Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutEIR 05-05; PONTO BEACHFRONT VILLAGE VISION PLAN; Environmental Impact Report (EIR)(Final-Part 4); 2007-08-01ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-1 August 2007 6.0 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT 6.1 Rationale for Alternative Selection CEQA requires the consideration of alternative development scenarios and the analysis of impacts associated with the alternatives. Comparing these alternatives to the proposed project, the advantages of each alternative can be analyzed and evaluated. Section 15126.6 of the CEQA Guidelines requires that an EIR: “describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project, but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives.” Additionally, CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6 states in part: An EIR need not consider every conceivable alternative to a project. Rather, it must consider a reasonable range of potentially feasible alternatives that will foster informed decision-making and public participation. An EIR is not required to consider alternatives that are infeasible (15126.6(a)). The range of potential alternatives to the proposed project shall include those that could feasibly accomplish most of the basic objectives of the project and could avoid or substantially lessen one or more of the significant effects. The EIR should briefly describe the rationale for selecting the alternatives to be discussed. The EIR should also identify any alternatives that were considered by the lead agency but were rejected as infeasible during the scoping process and briefly explain the reasons underlying the lead agency’s determination. Among the factors that may be used to eliminate alternatives from detailed consideration in an EIR are: (i) failure to meet most of the basic project objectives, (ii) infeasibility, or (iii) inability to avoid significant environmental impacts (15126.6(c)). The specific alternative of “No Project” shall also be evaluated along with its impact (15126.6(e)(1)). If the environmentally superior alternative is the “No Project” Alternative, the EIR shall also identify an environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives (15126.6(e)(2)). A comparison of the proposed alternatives is presented in Table 6-1. 6.1.1 Alternatives Considered but Rejected from Further Detailed Analysis 6.1.1.1 Open Space Alternative The Open Space Alternative assumes that the project development area would remain in its current state with the existing residential, commercial, and light industrial uses, and undeveloped parcels. No development would be proposed on the remaining undeveloped parcels of the Ponto Area; however, the undeveloped areas of the site would be preserved as dedicated open space for habitat preservation and/or potential recreational use. The Ponto Area would be rezoned as Open Space and amendments to the General Plan and LCP would be required. An open space easement would be dedicated over the undeveloped areas to ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-2 August 2007 ensure that this acreage remained in perpetuity as the intended use. Recreational uses may include interpretive hiking trails or bike paths that would provide a linkage to other trails in the area. Other passive activities such as picnicking may also be permitted. This alternative would reduce impacts to traffic, air quality, and noise as compared to the proposed project, as no additional development on the site would occur, thereby reducing resultant vehicle trips and emissions as compared to the proposed project. In addition, biological impacts would also be reduced, as no sensitive species or habitat would be impacted by future development activities on the undeveloped parcels, since they would be preserved as open space for the long-term. Visual impacts, while not significant under the proposed project, would be reduced because there would be no new development. Almost all of the property within the area affected by the Vision Plan is privately owned and currently zoned to allow for development. Under the existing zoning, none of the ownerships within the 50-acre Ponto Area are intended for open space, habitat preservation, or long-term biological management. Under this alternative, the existing development would remain, and individual landowners of the undeveloped parcels would not be allowed to propose development or improvements on their property as desired. The City would likely be required to enter an eminent domain process with the current landowners to acquire the open space. Although this alternative would achieve the SCCRA Plan’s goal of developing new beach and coastal recreational opportunities, the majority of the other goals established by the Plan would not be obtained. By preserving the undeveloped areas of the site as open space, the following goals would not be achieved: (1) assembling of land into parcels for modern, integrated development with improved pedestrian and vehicular circulation in the Project Area; (2) rezoning, redesigning and developing properties which are stagnant or improperly utilized; (3) increase, improve and preserve the City’s supply of housing affordable to very low, low and moderate income utilized; (4) eliminate blight and environmental efficiencies in the Project Area; and, (5) increase parking and open space amenities. In addition, this alternative would not meet the goals of the Vision Plan or the General Plan for development of this area. In addition, the Open Space Alternative fails to achieve the majority of the objectives of the Vision Plan. This alternative would not meet the goals of establishing a mixed-use district that encourages local and tourist-oriented retail, commercial, recreational and residential uses, or accommodating a mix of local and tourist-serving commercial, medium- and high- density residential, mixed use, live/work, and open space land use opportunities that are economically viable and support the implementation of these goals. In addition, this alternative would not establish the Southern Coastal Gateway to the City, as no improvements would be made to signify such an entry point. As this alternative would not meet these and other objectives, this alternative is not considered a viable option and was rejected from further analysis. 6.1.1.2 Alternate Location Alternative The Alternate Location Alternative assumes that the intent and guidelines given in the Vision Plan will be applied to an alternative location within the City of Carlsbad. Alternate locations considered included properties both within and outside of the SCCRA. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-3 August 2007 Although other land is available within the SCCRA, the Ponto Area represents an area with large, undeveloped acreage where the existing General Plan, zoning designations and Local Coastal Program would allow for the uses proposed in the Vision Plan. Under the existing zoning, a mixed-use district that encourages local and tourist-oriented retail, commercial, recreational, and residential uses could be developed. In addition, the proposed site’s proximity to the State Beach allows for the opportunity to supplement and enhance existing recreational and scenic resources within the City, consistent with the goals of the Vision Plan. The proposed project site also represents an opportunity to establish and enhance the entry corridor into southern Carlsbad, creating a Southern Coastal Gateway to the City, and thereby controlling potential visual impacts that may result if parcels within 50-acre area were developed individually without the design guidelines given in the Vision Plan. By proposing development of the Vision Plan uses at an alternate location within the SCRRA, it can be assumed that impacts to traffic, air, and noise would be similar to that of the proposed project, as similar uses would be proposed and thereby, a similar number of vehicle trips would be generated (although potentially at different locations and therefore, different traffic distribution patterns may result). Impacts to biological resources may be increased as compared to the proposed project depending on the alternative site selected, as a large portion of the Ponto project site is currently either developed or disturbed, with limited sensitive biological resources. Opportunities for an alternate site outside of the SCRRA, within the City of Carlsbad, were also analyzed. However, due to the uses intended with the Vision Plan, an available site (or combination of parcels) of adequate size was not identified. In addition, this alternative would not achieve the objective of providing expanded beach access, as another site of adequate size to support the uses proposed while providing proximity to the beach was not identified within the City of Carlsbad. This alternative would also not establish the Southern Coastal Gateway to the City, as the Ponto Area includes the southernmost coastal property within the City of Carlsbad. Therefore, the opportunity to achieve the goal of enhancing the major entryway into the City at the southerly boundary would not be an option at an alternate location. In addition, a site outside of the SCCRA would not achieve the SCCRA’s Plan goal to eliminate blight and environmental deficiencies in the Ponto Area, or to develop new beach and coastal recreational opportunities. In addition, the re-alignment of Carlsbad Boulevard re-alignment that would yield excess property to facilitate expansion of the Carlsbad State Beach campgrounds and/or provide for other recreational facilities would not occur if an alternate site were selected. The Alternate Location Alternative would not achieve many of the objectives and goals of the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan or the SCCRA Plan. Therefore, this alternative is rejected from further analysis. 6.2 Analysis of the No Development Alternative 6.2.1 No Development Alternative Description and Setting The No Development Alternative assumes that the project site would not be developed with the proposed project. The project site would remain in its present condition and would continue to support the existing single-family residential and small-scale commercial and ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-4 August 2007 light-industrial uses. No onsite or offsite roadway improvements, including Carlsbad Boulevard, would occur with this alternative. Although this alternative is similar to the Open Space Alternative, preservation of the undeveloped portions of the Ponto Area would not be guaranteed for the long-term through zoning or dedication of an open space easement. 6.2.2 Comparison of the Effects of the No Development Alternative to the Proposed Project 6.2.2.1 Air Quality As the No Development Alternative would not result in development of the site, the uses proposed with the Vision Plan would not be developed, thereby reducing the number of vehicle trips generated by uses on the property. Therefore, the No Development Alternative would result in an incremental reduction in air quality impacts as compared to the proposed project. In addition, grading of the site would not be required, thereby incrementally reducing air quality impacts associated with operation of heavy construction equipment as compared to the proposed project. Therefore, impacts on air quality under the No Development Alternative would be reduced as compared to the project. 6.2.2.2 Biological Resources As no additional development would occur with this alternative, disturbed areas on the site would remain in their present state as undeveloped land. This alternative would not propose to preserve onsite habitat through dedication of open space lots or within a dedicated easement; however, as no development would occur on the site, potential impacts to biological resources both on and off the site would not occur. Impacts to biological resources under the No Development Alternative would be avoided and therefore, reduced as compared to the proposed project. 6.2.2.3 Cultural Resources As no development would take place on the site under this alternative, potential impacts caused by disturbance to undiscovered cultural resources during grading or construction activities would not occur. Mitigation in the form of monitoring during such activities would therefore not be required. Therefore, potential impacts to cultural resources would be reduced with the No Development Alternative as compared to the proposed project. 6.2.2.4 Hazards and Hazardous Materials With this alternative, the site would remain in its present state, with the existing residential, commercial and light industrial uses remaining. This alternative would not result in additional housing or development on the site that could potentially expose persons to the risk of hazardous materials; however, existing conditions on the site would remain, wherein continued exposure of current residents to potentially hazardous materials identified during the Phase I ESA would continue. The potential for impacts resulting from hazards or hazardous materials under the No Development Alternative would be reduced as compared to the proposed project. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-5 August 2007 6.2.2.5 Noise As no improvements would occur on the site under the No Development Alternative, noise generated by temporary construction or grading activities would not occur. In addition, as no residential or hotel units would be constructed, and noise potentially generated by the operation of commercial uses, such as vehicular activity or delivery truck activity, would not occur. Therefore, noise impacts under this alternative would be reduced as compared to the proposed project. 6.2.2.6 Traffic and Circulation As compared to the proposed project, this alternative would not result in the construction of new residential units or commercial uses that would generate additional vehicular trips along area roadways. As stated above, no additional onsite or offsite roadway improvements would occur with this alternative. Therefore, impacts to traffic and circulation under the No Development Alternative would be reduced as compared to the proposed project. 6.2.2.7 Visual Aesthetics and Grading As compared to the proposed project, impacts to visual resources would be less than significant. No improvements would be made to enhance the scenic corridor, and as no development would occur and current uses on the site would remain, there would be no changes to the existing conditions onsite. Therefore, visual impacts would be reduced as compared to the proposed project. 6.2.2.8 Agricultural Resources As compared to the proposed project, impacts to agricultural resources would be less than significant. However, no conversion of former agricultural lands would occur. Therefore, impacts to agricultural resources would be reduced as compared to the proposed project. 6.2.2.9 Geology and Soils As compared to the proposed project, impacts to geology and soils resources would be less than significant. Therefore, impacts to geology and soils would be the same as compared to the proposed project. 6.2.2.10 Hydrology and Water Quality As with the proposed project, this alternative would not result in a significant impact on existing hydrology and water quality. The site would remain in its present state and no alteration of the site or other surface features would occur. However, no Best Management Practices (BMPs) would be implemented and no drainage improvements would occur. Surface water runoff would continue to leave the site untreated as it presently does, potentially resulting in impacts on hydrology and water quality. As a result, potential impacts on hydrology and water quality are considered to be greater under this alternative as compared to the proposed project. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-6 August 2007 6.2.2.11 Land Use As with the proposed project, land use impacts would be less than significant under this alternative. As no development would occur, and current uses on the site would remain, no revisions to the existing land use or zoning designations would be required. Therefore, land use and planning impacts would be reduced as compared to the proposed project. 6.2.2.12 Public Utilities and Service Systems As with the proposed project, this alternative would not result in significant impacts on utilities or public services. However, under the No Development Alternative, a lesser demand would be placed on existing or future utility systems and public services, as no development would occur on the site, and new residents and recreational commercial uses would not require public water or sewer or other services, such as law enforcement or fire service protection. Therefore, this alternative is considered to reduce impacts on utilities and service systems as compared to the proposed project. 6.2.3 Rationale for Preference of Proposed Project over the No Development Alternative The No Development Alternative would reduce or avoid all of the impacts associated with the proposed project, with the exception of hydrology and water quality, as BMPs to control drainage from the site would not be implemented. Therefore, the No Development Alternative is considered to be the Environmentally Superior Alternative. However, this alternative does not meet any of the project objectives, such as establishing the Southern Coastal Gateway to the City or providing a balanced and cohesive mix of local and tourist- serving commercial, medium- and high-density residential, mixed use, live/work, and open space land use opportunities that would be economically viable. In addition, this alternative would not establish a pattern of pedestrian and bicycle accessibility that would link with adjacent existing and planned pedestrian and bicycle facilities, or establish a mixed-use district that encourages local and tourist-oriented retail, commercial, recreational and residential uses. For these reasons, this alternative was rejected from further consideration. 6.3 Analysis of the No Project Alternative The analysis of the No Project Alternative is required under CEQA Guidelines. As set forth in CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(2), the No Project analysis shall discuss the existing conditions at the time the Notice of Preparation is published and “what would be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the project were not approved, based on current plans and consistent with available infrastructure and community services.” Section 15126.6(e)((3)(B) adds that, for a development project on identifiable property, the No Project alternative Alternative is the circumstance under which the project does not proceed, and “the discussion would compare the environmental effects of the property remaining in its existing state against environmental effects that would occur if the project is approved.” 6.3.1 No Project Alternative Description and Setting Under the No Project Alternative, the Vision Plan development area would be developed as allowed under the current General Plan land use and zoning designations without special permitting. As the proposed project does not propose a change to the underlying General ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-7 August 2007 Plan or zoning, and The proposed project would allow the same uses as those allowed under the existing General Plan designations and zoning, as well as the underlying Specific Plans (Poinsettia Properties Specific Plan and the Poinsettia Shores Master Plan), uses developed under the No Project Alternative would be similar to that proposed with the Vision Plan; however, the Vision Plan envisions uses that would actually result in a decreased intensity than what would that ultimately be allowed under the existing land use designations. The No Project Alternative would allow the property to be developed with travel/recreational commercial, medium-high residential uses, or as open space or parks. In the southern portion of the site, the existing General Plan designation would allow for travel and recreational commercial uses, such as hotels, restaurants, and commercial retail, to enhance the tourism and recreational opportunities in the City. In the northern portion of the site, residential housing could be provided at a density of 8-15 dwelling units per acre, or in combination with travel and recreational commercial uses. Areas that are currently designated as unplanned “Unplanned” may require further planning to determine appropriate uses. Similar to the proposed project, this alternative would ultimately contribute to offsite road improvements, as applicable, to mitigate for future potential traffic impacts caused by vehicular trips generated by onsite uses. This alternative could would also propose onsite trails and linkage to the regional trail system for recreational use. In addition, improvements would be made, consistent with the Zone 9 and 22 LFMPs, to provide public water and sewer service to the site. Development onsite would be consistent with the Scenic Corridor Guidelines and would contribute to improvements along Carlsbad Boulevard, but would not result in an overall themed design approach that would establish and enhance a major entryway into the City of Carlsbad. 6.3.2 Comparison of the Effects of the No Project Alternative to the Proposed Project 6.3.2.1 Air Quality The No Project Alternative could generate a greater number of vehicle trips as developed to its full potential under the existing land use and zoning designations, thereby incrementally increasing air quality impacts as compared to the proposed project. Although a greater intensity of uses is assumed under this alternative, gGrading requirements for building pads, as well as the time period heavy equipment would be in operation, would likely be similar to that of the proposed project. Therefore, due to additional traffic generation, impacts on air quality under the No Project Alternative would be increased as compared to the proposed project. 