location of the brodiaea population on the
project site should be more reliably determined.
Appendix E attributes
SBB 12)
5DD 14)
Section 5.4 states that neither orange throated whiptails (memidohorup
blainvillei), both Category 2 candidates for Federal listing as
threatened or endangered, were observed during the bird and plant
surveys for this project, and potential impacts to these species are not assessed. However, Appendix E states that no surveys were conducted for reptiles, amphibians, or mammals, and again references the 1986 WESTEC report for information regarding these groups. Given that both of these
species are associated with sage scrub and chaparral habitats and that
San Diego horned lizards are known to be present and orange throated
whiptails are suspected to occur immediately to the east of the project
site, the final EIR should more thoroughly evaluate the likelihood of these species occurring on the project site and assess potential impacts
to these species.
Section 5.4 identifies the proposed loss of San Diego golden star (m clevelandu) populations on site, a Category 2 candidate for Federal listing as threatened or endangered, as significant unless
substantially mitigated. To mitigate this loss, the DEIR suggests that
the grading limits be pulled back in the vicinity of the golden star
populations thereby avoiding the impact. incorporation of this measure into the proposed project. If this measure is adopted, the figures depicting the grading footprint and the acreages of habitat loss should be revised accordingly.
measures to reduce the adverse impacts of tha proposed development
immediately adjacent to the preserved golden star populations should be proposed. included as a remaining significant impact or other mitigation to reduce
the significance of this loss should be proposed.
The discussion of indirect impacts to biological resources in Section
5.4 does not fully identify and assess the significarice of all
reasonably anticipated indirect impacts. Although the DEIR mentions
that fragmentation of habitat on aite will occur as a result of this
project, the effects of physical and fWCtiOMl isolation on the continued viability of the habitats and species to be preserved aro not evaluated. In order to fully evaluate the impacts resulting from fragmentation, the edge effects associated with reaidential and commercial development should also be considered. These impacts include
light, noise, introduction of exotic plants, irrigation, pesticide and
herbicide use, wildfire fuel management, off road vehicle use, and other
bv-rvthrua 1 nor San Diego horned lizards (- mcoronatum
The Service encourages
In addition,
If this measure is not incorporated, this impact should be
Response SBB The two lizard species referred to (San Diego homed lizard and orange-throawd wiptail lizard) may well occur on the site; however, they have not been reported by any of the field zoologist’s visits to the site throughout the late summer and fall months. The San Diego homed lizard is found in a variety of habitats in the coastal foothills of San Diego County but requires a ready supply of harvester ants as a food source. The preponderance of clayey, rather than sandy soils my indicate a paucity of harvester ants, and therefore homed lizards are uncommon on the site.
Likewise, the orange-throated whiptail lizard was not reported by any of & field observers; this species feeds exclusively on ground-dwelling termites. typically in coastal sage or chaparral habitats, and should have been active during the late summer field assessments.
To the writer’s knowledge, there have been no requirements for detailed field surveys or census’s for these two species as part of the CEQA review prmss. We note that the State Scientific Review Panel has recently (December 20. 1991) released field data sheets and procedures for detailed surveys of these and other species, but no specific requirements which apply to the CEQA process have been required.
Response SCC: Comment noted. The grading plan had been modified iteratively prior to release of the DEIR for public review. As shown in Figures 9-2 and 9-28 attached to comment letter number three and Figure 9-3 included here, grading shown on the latest plans submitted to the City entirely avoids dense populations of the San Diego Goldenstar, and preserves 75 percent of the sparse Goldenstar population. There will be no further changes to the grading plan dated with the project and no modifications to the EIR are nec~s~a~y.
Mitigation measure 4C under Muilla Clevelandii Mitigation requires permanent signs to be erected at preserve sites identifying preserve areas and prohibits removal or addition of vegetation or soil. Additional mitigation measures to ensure protection of the remaining Goldenstar area adjacent to development have been added as items 1.2 and 3 under measure 4D on page 5.4-21 of the EIR. Residual impacts to the area of Sarr Diego Goldenstar adjacent to project grading is less than significant.
Response 5DD Tbe indirect effects of project build-out and implementation cannot be identified at this time because specific development plans are not available. The project proposes realignment and construction of Rancho Santa Fe Road and the accompanying mass grading. The effects mentioned in the comment letter typically occur adjacent to residential housing in open space areas, but until the precise nature of the ultimate project are known these effects cannot bc quantified or identified. Please see 5K response.
Mr. alristec westman 7
features of development that compromise the ecological function of adjacent habitats. The identification and assessment of indirect impacts should also consider the effects of existing or proposed development adjacent to the areas to be preserved on site. Similarly, the indirect impacts of the proposed project on biological resources adjacent to the project site should be evaluated.
5EE. 15) Section 5.4 concludes that 14 pairs of California gnatcatchers will be
eliminated and habitat for 3 pairs will be reduced by implementation of
the proposed project. The Service believes that consideration of the
issues raised in items 3, 4, 6, 14, 17, and 18 of this letter is likely to indicate that additional pairs will be significantly adversely affected by the proposed project. In the final EIR the potential
impacts to California gnatcatchers should be reexamined in light of the
issues identified in this letter. Special attention should be given to
analysis of the continued viability of the California gnatcatcher pairs identified in Figure 5.7 of the DEIR by the numbers 4, 5, 10, 14, and 21.
The Mitigation Measures portion of Section 5.4 proposes a conceptual mitigation plan intended to offset the impacts to California gnatcatchers and coastal sage scrub. This proposal involves a combination of onsite and offsite preservation of specified acreages of coastal sage scrub and numbers of gnatcatcher pairs together with a
variety of research projects set in coastal sage scrub habitat. The
proposed mitigation will not reduce the impacts to gnatcatchers and
coastal sage scrub to a level of insignificance for the following reasons :
5FF 16)
Y v 03
5GC
5HH
a) the impacts to these biological resources have not been fully
assessed (see items 3, 4, 6, 14, 17, and 18) and are therefore
not fully addressed by the mitigation proposed; b) the impacts to these resources have not &en avoided or
minimized to the extent possible (the discussion in Section
6.0 - Alternatives states that development of a more sensitive
grading footprint is possible); and, the proposed plan is conceptual and does not contain the
detail necessary to support the conclusion that the impacts
have been mitigated to a level of insignificance.
c)
The first issue can be resolved by thorough and careful response to the
issues enumerated in this letter and a corresponding expansion of the
measures proposed to avoid, minimize, and compensate for these impacts. The second two issues can be resolved by including the necessary detail
in the final EIR. In our meeting of September 10, the representative
from Fieldstone stated that the planning detail necessary to ensure that impacts are avoided and minimized to the extent possible could not be obtained so far in advance of actual developaent. Similarly, details
regarding a specific offsite preservation area are not currently
available. It was suggested that, in lieu of a more detailed project
description and mitigation proposal, the final EIR could set forth a procedural mechanism to ensure that all possible impacts are avoided and
Response SEE The biological analysis regarding impacts to the California gnatcatcher contained in the EIR is considered correct by the biological consultants retained by the City of Carlsbad and no additional pairs are affected as the result of the items listed in the comment letter. The conclusion in the EIR that gnatcatcher pairs 4, 5. 10, 14, 16, 19 and 21 will be able to survive based on habitat availability (paragraph three. page 5.4-13) remains valid. Please see 1B response.
Items 3, 4 and 6 in the comment letter relate to sedimentation of low-lying drainage courses which are not the habitat preferred by the gnatcatcher and does not directly affect gnatcatcher habitat. Erosion and sedimentation will be mitigated to levels of less than significant by implementation of the mitigation measures contained in the EIR (Please see responses 5R, 5s and 5U). Please see 1B response.
(.. i
GOLDEN STAR
€SB-DENSE AREA
=-SPARSE AREA
TOTAL AREA
OAK RIPARIAN
Ifh North
Rancho Santa Fe Road EIR
Figure 9-3
Revised Grading Plan
em
? Q, 0
Item 14 refers to habitat fragmentation which may cause tbe elimination of gnatcatcher pairs. There is no basis for concluding that additional gnatcatcher pairs will be destroyed by habitat fragmentation (Please see response 5DD). Please see 1B response
Item number 18 refers to gnatcatcher losses associated with proposed land use; the parcel of land adjacent to the east side of Rancho Santa Fe Road and north of Questhaven Road is shown in the EIR (seaion 5.7, Land Use) to be developed as low-density residential, but will not be developed as part of this project. As a subsequent action, the City of San Marcos is requesting deannexation of the parcel from the City of Carlsbad (as stated on page 3-12 of the EIR). Carlsbad has not agreed to this request, however, and future development will not occur and impaas to the gnatcatcher are not idenwied on this parcel of land. Please see 1B response.
Response SFF: The City of Carlsbad believes that impacts to Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat and the California gnatcatcher will be significant and unmitigated until approval of an HCP for the project site occurs. Upon approval of an HCP for the project site, impacts to Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat and the California gnatcatcher are reduced to a level of less than significant. Please see 5D response. Responses to individual items a, b and c are listed below.
a Analysis of impacts contained in the EIR have been fully addressed and will be mitigated by the measures proposed, with the exceptions of air quality and Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat and the California gnatcatcher. Please see responses 5R, 5S, 5U. 5DD, 5" and 500.
Impacts have been avoided and or minimized to the greatest extent possible at this stage of project design (please see SK response). Tbe EIR is a program EIR and a specific project design for the development of the mass grading area has not been proposed (please see 5K and SU response). Consequently, information regarding the possibility of more sensitive project grading plans is not presently available. Subsequent environmental review of specific development plans would be required as plans are submitted to the City. The first paragraph on page 6-6 of Section 6.0, Alternatives, states that deferral of grading may provide the opportunity to design a more sensitive grading plan. Creation of a more sensitive design would be dependent upon the housing type and density that would be acceptable to the City of Carlsbad. The EIR does not state that a more sensitive grading plan is possible.
Please see SD and 5K response. A conceptual plan incorporated into the "Program EIR" is not sufficient as mitigation for impacts to Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat and the California gnatcatcher. A Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) will be prepared for this project. The purpose of the HCP is to allow certain interim activities which result in the "incidental take" of individuals and habitat of the gnatcatcher. The "taking" of birds and/or habitat must be approved by Carkbad and the
b.
c.
USFWS under the same standards that would be applicable if such species were listed as "endangered" under the Federal and California Endangered Species Acts. Impacts to Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat and the California gnatcatcher will be mitigated to levels of less than significant with approval of the HCP for be project site. The work program and implementation schedule for the HCP is included as Appendix J to the EIR.
The HCP would ultimately be integrated into a Citywide Habitat Management Plan (HMP). The City of Carlsbad has undertaken the development of a Citywide Habitat Management Program (HMP) to provide for the preservation and management of sensitive wildlife and habitats.
Response SGG: Please see 5FF response. Thorough and careful responses have been provided to the issues enumerated in the comment letter. Modifications have been made to the EIR as the result of issues raised in this letter. The City of Carlsbad believes that the EIR is adequate and meets the requirements of CEQA.
Response 5": Please see 5D, 5K and 5FF responses. CEQA does not require a "Program EIR," to provide the level of detail of the mitigation requested in the comment letter. Approval of the HCP for the project site will reduce impacts on biological resources to levels of less than significant. Impacts to Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat and the California gnatcatcher are significant and unmitigable until approval of the HCP occurs. The EIR has been prepared as a "Program EW because the level of specificity regarding the development project and associated environmental impacts and necessary mitigation docs not allow for the preparation of a "Project Level" EIR.
Ilr. Qvister thstran 8
minimized and that sufficient and appropriate mitigation is proposed prior to issuance of grading permits.
The Service believes this approach would suffice for the purpose of finalizing the EIR provided that the proposed mechanism ensures that the
following steps are taken sequentially and that each step is reviewed
and approved by the Service:
a)
b)
c)
all reasonably expected direct and indirect impacts will be
identified and their significance assessed;
all possible efforts will be made to avoid and minimize the
impacts identified; mitigation will be developed to fully offset the impacts remaining after avoidance and minimization measures are
implemented; and,
accomplished according to an appropriate time table related to
the occurrence of the identified impacts.
d) a plan will be developed to ensure that the mitigation is
An effort to develop mitigation for this and other projects has already been initiated by a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between the City of
Carlsbad, the Fieldstone Company, and the Service. This MOA describes a
framework for development of a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) that will offset the impacts to California gnatcatchers and coastal sage scrub resulting from specified projects in the City of Carlsbad. Simultaneously, a more comprehensive plan will be formulated, called the Habitat Management Plan (HMP), to address the loss of sensitive species
and habitats city wide.
those associated with projects that are likely to be implemented prior
to completion of the HMP and thus are termed "Interim Projects". Rancho Santa Fe Road project is identified as one of the interim projects .
It should be noted that page 5 of the MOA includes the following
sentence :
The impacts to be addressed by the HCP are
The
"It is contemplated that said Interim Activities may result in the
'incidental take' of individuals and habitat of the Species of
Concern, for which appropriate mitigation will be provided, provided that such 'taka' is approved by the City and ?WS under the same standards that would be applicable if such species were listed
as 'endangered' under the Federal and California Endangered Species Acts ('ESAS' ."
The species of concern addressed by the MOA is the California
gnatcatcher. Take of an endangered species is only permitted, pursuant to Section 10(a) of the Endangered Species Act, when an HCP is subitted that contains specific information and satisfies specific criteria.
Therefore, in order for the Service to approve take of the California
gnatcatcher under the same standards that would apply if the species
were listed as endangered, the HCP developed for the interim projects should conform to the standards specified in Section 10 of the Act.
511
511
Response 511: Items 'a' through 'd' in the comment letter have been addressed in previous responses (see previous responses). The EIR has been modied in response to this comment letter and all direct and indirect impacts have been identified in the FEIR and the significance assessed. At this preliminary stage of project design, all possible efforts have been made to avoid and minimize environmental impacts and have been included in this Program EIR. An HCP is being proposed to mitigate impacts to Diegan coastal sage saub habitat and the California gnatcatcher. The HCP is to be implemented according lo a spedfic timeline which is included in these responses. Please refer to response 5FF.
Response SJJ: Please see response 5FF and Attachment I to the FEIR. The HCP being developed for this project will conform to the standards specified in Section 10 of the Federal Endangered Species Act.
5KK
5LL
5MM
ce 0) W
5NN
500
m. mister wasball 9
The information that must be provided in an HCP includes specification of the steps taken to minimize impacts, a description of alternatives to
the actions that will result in take, and a discussion of why the alternatives will not be utilized. and issuance of a permit to take includes a finding that the applicant will, to the maximum extent practicable, minimize and mitigate the
impacts of the proposed taking.
The Service believes that the proposed MSS clearing and grading well in advance of development comprises a direct impact that could be
substantially reduced, and introduces a suite of indirect impacts (see
items 3, 4, and 6) that are clearly avoidable. Therefore, the Service recommends that the mechanism proposed to ensure development of appropriate mitigation include either separation of the mass grading from construction of the road, or deferral of grading until specific
development is proposed and construction is imminent.
It should also be noted that another criteria for approval of an HCP and issuance of a permit to take a listed species is that the proposed take will not appreciably reduce the likelihood of the survival and recovery
of the species in the wild. while the take of California gnatcatchers
resulting from the project as proposed may not reduce the likelihood of
survival and recovery of the gnatcatcher, it is possible that the cumulative impacts of this and other projects in the area will, at the least, significantly depress this threshold and therefore reduce the take allowed by future projects.
Figure 5.12 - Proposed Land use depicts land use designations for the proposed project. This figure indicates that low to medium density
residential development is proposed for the area east of the proposed Rancho Santa le Road alignment and north of the Stanley Mehr Reservoir.
None of the figures that depict the locations of biological resources identify this area as being within the footprint of disturbance. Furthermore, this area contains territories of two pairs of California gnatcatchers that are identified as being preserved by the proposed
project. This contradiction should be eliminated in the final EIR and
all relevant figures, acreage tables, and enumeration of impacts
adjusted as necessary.
The area discussed in item 17 is also shown as being part of the university Commons project in the DEIR prepared for the City of San
Harcos for that project. In our meeting of September 10, the Fieldstone representative stated that the overlap of project boundaries had not been resolved and such resolution may involve the sale of the overlap area to the City of San Harcos or the University Commons proponents. As mentioned above, this area is shown to support coastal sage scrub and
two pairs of gnatcatchers that are proposed to be preserved as a part of
this project. This issue should be resolved in the final EIR and all
relevant figures, acreage tables, and enmeration of impacts adjusted as
necessary.
he criteria for approval of an HCP
17)
18)
Response SKK: Comment noted. The HCP referenced in these rcsponses which is being developed for this project will contain the information required by the USFWS, as the agency is party to the Memorandum of Agreement for the HCP and has approval authority of the plan.
Response SLL: The EIR contains several alternatives which analyze impacts from deferral of grading and conclusions support this comment. The "Defer Grading" alternatives are identified as being environmentally superior to the proposed project As discussed in response 5B, separation of mass grading from road realignment would not accomplish the objectives of the project. Mass grading is necessary to assure formation of the Assessment District which will provide funding to realign and widen the road.
Response SMM Cumulative impacts are thoroughly discussed in section 7.0 of the EIR. Cumulatively significant and unmitigable impacts to biological resources, specifically the California gnatcatcher, throughout the region are identified in the Biological Resources section of the EIR. Further analysis of the cumulative impacts will be contained in the HCP and HMP.
Response SNN: Information contained within the Biological Resources section of the EIR is correct and revision is not necessary. Grading will OcNr as displayed in Figures 3-7 and 5-7 of the EIR. Although the area of land referenced in the comment is designated for residential land use on Figure 5-12, grading will not occur within the entire area designated as low and low-medium residential shown in Figure 5- 13. Please see 500 response.
Response 500 Comment noted. The parcel of land adjacent to the east side of Rancho Sank Fe Road and north of Questhaven Road is shown in the EIR (section 5.7, Land Use) as low-density residential, but will not be developed as part of this project, As a subsequent action, the City of San Marcos is requesting deannutation of the parcel from the City of Carlsbad. Carlsbad has not agreed to this request, however, and future development of this parcel of land would be subject to an environmental analysis when development plans are proposed. Development of this parcel is not a part of this project and need not be addressed further is this EIR.
I
I
nr.
5PP 19)
? 0, P
5RR
mrister wasban 10
Section 6.0 - Alternatives provides conflicting information regarding
impacts associated with the road realignment portion of the project.
The description of the first alternative states that the realignment of Rancho Santa Pe Road will eliminate four pairs of California gnatcatchers but descriptions of the other alternatives state that 7 pairs of gnatcatchers will be eliminated by the road realignment portion of the project. This inconsistency should be corrected in the fiMl
EIR .
5QQ 20) The discussion of cumulative impacts to biological resources, presented
in Section 7.0 - Other Environmental Issues, discusses impacts of development on natural habitat in very general terms but does not
address the contribution of this project or other reasonably anticipated
projects to the decline of sensitive habitats and species in the project area. For example, the DEIR for the adjacent Univorsity Commons project
states that at least 40 pairs of California gnatcatchers will be eliminated by the implementation, as proposed, of five projects in the
area.
species in the area, the significance of these inpacts, the contribution
of this project to these cumulativo impacts, and available measures to
avoid and/or minimize these impacts should be discussed in the final EIR .
The extent of cumulative impacts to habitats and sensitive
21) Finally, the DEIR provides conflicting conclusions regarding the significance of impacts to biological resources. On page 5.4-15 it is
concluded that the impacts of the proposed project are significant but
nitigable to a level less than significance.
Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes concludes that impacts to biological resources are significant and irreversible. The assessments
of the significance of impacts to specific biological resources and the
impacts to biological resources collectively should be consistent
throughout the final EIR.
However, Section 7.5 -
we appreciate the opportunity to comment on the DEIR for this project.
have any questions regarding these comments please call Carrie Phillips at
If you
(714) 643-4270.
Response SPI? Comment noted and the text on page 6-6 of the EIR has been corrected accordingly.
Response SQQ. Page 7-9 of the Cumulative Impacts section of the EIR has been modified to contain more s~cific information regarding imDacts to biological resources. 'Lbe level of cumuldtivc impacts in the maon h-as ken identilied-as signirican~ md unmitigable. Mitigation for cumulative impacts within the City of Carbbad can be achieved with implementation of the Citywide Habitat Management Plan.
noted, an HCP will be prepared for the Rancho Santa Fe Road project. Un Y!K Project-specific mitigation will reduce individual project impacts. As prcvio
approval of the HCP occurs, impacts to Diegan coastal sage scrub habitat and the California gnatcatcher are significant and unmitigable. Imppets to these resources will be mitigated to a level of less than significant wth approval of the HCP. Please see 1B response.
Response SRR: Comment noted. Section 7.5 of the EIR has been modified to conclude that significant irreversible environmental changes occur only to air quality.
Sincerely,
Brooks Harper
Office Supervisor
17, 1Wt
'4
68
6D
Rerpoarc LA: This comment letter is an addendum to comment letter number one submitted by the Department of Fish and Game on August 19,1991. Please see responses 1A through 1F for responses to the previously comment letter. Please note that the addendum to comment letter number one is dated December 17, 1991, approximately 4 months after the end of the public comment period (August 30, 1991).
Response 6B: Comment noted. The comment docs not address the adequacy of UJC EIR. Please note that the analysis of alternatives in the DEIR (which include deferral of inass grading) on page 6-6, paragraph one, rcacbcs the conclusion that more sensitive site plan-specific grading plans le- to more sensitive design add possibly be created with time. The statement IS preliminary and no Specirc information exists upon which a definitive conclusion can be reached. The EIR concludes that alternatives which provide deferral of grading are environmentally superior to the proposed project. Please sce 1B and SFF responses to previous comment letter.
Response 6C: The statement in the DEIR concerning a more scnsiitive project design (page 6-6, first paragraph) was intended to provide insight as to the benefits which could potentially be realized with deferral of grading, and not to insiiuatc that the grading plan proposed by the project is not as environmentally sensitive as possible at this preliminary planning stage. A more sensitive design might lessen the impacts to some degree, but development of slopes of 15 percent or greater is restricted by the City's the Hillside Development Ordinance o). Requirements of the HDO severely constrain the feasibility of project redesign. Please see 1B response.
Response 6D: Comment noted. Please see 1B and 6C responses. The comment docs not address the adequacy of the EIR and no further response is necessary.
6E
? 6F a QI
6G
6H
Response 6E: AI wetlands and watercourse locations are provided in the DEIR. Figure 5-4, Project Area Drainage, of the EIR depicts the locations of blue-line streams within the project site. Stanley Mahr Reservoir (the small dammed pond referenced in the comment letter) is depicted in most other figures in the EIR (see Figures 34 through 3-7 in the Project Description). The descriptiqn of the springs on page 5.445 in the Biological Resources section of the DEIR did not specify that flows were year-round, but stated that flows are possibly the result of occasional flows between soil layers and do not represent true geological springs. Springs are not documented to occur in the area according to the United States Geological Survey and the geotechnical consultant did not address these phenomena. The locations of the "spring-type" phenomena have been included on Figure 5-5, Existing Vegetation With Grading.