6.3.2.2 Biological Resources With the No Project Alternative, impacts on biological resources would be similar as compared to the proposed project. Although the use of the site is assumed to be more intense under the Under the No Project Alternative, the development footprint would remain largely the same as compared to the proposed project. In addition, grading required for the development of the 50-acre sitedevelopment area would be roughly the same; therefore, potential biological impacts to on sensitive resources resulting from noise generated by heavy equipment would be similar with this alternative. Other potential impacts, such as night ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-8 August 2007 lighting and threats from domesticated pets, would also be similar. Therefore, with the No Project Alternative, impacts on biological resources would be similar as compared to the proposed project. 6.3.2.3 Cultural Resources As similar development would take place on the site under this alternative, potential impacts caused by disturbance to undiscovered cultural resources during grading or construction activities would be similar to that of the proposed project. Mitigation in the form of monitoring during such activities would be required. Therefore, potential impacts to cultural resources would be similar with the No Project Alternative as compared to the proposed project. 6.3.2.4 Hazards and Hazardous Materials With this alternative, the site would be developed with uses allowed under the existing zoning and General Plan land use designations, which would include residential, commercial and tourism-oriented uses. The existing residential, commercial and light industrial uses would be allowed to remain. This alternative would result in additional housing or development on the site that could potentially expose persons to the risk of hazardous materials. Additional analysis of the site in the form of a Phase II ESA may be required to further assess potentially hazardous materials identified during the Phase I ESA. The potential for impacts resulting from hazards or hazardous materials under the No Project Alternative would be similar as compared to the proposed project. 6.3.2.5 Noise With this alternative, noise impacts would be increased as compared to the project, as a more intense development of the site could potentially occur. This alternative would generate construction noise similar to the proposed project because the same type of construction equipment would be used; however, long-term noise impacts are assumed to be incrementally greater than the proposed project due to increased intensity in use of the site (i.e. more delivery trucks, mechanical equipment, etc.). As a result, similar mitigation measures to those required for the proposed project would be required as part of this alternative to reduce potential noise impacts. Therefore, noise impacts would be greater with the No Project Alternative as compared to the proposed project. 6.3.2.6 Traffic and Circulation The No Project Alternative could result in increased traffic and circulation impacts as compared to the proposed project, depending on the ultimate buildout of the project area. Please see Table 5.6-3 in Section 5.6 of this EIR. Table 5.6-3 calculates the potential traffic generation that could occur under the existing General Plan designations. As the Vision Plan proposes a less intense development of the site than that which would be allowed under the existing General Plan designations, traffic generated by development of the site under the No Project Alternative would be greater. Access would occur from the same points as under the proposed project (Avenida Encinas and Ponto Road and Beach Way). Traffic generated under this alternative would utilize the same roadways as the proposed project; however, impacts to these roadways would be greater with the increase in vehicles trips generated by ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-9 August 2007 the more intense use of the site, thereby increasing significant impacts on these roadways over that resulting from the proposed project. Mitigation in the form of improvements to these roadways and intersections would be similar to that required of the proposed project. Therefore, the No Project Alternative would result in increased impacts to traffic and circulation as compared to the proposed project. 6.3.2.7 Visual Aesthetics and Grading Under this alternative, impacts on landform and visual aesthetics would be similar as compared to the proposed project, as the development area and potential uses would be similar. Development would be subject to the City’s Scenic Corridor Guidelines and the requirements of the Landscape Design Manual to reduce the potential for visual impacts to occur. Mitigation Design measures in the form of landscaping manufactured slopes and screening of retaining walls would be required. However, there would be no plan for a cohesive mix of landscaping and architecture or adopted design guidelines. Therefore, potential visual impacts would be greater under this alternative. 6.3.2.8 Agricultural Resources As comparedSimilar to the proposed project, impacts to agricultural resources would be less than significant. Therefore, impacts to agricultural resources would be the same as compared to the project. 6.3.2.9 Geology and Soils Similar to the proposed project, no significant impacts relating to geologic resources would occur under this alternative. Although additional grading of onsite soils may be required due to a potential increase in the number of units or square footage of development, grading would not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil, or increase exposure of residents to the risk of landslides or earthquakes. As such, potential impacts from geological resources under this alternative would be similar to that of the proposed project. 6.3.2.10 Hydrology and Water Quality As with the proposed project, this alternative would not result in a significant impact on hydrology or water quality. The amount of impervious surfaces on the site would be similar with the No Project Alternative as compared to the project in terms of driveways and roadways, and the development footprint is assumed to also be similar. Required stormwater facilities would be adjusted accordingly. Similar design measures and BMPs required for the proposed project would be required for this alternative to minimize potential water quality impacts. Therefore, impacts to water quality and hydrology would be similar as compared to the proposed project. 6.3.2.11 Land Use and Planning As with the proposed project, no significant land use impacts would occur with this alternative. The No Project Alternative would be consistent with applicable land use plans and zoning, as development of the site would occur under the current land use and zoning designations. Therefore, land use impacts under this alternative would be similar to the proposed project and no mitigation would be required. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-10 August 2007 6.3.2.12 Public Utilities and Public Service Systems As with the proposed project, this alternative would not result in significant impacts on utilities or public services, as all development would be consistent with the requirements of the LFMPs for Zones 9 and 22. However, under the No Project Alternative, it is assumed that a greater demand would be placed on existing or future utility systems and public services, as a greater number of residential units or greater intensity of commercial uses could occur, thereby incrementally increasing the demand for public water and sewer and other services, such as law enforcement and fire service protection, and educational services at local schools. Therefore, this alternative would increase impacts on public utilities and service systems as compared to the proposed project. 6.3.3 Rationale for Preference of the Proposed Project over the No Project Alternative Like the proposed project, this alternative would be consistent with all land use plans and zoning, and would reflect the type of development originally intended for the site under the General Plan. However, with the No Project Alternative, impacts to traffic and circulation, noise, utilities and public service systems, as well as air quality, would be greater than the proposed project, due to the potential increase in the number of proposed residential units or square footage of development. This alternative would meet the objective of conforming with the General Plan, Amended Zone 9 and 22 Local Facilities Management Plans (LFMP), applicable City ordinances, regulations and policies. This alternative would also meet the objective of establishing a mixed-use district that encourages local and tourist-oriented retail, commercial, recreational and residential uses, as such uses would be allowed under the existing land use and zoning designations. This alternative would also be required to assure that public facilities and services meet the requirements of the Growth Management Plan. However, as the Vision Plan would not be implemented with this alternative, this alternative would not achieve the project objectives of establishing the Southern Coastal Gateway to the City or providing site design guidelines that require street scenes and site plans to respect pedestrian scale and express a cohesive and high-quality architectural theme. In addition, this alternative would not provide for expanded and enhanced beach access, or establish a mixed- use district that encourages local and tourist-oriented retail, commercial, recreational and residential uses. This alternative would also not achieve the objective of requiring landowners within the project development area to utilize landscape architecture that celebrates the historic past and horticultural heritage of the City, thereby reinforcing an overall theme. Expanded and enhanced beach access would also not be provided. For these reasons, this alternative was rejected from further consideration. 6.4 Analysis of the Increased Residential Use Alternative 6.4.1 Increased Residential Use Alternative Description and Setting The Increased Residential Land Use Alternative assumes that the majority of the project site would be developed with townhomes, at a density of 19 du/acre; refer to Figure 6-2. At this density, an estimated 352 townhomes could be constructed. In addition, the Resort Hotel and Hotel/Commercial uses would also be developed, similar to the proposed project. No Mixed- Use or Live-Work/Mixed-Use uses would be developed, thereby minimizing commercial ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-11 August 2007 retail or tourism-oriented uses. This alternative would not result in improvements associated with the State Beach, nor include enhancements to the major entryway into the City at Carlsbad Boulevard and Batiquitos Lagoon. 6.4.2 Comparison of the Effects of the Increased Residential Use Alternative to the Proposed Project 6.4.2.1 Air Quality The Increased Residential Use Alternative would generate fewer vehicle trips than the proposed project as the result of the elimination of the mixed-use commercial and Village Hotel uses, and would therefore result in an incremental decrease in air quality impacts resulting from vehicle emissions. Therefore, impacts to air quality under this alternative would be reduced as compared to the proposed project. 6.4.2.2 Biological Resources With this alternative, impacts on biological resources would be similar as compared to the proposed project. The development footprint would remain largely the same, as the majority of the site would be assumed to be impacted. In addition, grading required for the proposed uses and project roadways would be roughly the same; therefore, potential biological impacts to sensitive resources resulting from noise generated by heavy equipment during grading and construction activities would be similar with this alternative. Other potential impacts, such as night lighting and threats from domesticated pets, would also be similar. Therefore, with the Increased Residential Use Alternative, impacts on biological resources would be similar as compared to the proposed project 6.4.2.3 Cultural Resources Potential impacts caused by disturbance to undiscovered cultural resources during grading or construction activities would be similar to that of the proposed project. Mitigation in the form of monitoring during grading activities would therefore be required. Therefore, potential impacts to cultural resources would be similar as compared to the Increased Residential Alternative as compared to the proposed project. 6.4.2.4 Hazards and Hazardous Materials Similar to the proposed project, the existing residential and commercial uses would remain onsite with this alternative. As such, future residents and visitors to the site would be exposed to potentially hazardous conditions such as contaminated soils or chemicals utilized on the site. As such, additional site assessment would be required under this alternative to determine the extent of potential impacts due to the exposure of humans to such conditions. Therefore, impacts related to hazards and hazardous conditions would be similar to the proposed project under this alternative. 6.4.2.5 Noise With this alternative, potential noise impacts would be reduced as compared to the proposed project. By removing the mixed-use and Village Hotel uses, potential noise impacts from the operation of electrical and mechanical equipment (i.e., ventilation and air conditioning units) ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-12 August 2007 would be reduced. As the majority of the site would be developed under this alternative, noise impacts resulting from construction and operation of construction equipment would be largely the same as that of the proposed project. However, as this alternative would place a large number of residential units adjacent to Carlsbad Boulevard, additional analysis would be required to determine potential noise impacts. Similar mitigation measures would be required to demonstrate that noise levels are reduced to a less than significant level. Therefore, noise impacts under this alternative would be similar to the proposed project. 6.4.2.6 Traffic and Circulation The Increased Residential Use Alternative would generate fewer vehicle trips than the proposed project, due to the proposed residential uses versus the mixed-use or resort- commercial uses, resulting in a decrease in traffic as compared to the project. As the same circulation system is proposed, roadway segments and intersections would likely operate at an improved level of service under this alternative with the reduction in ADT generated. Therefore, impacts to traffic would be reduced with this alternative. 6.4.2.7 Visual Aesthetics and Grading Although impacts to visual aesthetics and grading are not considered to be significant with the proposed project, the Increased Residential Use Alternative would increase such impacts as compared to the proposed project. The construction of residential uses along the coastal bluffs would be inconsistent with the goals of the Local Coastal Program. The Coastal Commission prefers the construction of mixed-use and commercial uses along the coastline, as such uses typically allow for better preservation of existing views across a site. In addition, typical residential development involves the defining of individual lot boundaries with fences or thick landscaping, such as shrubs, to obscure views into one’s yard. As a result, views through residential areas are generally limited, as compared to a hotel site, where there may be one large structure, combined with several smaller, independent support structures, with intervening parking as well as public access to the space for views. This pattern of development provides a more open visual environment, allowing views or line-of- sight across the property to be less impacted or restricted as compared to a residential area. Onsite development would be subject to the Scenic Corridor Guidelines, similar to the proposed project. With this alternative, the potential for impacts to visual resources would be increased as compared to the proposed project. 6.4.2.8 Agricultural Resources As compared to the proposed project, impacts to agricultural resources would be less than significant. Therefore, impacts to agricultural resources would be the same as compared to the project. 6.4.2.9 Geology and Soils Similar to the proposed project, no significant impacts relating to geologic resources would occur under this alternative. Grading for the proposed uses would not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil, or increase exposure of residents or visitors to the risk of landslides or earthquakes. As such, potential impacts from geological resources under this alternative would be similar to that of the proposed project. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-13 August 2007 6.4.2.10 Hydrology and Water Quality As discussed in Section 5.10, the proposed project would not result in a significant impact on hydrology and water quality. Under this alternative, the area of impervious surfaces would be similar to the proposed project. Required storm water facilities would be adjusted accordingly and would be consistent with the requirements of the Zones 9 and 22 LFMPs. Similar BMPs required for the proposed project would be required under this alternative to ensure that impacts are less than significant, similar to the proposed project. 6.4.2.11 Land Use and Planning This alternative would include a General Plan Amendment to change the existing General Plan designation to an Area of Special Consideration, similar to the proposed project. This alternative would conflict with the LCP goals of providing visitor serving commercial uses within the coastal zone. Therefore, no impacts related to land use and planning would be greater than the proposed project. 6.4.2.12 Public Utilities and Service Systems As with the proposed project, this alternative would not result in significant impacts to utilities or service systems. This alternative would implement public utilities consistent with that anticipated in the LFMPs for Zones 9 and 22. While this alternative would result in an increased demand for City administrative, library, parks, fire and school facilities, the project would not in itself necessitate the construction or alteration of these facilities. Therefore, impacts to public utilities and services under this alternative would increase slightly as compared to the proposed project. 6.4.3 Rationale for Preference of Proposed Project over the Increased Residential Use Alternative This alternative was rejected because it fails to achieve the majority of the project objectives. As the majority of the project site would be developed with residential uses under this alternative, the objective of establishing a mixed-use district that encourages local and tourist-oriented retail, commercial, recreational and residential uses or accommodating a mix of local and tourist-serving commercial, medium-and high-density residential, mixed use, live/work, and open space land use opportunities that are economically viable would not be achieved. This alternative would also not provide expanded and enhanced beach access, or provide site design guidelines that require street scenes and site plans to respect pedestrian scale and express a cohesive and high-quality architectural theme. In addition, this alternative would not establish the Southern Coastal Gateway to the City, as no improvements would be made to signify such an entry point. As this alternative would not meet these and other objectives, this alternative is was rejected. 6.5 Analysis of the Increased Residential Use / Open Space Alternative 6.5.1 Increased Residential Use / Open Space Alternative Description and Setting The Increased Residential Use / Open Space Alternative would result in a large portion of the property being developed with townhomes at a density of 19 du/acre; refer to Figure 6-3. This would allow approximately 316 dwelling units. In addition, a Mixed-Use Center would ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-14 August 2007 be developed in the same location as with the proposed project, and would allow for a variety of commercial retail uses, restaurants, and specialty stores to support the residential and hotel and residential uses. The Hotel/Commercial use would be proposed in the northern portion of the property, although at a smaller scale than compared to that of the proposed project. In addition, this alternative proposes an open space/community park in the southern portion of the property, rather than the Beachfront Resort. The park would be open to the public and would offer opportunities for active and passive recreation, such as walking trails and picnic tables. Development of the Ponto Area would not occur under the Vision Plan with this alternative. 6.5.2 Comparison of the Effects of the Increased Residential Use / Open Space Alternative to the Proposed Project 6.5.2.1 Air Quality This alternative would reduce the number of vehicle trips generated to and from the property, as travel/recreation commercial uses would be reduced and a greater number of residential units would be constructed. As a result, air quality impacts would be incrementally reduced as compared to the proposed project. In addition, pollutants generated by operation of construction equipment would be roughly the same as compared to the proposed project, as the development area is assumed to be similar. 6.5.2.2 Biological Resources With this alternative, impacts to biological resources would be reduced as compared to the proposed project. Approximately 12 acres would remain as open space/community park for public use. As the majority of the area that would be used for the park is disturbed habitat or non-native vegetation, impacts would be similar to that of the proposed project; however, an area of Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub (disturbed) occurs in the southwestern portion of the site, which could be avoided by design of the open space/park use. Impacts to biological resources would therefore be reduced with this alternative as compared to the proposed project. 6.5.2.3 Cultural Resources Potential impacts caused by disturbance to undiscovered cultural resources during grading or construction activities would be similar to that of the proposed project, with the exception of the area proposed as open space/community park. Grading for minor improvements for the park may be required; however, the majority of the ground surface would not be disturbed, thereby reducing potential impacts to undiscovered cultural resources. Mitigation in the form of monitoring during grading activities would be required. Therefore, potential impacts to cultural resources would be reduced as compared to the proposed project. 