Quantification of impacts to wetlands is provided in the EIR in Table 5-9, Plant Communities Before and After Project Implementation. Mitigation and monitoring of wetlands is provided throughout the EIR and specifically in section 5.4 and Appendix B, respectively. Mitigation measure number 5 on page 54-22 of the EIR includes obtaining a Fish and Game Code 1600-1603 agreement for streambed alteration to San Marcas Creek. Indirect impacts to wetlands from sedimentation is mitigated by measures included in sections 5.1 (Earth Resources) and 5.11 (Landform Ateration/Visual Quality) of the EIR. Mitigation includes submittal of an erosion control plan to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. A preliminary erosion control design plan has been submitted to the City and is currently being reviewed.
Response 6F: Comment noted. Please see 6E response. The EIR requires the applicant to obtain a Fish and Game Code 1W1603 agreement to mitigate impacts to San Marcos Creek from bridge construction. Also. please see 5Y response regarding the process that will be followed to obtain a Section 160&1603 agreement from State Fish and Game, and a Section 404 Permit from ACOE. Discrepancies between the EIR and Appendix E regarding the acreage of willow riparian and Baccharis scrub habitat have been corrected in the fifth paragraph on page 5.4- 12.
Response M;: Comment noted. Please see 6E and 6F responses. The wildlife movement corridor is included in the area designated as open space on the project land use maps.
Response 6H Comment noted and the comment does not address the adequacy of the EIR. It should be noted that mitigation required in section 5.4 of the EIR includes modifying grading plans to preserve 100% of the dense area of San Diego goldenstan and 75% of the sparse area of the plant.
Response 61: Please see 6E response. Quantification of all habitat types is included in the EIR. The two lizard species referred to (San Diego homed lizard and orange- throated whiptail lizard) may well occur on the site; however, they have not been reported by any of the field zoologist's visits to the site throughout the late summer and fall months. The San Diego homed lizard is found in a variety of habitats in the coastal foothills of San Diego County but requires a ready supply of harvester ants as a food source. The preponderance of clayey, rather than sandy soils may indicate that harvester ants, and therefore the horned lizard are uncommon on the site.
Likewise, the orange-throated whiptail lizard was not reported by any of the field observers; this species feeds exclusively on ground-dwelling termites, typically in coastal sage or chaparral habitats.
To the writer's knowledge, there have been no re uirements for detailed field
We note that the State Scientific Review Panel has recently released field data sheets and procedures for detailed surveys of these and other species. but no specific requirements which apply to the CEQA process have been formulated.
Response 4: Please see SR and 5U responses to the previous comment letter. The EIR is a "Program EIR" for subsequent development which identifies impacts and requires mitigation at the level of specificity of the proposed project. Specific development plans for the project are not awlable. Certain indirect impacts related to increased quantities and velocities of runoff and water quality of downstream from the project cannot be assessed with the infomation available. Subsequent environmental review will be required when development plans are submitted to the City.
Indirect impacts are less than significant as the result of the implementation of mitigation measures contained in the EIR. Erosion control plans and drainage facilities are required, as well as other mitigation measures. which will reduce on- site and off-site impacts from erosion and sedimentation to less than significant. A preliminary erosion control design plan has been submitted to the City and is currently being reviewed. Please note that the EIR contains the mitigation requirement of preparation of a hydrology study for San Marcos Creek to assess impacts of development on runoff.
Response 6K: Please see 6J response. Mitigation required in the EIR is sufficient to mitigate impacts to downstream wetland areas. The EIR requires the use of temporary sedimentation catching devices during construction, submittal of an erosion control plan to the satisfaction of the City engineer and adherence with the City's Grading Ordinance. The erosion control design plan is preliminary and has not been approved by the City. Therefore there is no approved erosion control plan available to provide information for analysis in the EIR. Please see 6E response. A preliminary erosion control design plan has been submitted to the City and is currently being reviewed. The EIR conforms to CEQA, and CEQA does not require monitoring and alleviation of unforeseen impacts.
Response 6L: Impacts caused by construction activities during the construction phase of the project are adequately identified in the EIR. The discussions regarding noise (section 5.5) and light and glare (section 5.6) of the EIR assess impacts to sensitive existing and proposed surrounding land uses. In both cases, impacts are identified as being significant but mitigable to a level of less than signilicant. Mitigation measures to reduce impacts are included in the EIR.
surveys or census's for these two species as part o 4 the CEQA review process.
1
'7 I
6M 3.
6N 4.
60
Response CM: Impacts on biological resources in open space areas are dmd in general temu in section 5.4 of the EIR. The EIR is a "Program EIR" for subsequent development and provides analysis at the level of speCiricity of the proposed project. SpeciTc development plans are not available at this he. Subsequent environmental review will be required when specific development plans are available. Please see 61 and 6L responses. The EIR discusses fragmentation of the remaining habitat areas and the resulting impacts and the level of impact from noise and light and glare to surrounding areas. Mitigation to reduce impacts from development on surrounding areas is required in the respective sections of the EIR. Text has been added to paragraph four on page 5.4-15 of the EIR to clan'fy the impacts died in the comment letter.
Please see 1B response.
Consideration of off-site areas for potential conidon and the inventory of sensitive species on a regional level of beyond the scope of this EIR. As noted in the comment letter, the City is pursuing a regional solution to preservation of sensitive habitat by undertaking a Citywide Habitat Management Plan (HMP). Please see 1B response. This project will be initiated prior to completion of the HMP and a project-specific Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) will be prepared which may provide the information required to perform the suggested planning. Also, please see 1B response.
The purpose of the HCP to be prepared for this project is to allow certain interim activities which result in the "incidental take" of individuals and habitat of the gnatcatcher. The "taking" of birds and/or habitat must be approved by Carlsbad and the USFWS under the Same standards that would be applicable if such species were listed as "endangered" under the Federal and California Endangered Species Acts. The work program and implementation schedule for the HCP is included as Appendix J to the EIR. The HCP would ultimately be integrated into a Citywide Habitat Management Plan (HMP).
The HCP will provide the detailed information necessary to implement the mitigation measures described in the EIR (please see 5D response and paragraphs two and three of 1B response). Implementation of the mitigation measures are contained within the EIR will reduce impacts to a level of less than significant. Impacts to Diegan coastal sage snub habitat and the California gnatcatcher are significant and unmitigable without approval of the HCP for the project site. Upon approval of the HCP, impacts to these sensitive biological resources will be mitigated to a level of less than significant. Please see 5D and response from the previous comment letter.
Response (N:
Response 60:
Respoatc ip: Comment noted. The mitigation contained in section 5.4 of the EIR is the requirement of formation of a conceptual plan which meets a set of spedIic criteria The aforementioned HCP will provide the plan nc~essary to meet the criteria set forth in Ihe EIR. Please see 1B response and Appendix J for more specific information regarding the HCP. The Department of Fish and Game is party to a Memorandum of Agreement regarding the contents of the HCP. Please note that this is a "Program EIR" and the mitigation measures required are only as specific as the proposed project. Impacts to Began coastal sage scrub habitat and the California gnatcatcher are significant and unmitigable without approval of the HCP for the project site. Upon approval of the HCP, impacts to these sensitive biological resources will be mitigated to a level of lea than significant.
SpeCiric information regarding monitoring and enforcement of mitigation measures is contained in Appendix B to the EIR.
Responr (Q: Comment noted. The EIR conforms to CEQA. As previously stated, the EIR is a "Program EIR" for subsequent development and the level of specificity of analysis and mitigation is as specific as the proposed project. Specific development plans are not available at this time. Subsequent environmental review and resultant mitigation will be required when specific development plans are submitted to the City. An HCP is being prepared (0 provide the specific mitigation and compensation for losses of California gnatcatchers and gnatcatcher habitat. Please see 1B and 60 responses.
10.0 Amendices
Appendix A:
Notice of Preparation, Initial Study,
and Responses to the Notice of Preparation
RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD
REALIGNMENT AND EXPANSION TO A SIX=LANE PRIME ARTERIAL
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSEBSMENT FORM
PREPARED FOR:
CITY OF CARLSBAD
2075 Las Palmas Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92009
PREPARED BY:
FAY ROUND AND ASSOCIATES
2630 Cazadero Drive
Carlsbad, CA 92009
(619) 438-2407
September 1989
CASE NO. DAIE:
x- i;
..._.
(To be Complnted by APFl.ICAtlT)
Appl icant: City of Carlsbd
Carlsbad, CA 92009-4859
Phone Number: (619 1
Name, address and phone number of person to be contacted (if other than Applicant): hrk RowSon, Project Design Consultants, 1010 Second Ave, Ste. 2109
San Diego, Ca 92101 619-235-6472
GENEML INFORMATION: (Please be specific)
Project Description: Reali-nt and expansion of Rancho Santa Fe Road to a
six-land prime arterial frun La Costa Avenue on the south to Melrose Avenue on the north and associated grading to acccmmdate the road construction and
and timing. See accanpanying Rancho anta Fe Road Adoption Report for detailed descriptions
/- :-- . Project Location/Address: Eastern area of La Costa in the Citv of Carlstm d.
between La Costa Avenue and Melrose Avenue.
L
- Assessor Parcel ttumber.: Varies - -.. I-
General Plan Zone of Subject Property: siz:Jme Pr- afieeal as Shown on Circulation L lements of the General PlanTor =e City of Carlsbad,
Local Fac i 1 i ties Managernen t Zone :
Is the site within Carlsbad's Coastal Zonp? NO
Please describe the area surrounding the sit0 to the
North: Existing residential & vacant East: open SpCe
Zone . 11 --
South: Existing residential & vacant West: Existing residential & vacant
List all other applicablo permits & alipr-ov?lc related to this project: Grading and improvement plan from the City of Carlsbad. Also U.S. Anrry Corps ion 1603 at of Enqineers Section 404 permit, and State Fish 6; Game Sect related to the crossing of San Marcos Creek. 2 ,F--,
IPlease be Soecific. Attach Additional Paqes or Exhibits. if necessary).
I. Please describe the project site, including distinguishing natural and
manmade characteristics. Also provide precise slope analysis when a slope
Project site is approximately two miles in length and encanpasses the
Rancho Santa Fe Road right-of-way proposed by the City's Rancho mta Fe
Road Alignment Carmcittee fran La Costa Avenue on the South to Melrose
Avenue on the north. Vacant open land currently exists along both sides of the. .&.the .posed alignment. Please'deScribe energy conservation measures incorporated into the design
and/or operation of the project.
of 15' or higher and 15:: gratlc or greater is present on the site. -.
.
(See next page) 2.
None
3. PLEASE AlTACH A PROJECT SUtUlARY SIIEET NliIClf SfIOWS THE FOLLOYING:
a. If a residential project identify the number of units, type of units, schedule of unit sizes, range of sale prices or rents, and type of household size expected, average daily traffic generation (latest SANOAG
rates).
..
b. If a commercial project, indicate the exact type, activity(ies1,
square footage of sales arc?, average daily traffic generation
'I (latest SAllOAG rates), parking provided, and loading facilities.
c. If an industrial project, indicat.? the exact type or industry(ies),
average daily traffic genwatirw (latest SAHOAG rates), estimated
employment per shift, time of shifts, arid loading facilities.
d.. If an institutional project. indicate t.he major projoct/si te function, estimate4 employment par- shift, estimate4 occupancy,
loading facilities, and coimtinity benefits to be derived from the
project.