6.5.2.4 Hazards and Hazardous Materials Similar to the proposed project, the existing residential and commercial uses would remain onsite with this alternative. As such, future residents and visitors to the site would be exposed to potentially hazardous conditions such as contaminated soils or chemicals utilized on the site. As such, additional site assessment would be required under this alternative to determine the extent of potential impacts due to the exposure of humans to such conditions. Therefore, ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-15 August 2007 impacts related to hazards and hazardous conditions would be similar to the proposed project under this alternative. 6.5.2.5 Noise Noise impacts would be reduced with this alternative, with the reduction in the proposed resort-commercial and mixed-use land uses, by reducing mechanical equipment needs and commercial and visitor traffic. In addition, the removal of the Beachfront Resort would also reduce traffic noise and noise from daily operations. However, as residential units are proposed adjacent to Carlsbad Boulevard, additional acoustical site analysis would be required as mitigation to determine potential noise impacts on a project-specific basis. Therefore, noise impacts would be reduced with this alternative as compared to the proposed project. 6.5.2.6 Traffic and Circulation This alternative would reduce the number of vehicle trips generated by reducing the intensity of uses and by proposing a greater number of residential units, while reducing commercial and tourism-related activities. The density of townhomes or single-family units would be developed at a similar density as that under the proposed project; however, a larger area would be reserved for such townhome uses under this alternative. As this alternative would keep the onsite circulation system proposed with the project, and would contribute ADT along similar offsite roadways, mitigation measures to reduce impacts would be similar to that of the proposed project, but at a reduced scale, as this alternative would result in fewer trips generated. Traffic impacts would therefore be reduced with this alternative as compared to the project. 6.5.2.7 Visual Aesthetics and Grading Similar to the proposed project, no significant impacts related to visual aesthetics or grading would result from this alternative. Development would be consistent with City grading standards, the Landscape Design Manual, zoning regulations, and the Scenic Corridor Guidelines. The construction of residential uses along the coastal bluffs would be inconsistent with the goals of the Local Coastal Program. The Coastal Commission prefers the construction of mixed-use and commercial uses along to coastline, as such uses typically allow for better preservation of existing views across a site. In addition, typical residential development involves defining individual lot boundaries with fences or thick landscaping, such as shrubs, to obscure views into one’s yard. As a result, views through residential areas are generally limited, as compared to a hotel site, where there may be one large structure, combined with several smaller, independent support structures, with intervening parking. The southern portion of the site would not be developed with the Beachfront Hotel and would instead remain as open space/community park. Impacts to landform alteration and visual resources would therefore be similar with this alternative as compared to the proposed project. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-16 August 2007 6.5.2.8 Agricultural Resources Similar to the proposed project, impacts to agricultural resources would be less than significant. Therefore, impacts to agricultural resources would be the same as compared to the proposed project. 6.5.2.9 Geology and Soils Similar to the proposed project, no significant impacts relating to geologic resources would occur under this alternative. Grading for the proposed uses would not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil, or increase exposure of residents to the risk of landslides or earthquakes. As such, potential impacts from geological resources under this alternative would be similar to that of the proposed project. 6.5.2.10 Hydrology and Water Quality As discussed in Section 5.10, the proposed project would not result in a significant impact on hydrology and water quality. Improvement of the roadway for onsite circulation would require limited grading as compared to the roadways and building pads proposed with the project, thereby reducing the acreage of impervious surfaces. BMPs would be required with this alternative with the onsite roadway. Impacts to hydrology and water quality would be reduced with this alternative as compared to the proposed project. 6.5.2.11 Land Use and Planning This alternative would include a General Plan Amendment to change the existing General Plan designation to Area of Special Consideration, similar to the proposed project. This alternative would conflict with the LCP goals of providing visitor-serving commercial uses in the coastal zone. Therefore, impacts related to land use and planning would be greater than the proposed project. 6.5.2.12 Utilities and Service Systems Similar to the proposed project, this alternative would not result in a significant impact to utilities or service systems; however, this alternative would result in an increase in demand on public services and facilities, due to the increased residential uses as compared to the proposed project. Therefore, this alternative would increase impacts to utilities and public service systems as compared to the proposed project. 6.5.3 Rationale for Preference of Proposed Project over the Increased Residential Use/ Open Space Alternative This alternative would reduce impacts to traffic, noise and air quality, as well as impacts to biological resources as compared to the proposed project, due to the removal of the Resort hotel use and reduction of the Mixed-Use area. In addition, this alternative would achieve the project objectives of assuring that public facilities and services meet the requirements of the Growth Management Plan and that the project conforms with the General Plan, Amended Zone 9 and 22 Local Facilities Management Plans (LFMP), applicable City ordinances, regulations and policies. As Carlsbad Boulevard would be re-aligned, expanded and enhanced beach access would be provided. However, as a planthe Vision Plan would not be developed to guide development within the project area, this alternative would not achieve ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-17 August 2007 the goals of establishing the Southern Coastal Gateway to the City or providing site design guidelines that require street scenes and site plans to respect pedestrian scale and express a cohesive and high-quality architectural theme. This alternative would also conflict with the stated goals of the LCP to provide visitor-serving commercial uses in the coastal zone. In addition, thethis alternative would not provide landscape architecture that celebrates the historic past and horticultural heritage of the City, as no design guidelines would be proposed. As this alternative would not meet these and other objectives, this alternative was rejected. 6.6 Analysis of the Increased Townhomes / Single-Family Detached Alternative 6.6.1 Increased Townhomes / Single-Family Detached Alternative Description and Setting The Increased Townhomes / Single-Family Detached Alternative assumes that the project site would be largely developed with townhomes and single-family development at a density of 10 du/acre; refer to Figure 6-4. This would allow for approximately 172 dwelling units within the northern portion of the site. In addition, the Hotel/Commercial uses at the northern end of the property would be developed. A Mixed-Use Center would be developed in the central portion of the site, just north of Avenida Encinas, similar to the proposed project, but at a smaller scale. The Resort Hotel Use would be developed in the southern portion of the site, also similar to the proposed project. This alternative assumes the re-alignment of Carlsbad Boulevard with development of a linear park along the west side of the roadway. Onsite road patterns would be the same as the proposed project. No improvements to enhance the State Beach would be proposed with this alternative. 6.6.2 Comparison of the Effects of the Increased Townhomes / Single-Family Detached Alternative to the Proposed Project 6.6.2.1 Air Quality This alternative would reduce the number of vehicle trips generated to and from the property, as a greater number of residential units would be constructed, and commercial and resort- commercial uses would be reduced as compared to the proposed project. As a result, air quality impacts would be incrementally reduced; however, mobile emissions would still remain above the significance threshold level for criteria pollutants, although impacts would be less than that of the proposed project. Pollutants generated during the operation of construction equipment would be similar to that resulting from the proposed project, as the development footprint would be similar with this alternative. 6.6.2.2 Biological Resources With this alternative, the development footprint would be largely the same as the proposed project, although the mixture of uses would differ. Similar mitigation measures would therefore be required to reduce impacts to less than significant. Impacts to biological resources would be similar with this alternative as compared to the proposed project. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-18 August 2007 6.6.2.3 Cultural Resources This alternative would result in a similar impact to cultural resources as the proposed project. The development footprint would be similar under this alternative, and grading activities would represent the potential for disturbance to undiscovered cultural resources. Therefore, the same resources would potentially be impacted with this alternative and similar mitigation measures in the form of monitoring would be required to reduce impacts to less than significant. 6.6.2.4 Hazards and Hazardous Materials Implementation of this alternative would result in a similar impact related to hazards and hazardous materials as with the proposed project. Development on the property would expose people to potentially hazardous materials, such as contaminated soils, asbestos and/or lead paint, and other hazardous chemicals, as identified during the initial site assessment. Such materials would need to be properly disposed of and remediated as applicable before development could occur on the site with this alternative. Impacts are similar under this alternative compared to the proposed project. Implementation of mitigation measures similar to that of the proposed project would be required. 6.6.2.5 Noise Noise impacts would be reduced with this alternative, with the reduction in the proposed resort-commercial and mixed-use land uses by reducing mechanical equipment needs and commercial and visitor traffic. However, as residential units are proposed adjacent to Carlsbad Boulevard, additional acoustical site analysis would be required as mitigation to determine potential noise impacts on a project-specific basis. Therefore, noise impacts would be reduced with this alternative as compared to the proposed project. 6.6.2.6 Traffic and Circulation This alternative would reduce vehicle trips generated by reducing the intensity of uses and by proposing a greater number of residential units, while reducing commercial and tourism- related activities. The density of townhomes or single-family units would be developed at a density of 10 du/acre rather than 19 du/acre, as compared to the proposed project. As this alternative would keep the onsite circulation system proposed with the project, and would contribute ADT along similar offsite roadways, mitigation measures to reduce impacts would be similar to that of the proposed project, but at a reduced scale, as this alternative would result in fewer trips generated. Traffic impacts would therefore be reduced with this alternative as compared to the project. 6.6.2.7 Agricultural Resources This alternative would result in a similar, non-significant impact to agricultural resources as compared to the proposed project. The conversion of agricultural land affected by the LCP Mello II would still require payment of fees with this alternative. 6.6.2.8 Geology and Soils As with the proposed project, no significant impacts as the result of geologic conditions onsite would occur with this alternative. Construction design measures to address any ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-19 August 2007 geologic concerns onsite, such as landslides or soil erosion would be applied on a project- specific basis. Therefore, potential impacts relating to geologic resources would be similar as compared to the proposed project. 6.6.2.9 Hydrology and Water Quality Drainage requirements would be similar to that of the proposed project, and would include relocation of the existing onsite storm drain. Best management practices would be implemented to reduce potential water quality impacts to less than significant, similar to those identified for the project. With implementation of BMPs, impacts on water quality would be similar with this alternative as compared to the proposed project. 6.6.2.10 Land Use and Planning This alternative assumes that a General Plan Amendment would be approved and that the property would be developed under the General Plan designations that would permit a mix of multi-family or single-family residential development. Existing zoning designations would require changes to permit additional residential uses. As no significant impacts on land use and planning were identified with the proposed project, land use and planning impacts would be similar with this alternative as compared to the proposed project. 6.6.2.11 Utilities and Service Systems As stated in Section 3.6, the proposed project would not result in a significant impact to utilities or service systems; however, this alternative would have an increased demand on public utilities and service systems as compared to the proposed project, as additional residential units would be constructed that would require public water and sewer, as well as public services, such as schools and parks. This alternative also proposes development of the linear park for public recreational use, but park-in-lieu-of fees would be paid as applicable. This alternative would result in an increase demand on school services, but development would not cause a significant impact on such facilities or cause a demand for the construction of new school facilities. Therefore, this alternative would reduce impacts to utilities and public service systems as compared to the proposed project. 6.6.2.12 Visual Aesthetics and Grading Similar to the proposed project, no significant impacts related to visual aesthetics or grading would result from this alternative. Development would be consistent with City grading standards, the Landscape Design Manual, zoning regulations, and the Scenic Corridor Guidelines. The construction of residential uses along the coastal bluffs would be inconsistent with the goals of the Local Coastal Program. The Coastal Commission prefers the construction of mixed-use and commercial uses along to coastline, as such uses typically allow for better preservation of existing views across a site. In addition, typical residential development involves defining individual lot boundaries with fences or thick landscaping, such as shrubs, to obscure views into one’s yard. As a result, views through residential areas are generally limited, as compared to a hotel site, where there may be one large structure, combined with several smaller, independent support structures, with intervening parking. As the development footprint would be similar to that of the proposed project, required grading for this alternative is assumed to be similar. Impacts to landform alteration and visual ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-20 August 2007 resources would therefore be similar with this alternative as compared to the proposed project. 6.6.3 Rationale for Preference of Proposed Project over the Increased Townhomes / Single-Family Detached Alternative The Increased Townhomes / Single-Family Detached Alternative would reduce potential significant impacts to traffic and circulation, as well as incrementally decrease air quality impacts, due to a decrease in the number of trips generated. Noise impacts would also be reduced, due to the reduction of commercial uses. The objectives of assuring that public facilities and services meet the requirements of the Growth Management Plan and conformance with the General Plan, Amended Zone 9 and 22 Local Facilities Management Plans (LFMP), applicable City ordinances, regulations and policies, would be achieved. As individual ownerships would be developed without an overall plan for guidance, this alternative would not establish a mixed-use district that encourages local and tourist-oriented retail, commercial, recreational and residential uses. This alternative would allow for the establishment of a mixed-use district that encourages local and tourist-oriented retail, commercial, and recreational land uses, but at a reduced scale as compared to the proposed project. Improvements to Carlsbad Boulevard would provide additional parking, thereby enhancing access to the State Beach. This alternative does not meet the project objectives of establishing a Southern Coastal Gateway to the City, or of accommodating a balanced and cohesive mix of local and tourist- serving commercial, medium- and high-density residential, mixed use, live/work, and open space land use opportunities. that are economically viable and support the implementation of these goals. This alternative would conflict with the stated goals of the LCP to provide visitor-serving commercial uses in the coastal zone. In addition, no cohesive architectural theme would be achieved for development of the site, as the site would not be developed under the Vision Plan and site guidelines would therefore not be proposed. Although this alternative does reduce some adverse impacts associated with the proposed project, it does not result in a substantial reduction in impacts that would make it preferable over another project alternative. As this alternative would not meet these and other objectives, this alternative was rejected. 6.7 Analysis of the Increased Townhomes / Visitor Use Alternative 6.7.1 Description and Setting The Increased Townhomes / Visitor Use Alternative assumes that the project site would be largely developed with a mixture of commercial retail and hotel uses, similar to the proposed project, but with additional residential dwelling units provided; refer to Figure 6-5. In the southern portion of the site, the Resort Hotel use would be developed, similar to the proposed project. An increased number of townhomes would be developed at a density of 19 du/acre as compared to the proposed project, with such uses replacing the Mixed-Use Center. Approximately 281 dwelling units could be developed under this alternative. This alternative would allow for a mixture of commercial uses including retail shops and restaurants. In addition, the Hotel/Commercial use at the northern portion of the site would be developed at a reduced scale, with construction of a neighborhood park at the northernmost portion of the site to provide recreational opportunities and to buffer the hotel use from the adjacent ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-21 August 2007 residential neighborhoods. This alternative assumes the re-alignment of Carlsbad Boulevard with development of a linear park along the west side of the roadway. Onsite road patterns would be the same as the proposed project. No improvements to enhance the State Beach would be proposed with this alternative. 6.7.2 Comparison of the Effects of the Increased Townhomes / Visitor Use Alternative to the Proposed Project 6.7.2.1 Air Quality This alternative would reduce the number of vehicle trips generated to and from the property, as a greater number of residential units would be constructed, and commercial and resort- commercial uses would be reduced as compared to the proposed project. As a result, air quality impacts would be incrementally reduced; however, mobile emissions would still remain above the significance threshold level for criteria pollutants, although impacts would be less than that of the proposed project. Pollutants generated during the operation of construction equipment would be similar to that compared to that resulting from the proposed project, as the development footprint would be similar with this alternative. 6.7.2.2 Biological Resources With this alternative, the development footprint would be largely the same as the proposed project, although the mixture of uses would differ. Similar mitigation measures would therefore be required to reduce impacts to less than significant. Impacts to biological resources would therefore be similar with this alternative as compared to the proposed project. 6.7.2.3 Cultural Resources This alternative would result in a similar impact to cultural resources as the proposed project. The development footprint and limits of grading would be similar under this alternative, and grading activities would represent the potential for disturbance to undiscovered cultural resources. Therefore, cultural resources not previously identified could potentially be impacted with this alternative, and similar mitigation measures in the form of monitoring would be required to reduce impacts to less than significant. 6.7.2.4 Hazards and Hazardous Materials Implementation of this alternative would result in a similar impact related to hazards and hazardous materials as with the proposed project. Hazardous materials identified onsite during preparation of the Phase I ESA would require further analysis and determination of potentially significant impacts to human health. Removal of such hazardous materials could be required through implementation of mitigation measures similar to that of the proposed project. 6.7.2.5 Noise Noise impacts would be reduced with this alternative, as an increase in residential units would occur, the Village Hotel would be replaced by residential uses, and the live-work neighborhood would not be developed, thereby distancing residential uses from commercial ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-22 August 2007 retail uses. In addition, a reduction in noise impacts would also occur, as the need for mechanical equipment and the number of vehicle trips generated would also be reduced. However, townhomes would be constructed adjacent to Carlsbad Boulevard, thereby potentially exposing onsite residents to noise impacts from traffic along the roadway. Additional acoustical site analysis would be required as mitigation to determine potential noise impacts on a project-specific basis. Therefore, noise impacts would be reduced with this alternative as compared to the proposed project. 6.7.2.6 Traffic and Circulation This alternative would result in a slight reduction in the number of vehicle trips generated per day, as the result of a removal of the Village Hotel and Mixed-Use Center. In addition, the Hotel/Commercial area would be reduced in size, to allow for provision of the neighborhood park. Onsite circulation would be similar to that proposed with the project, and ADT generated would result in impacts to similar offsite roadways. Mitigation measures to reduce impacts would therefore be similar to that of the proposed project. Traffic impacts would therefore be reduced with this alternative as compared to the project. 6.7.2.7 Agricultural Resources This alternative would result in a similar, non-significant impact to agricultural resources as compared to the proposed project. The conversion of agricultural land affected by the LCP Mello II district would require payment of fees with this alternative to reduce potential impacts. 6.7.2.8 Geology and Soils No significant impacts as the result of geologic conditions onsite would occur with this alternative. Development of the site would not increase the risk of exposure to any geologic conditions onsite, such as landslides or soil erosion, and design measures would be implemented on a project-specific basis. Therefore, potential impacts relating to geologic resources would be similar as compared to the proposed project. 6.7.2.9 Hydrology and Water Quality This alternative would result in similar drainage requirements as compared to the proposed project, as it is assumed that the amount of impervious surfaces would be roughly the same. Drainage improvements would be provided consistent with the LFMPs for Zones 9 and 22 as applicable. The existing onsite storm drain would be relocated with this alternative. BMPs similar to those proposed for the project would be implemented to reduce potential water quality impacts to less than significant. With implementation of the BMPs, impacts on water quality would be similar with this alternative as compared to the proposed project. 6.7.2.10 Land Use and Planning Similar to the proposed project, this alternative would involve development of the site under an approved GPA that would allow the property to be developed under a General Plan designation of an Area of Special Consideration for commercial/hotel components of the plan. The removal of the mixed-use component of the plan would eliminate uses that would appeal to other city residents or visitors not living or staying within the Vision Plan area. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-23 August 2007 Removal of the mixed-use area would result in reduced coastal access because fewer services for people from outside the Vision Plan area would be available. As with the proposed project, land use and planning impacts would be less than significant. As no significant impacts on land use and planning were identified with the proposed project, land use and planning impacts would be similar with this alternative as compared to the proposed project. 6.7.2.11 Utilities and Service Systems This alternative would result in an increased demand on public utilities and service systems as compared to the proposed project, due to the increase in housing and permanent population. Residents living in the proposed residential units would place a demand on public sewer and water service, similar to conditions with the proposed project. However, as a greater number of permanent residents would reside on the site, an increased demand for facilities such as schools, fire protection, parks, libraries and City administration facilities would be created. This increased demand would not adversely impact the ability of the City to provide such services, as demonstration of consistency with the Zones 9 and 22 LFMPs for adequate provision of these services would be required prior to development. This alternative also proposes development of the linear park for public recreational use, as well as a small neighborhood park to provide for additional parkland and recreational facilities. The payment of school and park in-lieu-of fees would be required as applicable to reduce potential impacts on public service systems. Overall, this alternative would increase impacts to utilities and public service systems as compared to the proposed project. 6.7.2.12 Visual Aesthetics and Grading Similar to the proposed project, no significant impacts related to visual aesthetics or grading would result from this alternative. All development would occur consistent with City grading standards, the Landscape Design Manual, zoning regulations for height and setbacks, and the City’s Scenic Corridor Guidelines to reduce potential visual impacts and maintain visual resources. As the development footprint is assumed to be similar with this alternative as compared to that required for development of the proposed project, required grading for this alternative is also assumed to be similar. Impacts to landform alteration and visual resources would therefore be similar with this alternative as compared to the proposed project. 6.7.3 Rationale for Preference of Proposed Project over the Increased Townhomes / Visitor Use Alternative The Increased Townhomes / Visitor Use Alternative would reduce potential significant impacts to traffic and circulation, as well as resultant noise and air quality impacts, as compared to the proposed project. This alternative would meet the objectives of assuring that the provision of public facilities and services would meet the requirements of the Growth Management Plan, prior to development. In addition, conformance with the General Plan, Amended Zone 9 and 22 Local Facilities Management Plans (LFMP), applicable City ordinances, regulations and policies would also be achieved with this alternative. Improvements to Carlsbad Boulevard would also allow for additional parking for the State Beach, providing improved access. However, as no overall plan would be provided to guide development within the area without the Vision Plan, and individual ownerships would be developed as desired, a cohesive mix of ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-24 August 2007 local and tourist-serving commercial, medium- and high-density residential, mixed use, live/work, and open space land use opportunities that are economically viable would not be achieved. In addition, this alternative would not provide a cohesive architectural theme for development of the site. , as the Vision Plan would not be implemented. Similarly, requirements for landscape architecture that would celebrate the historic past and horticultural heritage of the City would not be achievedrequired without the Vision Plan. Although improvements would be made consistent with the Scenic Corridor Guidelines, this alternative does not specifically meet the project objective of establishing a Southern Coastal Gateway to the City. The eliminator of the mixed-use component of the plan would remove uses that would appeal to other visitors and residents in the City of Carlsbad. The removal of the mixed-use area would mean fewer services would be available for city residents or visitors from outside the Vision Plan area. As this alternative would not meet these and other objectives, this alternative was rejected. 6.8 Analysis of the Increased Recreational Amenities/Green Space Alternative 6.8.1 Description and Setting The Increased Recreational Amenities/Green Space Alternative assumes that the project site would be developed with the same mixture of uses as proposed with the Vision Plan; however, this alternative would decrease the size of the Resort Hotel facilities at the southern end of the Vision Plan area and provide an open area along the bluff that would be available for public recreational use; refer to Figure 6-6. In addition, the area would provide an added buffer between the hotel facilities and the Batiquitos Lagoon. The open area would complement the multi-use trail envisioned in the Vision Plan, and would be located within the setback of the development envelope for the Resort Hotel. The open area would be maintained by the property owner. It is envisioned that the open area would be bermed to provide varied topography, and landscaped with trees for shade and grassy areas for passive or active recreation. Amenities such as benches or picnic tables for meeting or relaxing could be provided within the space and may offer views to the lagoon and the Pacific Ocean. Other amenities such as an open grassy area for weddings, or a gazebo for ceremonies or viewing opportunities, could also be provided. Signage could also be installed within the open area to identify vegetation or flower types, or perhaps animal or avian species that would typically occupy the lagoon, to provide an educational opportunity. With the above-described exceptions, future development of the Ponto Area would occur as envisioned by the Vision Plan. This alternative assumes the re-alignment of Carlsbad Boulevard with development of a linear park along the west side of the roadway, and construction of a pedestrian underpass to the State Beach. Onsite road patterns would be the same as the proposed project. In addition, improvements to enhance Carlsbad Boulevard as the southern gateway into the City are also envisioned with this alternative. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-25 August 2007 6.8.2 Comparison of the Effects of the Increased Recreational Amenities/Green Space Alternative to the Proposed Project 6.8.2.1 Air Quality This alternative would slightly reduce the number of vehicle trips generated to and from the property as compared to the proposed project, as the resort use would be reduced in square footage. As a result, air quality impacts would be incrementally reduced; however, mobile emissions would still remain above the significance threshold level for criteria pollutants, although impacts would be less than that of the proposed project. Pollutants generated during the operation of construction equipment would be similar to that resulting from the proposed project, as the development footprint would be similar with this alternative. 6.8.2.2 Biological Resources With this alternative, the development footprint would be largely the same as that resulting with the proposed project and therefore, similar mitigation measures would be required to reduce potential impacts to less than significant. Impacts to biological resources would therefore be similar with this alternative as compared to the proposed project. 6.8.2.3 Cultural Resources This alternative would result in similar impacts to cultural resources as the proposed project. The development footprint would be similar under this alternative, and grading activities would represent the potential for disturbance to undiscovered cultural resources. Therefore, the same resources would potentially be impacted with this alternative and similar mitigation measures in the form of monitoring would be required to reduce impacts to less than significant. 6.8.2.4 Hazards and Hazardous Materials Implementation of the increased Recreational Amenities/Green Space Alternative would result in similar impacts relative to hazards and hazardous materials as compared with the proposed project. Hazardous materials identified onsite during preparation of the Phase I ESA would require further analysis and determination of potentially significant impacts to human health upon future development of individual ownerships within the Ponto Area. The removal of hazardous materials would be required, as applicable, through implementation of mitigation measures, similar to the proposed project to reduce potential impacts to less than significant. 6.8.2.5 Noise Potential noise impacts would be slightly reduced with this alternative, as the area proposed for the Resort Hotel would be reduced in size to allow for provision of the open area. In addition, the number of vehicle trips generated would also be incrementally reduced, resulting in a decrease in noise generated by cars traveling to and from the site. Additional acoustical site analysis would be required as mitigation to determine potential noise impacts on a project-specific basis for future development within the Ponto Area. Overall, noise impacts would be reduced to less than significant with this alternative, as compared to the proposed project. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-26 August 2007 6.8.2.6 Traffic and Circulation As stated above, this alternative would result in a slight reduction in the number of vehicle trips generated per day, due to the reduction of the Resort Hotel facilities to allow for provision of the open area. Onsite circulation would be similar to that proposed with the project, and ADT generated would result in impacts to similar offsite roadways. Mitigation measures to reduce potential traffic impacts would therefore be similar to that of the proposed project. 6.8.2.7 Agricultural Resources This alternative would result in a similar, non-significant impact to agricultural resources as compared to the proposed project. The conversion of agricultural land affected by the LCP Mello II district would require payment of fees with this alternative to reduce potential impacts to less than significant. 6.8.2.8 Geology and Soils Development of the Ponto Area would not increase the risk of exposure to any geologic conditions onsite, such as landslides or soil erosion. Design measures would be implemented on a project-specific basis. Therefore, potential impacts relative to geologic resources would be similar and non-significant, as compared to the proposed project. 6.8.2.9 Hydrology and Water Quality This alternative would result in similar drainage requirements as compared to the proposed project, as it is assumed that the amount of impervious surfaces would be roughly the same. Drainage improvements would be provided consistent with the LFMPs for Zones 9 and 22 as applicable. BMPs similar to those proposed for the project would be implemented on a project-by-project basis to reduce potential water quality impacts to less than significant. 6.8.2.10 Land Use and Planning Similar to the proposed project, this alternative would involve development of the Ponto Area under an approved GPA that would allow the property to be developed under a General Plan designation of an Area of Special Consideration All future development would be consistent with the General Plan designation and as envisioned by the Vision Plan. No significant impacts relative to land use and planning were identified with the proposed project. Potential land use and planning impacts would be similar with this alternative as compared to the proposed project. 6.8.2.11 Utilities and Service Systems Future development within the Ponto Area would be required to demonstrate consistency with the Zones 9 and 22 LFMPs for adequate provision of public services such as police and fire protection. This alternative proposes development of an open area that would provide recreational opportunities for the public. Landowners within the Ponto Area would be required to pay school and park in-lieu fees as applicable to reduce potential impacts on public service systems and facilities. As such, this alternative would result in similar impacts on utilities and public service systems, as compared to the proposed project. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-27 August 2007 6.8.2.12 Visual Aesthetics and Grading Similar to the proposed project, no significant impacts relative to visual aesthetics or grading would result from the Recreational Amenities/Green Space Alternative. All future development within the Ponto Area would be consistent with City grading standards, the City’s Landscape Design Manual, zoning regulations for building height and setbacks, and the City’s Scenic Corridor Guidelines to reduce potential visual impacts and maintain visual resources. The overall development footprint would also be similar with this alternative as compared to the proposed project, with the exception of a reduction in the Resort Hotel facilities. In addition, this alternative would locate the Resort Hotel facilities at a greater distance from the bluff and would provide a landscaped open area that would be visible from offsite public vantage points. Grading for this alternative is assumed to be similar to that required for the proposed project, as development would be largely the same. Potential impacts to landform alteration and visual resources would therefore be similar with the Recreational Amenities/Green Space Alternative as compared to the proposed project. 6.8.3 Rationale for Preference of Proposed Project over the Increased Recreational Amenities/Green Space Alternative As the Increased Recreational Amenities/Green Space Alternative is similar to development envisioned in the Vision Plan, it would meet both the project goals as well as the majority of goals established in the South Carlsbad Coastal Redevelopment Area Redevelopment Plan. This alternative would incrementally reduce potentially significant impacts to traffic and circulation, as well as resultant noise and air quality impacts, as compared to the proposed project. In addition, future development of the Ponto Area would be consistent with requirements of the General Plan, Amended Zone 9 and 22 Local Facilities Management Plans (LFMP), and applicable City ordinances, regulations and policies, and therefore, no conflicts relative to land use and planning would occur. This alternative would also allow for improvements to Carlsbad Boulevard and establishment of a Southern Coastal Gateway to the City, as well as enhanced access to Carlsbad State Beach, similar to the proposed project. This alternative would also establish a mixed-use district that encourages local and tourist-oriented retail, commercial, recreational and residential uses, and would provide a cohesive architectural theme for future development of the Ponto Area. Similar to the proposed project, this alternative would meet the objectives of assuring that the provision of public facilities and services would meet the requirements of the Growth Management Plan, prior to development. Requirements for landscape architecture that would celebrate the historic past and horticultural heritage of the City would also be achieved. As discussed above, the Increased Recreational Amenities/Green Space Alternative would meet the project goals, as well as the goals of the SCCRA Redevelopment Plan. For these reasons, the Increased Recreational Amenities/Green Space Alternative was not rejected from further consideration. 