Major project function is to provide a 6-lane prime arterial as called for in the Circulation Element of the City of Carlsbad. COrmuIll * tY
benefits will include reduced congestion, improved traffic flow and increased safety.
..
3
'd
'4 '-;
'L
'I
1. (cbntinu& fran page 3)
The nearest urbanized uses include the La Costa Vale residential sukdivision
roughly onequarter mile to the west of the proposed alignment, the Stanley Mahr Water Reservoir just east of the alignment, and the Rancho Santa Fe Industrial
Park southeast of its intersection with Melrose Avenue.
crosses San Marcos Creek just south of its intersection With Melrose Avenue. The proposed aligmnent '..
L '-
L
.. '
t
I..
I . ENV I RONMENTAL I IlFACT AIIALY S IS - Please Answer each of the fol~owing qliestions by placing a check in the appropriate space. Then, fully discuss and explain why each item was checked yes or no. Provide sui’pwting data if applicable. Attach additional sheets as necessary.
1) Could the project significantly impact or change present or future land uses in the vicinity of the act i vi ty? X
EXPMATION: The project is in full confo-ce
with the Circulation Element of the City of Carlsbadi
as well as with other elements of the General Plan.
2) Could the activity affect the use of a recreational area, or area of aesthetic value? X
EXPWIATIOH :
,-
.I
3) Could the activity affect the flrnctioiiiiig of an establ ished community or nr?igtiborhowJ? X
. EXPLANATIOtI: The Project will cove traffic flow
fran existing and planned neiqhborhoods. --..--.
4) Could the activity result in tho displacement of
communi ty res iden t s? X
EX PIAHAT I ON :
f- 4
- YES - NO
...
L
.
5) Could the activity increase tlie nrimber of low and moderate cost housing units in the city?
EXPLNlATIOH:
- - X
6) , Could the activity significantly affect existing
housing or create a demand for additional housing? X
EXPLAtMT ION :
7) Are any of the natural or man-made features in the activity area unique, that is, not Found in other parts of the county, state or nation? X
EXPLArlAT ION :
8) Could the activity significantly affect an
EXPLAPlATIOf{: As described in Attachment A, no
historical or archaeological site or its settings? X
important cultural resources were located within
the proposed aligmnent, and no direct or indirect
impacts will result fran its developnent. .. -
9) Could the activity significantly affect tlie potential use, extraction, or conservation of a scarce natural resource? X
EX PU\rMT 1011:
5
10) Could the activity significantly affect fish,
EXPUIIATIOH: As described in -Attachpent B; the proposed alignmnt will impact existing riparian habitat alonq San Marcos Creek, as-well as Coastal
- wildlife or plant resources? X --.
Sage Scrub (Gnatcatcher Habitat).
11) Are there any rare or endangered plant or animal
EXPUNATI0N:The riparian habitat along San Marcos
Creek is potential habitat for the state and f&emlly endanqered Least's Bell's Vireo. Additionally, eight breeding pairs of Gnatcatchers (which is under
species in the activity area? X
review for potential listing as either threatened or
endangered) may be present onsite (See Attachment B)
12) Could the activity change existing features of any of the city's stream, lagoons, bays, tidelands or beaches? X
EXPLANATION: The project will hvolve hnpcts to
San Marcos Creek near the northern end of the
pposed aligrnnen t.
13) Could the activity result in t.k ern:inn ot- 01 imin-
EXPUNAT ION :
ation of agt-icul tiIra1 laivls? X
14) Could the activity serve to encourage development of presently undeveloped areas or intensify develop-
EXPIANATION: While the project is in full conformance
with the General Plan of the City of Carlsbad, it
could encourage the developnent of currently vacant
lard along both sides of the proposed alignment.
ment of already developed areas? x.
6 r --
..,'
L c c
F
.
15) Will the activity require a variance from estab- lished environmental standards (air, water, noise, etc.)?
16) Is the activity carried out as part of a larger project or series of projects?
EXPU\NATION: Ihis project will serve to implement a
portion of the overall roadway system as called for in
the Circulation Element of the Citv of Carlsbd.
X
17) Will the activity require certification, authoriza- tion or issuance of a permit by any local, state
or federal environmental control agency? X
EXPUVIATIOH: The project will mst likely require a
U.S. Army corps pe rmit (Section 4041, and a Streambed
Alteration Permit (Section 1603) from the State Department
of Fish and Game.
18) Will the activity require issuance or a variance or conditional use permit by the City?
EXPLANAT ION :
\
19) Will the activity involve the application, use, or disposal of potentially hazardous materials?
X
X
X
EXPLANATION: .
7
-.
I
E5 20) Will the- activity involve construction of facilities
in a flood plain? X
EXPlAtfATION: San Marcos Creek near the north end
of the lxo~o sed aliqrment will requigg flood
control reauiranents as part of the 'ect . -
21) Will the activity involve construction of facilities - in the area of an active fault?
EXPLANAT I ON :
As described in the acccmpany ins Soil and Geologic
Reconnaissance Report, the project is not located
on or near an active fault.
22) Could the activity result in the generation of
significant amounts of dust? -
EXPLANATIOH: The Pro1 'ect will generate dust
during construction, but it is not expected to be
significant as defined by CEQA.
23) Will the activity involve the burning of brush. trees, or other materials?
EXPLANATION: -- -- -
24) Could the activity result in a significant change in the quality of any portion of the region's air or water resources? (Should note surface, ground
water, off-shore.)
EXPIANATION:
X
X
X
X
8
...
.
...
25) Will the project substantially incrpase Fuel ccnsumption (electricity, oil. natural gas, etc.)?
EXPLAMT I ON :
26) Will the activity involve construction of facilities
on a slope of 25 percent or greater?
EXPLANATION: APFO ximately 15-20 percent of the
X -
graded area involves slopes 25% or greater.
27) Will there be a significant change to existing land form?
(a) Indicate estimated grading to be done in
(b)
cubic yards: 5,000,000 Cy excavate is ccmpact
Percentage of alteration to the present
land form: 80 percent
(c) Ilaximum heiqht of cut or fill slcnes: .. 80-100 feet
EX PLANAT ION :
- NO
X -
X
28) Will the activity result in substantial increases in the use of utilities, sewers, drains or streets? X
EXpLN{ATION: Althqh the project Will require the
relocation of certain of these facilities; it will
not result in increased usage.
c
,,- 9
, .
,
.
..
29) Will the project significantly increase wind or
water erosion of soi 1 s?
EXPWT ION :
30) Could the project significantly affect existing fish or wildlife .habitat?
EXPLANATION: As described in Attactmerit B, the project
X -
will result in significant impacts to existing
riparian habitat as well as to the Coastal Saqe Scrub
habitat.
31) Will the project significantly produce new light or glare?
EXPLANATION:
typical of a prime arterial roadway.
The project will include street .liqhts
- NO
X
10
-.
.-
I I. STATEMENT OF NON-SIGNIFICANT ENV1ROtIMEttTAl EFFECTS
If you have answered.yes to any of the questions in Sectlon I but think the activity will have no sfgnificant environmental effects, Indfcate your reasons below:
Unless sane form of acceptable mitigation can be developed for the impacts to riparian habitat associated with San Marcas Creek, as well as for the loss of Blacktailed Gnatcatcher habitat, it is likely that an EIR will be required. With the exception of land form alteration,other potential impacts denoted
by a YES response qn the previous pages can probably be reduced to
insignificant levels or would not be considered significant (such as Questian 16).
111. COI-INENTS OR ELABORATIONS TO AHY OF TltE-fl_U_ESTTONS IN SECTION 1
(If additional space Is needed for answering any questions, attach additional sheets as needed.)
Signature
Fay 0. bund, Jr. Fay Rad d Associates Date Sfgned Septert.3ser 11, 1909
Instruct . e i a 18s: 1 h r'
11
FKPI CT ASSESSMENT FORM - PART 11 RONXENTAL IMP%
(TO BE COMPLETED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT)
CASE NO. Rancho Santa Fe Road
Realignment
DATE : fi
BACKGROUND
CASE NAME: Rancho Santa Fe Road Realignment/Pro]ect Grading 1.
2. A~~LI~~T:, City of Carlsbad/Fieldstone-La Costa
3. ADDRESS AND PHONE NUMBER OF APPLICANT: City Of Carlsbad 207 Las Palmas
Drive Carlsbad 438-1161 Fieldstone/La Costa Associates
P.O. Box 9000-266 Carlsbad 931-1677
4. DATE EIA FORM PART I SUBMITTED: September 1989
5. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: Realignment and widening of Rancho Santa
Road to a 6 lane prime-arterial
ENVIRONMENTAL IMP ACTS
STATE CEQA GUIDELINES, Chapter 3, Article 5, section 15063 requires that the City
Cor Ct an Environmental Impact Assessment to determine if a project may have a si$.-ficant effect on the environment. The Environmental Impact Assessment --
appears in the following pages in the form'of a 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 or Negative Declaration.
* 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 effect on the environment. On the checklist, will be checked to indicate this
determination.
* An EIR must be prepared if the City determines that there is substantial evidence that any aspect of the project may cause a Sianifi cant effect on the
environment. The project may qualify for a Negative Declaration however, if
adverse impacts are mitigated so that environmental effects can be deemed jnsianif icant. These findings are shown in the checklist under the headings
n1YES-sign8 and "YES-insignt respectively.
This checklist
A discussion of potential impacts and the proposed mitigation measures appears at the end of the form under J)ISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL E VALUATION . Particular
attention should be given to discussing mitigation for impacts which would otherwise be determined significant.
-1
WIL, THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: NO
1. Result in unstable earth conditions or increase the exposure of people or property
Appreciably change the topography or any
3. Result in or be affected by erosion of soils
to geologic hazards? X
unique physical features? X 2.
X either on or off the site?
4. Result in changes in the deposition of beach sands, or modification of the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or
any bay, inlet or lake? - X
5. Result in substantial adverse effects on
6. Result in substantial changes in air
ambient air quality? X
movement, odor, moisture, or temperature? X
7. ubstantially change the course or flow of -
X water (marine, fresh or flood waters)?
8. Affect the quantity or quality of surface water, ground water or public water supply? X
9. Substantially increase usage or cause depletion of any natural resources? X
10. Use substantial amounts of fuel or energy? X
11. Alter a significant archeological,
X paleontological or historical site, structure or object?
-2-
BIOLO6ICAL ENVIRONMENT
sa WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY:
12.
13.
14
15.
16.
Affect the diversity of species, habitat or numbers of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, microflora and aquatic
Introduce new species of plants into an area, or a barrier to the normal replenishment of
plants) ? X
existing species? X
Reduce the amount of acreage of any agricultural crop or affect prime, unique or other farmland of state or local importance?
Affect the diversity of species, habitat or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals, all water dwelling organisms
Introduce new species of animals into an
area, or result in a barrier to the
and insects? X
ligration or movement of animals? X
HUMAN ENVIRONMENT
133 WILL THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY:
17.
18.
19 e
20.
21.
Alter the present or planned land use
of an area?
Substantially affect public utilities,
schools, police, fire, emergency or other public services?
Result in the need for new or modified sewer systems, solid waste or hazardous waste
control systems?
Increase existing noise levels?
X
X
X
Produce new light or glare? X
~
X
NO
-3-
--.
HUMAN ENVIRONMENT
WIIJ. THE PROPOSAL DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY: rc
22. Involve a significant risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation)?
Substantially alter the density of the human population of an area?
23.
24. Affect existing’housing, or create a demand for additional housing?
251 Generate substantial additional traffic?’ X
26. Affect existing parking facilities, or create a large demand for new parking?
27. Impact existing transportation systems or ,alter present patterns of circulation or
movement of people and/or goods?
28. Alter waterborne, rail or air traffic?
29. Increase traffic hazards to motor
/-- ‘o,hicles, bicyclists or pedestrians?
30. Interfere with emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans?
31. Obstruct any scenic vista or create an aesthetically offensive public view? X
32. Affect the quality or quantity of
existing recreational opportunities?
NO
X
x
x
x
X
X
X
-4-
33.
MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
NO
Does the project have the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wild- life 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 en- dangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. X
--.
34. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the dis- advantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future.)
35. Does the project have the possible environmental effects which are in-
dividually limited but cumulatively considerable? (nCumulatively con- siderable" means that the incremental effects of an individual 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.) X
X
-
36. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? X
-5-
PIscussIoN OF ENVIRONMENW EVAL UATION
SEE ATTACHMENT
-6-
Phased development of the project, b) alternate site designs, alternate scale of development, d) alternate uses for the site,
development at some future time rather than now, f) alter-
nate sites for the proposed, and g) no project alternative.
ANALYSIS OF VIABLE ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT
Alternative tl: No Project
This alternative would leave Rancho Santa Fe Road in its current
location and would not widen or otherwise improve the road.
Significant impacts associated with landform alteration and biological resources would be avoided by this alternative.
Existing noise impacts to housing along the west side of Rancho Santa Fe Road would increase as traffic volumes along the road increase. Future traffic flow could be impeded by the inability of
the existing roadway to accommodate future traffic volumes.
Alternative 82: Widen Existing Alignment
This alternative would leave Rancho,Santa Fe Road in its current
location and would ultimately widen the road to a six-lane Prime Arterial standard.
Most of the significant impacts associated with landform alteration -
and biological resources would be avoided by this alternative. A reduced level of impacts to the Coastal Sage Scrub vegetative cover, wetlands and landform would result from grading required to
widen the road and the widening of the existing bridge across San
Marcos Creek.
Existing noise impacts to housing along the west side of Rancho
Santa Fe Road would increase as traffic volumes along the road increase. Future traffic flows would probably be at a much higher
speed due to the improved roadway and would result in greater noise impacts.
Alternative #3: Realign Rancho Santa Road And Defe'r Grading Of
Residential Area
This alternative would realign Rancho Santa Fe Road as proposed in the near-term, but would defer grading of the residential areas
until a later time.
In the short-term this alternative would reduce the level of impacts to the biological resources. However, all of the impacts
previously described would ultimately occur when the residential area is developed.
File: \Philip\EIR\Inistudy.244
-7-
pETERMINAZLQH (To Be Completed By The Planning Department) - On the basis oE this initial evaluation:
the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. -- I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on
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 Conditional Negative
Declaration will be proposed. x I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I l4lw ' Date
LIST MITIGATING MEA SURES (IF AP PLICA BLE 1 -
ATTACH MITIGATION MONITORING P ROGRAM (IF APPLICABLE)
-8-
APPLICA NT CO NCURRENCE WITH MITIG ATING MEASURES
THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT I HAVE REVIEWED THE ABOVE MITIGATING MEASURES .- 9ND CONCUR WITH THE ADDITION OF THESE MEASURES TO THE PROJECT.
Date Signature
-9-
r' DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION
1. A Soil and Geologic Reconnaissance report did not reveal any geologic hazards.
2. The road construction will result in 1,100,000t cu.yds. of grading that will alter 80 percent of the existing landform. Cut and fill slopes with heights of 80 to 100 feet are expected to be required.
Additional grading of areas to be developed with residential
areas in the future will result in an additional 3,400,000t cu.yds. of grading. The total amount of grading will involve approximately 5,000,000 cu.yds. of earth.
3. On-site erosion could result during the construction of the project. Grading for the future residential development areas could result in erosion and downstream siltation until permanent erosion control measures are implemented.
4. San Marcos Creek (at the northern end of the project area) would be affected by construction of the new road alignment and bridge, A U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Section 404) Permit and a California Dept. of Fish and Game Streambed
Alteration Agreement (Section 1603) would be required.
An unnamed tributary (blueline stream) of San Marcos Creek paralleling the central portion of the road realignment is proposed to be filled by the project. This would
substantially alter the stream course and would require a Corps Permit and Fish and Game Agreement.
5. Dust would be generated during the grading and construction period that would have a short-term effect on local air quality. No long-term air quality impacts are anticipated since traffic generated by the residential development is consistent with the Carlsbad General Plan and has been included in the Regional Air Quality Strategy.
6. No substantial changes in air movement, odor, moisture or temperature is anticipated.
7. See #4 above.
8. Groundwater recharge would affected by the ultimate development of the residential project. Existing drainage patterns would be changed and downstream siltation could occur during construction and afterwards until adequate erosion control measures are constructed.
9. No natural resources are present in the area.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
Fuel arid energy requireiilents would not exceed those normally associated with residential development.
No known archaeological, paleontological or historic sites are located within the road right-of-way. However, other such sites may be present with the project area that may be affected by the grading operation. Twenty-eight cultural resources have been recorded within a one-mile radius of the project site.
The project area contains chaparral, oak woodlands, coastal sage scrub and riparian woodland habitats. Several sensitive plant species and 12 pairs of California Gnatcatcher are known to occupy the project area. An extended discussion of these resources is contained in the Biological Resource Survey completed for the area in September, 1989 (see Attachment).
Construction of the road and development of the residential area would result in the introduction of non-native plant species and eliminate the normal replenishment of existing species.
There are no prime agricultural soils or important farmlands
in the area.
The diversity of native plant and animal species and habitat would diminish as a result of constructing this project (see
#4 and #12 above).
Animals associated would urban development would be introduced into the area and the movement of native species would be significantly affected by the project.
The General Plan land uses designations in the project area would remain essentially the same as currently adopted. However, a General Plan amendment would be requested to change the configuration of the designations. No increase in density is to occur as a result of the General Plan amendment.
A substantial increase in the existing levels of public services required for the area would result from development of the residential area. However, the services would be consistent with the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone
11.
The residential development would require the provision of new and/or modified sewer systems and would increase the amount of solid waste.
Short-term construction noise would be associated with the construction of the road realignment and the residential areas. Long-term noise increases are expected since the
-.
-..
2 - -.
r-
L
j residential development would result in increased traffic,
21. The installation of additional street lights and outdoor
lighting associated with the residential areas would increase the amount of lighting in the area.
22. The project would not involve any hazardous substances.
23. The project would not increase the residential density of the project area as shown on the General Plan Land Use Map. However, the ultimate development of the residential area would increase the existing population levels,
24. The project would not create a demand for additional housing. The relocation of Rancho Santa Fe Road would reduce existing traffic noise for current housing along the west side of the road.
25. The relocation of Rancho Santa Fe Road is consistent with the
City's Circulation Element. The future development of the residential area would generate a substantial amount of traffic.
26. Existing parking facilities would not be affected, nor would new parking facilities be required.
27. The relocation of Rancho Santa Fe Road would not substantially alter the present pattern of circulation. The relocation is consistent with the City's Circulation Element. The future construction of Melrose Avenue southeasterly of Rancho Santa Fe Road is included in the grading plans.
--
28. Water, rail and air traffic would not be affected.
29. The project would not increase traffic hazards, but would eliminate any existing hazards associated with the current alignment of Rancho Santa Fe Road.
/- (-
30. The project would not interfere with emergency response or evacuation plans.
The proposed realignment of Rancho Santa Fe Road and grading for the future residential development area would result in significant alterations of the existing landforms. Cut and fill banks of 80 to 100 feet in height are anticipated to be required.
31.
32. No existing recreational facilities would be affected.
33. Wetlands habitats associated 'with San Marcos Creek and an unnamed tributary would be affected by the road realignment and residential grading. Twelve pairs of California
3 -
- i Gnatcatchers would be directly affected by the project and four pairs could be indirectly affected. A large Coastal Sage Scrub vegetative community (habitat) would be removed by the project.
34. The road realignment would eliminate existing traffic noise impacts to existing residences along the west side of Rancho
Santa Fe Road. However, the realignment would result in significant impacts to the California Gnatcatcher, Coastal Sage Scrub vegetative cover and wetlands associated with San Marcos Creek and an unnamed tributary.
35. Cumulative impacts to regionally significant biological resources would result.
36. No substantial adverse effects on human beings are anticipated.
-.
-c- San Diego Biodiver.dty Project
PO. Box 1944]uhn. c4 92036
August 5, 1990
Planning Director
City of Carlsbed
2075 Lrts Palmas Dr.
Carlshed, CA.
ItE: Sensitive species withen Carlsbed City Limits.
Planning Iliirector,
Crtrlsbed awnre of sensitive species locations inside the city limits.
The S.D.I3.P. expects the City of Carlsbed to designate all areas occupied
by sensitive species as Sensitive Resource Areas, that is, areas that would
require a complete biological survey hefore the isuence of a negetive
declaration in approval of development. Besides sensitive species, the City
of Carlsbed is home to four rare habitats; Riparian Woodland, Constnl Sage
Scrub, Coastnl Mixed Chaparral, and Native Grassland. These areas must he
granted Sensitive Resource Area designations as well.
Sensitive Carlsbed Plant Species:
(1) Acanthomintha ilicifolia (San Diego Thorn Mint) CE C1
(2) Rrodiaea filifolia (Thread-leaved Rrodiaea) CE C1
Note: The following plnnts hnve a high potential for occurrence in
The Snn nieqo lliodivcrsity Project would like to make the City of
State/Fed. Status /"
(3) Dudleya viscida (Sticky Dudleya) - Cl
(4) Comarostaphylis diversifolia v. diversifolia - -
(5) Corethrogyne filaginifolia V. linifolia - c2
(6) naccharis vanessae (Encinitns baccharis) CE c1
any Carlshed Coastal Mixed Chaparral.
Note: Species 1, 2, 5, and 6 will probably be listed withen a year.
Sensitive Carlsbed' Reptile Species: (1) Cnemidophorus hyperythrus (Orange-throated Whiptail) - -
(2) Phrynosoma coronntum (Coast llorned Lizard) - c2 (3) Thamnophis hamondii (Two-striped Garter Snake) - -
Sensitive Carlsbed Bird Species:
(2) Vireo bellii pusillus (Least Bell's Vireo) CF: FE
(3) Sterna antillarum browni (Calif. Least Tern) CE FE
Note: Species number one will prohebly be listed (Federsly Endangered)
(1) Polioptila melanura californica (Calif. Cnatcntclier) - c2
withen two years.
Reptiles 1 and 2, and bird number 1 all depend on Coastal Sage Scrub.
This rare hahitat has been reduced in San Dieco County by 80%. Plants 4, 5,
an& 6 are dependant on Coastal Mixed Chaparral, a habitat that has been reduced
by 85-90%. \Ye sincerly hope that the City of Carlsbed will take a lead role in
the protection of the above species and habitats.
rc
Sinc erly,
David' Jlogan v .D. Biodiversity c-/
Project
San Diego Biodiversity Project
PO. Box 1944j&n, c4 92036
-_
Status Definitions:
( 1) CE- Cal if orni’a Endangered
(2) FE- Federal Endangered
(3) C1- Cnnidnte for Federal Endangered Species status. Rnongh information
(4) C2- Can. date for Federal Endangered Species status. More information
is on file to support the listing of these species.
on this species. is needed to support a listing.