6.86.9 Carlsbad Boulevard Re-Alignment Alternatives The Vision Plan includes four alternatives for the realignment of Carlsbad Boulevard; refer to Figures 6-1A and 6-1B. The alignments were largely evaluated for potential effects relative to impacts on biological resources, visual resources, parking, traffic signal operations ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-28 August 2007 and bridge requirements; refer to Table 6-2. An analysis was performed to determine the potential benefits of moving the existing northbound/southbound Carlsbad Boulevard lanes either to the west or to the east of their current location. The re-alignment of Carlsbad Boulevard represents the opportunity to achieve several goals of the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan and the South Carlsbad Coastal Redevelopment Area Redevelopment Plan. These goals were considered in the evaluation of the following alternatives to determine the potential benefits and adverse impacts of each. The goals are as follows: Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan Provide expanded and enhanced beach access; Establish the Southern Coastal Gateway to the City; Require landscape architecture that celebrates the historic past and horticultural heritage of the City; and, Assure that public facilities and services meet the requirements of the Growth Management Plan. South Carlsbad Coastal Redevelopment Area Redevelopment Plan (July 2000) Develop new beach and coastal recreational opportunities; Provide a funding source for the potential re-alignment of Carlsbad Boulevard that will yield excess property that could facilitate expansion of the Carlsbad State Beach campgrounds and other recreational facilities, and/or development of cultural facilities or other public facilities; and, Increase parking and open space amenities. Alternative #1 Alternative #1 envisions shifting the southbound lanes of Carlsbad Boulevard between existing Ponto Road and Avenida Encinas to the east, thereby providing additional space on the west side of the roadway for both on-street parking and an enhanced multi-purpose trail. No realignment or improvements would occur north of Ponto Road. In relocating the roadway, Alternative #1 would create approximately 0.8 acre along the west side of Carlsbad Boulevard, which could be utilized as a linear public park; refer to Figure 6-1A. This alternative is considered the Environmentally Superior Alternative with regards to the re-alignment alternatives for Carlsbad Boulevard, as it would result in the least impact to biological resources due to roadway construction. Approximately 3.0 acres of Disturbed Diegan coastal sage scrub would be impacted in the median between Ponto Drive and Avenida Encinas with this alternative. However, this alternative would retain the existing cypress trees in the median to the south of Avenida Encinas, thereby maintaining a visual natural resource along the roadway. This alternative would provide 61 diagonal parking spaces and 48 parallel parking spaces along Carlsbad Boulevard for visitors to the State Beach. Traffic improvements would require a complex signal operation at Avenida Encinas, due to the width of the required median (longer time to make turning movements), but similar to the existing condition. This ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-29 August 2007 alternative would also retain the existing northbound bridge, but would require construction of a new southbound bridge to implement the grade-separated pedestrian underpass under the roadway. Potential impacts for this alignment are approximately equal to the proposed project, with the exception of reduced impacts to Disturbed Diegan coastal sage scrub. This alternative would have the same impacts as the proposed project for the other issue areas and would include the same mitigation measures. This alternative would achieve the Vision Plan’s objectives of providing expanded and enhanced beach access and would enable the establishment of a Southern Coastal Gateway to the City. In addition, landscape architecture that celebrates the historic past and horticultural heritage of the City could be applied to further enhance the roadway following re-alignment. With the additional available land created by re-aligning the roadway, this alternative would address the provision of public parks facilities through creation of a linear park for public use and recreation. This alternative would also achieve the goal of the SCCRA Redevelopment Plan to develop new beach and coastal recreational opportunities, and would result in the opportunity for potential expansion of the Carlsbad State Beach campgrounds and other recreational facilities, or development of cultural facilities or other public facilities. Lastly, this alternative would provide additional parking and open space amenities. Therefore, this alternative was not rejected from consideration. Alternative #2 Alternative #2 is the alignment of Carlsbad Boulevard analyzed as part of the project in the EIR with respect for potential environmental impacts; refer to Figure 3-5. , which reflects the same alignment as Alternative #2. Similar to Alternative #1, Alternative #2 envisions shifting the southbound lanes of Carlsbad Boulevard between existing Ponto Road and Avenida Encinas to the east, thereby providing space on the west side for both on-street parking and an enhanced multi-purpose trail. No realignment or improvements would occur north of Ponto Road. This alternative would create approximately 2.0 acres on the west side of Carlsbad Boulevard north of Avenida Encinas and 1.8 acres on the west side of Carlsbad Boulevard, south of Avenida Encinas. This available land could then be used for a linear public park or for expansion of the South Carlsbad State Beach Campground; refer to Figure 6-1A. The enhanced Carlsbad Boulevard would accommodate two traffic lanes in each direction, dedicated left turn lanes, Class II bike lanes on both sides, and a landscaped center median. By moving the alignment eastward, land on the west side of Carlsbad Boulevard would be available for the location of community amenities such as a pedestrian underpass under the Boulevard, additional parking spaces for beach parking, a multi-use trail, and opportunities for beautification of the median. This alignment would allow for a five- to ten-foot wide linear park pathway or sidewalk along each side of the roadway, with parking provided along one side of the road. An eight-foot wide bike lane could also be constructed on both sides of the roadway, with two 12-foot wide travel lanes in either direction, separated by an 18-foot wide landscaped median; refer to Figure 3-7. In addition, the repositioning of the roadway would provide potential opportunities for the State Parks campground to expand onto land vacated by the re-alignment. The re-alignment of the southbound lanes of Carlsbad Boulevard to the east would align with improvements to ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-30 August 2007 the roadway recently completed as part of the Hanover Beach Colony development to the north. With the re-alignment, the Vision Plan envisions a new access point into the Beachfront Village from Carlsbad Boulevard, approximately midway between Ponto Drive and Avenida Encinas. The intersection would be signalized, and a dedicated left-turn lane along Carlsbad Boulevard southbound lanes would be constructed. This alternative would provide 61 diagonal parking spaces and 48 parallel parking spaces for beachgoers located along the southbound lanes of Carlsbad Boulevard between Ponto Road and Avenida Encinas. A less complex signal operation would be required at Avenida Encinas to improve traffic flow as compared to Alternative #1, due to a standardized intersection (i.e., no wide median). This alternative would also retain the existing northbound bridge, although a new southbound bridge would be required to accommodate lane relocation and to implement the grade- separated pedestrian underpass to the west. Approximately 3.7 acres of Disturbed Diegan coastal sage scrub would be affected in the median between Ponto Drive and Avenida Encinas. This alternative would potentially disturb approximately 0.6 acre of Southern Coastal Salt Marsh in the median immediately north of the Los Batiquitos Lagoon bridges. In addition, the removal of the existing cypress trees in the median south of Avenida Encinas would be required. This alternative would achieve the Vision Plan’s objectives of providing expanded and enhanced beach access and would enable the establishment of a Southern Coastal Gateway to the City. In addition, landscape architecture that celebrates the historic past and horticultural heritage of the City could be applied to further enhance the roadway following re-alignment. With the additional available land created by re-aligning the roadway, this alternative would address the provision of public parks facilities through creation of a linear park for public use and recreation. This alternative would also achieve the goal of the SCCRA Redevelopment Plan to develop new beach and coastal recreational opportunities, and would result in the opportunity for potential expansion of the Carlsbad State Beach campgrounds and other recreational facilities, or development of cultural facilities or other public facilities. Lastly, this alternative would provide additional parking and open space amenities. This alternative alignment for Carlsbad Boulevard would allow the project to meet objectives and goals established by the Ponto Vision Plan and SCCRA Redevelopment Plan. Therefore, this alternative was not rejected from consideration. Alternative #3 Alternative #3 would relocate the southbound lanes of Carlsbad Boulevard to the east, freeing approximately 0.8 acre on the west side of Carlsbad Boulevard for a future public linear park. No realignment or improvements would occur north of Ponto Road. In addition, re-alignment of the northbound lanes to the west would create approximately 1.2 acres along the east side of Carlsbad Boulevard, north of Avenida Encinas, and 2.2 acres on the east side of Carlsbad Boulevard, south of Avenida Encinas. This acreage would be available for additional development or community amenities; refer to Figure 6-1A. Approximately 3.7 acres of Disturbed Diegan coastal sage scrub in the median between Ponto Drive and Avenida Encinas would be impacted by Alternative #3. Potential disturbance to approximately 0.6 acre of Southern Coastal Salt Marsh within the median ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-31 August 2007 immediately north of the Los Batiquitos Lagoon bridges would also occur with this roadway re-alignment. Similar to Alternative #1, this alternative would require the removal of cypress trees in the median south of Avenida Encinas. Similar to the other alternatives, an additional 61 diagonal parking spaces and 48 parallel parking spaces would be created with relocation of the Carlsbad Boulevard. A less complex signal operation at Avenida Encinas, as compared to Alternative #1, would be required as a standardized intersection (i.e., no wide median) would be constructed. This alternative would achieve the Vision Plan’s objectives of providing expanded and enhanced beach access and would enable the establishment of a Southern Coastal Gateway to the City. In addition, landscape architecture that celebrates the historic past and horticultural heritage of the City could be applied to further enhance the roadway following re-alignment. With the additional available land created by re-aligning the roadway, this alternative would address the provision of public parks facilities through creation of a linear park for public use and recreation. This alternative would also achieve the goal of the SCCRA Redevelopment Plan to develop new beach and coastal recreational opportunities, and would result in the opportunity for potential expansion of the Carlsbad State Beach campgrounds and other recreational facilities, or development of cultural facilities or other public facilities. Lastly, this alternative would provide additional parking and open space amenities. This alternative alignment for Carlsbad Boulevard would allow the project to meet objectives and goals established by the Ponto Vision Plan and SCCRA Redevelopment Plan. Therefore, this alternative was not rejected from consideration. Alternative # 4 With Alternative #4, the northbound and southbound lanes of Carlsbad Boulevard between (proposed) Beach Way and Ponto Road would be re-aligned to the east to provide area for a linear public park to the west of the roadway; refer to Figure 6-1B. The existing lane configuration would not be changed with the roadway re-alignment (no additional lanes would be proposed). The re-alignment of Carlsbad Boulevard with Alternative #4 would be designed to connect with the roadway as recently improved with the Hanover Beach Colony development to the north. To the south of Beach Way, Alternative #4 would re-align Carlsbad Boulevard to the east, consistent with the re-alignment proposed with Carlsbad Boulevard Re-alignment Alternative #1 (see description above). As such, to the south of Beach Way, Alternative #4 would result in the same impacts (and benefits), as those identified for Alternative #1, and are therefore not re-analyzed with this Alternative; refer to Table 6-2. Mitigation measures for Alternative #4 would also be the same as those required for Alternative #1 for the portion of the Carlsbad Boulevard to the south of Beach Way. Overall, Alternative #4 would provide 61 parking spaces (60 degrees diagonal) and 48 parallel parking spaces for visitors to the State Beach. No existing parking would be removed with the proposed re-alignment. As the onsite area through which Carlsbad Boulevard would be re-aligned to the north of Beach Way is currently developed and supports the existing frontage roadway, sensitive resources were not identified within this area. The roadway would be re-aligned wherein the northbound lanes would generally follow the alignment of the existing frontage road, and ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-32 August 2007 therefore, construction would occur in an area that is presently disturbed. Therefore, no additional impacts to sensitive resources within this onsite area would result with this alternative. As with Alternative #1, the existing cypress trees within the median would be preserved. No additional significant impacts to other resources within the median were identified with this alternative; refer to Table 6-1. Therefore, potential impacts for this alignment would be approximately the same as the proposed project, and the same mitigation measures would be required. This alternative would achieve the goal of providing expanded and enhanced beach access by freeing approximately 0.5 acre on the west side of Carlsbad Boulevard for use as a future public linear park, combined with the 0.8 acre created with Alternative #1. This alternative would also achieve the goals to integrate landscape architecture that would reinforce the historic past and horticultural heritage of the City, and would increase open space and parking amenities. In addition, Alternative #4 would allow for establishment of a Southern Coastal Gateway to the City. As such, this alternative for the re-alignment of Carlsbad Boulevard would meet the majority of goals established for the Ponto Vision Plan and the SCCRA Redevelopment Plan. Therefore, this alternative was not rejected from consideration. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad FinalEIR 6-33 August 2007 Table 6-1 Comparison of Project Alternatives ALTERNATIVE DESCRIPTION Carlsbad Re-alignment Impact Category No Development No Project Increased Residential Use Increased Residential Use / Open Space Increased Townhomes / Single- Family Detached Increased Townhomes / Visitor Use Increased Recreational Amenities / Green Space Alternative 1 Alternative 3 Alternative 4 Air Quality Lesser Greater Lesser Similar Similar Similar Lesser Similar Similar Similar Biological Resources Lesser Similar Similar Lesser Similar Similar Similar Lesser Greater Similar Cultural Resources Lesser Similar Similar Lesser Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar Hazards Lesser Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar Noise Lesser Greater Similar Lesser Lesser Lesser Similar Similar Similar Similar Traffic Lesser Greater Lesser Lesser Lesser Lesser Lesser Similar Similar Similar Visual Lesser Greater Greater Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar Agricultural Lesser Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar Geology and Soils Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar Hydrology/ Water Quality Greater Similar Similar Lesser Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar Land Use Lesser Similar Greater Greater Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar Similar Public Utilities Lesser Greater Greater Greater Lesser Greater Similar Similar Similar Similar *Alternative 2 not included because it is analyzed with the proposed project. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-34 August 2007 Table 6-2 Comparison of Carlsbad Boulevard Re-Alignment Alternatives FACTOR ALTERNATIVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2 ALTERNATIVE 3 ALTERNATIVE 4 Additional Vacated Acreage Available for Other Uses Creates 0.8 acres on west side of Carlsbad Boulevard, available for use as a public linear park. Creates 2.0 acres on west side of Carlsbad Boulevard north of Avenida Encinas and 1.8 acres on west side of Carlsbad Boulevard south of Avenida Encinas, available for use as a public linear park or potential expanded use for the South Carlsbad State Beach Campground. Creates 0.8 acres on west side of Carlsbad Boulevard, available to be used as a public linear park. Creates 1.2 acres on east side of Carlsbad Boulevard, north of Avenida Encinas and 2.2 acres on east side of Carlsbad Boulevard, south of Avenida Encinas, available for additional development or community amenities. Creates 0.5 acres on west side of Carlsbad Boulevard, available for use as a public linear park. South of Beach Way: Creates 0.8 acres on west side of Carlsbad Boulevard, available for use as a public linear park. Effect on Vegetative Communities Approximately 3.0 acres of Disturbed Diegan coastal sage scrub to be affected in median between Ponto Drive and Avenida Encinas. Retains cypress trees in median south of Avenida Encinas. Approximately 3.7 acres of Disturbed Diegan coastal sage scrub to be affected in median between Ponto Drive and Avenida Encinas. Potential disturbance to approximately 0.6 acres of Southern Coastal Salt Marsh in median immediately north of the Los Batiquitos Lagoon bridges. Removal of cypress trees in median south of Avenida Encinas. Approximately 3.7 acres of Disturbed Diegan coastal sage scrub to be affected in median between Ponto Drive and Avenida Encinas. Potential disturbance to approximately 0.6 acres of Southern Coastal Salt Marsh in median immediately north of the Los Batiquitos Lagoon bridges. Removal of cypress trees in median south of Avenida Encinas. Approximately 3.73.0 acres of Disturbed Diegan coastal sage scrub to be affected in median between Ponto Drive and Avenida Encinas. Retains cypress trees in median south of Avenida Encinas. Parking Provides 61 parking spaces (60 degree diagonal) and 48 parallel parking spaces. Provides 61 parking spaces (60 degree diagonal) and 48 parallel parking spaces. Provides 61 parking spaces (60 degree diagonal) and 48 parallel parking spaces. Provides 61 parking spaces (60 degree diagonal) and 48 parallel parking spaces. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Table 6-2 continued Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-35 August 2007 FACTOR ALTERNATIVE 1 ALTERNATIVE 2 ALTERNATIVE 3 ALTERNATIVE 4 Traffic Signal Operations More complex signal operation at Avenida Encinas due to width of median (longer time to make turning movements) but similar to existing condition. Less complex signal operation at Avenida Encinas, due to standardized intersection (i.e., no wide median). Less complex signal operation at Avenida Encinas, due to standardized intersection (i.e., no wide median). More complex signal operation at Avenida Encinas due to width of median (longer time to make turning movements) but similar to existing condition.Less complex signal operation at Avenida Encinas, due to standardized intersection (i.e., no wide median). Vehicular Bridges Retains existing northbound bridge; requires new southbound bridge to implement the grade-separated pedestrian underpass to the west. Retains existing northbound bridge; requires new southbound bridge to accommodate lanes re-location and to implement the grade-separated pedestrian underpass to the west. Requires two new bridges – one northbound and one southbound. Retains existing northbound bridge; requires new southbound bridge to accommodate lanes re-location and to implement the grade-separated pedestrian underpass to the west. ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-36 August 2007 THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-37 August 2007 Figure 6-1A Carlsbad Boulevard Re-alignment Alternatives ; a I I I I I I CARLSBAD RE-ALIGNMENT ALTERNATIVE 1 CARLSBAD RE-ALIGNMENT ALTERNATIVE 2 CARLSBAD RE-ALIGNMENT ALTERNATIVE J ,.. CONSULTING 25101951/195 h.007 .a [1Mronnwnt.i 1rr11,eCt Carlsbad Boulevard Realignment Alternatives Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR Figure 6-lA ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-39 August 2007 Figure 6-1B Carlsbad Boulevard Alternatives I I I I I I I I I I I I CARLSBAD REALIGNMENT -ALTERNATIVE 4 (NORTH PORTION) CARLSBAD REALIGNMENT -ALTERNATIVE 4 (SOUTH PORTION) = - CARLSBAD REALIGNMENT -ALTERNATIVE 4 ~ CONSULTING 251019Sl/\951t16l at E.nworwnentll lmp«;t Carlsbad Boulevard Realignment Alternatives Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR Figure 6-18 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-41 August 2007 Figure 6-2 Increased Residential Use Alternative ( San Diego Northern-Railroad ---------·---------------------------·····--··-··-··-··~·~;;,-,··--···--···--···-·~ ______ .... -· If:'.~ 8 CONSULTING Not to Scale ?Sl019SI/I 9'Slu62_. [""1f'ClftffltftUlfmci«t TOWNHOMES 19 DU/AC ------------------------------------------------------------------------------·-..... __ ·························~:.~--=-,~-_,,........__-_ ___,_ Pacific Ocean Increased Residential Use Alternative Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR Figure 6-2 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-43 August 2007 Figure 6-3 Increased Residential Use / Open Space Alternative -------·· San Diego Northern Railroad ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- •H••• ... ••w ••w --w •--lliiiii••~------•-----------•• -------~ ----·------------------------ TOWNHOMES 19 DU/AC ----------------------------------------· -- Pacific Ocean -----------------------.......... . IGI 8 Increased Residential Use / Open Space Alternative Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR CONSULTING Notto Scale 2Sl01951/19Slu62.• E.nwonrntl'Qltnoa(t batlqultos lilgoon ··' Figure 6-3 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-45 August 2007 Figure 6-4 Increased Townhomes / Single-Family Detached Alternative ------------ I":'.~ 8 cc NSU LTIN 13 Not to Scale 2Sl01~1/19Slu62.• E.nwof,mt,ulmo,c.1 San Diego Northern Railroad---· --------------------------······--------- TOWNHOMES / Single family detached ----------------------------------. -----------------------------···--.. _______ . ---. -------------- Pacific Ocean _____ -.-.?.·: .. ::-__:::::-:.~,.-;-•.••.• ~ •. -•• .:::: Increased Townhomes/Single-Family Detached Alternative Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR Figure 6-4 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-47 August 2007 Figure 6-5 Increased Townhomes / Visitor Use Alternative TOWNHOMES 19 DU/AC ---";_----~--:-.-.:::::::,.~-----+----= --------------------------------· --· -------------------------------------------------------------- lftl 8 C □NBULTINl3 Not to Scale 2Sl0lttl/lflh.,.fi2.• Ctwlfortntrrtalmo,tel Pacific Ocean Increased Townhomes / Visitor Use Alternative Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR Figure 6-5 ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROPOSED PROJECT Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 6-49 August 2007 Figure 6-56 Increased Recreational Amenities / Green Space Alternative Village Hotel Townhouse Neighborhood Beachfront Resort Recreational/ Green Space =:, ... ---·•-=="···..,' -- Garden Hotel * * Character Areas in Italics 1,.~ 8 CCNSU LTI N 13 Not to Scale 25101951/19Slu06!> a C.nwUl'Wfttntaln,pac:t Live I Work Neighborhood Increased Recreational Amenities / Green Space Alternative Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR IATJO0ITOC Li\(;OO11 ------} i ' -r---lf it_t ,,-/ Figure 6-6 ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 7-1 August 2007 7.0 ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS 7.1 Cumulative Impacts Sections 15130 and 15065(c) of the CEQA Guidelines require the discussion of cumulative impacts when they are significant. The EIR is required to identify and discuss cumulative impacts that may result from the proposed project when considered with other closely related projects and reasonably foreseeable future projects. The 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 reasonably foreseeable future projects (CEQA Guidelines Section 15355). The Guidelines allow the use of two alternative methods to determine the scope of projects for the cumulative impact analysis: List Method – A list of past, present, and probable future projects producing related or cumulative impacts, including, if necessary, those projects outside the control of the lead agency. General Plan Projection Method – A summary of projections contained in an adopted general plan or related planning document, or in a prior environmental document that has been adopted or certified, which described or evaluated regional or area-wide conditions contributing to the cumulative impact (CEQA Guidelines Section 15130). For purposes of this EIR, the List Method has been used; refer to Table 7-1. Existing and reasonably anticipated projects have been identified and are discussed in greater detail in terms of their potential to contribute to significant cumulative impacts, as part of the following subject-based analysis. 7.1.1 Specific Cumulative Projects The area surrounding the Ponto site is largely built-out, limiting the number of proposed projects that would contribute to cumulative project impacts, due to proximity to the project development area. Five individual projects were identified and considered for the cumulative impact analysis and are in varied stages of planning and development. Information regarding these projects was collected with assistance from the City and from active applications filed with the City Planning Department. Specific projects encompassed within this cumulative analysis are shown in Figure 7-1 and listed in Table 7-1. Hotel Project - City of Encinitas (99-001; 04-268; 93-172) The hotel project involves the consolidation of four existing lots into one parcel of approximately 4.3 acres. The project site is located directly to the south of the Ponto Beachfront Village site, across Batiquitos Lagoon, in the City of Encinitas. The project requires a major use permit (MUP) to allow for development of a 130-room hotel with a 200- seat restaurant and lounge area, meeting rooms, and an administrative/service area for a total floor area of approximately 122,540 square feet. A total of 229 parking spaces are also ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 7-2 August 2007 proposed. An EIR was approved for the project by the Encinitas City Council on January 22, 1992. Poinsettia Single-family Residential (CT –5-10) This project proposes the subdivision of approximately 5.0 acres into 29 single-family residential lots, two open space lots, and one driveway lot. The project site is located to the northeast of the Ponto Beachfront Village site, east of Interstate 5 along Poinsettia Lane. A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), dated May 2, 2006, and a Notice of Declaration (NoD), dated May 19, 2006, have been issued for the project. Calvary Chapel (CUP 04-05) The Calvary Chapel project is located on an approximately 27-acre site, located to the northeast of the Ponto Beachfront Village project site, across Interstate 5 at the northeast corner of Aviara Parkway and Poinsettia Lane. The project proposes a 13-acre church campus, supporting a 49,000 sq. ft. multi-purpose building and family center (maximum capacity 1,800 persons). Uses proposed as part of the church campus include a 19,000 sq. ft. two-story preschool (150 students), 4,000 sq. ft. chapel building, 7,000 sq. ft. gymnasium, 3,000 sq. ft. youth building, and 6,000 sq. ft. adult education building. Approximately 1,050 parking spaces will be provided to support the facilities. A MND, dated September 20, 2005, and a NOD, dated January 11, 2005, have been issued for the project. Bressi Ranch (CT 02-14; CT 02-15; CT 03-03; CT 02-19) The Bressi Ranch project site is approximately 585.1 acres in size and is located to the northeast of the project site, east of Interstate 5 and along Palomar Airport Road. The project site is divided into a northern and a southern portion and will ultimately include development of 15 planning areas and six open space areas. The northern area (approximately 150.3 acres) will involve development of five industrial lots; the southern area (approximately 434.8 acres) will include development of seven residential lots, one industrial lot, one mixed-use lot, one community facility lot, and six open space lots. A Master Plan EIR was approved for the project on July 23, 2002. Portions of the project are currently either built or under construction, while other areas remain unbuilt. La Costa Town Square Project (CT 01-09) The La Costa Town Square project site is approximately 81 acres in size, located to the southeast of the Ponto Beachfront Village project site, near the northeast corner of La Costa Drive and Rancho Santa Fe; refer to Figure 7-1. The project proposes a mixed-use retail/commercial/office/residential development. The project will result in the development of 131 residential units, 80,000 sq. ft. of industrial space, and 380,000 sq. ft. of commercial space. Approximately 5.7 acres will be protected as onsite open space. An EIR is currently pending for the project. Shoreline Resort – City of Encinitas (00-201) The Shoreline Resort project is 26-unit timeshare/hotel development and associated site improvements on 1.81 acres. The property is zoned Visitor-Serving Commercial and is located within the North 101 Corridor Specific Plan within the City of Encinitas. The project ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 7-3 August 2007 is located south of the proposed project site and Batiquitos Lagoon on the northeast corner of Highway 101 and La Costa Avenue. The project requires a Major Use Permit, Design Review Permit, and a Coastal Development Permit. The development will construct a limited term occupancy 26-unit timeshare and hotel. A minimum of seven units are reserved as exclusive use hotel units. An Environmental Impact Report was certified by the City of Encinitas on September 1, 2005. Coral Cove Tentative Map – City of Encinitas (03-090) The Coral Cove project is a subdivision of approximately 10 acres into 69 residential lots (39 detached single-family and 30 attached single-family) through a density bonus and a Planned Residential Development, Major Use Permit, Design Review Permit, and a Coastal Development Permit. An EIR was certified by the City of Encinitas on June 1, 2006. 7.1.2 Air Quality 7.1.2.1 Cumulative Construction Emissions The San Diego Regional Air Quality Strategies (RAQS) establish an “emissions budget” for the San Diego Air Basin. This budget takes into account existing conditions, planned growth based on the general plans of cities within the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) region, and air quality control measures implemented by the San Diego Air Pollution Control District (SDAPCD). With respect to the project’s construction-period air quality emissions and cumulative Basin- wide conditions, the SDAPCD has developed strategies to reduce criteria pollutant emissions outlined in the RAQS pursuant to FCAA mandates. As such, the proposed project would comply with all feasible mitigation measures. In addition, the proposed project would comply with adopted RAQS emissions control measures. Per SDAPCD rules and mandates as well as the CEQA requirement that significant impacts be mitigated to the maximum extent feasible, these same requirements (i.e., fugitive dust compliance, the implementation of all feasible mitigation measures, and compliance with adopted RAQS emissions control measures) would also be imposed on construction projects Basin-wide, which would include each of the related projects mentioned above. Although compliance with SDAPCD rules and regulations would reduce construction-related impacts, the project-related construction emissions have been concluded to be significant and unavoidable. Thus, it can be reasonably inferred that the project-related construction activities, in combination with those from other projects in the area would deteriorate the local air quality and lead to cumulative construction-related impact. Therefore, even with the implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ-1 through AQ-5 given in Section 5.1, a significant and unavoidable cumulative construction air quality impact would result. 7.1.2.2 Cumulative Long-Term Impacts The SDAPCD classifies cumulative impacts as direct and indirect project emissions. If a project-related air quality impact is individually less than significant, the impacts of reasonably anticipated future activities, probable future projects, and past projects are included based on similar air quality impacts, transport considerations and geographic location. Currently the SDAPCD’s approach towards assessing cumulative impacts is based on the fact that the SDAPCD Regional Air Quality Strategy forecasts attainment of ambient ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 7-4 August 2007 air quality standards in accordance with the requirements of the CCAA, which takes into account the SANDAG forecasted future regional growth. Although it has been shown that the project would be consistent with RAQS and the RCP, the project would still exceed the SDAPCD regional thresholds of significance for ROG and PM10, which are regional transport pollutants and ozone precursors. As a result, the proposed project in combination with other reasonably foreseeable projects could lead to periodic exceedances of the Ambient Air Quality Standards. Therefore, the proposed project would result in a significant and unavoidable cumulatively significant impact. 7.1.3 Biological Resources As shown on Table 5.2-5, the implementation of the proposed project would significantly impact approximately 3.14 acres of three sensitive vegetation communities (southern willow scrub, southern coastal bluff scrub [including disturbed], and Diegan coastal sage scrub [including disturbed]). In addition, the proposed project would impact 22.7 acres of vegetation communities that are not sensitive but require mitigation (eucalyptus woodland and disturbed habitat). In addition to significant biological resource impacts associated with the proposed project, the biological resources analysis for the Ponto Vision Plan analyzed potential cumulative impacts resulting from the five seven development projects identified within the cumulative study area (City of Encinitas Hotel Project, Poinsettia Single-family Residential, Calvary Chapel Project, Bressi Ranch, and La Costa Town Square Project, Encinitas Beach Hotel, and Coral Cove Tentative Map). One project, Poinsettia Single-family Residential, was determined not to result in significant impacts to biological resources, given that the site was previously impacted in conjunction with the surrounding residential development. The remaining four six cumulative projects would result in significant, but mitigable, impacts to biological resources. Two Three of the five cumulative projects would result in impacts to 416.0417 acres of vegetation communities requiring mitigation, including 0.08 acre of southern willow scrub, 30.931 acres of Diegan coastal sage scrub (including disturbed), and 385.0 acres of disturbed habitat; refer to Table 7-2. These impacts would be significant, but mitigable. The proposed project would significantly impact 0.04 acre of southern willow scrub, which represents 33.3 percent of the currently assessed cumulative impacts. The proposed project would impact 0.1 acre of southern coastal bluff scrub (including disturbed) and 0.3 acre of eucalyptus woodland, which represents 100 percent of the currently assessed cumulative impacts for both habitats. The proposed project would significantly impact 1.2 acres of Diegan coastal sage scrub (including disturbed), which represents 3.7 percent of the currently assessed cumulative impacts. The proposed project would significantly impact 21.1 acres of disturbed habitat, which represents 5.2 percent of the currently assessed cumulative impacts. Because the proposed project would fully mitigate for its impacts to these habitats, cumulative impacts would not be significant. All projects are required to mitigate for impacts to sensitive vegetation communities pursuant to the Natural Communities Conservation Planning program (NCCP). All impacts would be fully mitigated. As such, the proposed project together with the five cumulative projects would not have a significant impact on vegetation communities; refer to Table 7-2. ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 7-5 August 2007 Of the five seven cumulative projects, two projects would result in significant or potentially significant but mitigable impacts to biological resources. The proposed project and other projects being proposed or constructed in the area would be required to comply with regional planning efforts (i.e., NCCP) intended to address cumulative impacts to sensitive plant and animal species, as well as the habitats in which they occur. The proposed project would provide mitigation for impacts to sensitive habitats consistent with these plans. As a result, the proposed project would result in less than significant cumulative impacts to sensitive biological resources. Therefore, the Vision Plan is not anticipated to contribute to a cumulative impact related to biological resources. 7.1.4 Cultural Resources Land within the immediate area surrounding the project site is generally built-out. With the development of the five identified cumulative projects, the potential for an increase in impacts on archaeological sites in the City would occur, as grading and construction activities would result in disturbance to the lands. According to CEQA, the importance of cultural resources comes from the research value and the information they contain. Therefore, the issue that must be explored in a cumulative analysis is the cumulative loss of that information. For sites considered less than significant, the information is preserved through recordation and test excavations. Significant sites that are placed within open space easements would avoid impacts to cultural resources while preserving the data. Significant sites that are not placed within open space easements would preserve the information through recordation, test excavations, and data recovery programs that would be presented in reports and filed with the City of Carlsbad and the South Coastal Information Center (SCIC). The artifact collections from any potentially significant site would also be curated at the San Diego Archaeological Center and would also be available to other archaeologists for further study. The cultural resources analysis for the Ponto project indicated that, as significant cultural sites have been identified on the project site, additional significant cultural resources may be located within the City of Carlsbad. Disturbance of and construction on the currently vacant portions of the site have the potential to affect cultural resources in the site vicinity, potentially leading to a significant cumulative loss of such resources in the area. As development of the five seven projects identified for the cumulative analysis occurs in the future, landowners would be required to complete a site review and technical studies, as appropriate, to identify potentially significant cultural resources sites and provide proper mitigation to reduce impacts to less than significant. The proposed project's potential impacts to cultural resources would be mitigated to below a level of significance through establishment of a grading monitoring program, and all sites identified within the project footprint would be recorded. To reduce potential impacts on cultural resources located on the cumulative projects sites, mitigation measures, such as open space easements, and/or monitoring during grading activities, would be required to reduce impacts to less than significant. Therefore, because the impacts resulting from the proposed project and those projects within the cumulative impact study area would be mitigated to less than significant, the proposed project would not cumulatively contribute to a significant impact on cultural resources. ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 7-6 August 2007 7.1.5 Hazardous Materials and Hazards Continued future development, both on vacant and redeveloped lands, within the City of Carlsbad has the potential to result in the discovery of or human exposure to hazards or hazardous materials. With consideration of the five seven project sites considered for the cumulative analysis, preparation of Phase I Environmental Site Assessments would be required, as applicable, to identify hazardous conditions on the properties and to determine the potential for significant human health risk or hazardous conditions (i.e., contaminated soils or risk of wildfire). Additional assessment in the form of a Phase II analysis may also be required, if materials or conditions onsite are determined to pose substantial hazardous risk. Mitigation in the form of site remediation would be required as necessary to mitigate the potential impact as the result of each development project. In addition, a change in ownership of any of the ownerships would require identification of hazardous materials and conformance with the applicable federal, state and local regulations for the clean-up of such materials or conditions. As a result, implementation of the Ponto Vision Plan, with consideration for the other cumulative projects, is not anticipated to contribute to a significant cumulative impact related to hazards or hazardous materials. 7.1.6 Noise Of the other five seven related projects that have been identified within the project study area, the Applicant has no control over the timing or sequencing of related projects, and as such, any quantitative analysis to ascertain the daily construction emissions that assumes multiple, concurrent construction would be speculative. Construction-related noise for the proposed project and each related project would be localized. In addition, it is likely that each of the related projects would have to comply with the local noise ordinance, as well as mitigation measures that may be prescribed pursuant to CEQA provisions that require significant impacts to be reduced to the extent feasible. Thus, as construction noise is localized in nature and drops off rapidly from the source, a significant cumulative construction-related noise impact would not result. Mitigation measures given Section 5.5 would ensure that cumulative noise impacts from project construction do not result. With regard to stationary sources, the major stationary sources of noise that would be introduced in the Vision Plan Area by related projects would include rooftop equipment, loading docks, and residential activities. Since these projects would be required to adhere to City of Carlsbad noise standards, all the stationary sources would be required to provide shielding or other noise abatement measures so as not to cause a substantial increase in ambient noise levels. As such, it is not anticipated that a significant cumulative increase in permanent ambient noise levels would occur and the impact would be less than significant. Consequently, the proposed Vision Plan’s contribution to cumulative stationary noise impacts is not considered to be cumulatively considerable. 7.1.7 Traffic and Circulation The cumulative impact analysis forecasts the traffic impacts in an area resulting from the proposed project when considered with other related past, present, and reasonably foreseeable probable future projects. The North County Subarea Model, which is based on the SANDAG Series 10 model, was used for the Near Term 2010 Analysis to identify the project’s potential for significant ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 7-7 August 2007 cumulative impacts. Average Daily Traffic volumes produced by the traffic model were post- processed to forecast peak hour intersection turning movement volumes and peak hour roadway segment volumes. In the vicinity of the new roadways, turns reports produced by the traffic model were reviewed to identify potential changes in traffic patterns with the opening and/or extension of new roadways. The Subarea model assumes the full buildout of the roadway network identified in the City’s Circulation Element by the year 2030, which assumes the following major transportation improvements to be in place in the City of Carlsbad in the near term (prior to 2010): Extension of El Fuerte from Palomar Airport Road to Faraday Avenue (2007); Construction of Faraday Avenue from El Camino to Melrose Drive (2007); and, Completion of Poinsettia Lane (2010). Under the 2010 analysis, two scenarios were analyzed. The first scenario analyzed 2010 traffic without the land uses proposed by the Vision Plan. For this scenario, it was assumed that the Ponto Area would be developed with uses as defined by the existing General Plan land use designations for the site. The Ponto Area would generate between 12,708 and 15,408 daily trips if developed under the existing General Plan land use designations. Based on a trip distribution and assignment model, peak hour traffic volumes and average daily trip volumes were calculated for the study area intersections and street segments for this scenario (2010 Without Vision Plan). The results are provided on Figures 7-2, 7-4, and 7-5. The second scenario analyzed 2010 traffic with the land uses proposed by the Vision Plan. The land uses proposed by the Vision Plan would generate approximately 15,161 trips. Based on a trip distribution and assignment model, peak hour traffic volumes and average daily trip volumes were calculated for the study area intersections and street segments for this scenario (2010 with Vision Plan). The results are provided on Figures 7-3, 7-6 and 7-7. For both scenarios, the LOS for the study area intersections was analyzed using the delay- based 2000 Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) Operations methodology. This methodology is described in detail in the Traffic Analysis provided in Appendix G. The results are discussed below. Intersection Operations Table 7-3 summarizes the results of the Near-Term (2010) analysis for both scenarios (Without Vision Plan and With Vision Plan). As illustrated on Figures 7-4 through 7-7, most intersections would operate at an acceptable (LOS A or B) or marginal LOS (LOS C or D) in the year 2010 under both scenarios (Without the Vision Plan and With the Vision Plan). The following four intersections are forecast to operate at deficient (“failing”) LOS (LOS E or F) without or with the Vision Plan: Palomar Airport Road / El Camino Real; Palomar Airport Road / El Fuerte Street; La Costa Avenue / North Coast Highway 101; La Costa Avenue / Vulcan Avenue, and, La Costa Avenue / El Camino Real. ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 7-8 August 2007 To determine if the Vision Plan’s contribution to the above impacts are significant, the following threshold applies: When an intersection or roadway segment is operating at deficient service levels, the addition of trips generated by the proposed land use in the Vision Plan results in an increase in delay of more than 2.0 seconds when compared to the Without Vision Plan condition. Impacts T-1 and T-2 The traffic generated by implementation of the Vision Plan would not result in a change in delay of more than 2.0 seconds at the above intersections, with the exception of the intersections at La Costa Avenue/North Coast Highway 101 and La Costa Avenue/Vulcan Avenue, when compared to the 2010 Without the Vision Plan analysis; refer to Table 7-3. Therefore, this would be considered a significant impact and mitigation would be required. Street Segments The peak hour roadway segment analysis determined the LOS of the street segments within the study area (for the Without the Vision Plan and With the Vision Plan scenarios) by calculating volume-to-capacity ratio (V/C) of the street segments. The V/C of a street segment is calculated by dividing the peak hour traffic volume (or average daily traffic volume) of the street segment by the peak hour capacity (or daily capacity) of the street segment. The following V/C ratios determine the LOS of the street segment: V/C of 0.00 to 0.60: LOS A V/C of 0.61 to 0.70: LOS B V/C of 0.71 to 0.80: LOS C V/C of 0.81 to 0.90: LOS D V/C of 0.91 to 1.00: LOS E V/C over 1.00: LOS F Peak Hour Street Segments The results of the 2010 Peak Hour Segment Analysis are provided in Table 7-4. Based on the road segment capacities identified in the City of Carlsbad’s Circulation Element, all future roadway segments are forecast to operate at an acceptable LOS (LOS D or better) during the peak hours under both 2010 scenarios (Without the Vision Plan and With the Vision Plan). Therefore, peak hour impacts to the street segments would be considered less than significant. Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measures T-1 through T-2 (refer to Section 5.6.4) would mitigate the Vision Plan’s contribution to cumulative intersection impacts that would occur under the year 2010 analysis. ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 7-9 August 2007 7.1.8 Grading and Aesthetics Over time, development of the project site would ultimately change the visual character of the existing conditions, as the property stands largely undeveloped. Short-term impacts would result from grading and construction on the site, and would convert the natural setting into a built environment, similar to the developed lands adjacent to the property. However, the Vision Plan provides design guidelines to reduce potential visual impacts and to ensure an adhesive visual character that would respect the site’s location along the scenic corridor. In addition, development would occur consistent with the City’s Scenic Corridor Guidelines, zoning and General Plan designations, coastal development restrictions, and other applicable development standards, policies and regulations to reduce potential visual impacts to less than significant. Project-specific visual impacts were not identified for the development that would result with implementation of the Vision Plan. In addition, all cumulative projects would require City of Carlsbad or City of Encinitas review for determination of conformance with applicable policies and regulations, pertaining to visual resources, including consistency with the General Plan. Therefore, future development associated with the Vision Plan is not anticipated to contribute to a cumulative visual impact related to grading or aesthetics. 7.1.9 Agricultural Resources Several large-scale agricultural operations are active within the City of Carlsbad. The Flower Fields and the strawberry fields also represent agricultural activities, with other smaller-scale operations within the city limits on individual properties, providing produce and other agricultural products for commercial sale. Development within both the City of Carlsbad and the County of San Diego will continue to result in the conversion of agricultural lands to urban uses in the future. Although agricultural activities occurred on the project site, the development area is no longer actively used for such operations. Therefore, development of the project site would not remove such activities from the County’s agricultural operations or resources. In addition, the project would not convert land designated as Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance as identified by the California Department of Conservation, as no such lands have been identified onsite. Although agricultural lands may be converted with the cumulative projects considered, the conversion of such lands to an urban use reflects the general trend within the City and the region, largely due to economic and social influences. The City’s General Plan and General Plan EIR recognize this condition and account for such impacts with the intent that agricultural lands be used for such purposes as desired until planning for alternative uses is applicable. Therefore, project impacts are not considered to be cumulatively considerable by impeding existing or future agricultural uses within the City of Carlsbad or the surrounding region. 7.1.10 Geology and Soils Cumulative development would result in the potential for exposure of a greater number of people to geologic conditions where the risk to human health may be increased (i.e., earthquakes). Due to location and distance from the project site, development of the projects considered in the cumulative analysis in combination with development of the project site would not create a cumulatively considerable geologic hazard, such as an increased risk of mudslides or unstable slopes. Hazardous geologic conditions would be addressed through ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 7-10 August 2007 project-specific review, both on the project site and on the cumulative projects sites, thereby reducing potential impacts to less than significant through applicable engineering and grading applications. Implementation of the Vision Plan is therefore not considered to contribute to a significant cumulative impact relative to geology or soils. 7.1.11 Hydrology/Water Quality The Ponto development area lies within the San Marcos hydrologic area of the Carlsbad Hydrographic Unit. Receiving waters for the project site are the Batiquitos Lagoon and the Pacific Ocean. The design of individual projects within the project development area would not significantly alter drainage patterns downstream of the site within the watershed. While runoff patterns would be altered by the construction of curbs, streets, and other improvements, these changes would occur within the project area limits. As a result, existing drainage facilities within the watershed or another watershed would not be adversely affected by a significant change in drainage patterns. Therefore, the proposed project is not considered to result in a significant cumulative impact to hydrologic conditions. In addition, the proposed offsite improvements within Carlsbad Boulevard would allow flows to continue downstream as under existing conditions. The proposed road relocation would not substantially increase peak discharges, substantially increase the runoff coefficient, or decrease the time of concentration. Thus, hydrologic conditions would not be adversely impacted by the road widening improvements required with the proposed project. Therefore, the project is not anticipated to contribute to a cumulative considerable impact to hydrology as the result of offsite roadway improvements. Implementation of the proposed project, in addition to cumulative projects in the surrounding area, would result in an increased amount of soil disturbance and increased impervious surfaces within the cumulative study area. This could potentially result in increased erosion, runoff, flooding hazards, and pollutant concentrations within the watershed. BMPs for the proposed project would reduce potentially significant project level drainage/hydrology impacts to less than significant. The change in land use and associated increase in the runoff from impervious surfaces, along with the addition of drainage facilities, is not anticipated to create a cumulatively considerable impact to existing hydrologic conditions. All approved or future developments considered in the cumulative analysis, including the proposed project, would also be required to implement BMPs to reduce potential water quality impacts to less than significant, consistent with the City’s Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Plan (JURMP) and Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP) requirements. The combination of proposed construction and post-construction BMPs would reduce, to the maximum extent practicable, the expected pollutants and would not adversely impact the beneficial uses or water quality of the receiving waters within the watershed. As a result, no cumulatively considerable water quality impacts are anticipated for the projects considered, in combination with development of the proposed project. 7.1.12 Land Use The area surrounding the project site is largely built out, with little vacant land remaining for potential new development. Land uses proposed for the project development area would be ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 7-11 August 2007 consistent with that intended by the General Plan. Future development within the City would also be required to demonstrate consistency with the General Plan, Growth Management Plans, and other regulations intended to guide growth within the City in the future. Consistency with these plans and regulations would ensure that such projects did not contribute to a cumulative impact related to land use. As such, development of the project area is not considered to contribute to a significant cumulative land use impact. 7.1.13 Population and Housing As required, the proposed project would be consistent with the goals and policies of the City’s Growth Management Plan and LFMPs (for applicable Zones 9 and 22). Similarly, all existing and future development is required to demonstrate consistency with these Plans to guide future growth and the provision of public facilities and services within the City. Conformance with these Plans and continued review and updates by the City to ensure that development occurs as planned would reduce impacts to population and housing caused by uncontrolled growth or insufficient facilities or services to less than significant. Therefore, implementation of the Vision Plan is not anticipated to contribute to a cumulative impact related to housing or population. 7.1.14 Public Services and Utilities As with future development within the City of Carlsbad, development of the project site would result in an incremental increase in the demand for public utilities and services. Although the area surrounding the Ponto development area is largely built out, population within the City will continue to grow in the future, thereby increasing the demand for public services such as police and fire protection, as well as utilities such as water and electrical power; however, all future development within the City would be required to be consistent with the applicable LFMP as part of the City’s Growth Management Program. As such, public services and utilities would be adequately provided for within each LFMP zone, and as applicable to the projects considered in the cumulative analysis, thereby reducing potential impacts on such resources. All existing and future development would be required to pay fees as appropriate for such services to provide a financial mechanism for construction or service, thereby ensuring that such services and facilities are adequate at the time of development. As the project development area and the other projects considered in the cumulative analysis would be consistent with the measures of the appropriate LFMPs, cumulative impacts on public services and facilities would be less than significant. 7.1.15 Recreation Development of the project site would result in an increase in both permanent and transient population in the project area, thereby increasing the demand for provision of recreational services. However, development of the site would occur consistent with the LFMPs prepared for Zones 9 and 22 for the provision of parks. The Vision Plan also envisions an approximate four-acre linear park with picnic tables and benches with views to the ocean for recreational purposes. Other recreational amenities include a wetland interpretive park, nature/arts center, and numerous trails and pathways, in addition to the amenities provided by the hotels and resort services. Improvements for parking and access are also planned to improve recreational opportunities provided by South Carlsbad State Beach. As a result of the land ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 7-12 August 2007 uses proposed, implementation of the Ponto Vision Plan is not anticipated to contribute to a significant cumulative impact on recreational resources. 7.2 Growth Inducing Impacts As required by State CEQA Guidelines (Section 15126.2(d), consideration of growth- inducing impacts resulting from the project is required as part of the EIR analysis. Growth inducement is defined according to CEQA as, “…ways in which the proposed project could foster economic or population growth, or the construction of additional housing, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment.” Induced growth is any growth that exceeds planned growth and results from new development that would not have taken place without the implementation of the proposed project. Typically, the growth inducing potential of a project would be considered significant if it results in growth or population concentration that exceeds those assumptions included in pertinent master plans, land use plans, or projections made by regional planning authorities. Implementation of the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan would not remove any barriers to growth that would otherwise preclude development if the proposed uses were not to be developed. The project site is located adjacent to established residential neighborhoods. Although the majority of the Ponto site is largely vacant, infrastructure (water, sewer, and electric utilities) currently extend to the site and are available to serve the proposed uses. Therefore, no major extension of infrastructure would be required to serve the Ponto development area, although improvements are proposed. The minor extension of infrastructure into the project site as necessary to serve areas that are currently vacant would not open up any new lands near the Ponto site for development, as areas adjacent to the Ponto site are already built-out and are served by public sewer, water and other utility systems. The resulting development proposed by the Ponto Vision Plan would be consistent with growth patterns anticipated by the City of Carlsbad General Plan for the area. The uses proposed would be consistent with the City General Plan and Growth Management Program, and would conform to the goals and policies of the Local Facilities Management Plans (Zones 9 and 22) for infrastructure improvements and public services, such as educational facilities and recreational amenities, and would thereby not represent an increase in the number of dwelling units or population above that anticipated. As stated previously, the Vision Plan would reduce the density and the overall number of proposed units as compared to that allowed under the existing General Plan designations, thereby reducing potential growth assumed for the area in the LFMPs. Implementation of the Vision Plan would result in the development of the project site with hotels, timeshare units, and residential units, in addition to commercial retail and recreational amenities. As the hotel and timeshare units would support a transient population, rather than a permanent long-term demand for housing, these uses would not be considered to directly result in an increase in dwelling units for people residing in the area. The Vision Plan would generate short-term employment opportunities over time during the construction phase on individual properties, and long-term employment opportunities during the operations phase in the proposed resort and commercial uses; however, this level of development and type of use (visitor/commercial) is not expected to directly or indirectly result in a significant increase in population in the area, nor a significant increase in the demand for housing. ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 7-13 August 2007 Therefore, implementation of the Vision Plan would not result in a direct or indirect growth- inducing impact. 7.3 Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes As required by CEQA Section 15126.2(c), the consideration for the Ponto Beachfront Vision Plan to result in the potential use of non-renewable resources during both the project construction phase and the long-term occupancy and operational phases. Non-renewable resources may include energy; gravel; sand; lumber or other wood products; water; fossil fuels; metals; and, petrochemical construction materials. Construction activities within the Ponto development area, as well as during the future operation of the proposed uses, would contribute to an incremental consumption of these resources both locally and regionally. In addition, the development of land within the Ponto Vision Plan development area would be consistent with the City’s plans for growth and development, as referenced in the adopted policies and goals of the General Plan and the LFMPs. Therefore, the consumption of these resources is not anticipated to result in a significant degradation or destruction of sensitive natural resources. 7.4 Unavoidable Significant Environmental Impacts The proposed project would not result in an unavoidable long-term significant environmental impact to air quality. As development of the project site would add project traffic to the circulation system, an increase in air quality emissions would occur. As the San Diego Air Basin is in non-attainment for state air quality standards for O3 and PM10, the project would contribute emissions to an existing air quality violation. This significant impact would occur over the long-term, as technology is not available to reduce future vehicular operations and resultant air pollutants to a less than significant level. Refer to the analysis included in Chapter 5.0 of this EIR for discussion of significant impacts resulting from the project. 7.5 Effects Found Not to be Significant 7.5.1 Effects Found Not to be Significant as Part of the EIR Process Based on the analysis given in Chapter 5.0 of this EIR, the proposed Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan would not result in significant impacts for the areas of Grading and Aesthetics; Agricultural Resources; Geology/Soils; Hydrology/Water Quality; Land Use; Population and Housing; Utilities and Public Services; and Recreation. 7.5.2 Effects Found Not to be Significant During the Initial Study Effects found not to be potentially significant as part of the Initial Study and EIR scoping process include: Energy and Mineral Resources, Population and Housing, and Recreational Facilities, and therefore, were not included in the analysis in Section 5.0. Refer to the Initial Study provided in Appendix A of this EIR for a discussion of potential impacts found not to be significant during the initial EIR scoping process. ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 7-14 August 2007 7.5.2.1 Energy and Mineral Resources Future development of the Ponto area would require the consumption of energy during the construction phase, as well as during occupancy and operation of the proposed uses. Energy use for the area would consist of that typical of similar uses and would include electricity, oil, petroleum and other non-renewable resources. All future construction would be required to comply with Title 24 of the California Administrative Code, which establishes energy conservation requirements for new construction. Significant sources of non-renewable energy resources or known mineral resources of value to the City, region or state have not been identified within the City of Carlsbad, and therefore, future development of the project site would not result in the loss or decreased availability of such resources. Therefore, implementation of the Vision Plan is not anticipated to result in significant impacts to energy or mineral resources. 