NOTE: Sensitive Resource Area designation would mean that the City would be
responsible for contacting the Fire Marshal to ensure that sensitive
areas are not posted with brush clearing orders. Please supply the
local Fire hlarshal with copies of the enclosed maps.
STATE OF CALIFORNIA-THE RESOURCES AGENCY GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN, Governor
.3.)"-"' ~. @- DEPARTMENT OF FISH AND GAME
330 Golden Shore, Suite 50
(213) 590-5113
Long Beach, CA 90802 * "...*
September 19, 1990
Mr. Christer Westman City of Carlsbad
2075 Las Palmas
Carlsbad, CA 92009
Dear Mr. Westman:
We have reviewed the Notice of Preparation of a Draft EIR for the Rancho Sante Fe Road Assessment District project SCH
90010850. To enable our staff to adequately review and comment on this project, we recommend the following information be included in the Draft EIR:
1.
2.
3.
A complete assessment of flora and fauna within and adjacent to the project area, with particular emphasis upon identifying endangered, threatened and locally unique species and sensitive and critical habitats.
A discussion of direct, indirect, and cumulative
impacts expected to adversely affect biological
resources, with specific measures to offset such
impacts.
A discussion of potential adverse impacts from any increased runoff, sedimentation, soil erosion, and/or
urban pollutants on streams and watercourses on or near the project site, with mitigation measures proposed to alleviate such impacts. Stream buffer
areas and maintenance in their natural condition
through non-structural flood control methods should also be considered in order to continue their high value as wildlife corridors.
More generally, there should be discussion of alternatives to not only minimize adverse impacts to wildlife, but to include direct benefit to wildlife and wildlife habitat. Those
discussions should consider the Department of Fish and Game's policy that there should be no net loss of wetland acreage or
habitat values. We oppose projects which do not provide adequate mitigation for such losses.
1
Mr. Christer Westman -2- September 19, 1990
Diversion, obstruction of the natural flow, or changes in the bed, channel, or bank of any river, stream, or lake will
require notification to the Department of Fish and Game as
called for in the Fish and Game Code. Notification should be
made after the project is approved by the lead agency.
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on this
project. If you have any questions, please contact Kris La1
of our Environmental Services staff at (213) 590-5137.
Sincerely,
Fred Worthley
Regional Manager
Region 5
,.-
cc: Office of Planning 61 Research
Appendix B:
Mitigation Monitoring Checklist
.- e!
RANCHO SANTA FE ROAD REALIGNMENT AND MASS GRADING MITIGATION MONITORING CHECKLIST
PURPOSE OF THE MONITORING PROGRAM
The attached monitoring checklist is written in accordance with Section 21081.6
of the Public Resources Code added by Assembly Bill 3180 effective January 1,
1989. Its purpose is to provide for the accomplishment of mitigation measures
required by the Final Environmental Impact Report (SCI-I # 90010850) for the
City of Carlsbad. This monitoring checklist provides for the monitoring of
mitigation measures in compliance with the EIR, agency requirements, mitigation
measure implementation, completion, and effectiveness.
The following items are identified for each mitigation measure to ensure
understanding of responsibility and method:
0
0
0 Monitoring schedule.
0
Department or agency responsible for mitigation.
What is being monitored and how it will be accomplished.
Identification of when monitoring is complete.
Sanctions for non-compliance are to included in the Table. The City of Carlsbad
may determine appropriate sanctions for non-compliance and implement such
sanctions as it deems appropriate.
MITIGATION MEASURES
The mitigation measures are listed by impact area, as listed in the EIR, and by
order of their occurrence (i.e., project design, project construction, and projcct
operation). The mitigation measures listed are included in the Final EIR certified for the project, but the specific monitoring procedures and schedules cannot be fully described until the details of project design are finalized. The
final mitigation monitoring plan will be established by the City of Carlsbad and the designated environmental monitoring team, in consultation with the permitting and resource agencies, during the final design and pre-grading planning phase of the project. The composition of the mitigation monitoring team, as well as the specific responsibilities and procedures to be followed will be described in the final mitigation monitoring plan. .-
i
am )sources
issue &ea
Grading of 448 awes of the wrfaa will create cut and fill dopes of 80 to
100 feet in height, and alter 60 percon of the existing landform; dam instability cwld be caused by the blasting process and placement of fi at the dam toe and spillway; erosion mayoccur during grading and if the site is left undmaloped for sword years.
Potential Significant
Environmental Effect8
I.
2.
3.
1.
5.
Mitigation Measures
All earthwork shall follow the conclusions and recommendations of the consulting Geologic Engineer contained in Appendix C of this EIR. Grading shall be performed sccording to speci- fications contained in thr report in Appendix C.
The developer shall follow recommendations set forth in the Woodwerd-Clyde report lAppendix C of the Goocon Report) when conducting blastin1 and filling operations that may affeci the condition of La Costa Dam.
The developer shall adhere to tho building requirements set by the City of Carlsbad and the Uniform Building cod. to provide an acceptable level of Mfety regarding seismic hazards.
Grading shall occur in compliance with the La Costa Master Plan or any amendmentsthereto. No grading shall occur between October 1 and April 15, except when spacial measures can be taken to control siltation. This shall be met to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
The doveloper shall utilize straw, hydroseeding, mulching, or other suitable materials or techniques during construction activities to reduce the erosion potential for uncovered soils Special care shall be taken in areas to be
cleared and grubbed with the top 12" of materie remwed.
Menk Monitor/
Report Pqency
City Engineerin!
City Engineerin!
City Engineerin!
City Engineerin!
City Engineerin!
d on Sit1
Verified
Date/lni
-
-
Const/Operating
Frequw
Monitof
C
C
C
C
C
ShOminOondibocu ' dF9pmvd: MDnbmgh.puncy. RpporlinaFnquncy ..
A0 - Agency Option to knplement as Needed;
P - Plan, Program or Report Required; C - Throughout Construction; . c -Ongoing. 3 - Stop Work Order
AR - Pgency to Require on All Projects.
A - Wth Each New Development;
D - On Completion; E - Operating; F - On Violation.
a - Once, On Completion; 1 - Wthhold Building Permil
4 - Monetary
RC - Required by Code; B - Prior to Construction; b - On Wolation; 2 - Withhold aft. Of Occupancy
f to
b
- E
b
b
b
b
-
't
~ Potential Significant Environmental
Effd Mitigation Measures
3. The developer shall install temporary culverts, ditches, catchment bins, dams and settling ponds where needed during construction to collect excess water and sediments carried from the construction site. Sediments collected shall be disposed of on-site, unless contamination of sediment with hazardous material occurs, which would require disposal at a Class II or Class 111 disposal site.
7. The project shall be in compliance with the City's Hillside Devolopment Ordinance and grading ordinance.
8. The City shall require an erosion control plan. This erosion control plan will require sandbagging in unpavod street areas and the construction of approximately 15 desiltation basins on the site. The City shall verify conformance of erosion control measures by plan checks, field inspections and requiring as-
built plans.
9. Landslide areas shall be remedied to create slopes with a factor of safety 1.5 or greater, 01 the standard set forth by the City.
necessary to accomplish the proposed development as shown in the approved grading
10. Grading shall be limitedto the minimumarea
DbS.
When As
On0 Time -
X
led Monitor/
Report Agency
sty Engineerin!
City Planning
City Engineerin1
City Engineerin1
City Engineerin
ihown on Plans
Verified Dats/lnil -
istalled on Sitc Const/Operating
Frequer
Moni
C
C
B
C
C
' to - Report
b
a
a
b
b
-
MorwbmoFnquncy: -Fnsuency .. ShowninCbndRbmdAppmvJ: A0 - Agency Option to Implement as Needed;
AR - Agency to Require on All Projects.
A - wlth Each New Development;
D - On Completion; E - Operating; F - On Violation.
a - Once, On Completion; 1 - Withhold Building Permit
4 - Monetary
RC - Required by Code; P - Plan, Program or Report Required; C - Throughout Construction; . c - Ongoing. 3 - Stop Work Ordm B - Priir to Construction; b - On Violation; 2 - Wthhold art. Of OCrwpan~y
i
Significant long-ten increases in
ocor over existing lconditions; short- term impacts will occur from construction activities.
pollutant WS will
P
bW0
kea am lrsources
mtinud
-
hir Uuality
Potential Signifiit Environmrnw
EfiOCtS Mitigation Measures
11. Site specific geotechnical reports will be requirrc by the City prior to development of specific areas within this project. Recommendations included in these future reports should also be
implemented by the developer.
12. k contained in Won 11.06.130 of the City's Grading Ordinance, "the surface of all Cut slopes more than five feet in height and fill slopes more than three feet in height shall be protected against damage by erosion by planting with grass or ground anmr plants.' Specifications 01 this section shall be adhered to by the dwdoper. Planting plans shall be wbmittd to
the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
during planting operatins shall be performed by the developer at all locations where determined feasible by the City Engineer.
14. The developer shall obtain permission from SSn Diego Gas and aectric Company for grading within an easement.
13. Top soil banking or reuse of scarified top soil
I. The dwdoper shall, during cleaning, grading, earth moving 01 excavation:
control fugitive dust by regular watering, paving construction roads, or other dust preventive measures, as defined; and
maintain equipment engines in proper tune. O
_____~
Monitor/
mfi 4ency
City Planning-
City Engineerin1
City Engineerin
City Planning
City Planning & Engineering
5horm on Plan1 Const/Omatina
Fmwi
Mi
B
B
C
B
C
ShammCmdilianrdAppanl:
A0 - Mency Optin to Implement as RC - Fbauird bv Code:
ManbmoFnqwncy: RparlinoFnqurncy ..
Needed; A - With Each New Development; B - Prior to Construction;
D - On Completion; E - Operating; F - On Violation.
a - Once, On Completian; b - On Violation; 1 - Wthhdd Building Permit
4 - Monetary
2 - HMhhold CW. Of &CU~S~CY
P-- Man: Program;, Report Required; C - Throughout Construction; . c - Ongoing. 3 - Stop Work OIdW
AR - Agency to Require on All Projects.
to
!!E!!! a
a
b
a
- b
f
VI
Potential Wen Applied shown on Plans Installed on Site Const/Operating
Significant Monitor/ Shown Verified , Fmurncy to w Environmental One- Const Opera- Report incon- Vsrified &ea Effects Mitigation Measures Time Only ting Pqency ditions Rqd Date/lnit Rqd Datta/Kl Monitor Report
Air Quality 2. After clearing, grading. earth moving 01 X City Planning& AR C b
(continued) excavation, the debdoper shall: Engineering
O
O spread soil binders;
O
ssed and water until grass cover is grown;
wet the area down. sufficient enough to form a crust on the surface with repeated soakings, as nrc.s3aly, to maintain the crust and prevent dust pick up by the wind; and
perform strwt sweeping should silt k carried over to adjacent public thoroughfares.
O
3. During construction the developer shall: X City Planning& AR C b Engineering
O use water trucks or sprinkler systems to
keep all areas where vehicles mow damp enough to prevent dust raised when leaving the site;
wet down areas in the late morning and after work is completed for the day; and
use low sulfur fuel (0.5% by weight) for construction quipmmt.
O
O
4. The developer shall phase and schedule X City Planning& AR C b
construction activities to avoid high ozone days. Engineering
ShamhCbdilhsdv: fwaml- A0 - Pqency @tion to Implement as Needed; RC - Required by Code; P - Plan, Program or Report Required; C - Throughout Construction; ' c - Ongoing.
AR - Agency to Require on All Projects.
A - With Each New Development; B - Prior to Construction;
D - On Completion;
E - Operating; F - On Violation.
a - Once, On Completion; b - On Violation; 1 - Withhold Building Permit 2 - Withhold Cert. of Occupancy 3 - Stop Work Order 4 - Monetary
Monitor/
&port mncy
CityPlanning6. Engineering
City Planning& Engineering
Shown in con- ditions
AR
AR
Vator rsources Water quality of surface and subsurface bodies will be reduced by urban contributions;
drainage will k altered by urbanization of 448 acre9 of the surfacc producing greater
velocities; modification of th. roadway along -ley Mahr brvoir would eliminate spillway
functioning; grading northeast of the
NnOff VdUM Md
City Engineering
City Engineering
City Engineering
A0
P
AR
i
H
One- Tim
X
-
-
shown on Plana Mtalled on stc CondOwatina Mnificant Environmental
ir Quali
V&ed Date/hi
Fnqmr
mi Mitigation Measures
5. Bikwaya shall be provided along Rancho Santa Fe Road as required by City standards; if required by the North County Transit District, bus shelters and benches and street pockets shall be installed on Rancho Santa Fe Road; bicyde storage facilities shall be provided at
park and ride sites as required by celtrans.
xmtinued)
Ix 8. Commercial land uses shall be accessible by bicyde and pedestrian trails from the immediate neiahborhood.
b
a
b
-
1. The developer shall follow all recommendations made pmtaining to erosion control in the geotechnical evaluation by Geocon. Inc., the City of carlsbad's Grading, Clearing and Grubbing Policy, Grading Ordinance, and Landscmpe Manual.
2. The City shall establish a comprehensive maintenance program for the rrosion control and drainage facilities. Many of the desiltation basins will k temporary facilities, howevor a few could remain on-site after construction is completed. A sediment removal and drainage maintenance program should be rnaded by the City for all such facilities.
3. When feasible, hauling by the developer shall be accomplished in a manner that minimiresthe soillane of soil onto roads in developed areas.
ShoWninOmdilionrdAppranl: uonibrin0-W-v RpporlinoFnquency A0 - Agency Option to Implement as Needed; RC - Required by Code; P - Plan, Program or Report Required; C - Throughout Construction; . c - Ongoing.
AR - Agency to Require on All Projects.
A - With Each New Development; B - Priir to Construction;
D - On Completion; E - Operating; F - On Violation.
a - Once, On Completion; b - On Violation; 1 - Withhold Building Permit 2 - Withhold Cert. of Occupancy 3 - Stop Work Order 4 - Monetary
I
CityEngineering
City Engineering
City Engineering
City Engineering
CityEnginearing
City Engineering
City Engineering
U
M)
A0
AR
P
M
A0
A0
Potential Significant Environmantal
downstream flooding could be incmaamd by runoff
plodd by urbanization.
Mitigation Measures
The capadty of the spillway at the Stanley Mahr Resenroir shall be matched or exceeded by the developer in designing the new access road and spillway channel. This capacity is 310 cfs per woodward-clyd. Consultants (November l-).
The developer shall make certain and the City shall verify that the final grading on the area
northeast of the Stanley Mahr hservoir is performed wch that no additional runoff is
drained into the nselvoir.
Refuse material such as oil, grease, and broken equipment generated during grading shall be properly contained and removed off-site to a disposal site.
A hydrology study for Ssn Marcos Creek shall ba prepared that computes the existing or "natural condition' runoff for all watersheds in the subject area and compares them with runoff produced by development of proposed land
USM.
The developer shall adhere to recommendatiina by McDaniel Engineering regarding bridge construction in the report entitled "Structural Calculations for Rancho Santa h Road Bridge Over San Maras Creek."
The developer shall adhere to sitespecific geotechnical reports during development.
0. The developer shall maintain the southcentral trending drainage channel in a natural vegetated condition as a "best management practice" consistent with RWQCB order number 90-42.
Monitor/ shorn
Report Iinm Agency ditiona
MI Plan1
Verified Date/lni
-
-
nstalled on Sit(
Verified Date/lnii
ConsVOmrating
Freqrnn
Mi
C
C
C
B
C
C
C, D -- Fmam#Fnquncy .. ShaminCondilianrdC9pcovll: A0 - Agency Option to Implement as Needed; RC - Required by Coda; P - Plan, Program or Report Required; C - Throughout Construction; . c - Ongoing. 3 - Stop Work Order
AR - Agency to Require on All Projects.
A - Wth Each New Development; B - Prir to Constfudion;
D - On Completion; E - Operating: F - On Violation.
a - Once, On Completion; b - On Wdation; 1 - Wthhold Building Permit 2 - Wthhold Cert. of Occupancy
4 - Monetary
i
bsue ha
bise
Potential Significant Environmental EffOCtS
The project will cause the loss of 14 pairs of California
gnatcatchers (a candidate for an
endangered listing by the USFWS) ani 283 acres of intact vegetation which includes Diegan coastal sage scrub @I7 acres); the resultant vrgetatioi distribution would
create a fragmente ecosystem of thra irregularly-shaped parcels which will causa dysfunction and possible elimination of a healthy rcosvstem
Exposure of residential land uses to noise hl greater than 65 dB0 CNEL at the property line from increased traffic;
short-term noise associated with construction
Mitipation Measures
he developer shall perform a combination of the allowing:
I. Develop a viable gnatcatcher pnservr on and offsite large enough to support 14 pairs. The on- and off-site dedications shall follow criteria
listed in Section 5.4.
1. Make a contribution to a regional conseration plan for the gnatcatcher.
3. Fund the California gnatcatcher life-history study
1. Obtain a section 404 permit, and a C.D.F.G. code 1-1603 agreement.
5. Modify the project grading to presanm 1ooX of
the dense area of San Dim goldenstars and a minimum of 75% of the sparse area of goldenstars as defined in Appendix E. Hems A-
D shall be made conditions of project approval.
I. Tho City shall implementpolicies and action programs contained within tha Noise Element of the (kneral Plan whii apply to conetruction of the proposed project aa discussed abow.
2. The City and dewloper &all adhere to the requirements of Administrative Policy Number 17 Mditionally, the acoustical analysis called for in this policy shall be prepared with the Master
Plan or Tentative MaD amlication.
w
One- lime
-
-
X
X
X
X
- X
X
Ao-- Pgency 0ption-t; Implement as wed; RC - Required by Code; P - Plan. hram or Rewrt Reauired:
Monitor/
Report rrgency
3ty Planning & Engineering
City Planning & Engineering
City Planning & Engineering
City Planning & Engineering
City Planning &
Engineering
City Planning
City Planning
-
%own n con. Mons -
AR
AR
AR
Rc
AR
- Rc
Rc
-
In Plans
Verified hte/lnii
-
-
-
1 on sitc
Verified Date/lnil -
-
ConsVOperating
Frequen
Monitor
B
B
B
B
B
C
A
-FnqunCy
b - On Violation; A - With hch hw &elopment;
C - Throughout Construction; . c -Ongoing. 3 - Sop Work Order
D - On Completion; E - Operating;
F - On Violation.
a - Once, On Completion; 1 - Withhold Building Permit
4 - Monetaiy
B - Prior to Construction; 2 - Withhold Cert. Of Occupancy
AR - peency ib Require 6n 41 Piojects.
to -
!!E!!
a
a
a
a
a
- b
a
-
I
Potential Significant Environmental
EffKAS
lctivities such as
lasting, crushing Ind hauling of naterial.
Iswe kea
bise antinudl
Mitigation Measures
3. Prior to rmdation of the first final tract/parcel map or issuance of building permits the dwsloper shall prepare and record a notice that
this property may k subject to impacts from thc proposed or existing Transportstion Conidor and with subsequent development in a manner meeting the approval of the Planning Director and City Attorney prior to recordation of the firs1 final tract/parciml map or issuance of building permits, whichever is first.
\stalled
Rqd
6.
7.
on sitc
Verified Date/lnil
8.
in
hnst
Only
X
X
X
X
X
Construction activities will occur during the hours of 7 AM to 7 PM or normal Wng hours as stated in the b Costa Mastor Plan or any amendments thereto.
Stationary equipment shall be placed such that emitted noise is directd away from sensitive noise recaivrrs such as residential arms.
Stockpiling and whide staging areas shall be located as far as practical from occupied dwellings.
Ewry effort shall be made to create the greated distance between noise sources and receptors
during construction OperatiOnS.
UI construction equipment, including trucks used for hauling roadbed material, shall have exhaust and muffler systems in compliance with state standards for emission and noise control.
Applied
wra.
ting
- H
One Time
X
-
-
Shown
Rqd
on Plans
Verified Date/lni
Monitor/
Repod 4-
Const/Operating
Freauer
Monitor
AD
B, C, D
C
C
C
C
B
C
rto -
!!!!E!
0
a
b
b
b
b
b
b
-
Mrmbma-w-w -Fi.qUney .. gwrmm~d&#pfovd: A0 - Cqency Option to Implement as Needed;
P - Plan, Program or Report Required;
AR - Aqency to Require on All Projects.
A - With Each New Development;
C - Throughout Construction; 0 - On Completion; E - Operating; F - On Violation.
a - Once, On Completion;
c - Ongoing.
1 - Wthhold Building Permit
3 - Stop Work Order 4 - Monetary
RC - Required by Code; B - Prior to Construction; b - On Wolation; 2 - Wthhold art. Of OCarpanCy
‘i
-
ihown n con.
litions
AR -
Rc
AR
AR
Monitor/
Report &enw
3n Plant
Verified
Date/hi
-
-
Potential Significant Environmental
Effects
ncreases in light md glare visible to ,xisting residential andsouth and
nest of the project from traffic, stationary lighting, and reflectance lrom an urbanized surface cover.
Const/Operating d on Sitc
Verified Date/hit - to - 2s a
a
a
a
Frequen
Monitor
4C,D
B
D
B
lssur kea Mitigation Measures
1. Use roadway landscaping to limit the intrusion o headlights into residential areas.
2. Use median landscaping within specifications of lhe City’s Land- Manual to limittha affect of hmdlights to oncoming traffic.
3. All street lighting should b. properly directed so as to limit excess light from intruding into sensitive areas.
1. City design review shall consider use of low pressure sodium street lights for preservation of a ‘dark-skf.
ight and ilan sty Planning
sty Planning
Tty Planning
3ty Planning
~~~ ~ The developer shall conform to land uses and respective acreages on the General Plan land use map, and dwelling unit allocations in the Local Facilities Management Plan for Zone 11, 01 propose amendments to the General Plan, La Costa Master Plan, and Local Facilities Management Plan. The GPA shall indude the Trails Feasibility Study and be reviewed by the Open Space Committee.
Land uses assoCiated with the proposed projecl shall be consistent with land use guidelines as listed in the land Use Uemont of tho General Plan to insure compatibility. These indud, developing and maintaining suitable and adequate Iandacaping, sign control, site and building design, parking, buffering, and other performance standards to insure that future commercial developments are compatible with surrounding residential land uses.
3ty Planning
Jty Planning
4B
B
and use keas allotted to General Plan land uses are not consistent with the General Plan and Ls Costa Master Plan; proposed land uses will resul in greater land use intensity of the project area than allowed by the General Plan by adding 248,000 square feet of non- residential floor
area above that allotted for the arm by the Local Facilities Manapement Plan;
X
X
AR
AR X
-
-Fnsurncy A - With &ch New Development; B - Prior to Construction; C - Throughout Construction; . c - Ongoing. 3 - Stop Work Order
D - On Completion; E - Operating; F - On Nolation.
a - Once, On Completion; b - On Nolation; 1 - Withhold Building Permit 2 - Withhold art. of Occupancy
4 - Monetary AR - Agency G Require bn AI Piojects.
A0 - Agency Option to Implement as Needed; RC - Required by Code; P - Plan. Prooram or Re~ort Rewired;
Issue &ea
land use (continuodl
Traffic/ Circulation
A
-L
Potential Significant tirvironmtal Effacts
opm space areas will be reduced in we8 and degraded in quality by prading and drvdopmmt.
Traffic volumes will increase, but Rancho Santa h Rod will operate
accwtabty; Questhaven Road east of Rancho santa h bad will
opwatr un=-P*.
Migation Measures
3. The proJect applicantb) shall propose amendment to the boundary of open space as shorm on the City of Wsbad Comprehensive Oprn Space Network Map and General Plan on propetties owned by FWstocH and the MAG. Properties to indude larger, more environmental1 sensitive areas. In the absence of such open space boundary amendment, the developer($) shall revise grading plans to preserve open space areas/corridors shown on the City Map.
1. The City of Carlsbad shall construct intersection and road segment geometrics as proposed for Year 1995 without the sA.680 connection Qutun Melrose Drive). The City shall also retain right- of-way that will be sufficient for creation of the intersection at Rancho Santa h Road and Murc Melrose Driw south.
2. A detailed construction plan listing all timing. traffic and safety issues MI k d.Vrloprd by
tbe Contractors involwd. This plan shall indudc a truck rerouting plan and ahdl minimize detouring.
3. The Cities of Carlsbad and San Marws shall mate a mechanism to decide on the Rancho Santa Fe Road and Melrose Dfii intersection configuration. Other issIHs related to the intersection configuration, as discussed in &pond& F, should be resolvod by Carlsbad.
Monitor/
Report Pgrncy
3ty Planning
Jty Engineering
ZityEngineering
shorm inwn. ditionr
P
A0
P
%own on Plan:
one- Time
X
X
X
Hrnen 4
cons
only
X
rstalled on Sit(
Rqd
Verified Date/lnil - Verified Date/hi
Const/Operating
Freawn to
Monitor
B
D
B
AB
-h.qwncy: Rportino- .. Shominth&iOmdAppraral: A0 - Fqency Option to Implement as Needed;
P - Plan, Program or Report Required; C - Throughout Construction; ' c - Ongoing. 3 - Stop Work Order
AR - Pgency to Require on All Projects.
A - With Each New Development;
D - On Completion; E - Operating; F - On Violation.
a - Once, On Completion; 1 - Withhold Building Permit
4 - Monetary
RC - Required by Code; B - Prior to Construction; b - On Violation; 2 - HMhhOld art. Of OCarpan~y
?E!! a
- a
a
a
-
'1
'ublic irnricrs - ichodS
Significant Environmmtal E-
All schools that
SIN. tho project sro arrnnly at, or ow csp.city, ad lho project will add
E total of npproximately 2.M mom studollts to th. area.
Mitigation Measures
. An intorim signal shall be constructed by the City of Carlsbad at tho interadions of Rancho Snta Fe Road and Questhmn bad prior to Way construction. Signalization shall also be in placo at project completion.
5.
- 1.
0
0
Tho intorsection at Rancho Santa Fe Road and Cadencia Street shall bo constructed as a full signalized intersection.
Prior to the approval of a final map for any projects within the !bn Marcos Unifii School District, an agreemont shall be enterod into bohm the District and tho projecl proponent that shall provide for the following:
The deeding of an acceptable school Site to the district.
Tho guarantw for the financing and construction of a school for tho District. This guarantee shall bo in the form of bonding, cash deposit or me othor form of security as specified in said agrermmt.
-
One- Time -
- X
If any reimbursements and/or school fee crodits aro to bo given, tho school agroomen shall provide a mechanism to do so.
2. Tho devdoper shall pay developer's fees to the San Dieguito High School District for financing
5hoWfl on Plan: natalled on sit Const/Omratina
Freqwu
Mani
(to rn
a -
a
- a
a
-
Shawnhcmlrihm - afApprovd: Mmibrinah.quney: -Fnquncy A0 - Pqency Option to Implement as Needed; RC - Roquired by Code; P - Plan, Program or Report Required; AR - Pgency to Require on All Projects.
A - Wth Each New Development; B - Prior to Construction; C - Throughout Construction; I c - Ongoing. 3 - Stop Work Order
D - On Completion; E - Operating; F - On Violation.
a - Once, On Completion; b - On Violation; 2 1 - - Withhold Wthhold art. Ruilding of OcCupan~y Pormit
4 - Monetary
(except
whii aro significant
whii are
significant)
Potential
Significant Environmental Effects
Demand for fir0 protection, law enforcement, libraries, and hospital mnricrs will imam.
Mitigation Measures
%e Rot *
I. k conditions of approval of the development plana for buildout of the land adjacent to the project site, the project applicant shall construct a permanent fin station No. 6 along the present alignment of Rsncho Santa Fe Road and an amss road and traffic dgnal from the station tc Rancho Santa h Road.
&w Fnforcemenj
I. The doveloper shall implemonta Neighborhood Watch Program within new developments as buildout occurs on tho pr0i.a dte.
2. The City shall provide adequate police protection concurrent with buildout of Local
Facilities Management Plan of Zone 1 1.
Libraries
1. The deweloper shall pay a portion of Public Facility Fees at 3.5 percent of building permit valuation at the time of building permit issuance to be used for library construction.
Monitor/
-port Agency
3ty Engineerin(
3ty Planning
City Planning
City Planning
on Plans
Verified Dnte/lnii
-
-
Const/Operating
Frequer
Monitor
B
D
D
B
MDnrbmaFnquency: Rsportina- .. SmmkCbndWnad~: A0 - Agency Option to Implement as Needed; RC - Required by Code; P - Plan, Program or Report Required; C - Throughout Construction; . c - Ongoing.
AR - Agency to Require on All Projects.
A - With Each New Development; B - Prior to Construction;
D - On Completion; E - Operating; F - On Violation.
a - Once, On Completion; b - On Violation; 1 - Wthhold Building Permit 2 - Wthhold Cert. of Occupancy 3 - Stop Work Order
4 - Monetary
' to -
Report
a
a
a
a
-
Potontial Significant Environmental EffOCtS
brcentage ncroases in use of vator, sewor and did waste li8posal services, rrge incrow in
msumptii of iatural gas and ,Iectricity over uisting conditions uill result.
Mitigation Measures w!$!
1. Water demand will b. assassod during the development review proass established by bott the VWD and the OMWD which onsure that Zone 11 will remain in conformana with the
adopted performance standard through build- out.
2. Developments shall indude water saving devices in an effort to consem water.
3. Water redamation shall bo used where feasible for such uses as park and lawn irrigation.
1. UI new development will comply with the City's
performance standards for sewor senfico. Any upgrades to the 8ystem will bo funded by the
developer or through tho collection of sewor fees.
1. The developer shall incorporate a source separation recycling program in all nw development if deemed frasible.
When An -
one- Time
X
X
X
ed Monitor/
Report Agency
Olivehain Municipal & Vallecitos Water
Distrii
City Planning & Engineering
City Planning & Engineering
City Planning & Engineering
City Planning & Engineering
AR
AR
A0
AR
AR
-
Shown on Plant nstalled on sit4 Constloperating
Frauen to
Moni
SnmninChnMonsd~: Monir*ingFnquncy: RpporlinoFnpuency A0 - Agency Option to knplemont as Wed; RC - Required by Code; P - Plan, Program or Report Required; C - Throughout Construction; . c - Ongoing. 3 - stop Work Order
AR - Aqency to Require on All Projects.
A - With Each New Development; B - Prior to Construction;
D - On Completion; E - Operating; F - On Wolation.
a - Once, On Complotion; b - On Violation; 1 - Withhold Building Permit
4 - Monetaiy
2 - mhdd art. of ocarpancy
rporl
a
a
a
a
a
-
i
andform Heration/ isual bality
Potential Significent Environmental
Largescale alteration of the existing landscap. will occur with 4.2 million cubic yards of earth moved at t ratio of 7,676 cubic yards per acre; the proposal will conflict with severa policies in the Conservation and
Open spa- Element. and the Scenii Highways Element of the Gemral Plan; alteration of the natural drainage channel in the project area will detract from local aesthetics.
Itilities mtinurd)
Mitigation Measures
btural Gas a nd Electricity
. The developer shall be required to provide adequate infrastructure for the project and subsequent devdopment which meets all City and SDGE standards.
!. Whenever possible, the developer shall incorporate energy saving devices within the project and subsequent dewlopment such as
maior rrppliances and timed lighting devices.
All recommendations outlined in Aolnndix C an( lrppendix D of the cjkocon report'&pendix C of this EIR) shall k implemented.
All General Grading Guidelines as outlined in thr Carlsbad Grading Ordinance and Hillside Development Regulations shall be implemented.
The developer shall submit an erosion control plan and a planting plan to the City, and implemente planting program to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Planning Director.
X
Monitor/
Report Mew
Xty Engineering
2ty Engineering
2ty Engineerins
Sty Engineerins
Tty Engineering
AR
Rc
P
m Plans
Verified Date/lnil
-
-
- 1 on Sit(
Verified Date/lnii
-
-
Const/Operating
Freqwr
Mi
A
A
shownin- d-: Monnonnohsqusncy: -Po-Q- ..
A0 - Fgency Option to Implement as Needed; RC - Required by Code; P - Plan, Program or Report Required; C - Throughout Construction; . c - Ongoing.
AR - Agency to Require on All Projects.
A - With Each New Development; B - Prior to Construction;
D - On Completion; E - Operating; F - On Violation.
a - Once. On Completion; b - On Violation; 1 - Withhold Building Permit 2 - Withhold Cart. of Occupancy 3 - Sop Work Order 4 - Monetary
lsau8 Ana
Mural/ 4istaric L#Hlrcrs
One Mitigation Measures Tim
X The devaboer ahall have a certified
Potential Significant Environmental EffW
Six prehistoric sitar locatadwithinthe
proi.ctareaare vulnofabk to destruction. FNI~ th.sr sites are considend poantially important.
archaeologist perform subsurface testing of the
following dtes prior to any site alteration in an rffort to fully determine tha extant of subsurface materials. A report shall k produced describing methods. results, and final mitigation. The sites
11570, RSFcW1. SDM-W-940, SDM-W-941, SO-11569, SO-
Shown on Plans
Verified
Rqd Date/lni
If res0urc.s are found to be important, the X
developer shall have a certified archadogist develop a data rrowery plan and research design, or the City shall create an open rpscr easement on the site.
lnsta
Rqd
During project implementationthe City shall adhere to mgulations in tha Historic Prosowation Ordinance which apply to cultural/hietoric
mUrcQ8 of th. WOjOd dk. I
Monitor/
Faeport Agency
City Planning
City Planning
City Planning
Const/Opwating
Frquer
Moni
B
B
C. E
Vonrbma- -Fnquncy .. Shamin-dAppwd: A0 - Agency Option to Implement M Needed; RC - Required by code;
AR - Agency to Require on All Projects.
A - With Each Now Development;
D - On Completion; E - Operating; F - On Violation.
a - Once. On Oompletion; 1 - Wthhdd Building Permit
4 - Monetary
B - Prior to Construction; b - On Wolation; 2 - Withhold art. Of OCwpCmCy
P - Plan, Program or Report Required; C - Throughout Construction; , c -Ongoing. 3 - SOP Work OrdW
lto
a
- !E!!
a
C
-