7.5.2.2 Population and Housing As described in Section 5.11, Land Use and Planning, as part of the City’s Growth Management Program (GMP) and consistent with Chapter 21.90 of the City Zoning Ordinance, the City has been divided into 25 subareas, or zones, to guide the provision of facilities at a detailed level and to ensure that services and facilities will be adequately provided for existing and future development. Local Facilities Management Plans (LFMPs) address future growth and the future demand on public services and facilities. Preparation of a LFMP is required for each zone to implement the GMP by phasing development and the provision of public facilities, consistent with the GMP performance standards. The Ponto Vision Plan area is located within Zones 9 and 22 of the City’s Local Facilities Management Plans; refer to Figure 5.12-1. Future development proposals within the Ponto development area would be required to demonstrate that proposed facilities are consistent with the appropriate LFMP or propose amendments to the LFMP to ensure that public facilities and services are adequately provided to serve the development. The GMP limits the number of residential building permits that can be issued throughout the city to a maximum of approximately 54,600 dwelling units at buildout. The proposed project is within the Southwest Quadrant of the City, which allows for a maximum total of 12,859 dwelling units at buildout. This maximum number of units cannot be changed, unless approved by public vote. The Zone 9 LFMP, originally adopted in 1989, anticipated the buildout development capacity of the Zone to be 910 dwelling units and approximately 1,092,200 square feet of non- residential use. The 1993 LFMP amendment reflected the adoption of the Poinsettia Shores Master Plan and revised the projected number of residential dwelling units to 1,023, or an additional 113 units as allowed by the City of Carlsbad Density Bonus Ordinance. Projected non-residential uses were reduced to 178,600 square feet and 220 timeshares/hotel units. The Zone 22 LFMP, originally adopted in 1988, projected residential buildout at 1,472 dwelling units and 970,952 square feet of non-residential development. With the 1997 LFMP amendment, which reflected the adoption of the Poinsettia Shores Master Plan, the number of projected dwelling units was revised to 1,426. Non-residential uses were increased to 1,001,436 square feet. ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 7-15 August 2007 The adopted City of Carlsbad General Plan designates a mixture of uses for the project development area, which include travel, recreation, commercial, neighborhood commercial, and residential uses. under the existing land use designations. With implementation of the Vision Plan, the uses proposed would remain consistent with the type of development envisioned for this area under the current land use designations. As proposed under the Vision Plan, the 50-acre development area would be developed at a reduced density as compared to that which is currently allowed, thereby creating a corresponding reduction to population projections within the southwest quadrant of the City. Through the GMP, the City actively monitors development activity to assure compliance with the Growth Management Plan and ensure that adequate facilities and services are available for the City’s residents as the population continues to grow. Monitoring techniques include subdivision review; monthly development monitoring reports (residential and non- residential building permit activity); traffic monitoring reports; annual reporting on performance measures for growth management and capital projects to City Council; annual evaluation of individual capital improvement projects; an excess dwelling unit bank to control residential development; and, construction updates for public and private projects. Performance standards for future growth are established in the City’s Growth Management Plan and address eleven public facilities, of which eight are provided by the City of Carlsbad and three are provided in part by other agencies. These standards allow the City to control future development and to estimate future demand for public facilities and services, as well as to plan for the construction of such facilities. City approval of proposed development requires that the applicant demonstrate consistency with the performance standards established for the zone. Implementation of the project would not remove any barriers to growth that would otherwise preclude development if the project were not to be developed. The proposed project would involve minor construction, extension, or relocation of existing utilities to serve the project site. As surrounding neighborhoods to the north and east are built out and currently receive public water and sewer services, provision of these services to the project site would not provide increased capacity beyond existing conditions that would allow for the construction of a number of residential units that may not be anticipated by the General Plan and zoning designations because of the increased capacity. Therefore, impacts due to population growth due to the provision of utilities for development of the project site would be less than significant. As stated above, implementation of the Vision Plan would result in a reduction in the number of residential units and resulting population from that anticipated for in the approved LFMPs for Zones 9 and 22. As discussed in Section 5.12, Public Services and Utilities, implementation of the Vision Plan would not adversely impact planned or current levels of service for public facilities such as sewer, water, open space, parks, libraries, or fire or police protection, as the Plan would be consistent with (or lower than) the number of dwelling units planned for the area in the LFMPs. As a result, implementation of the Vision Plan would not significantly impact the planned residential unit count, population, or growth patterns intended for the project development area, or place an unanticipated demand on public facilities or services. ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 7-16 August 2007 Therefore, implementation of the Vision Plan is not anticipated to induce substantial population growth of the area, either directly (i.e., by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (i.e., through extension of roads or other infrastructure), as growth and provision of facilities and services would occur consistent with that projected for the area. Development within the proposed Ponto development areaArea would therefore be in conformance with the City General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, Growth Management Plan, LFMPs 9 and 22, and the South Carlsbad Coastal Redevelopment Area Plan, as well as other applicable goals and policies pertaining the future growth and development. Development of individual properties on the project site with the proposed residential, commercial, and recreational uses would generate short-term employment opportunities during the construction phase and long-term employment opportunities during the operations phase; however, this level of development and type of uses is not expected to directly or indirectly result in a significant increase in population in the area, nor a significant increase in the demand for permanent housing. Therefore, impacts to on area population growth would be less than significant. In addition, the Vision Plan is intended to serve as a guide for redevelopment of the Ponto development area and does not propose site-specific development or a phasing schedule for when development should occur. As development of the area would take place over future years, with applications submitted by individual landowners when development or redevelopment is desired, implementation of the Vision Plan would not result in adverse impacts caused by the displacement of substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere, as current landowners would not be forced from their homes or businesses to facilitate the proposed development. 7.5.2.3 Recreational Facilities Implementation of the Vision Plan would not result in significant impacts to existing recreational uses as a result of the project. Future development would be required to prepare development plans consistent with the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan, which includes design elements to supplement and enhance opportunities for recreation in the area. Such elements include a variety of trails and pathways, a Beachfront Resort multi-purpose trail, a wetland interpretive trail, pedestrian trails with connection to a regional trail system, and a connection to the Coastal Rail Trail which runs to the east of the Ponto site. Additional parking along and a pedestrian underpass below Carlsbad Boulevard are proposed for improved vehicular and pedestrian access to the South Carlsbad State Beach and Campground. Other recreational elements and community amenities envisioned include construction of a wetland interpretive park, a golf putting course, a community nature/arts center, an approximate four-acre linear park to the west of (realigned) Carlsbad Boulevard, and other plazas, courtyards, and pedestrian spaces for both active and passive recreational opportunities. In addition, the LFMPs for Zones 9 and 22 state that sufficient existing and projected parkland has been identified through buildout of the Southwest Quadrant. To ensure the continued provision of parkland within the District and conformance with performance standards, landowners within the quadrant would be required to pay Park-in-Lieu fees and Public Facilities Fees for the financing of parks prior to the approval of final maps or issuance of building permits, as no additional dedication of parkland is required. The LFMPs ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 7-17 August 2007 for Zones 9 and 22 require this condition. As the provision of parkland within the District is adequate, implementation of the Ponto Vision Plan would meet the performance standards and impacts would be less than significant. Therefore, the Vision Plan is not anticipated to increase the use of existing neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities such that a substantial deterioration of a facility would occur. In addition, implementation of the Vision Plan would not include the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that would have an adverse affect on the environment. Therefore, the project would not adversely affect existing recreational opportunities or resources within the City, and impacts would be less than significant. ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final IR 7-18 August 2007 Table 7-1 Cumulative Projects Site Number Reference/Project Number NAME Characteristics/Status Impacts 1 99-001; 04-268; 93- 172 (Located south of project site, across Batiquitos Lagoon) Hotel Project (City of Encinitas) The project is a consolidation of four existing lots into one parcel of 4.3 acres, a major use permit for a 130-room hotel, with a 200-seat restaurant and lounge area, meeting rooms, and a administrative and services area. Lot size – 189,000 square feet Floor area – 122,540 square feet Parking: 229 spaces 1,300 ADT (650 trips in / 650 trips out) Status: EIR approved by the Encinitas City Council on January 22, 1992. Traffic 1,3001,800 ADT (650 900 trips in/650 900 trips out) Biology Impacts to Del Mar sand aster. Impacts mitigated through transplantation to a suitable location offsite. 2 CT 05-10 (Located northeast of project site; east of I-5 along Poinsettia Lane) Poinsettia Single-family Residential Subdivision of approximately 5 acres into 29 single-family residential lots; two open space lots; one driveway lot. Status: MND – Stamped May 2, 2006 NOD May 19, 2006 Noise Impacts from Interstate 5; Mitigation 18’ X 18’ private rear yard, 6’ high barrier. Biology No Impacts. Site previously graded with surrounding residential development. No sensitive plant species identified on site. 3 CUP 04-05 (Located northeast of project site; northeast corner of Aviara Parkway and Poinsettia Lane) Calvary Chapel 26.94-acre site with a 13-acre church campus consisting of 49,000 square feet of a multi- purpose building and family center. Capacity is 1,800 persons. Project Buildings include: Biology Preserves: 7.58 acres of coastal sage scrub 1.49 acres of southern maritime chaparral ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS Table 7-1 continued Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 7-19 August 2007 Site Number Reference/Project Number NAME Characteristics/Status Impacts 19,000 sq. ft. two-story preschool with 150 students 4,000 sq ft chapel building 7,000 sq ft gymnasium 13,000 sq ft youth building 6,000 sq ft adult education building 1,049 parking spaces Status: MND dated September 20, 2005 NOD dated January 11, 2005 0.67 acres of southern willow scrub 0.60 acres of wetland ruderal Open Space - Northern portion of the site is native habitat (8.9 acres) 4 CT 02-14; CT 02- 15; CT 03-03; CT 02-19 (Located northeast of project site; across I-5 and along Palomar Airport Road) Bressi Ranch Project site is approximately 585 acres. The project includes 15 planning areas and 6 open space areas. Northern Area (150.3 acres): (5) Industrial lots Southern Area (434.8 acres): (7) Residential Lots (1) Industrial Lot (1) Mixed Use Lot (1) Community Facility Lot (6) Open Space Lots Status: Master Plan EIR approved July 23, 2002 Biology Impacts 30.9 acres of Diegan coastal sage scrub Mitigation provided at 2:1 (61.8 acres of Diegan coastal sage scrub) Offsite Impacts 1.85 acres riparian scrub 0.48 acres riparian woodland 12.9 acres Diegan CSS 11.2 acres Floodplain scrub 12.9 acres southern maritime mixed chaparral 46.8 acres of non- native grassland 1.5 acres eucalyptus 11.3 acres of disturbed habitat ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS Table 7-1 continued Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 7-20 August 2007 Site Number Reference/Project Number NAME Characteristics/Status Impacts 5 CT 01-09 (Located southeast of project site; near northeast corner of La Costa Drive and Rancho Santa Fe) La Costa Town Square Project Project site is approximately 81.4 acres with proposed mixed-use retail/commercial/office/residential development. Project includes 131 residential units; 80,000 sq. ft. industrial space; 380,000 sq. ft. commercial space. Approximately 5.7 acres will be protected as onsite open space. Status: EIR pending Traffic 22,800 ADT Biology Project site is part of the Fieldstone Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP). Two small (0.003 acres total) pooling areas were identified. No gnatcatchers identified onsite. Impacts to sensitive species will occur. Habitat and wildlife areas are provided as part of compliance with Fieldstone HCP. 6 00-201 MUP/DR/CDP (Located south of project site on the north side of La Costa Avenue on the northeast corner of North Coast Highway 101 and La Costa Avenue) Shoreline Hotel, City of Encinitas 26-unit timeshare/hotel development and associated site improvements for 1.81-gross acre property zoned visitor-serving commercial of the North 101 Corridor Specific Plan. Status: EIR approved by Encinitas City Council on September 1, 2005. Not constructed. Visual Highly visible coastal bluff top; retaining wall significant visual effect Biology Loss 174 sq. ft. of disturbed coastal sage scrub Noise disturbance of sensitive bird species (nearby Least Tern and Snowy Plovir nesting sites) Short term effect wetland and upland habitat Long term increase night lighting and human and pet intrusion in upland and wetland habitat Cultural Possible disturbance or destruction of unknown ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS Table 7-1 continued Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 7-21 August 2007 Site Number Reference/Project Number NAME Characteristics/Status Impacts buried fossils during grading and construction Geology and Soils Possible unstable temporary basement excavation slopes during construction Steep cut slopes Possible structural failure due to highly compressible fill soils and terrace deposits Hydrology and Water Quality Negative short-term construction erosion and sedimentation on water quality Increase in urban pollutants Land Use and Community Character Inconsistent with Encinitas General Plan Public Safety Policy and Resource Management Element Policy and Hillside/Inland Bluff Overlay Loss of vacant land Noise Possible excess noise levels Transportation and Traffic 208 ADT. Improvements to Highway 101 and La Costa Avenue required. ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS Table 7-1 continued Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 7-22 August 2007 Site Number Reference/Project Number NAME Characteristics/Status Impacts 7 03-090 TM/MUP/DR/CDP Coral Cove Tentative Map, City of Encinitas Subdivision of approximately 10 acres into 79 lots comprised of 69 single family residential lots, two private street lots, and eith open space lots to accommodate a total of 69 units Status: EIR prepared for project and certified as complete by the Planning Commission on June 1, 2006. Not constructed. Land Use and Planning Removal of three eucalyptus trees along Vulcan Avenue which would not be consistent with the vision and goals with Corridor Specific Plan Aesthetic/Community Character Proposed road widening would result in removal of three large eucalyptus trees Biology Indirect impacts to sensitive nesting raptors could occur if construction occurs during breeding season Cultural Resources Historical location of former structure shown to have potential for containing significant subsurface archaeological deposits Hydrology and Water Quality Greenhouse demolition would occur; bare soils would be exposed; soils and material stockpiles would be established; fuels, lubricants, and solid and liquid wastes would be stored within active construction areas. Transportation and Circulation 443 ADT; Under near ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS Table 7-1 continued Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 7-23 August 2007 Site Number Reference/Project Number NAME Characteristics/Status Impacts term cumulative without project traffic conditions Vulcan/La Costa Venue intersection would operate at an unacceptable LOS E; Traffic delay 4.8 seconds Noise Onsite noise level would exceed 65 dB along the western portion of the project site Hazards and Hazardous Materials Onsite soils within the vicinity could pose a significant threat due to GeoCon limited pesticide assessment; Potentially significant hazardous materials may result. ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 7-24 August 2007 Table 7-2 Cumulative Impacts To Vegetation Communities/Habitats (acres) 1 Southern willow scrub Southern coastal bluff scrub (including disturbed) Diegan coastal sage scrub (including disturbed) Eucalyptus woodland Disturbed habitat Total SITE NUMBER Name REFERENCE/ PROJECT NUMBER Impacted Mitigation Impacted Mitigation Impacted Mitigation Impacted Mitigation Impacted Mitigation Impacted Mitigation Proposed Project Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR 05-05/ GPA 05-04/ LCPA 05-01 0.04 0.12 0.1 0.3 1.2 2.4 0.3 2 21.1 2 22.7 2.81 1 City of Encinitas Hotel Project 99-001; 04-268; 93-172 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2 Poinsettia Single- family Residential CT 05-10 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3 Calvary Chapel CUP 04-05 Unk 0.67 0.0 0.0 Unk 7.58 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Unk 8.25 4 Bressi Ranch CT 02-14; CT 02-15; CT 03-03; CT 02-19 0.08 0.08 0.0 0.0 30.9 61.8 0.0 0.0 385.0 0.0 416.0 61.9 5 La Costa Town Square Project CT 01-09 Part of the Fieldstone HCP – impacts and mitigation are unknown. Total 0.12 0.87 0.1 0.3 32.1 71.78 0.3 2 406.1 2 441.6 72.97 Unk = unknown 1Errors in addition due to rounding. 2 Mitigated through payment of an in lieu mitigation fee in an amount to be determined by the City Council. ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 7-25 August 2007 Table 7-3 Near Term (2010) Peak Hour Intersection LOS – HCM Without Vision Plan With Vision Plan AM PM AM PM Change in Delay Intersections Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS Delay LOS AM PM Palomar Airport Road / Avenida Encinas 31.6 C 45.4 D 31.7 C 47.0 D 0.1 1.5 Palomar Airport Road / I-5 SB Ramps 20.0 C 15.8 B 20.1 C 16.0 B 0.1 0.2 Palomar Airport Road / I-5 NB Ramps 39.4 D 32.6 C 39.9 D 33.4 C 0.5 0.8 Palomar Airport Road / Paseo Del Norte 34.5 C 40.9 D 34.6 C 41.0 D 0.1 0.1 Palomar Airport Road / Armada Drive 20.8 C 47.8 D 20.8 C 47.8 D 0.0 0.0 Palomar Airport Road / Hidden Valley Road 14.1 B 16.2 B 15.3 B 16.4 B 1.2 0.2 Palomar Airport Road / College Boulevard 35.7 D 41.1 D 35.8 D 42.0 D 0.1 0.9 Palomar Airport Road / Camino Vida Roble 30.1 C 35.0 D 30.1 C 35.0 C 0.0 0.0 Palomar Airport Road / El Camino Real 49.3 D 77.3 E 49.3 D 78.4 E 0.0 1.1 Palomar Airport Road / El Fuerte St. 91.5 F 30.3 C 92.2 F 30.4 C 0.7 0.1 Palomar Airport Road / Melrose Drive 55.0 D 50.6 D 55.2 E 50.9 D 0.2 0.3 Carlsbad Boulevard / Island Way 8.1 A 7.2 A 8.0 A 7.2 A -0.1 0.0 Carlsbad Boulevard / Breakwater Road 12.6 B 6.2 A 12.7 B 6.2 A 0.1 0.0 Carlsbad Boulevard / Poinsettia Lane 28.3 C 32.3 C 34.9 C 54.6 D 6.6 22.3 Poinsettia Lane / Avenida Encinas 32.3 C 38.6 D 34.7 C 43.1 D 2.4 4.5 Poinsettia Lane / I-5 SB Ramps 25.9 C 28.0 C 30.8 C 46.0 D 4.9 18.0 Poinsettia Lane / I-5 NB Ramps 29.9 C 28.1 C 37.0 D 35.9 D 7.1 7.8 Poinsettia Lane / Paseo Del Norte 28.0 C 35.6 D 28.9 C 40.3 D 0.9 4.7 Paseo Del Norte / Camino del las Ondas 29.9 C 24.7 C 30.9 C 26.2 C 1.0 1.5 Poinsettia Lane / Batiquitos Drive 23.4 C 23.2 C 23.0 C 23.1 C -0.4 -0.1 Poinsettia Lane / Aviara Parkway 30.2 C 33.2 C 30.1 C 33.9 C -0.1 0.7 El Camino Real / Cassia Road 21.2 C 11.2 B 22.4 C 15.2 B 1.2 4.0 El Camino Real / Camino Vida Roble 23.0 C 40.9 D 23.0 C 41.1 D 0.0 0.2 Carlsbad Boulevard / Ponto Drive 9.6 A 18.5 B 20.1 C 30.8 C 12.3 14.4 Carlsbad Boulevard / Beach Way - - - - 11.6 B 14.6 B 10.0 14.6 Carlsbad Boulevard / Avenida Encinas 13.9 B 14.2 B 18.7 B 19.6 B 4.8 5.4 Ponto Drive / Avenida Encinas 29.3 C 31.7 C 34.0 C 36.2 D 4.7 4.5 La Costa Avenue / N. Coast Highway 101 38.2 D 41.1 C 42.4 D 87.4 F 4.2 46.3 La Costa Avenue / Vulcan Avenue 98.8 F 151.8 F 216.4 F 394.4 F 117.6 242.6 La Costa Avenue / I-5 SB Ramps 25.5 C 27.6 C 25.1 C 27.2 C -0.4 -0.4 La Costa Avenue / I-5 NB Ramps 22.4 C 23.0 C 22.8 C 24.3 C 0.4 1.3 La Costa Avenue / Piraeus St. 11.6 B 11.1 B 11.6 B 11.0 B 0.0 -0.1 El Camino Real / La Costa Avenue 61.3 E 39.4 D 61.5 E 39.9 D 0.2 0.5 N. Coast Highway 101 / Leucadia Avenue 33.7 C 48.1 D 35.4 C 50.1 D 1.7 2.0 La Costa Avenue / Sheridan Road 11.0 B 16.8 C 13.2 B 23.8 C 2.2 7.0 Italic - Unsignalized Intersection Deficient intersections shown in bold. ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 7-26 August 2007 Table 7-4 Near Term (2010) Peak Hour Roadway Segment LOS 2010 No Vision Plan A.M. 2010 No Vision Plan P.M. 2010 With Vision Plan A.M. 2010 With Vision Plan P.M. Change in V/C Location Direction (# lanes) Capacity Volume V/C LOS Volume V/C LOS Volume V/C LOS Volume V/C LOS AM PM NB (2) 3,600 414 0.12 A 1,064 0.30 A 438 0.12 A 1,091 0.30 A 0.00 0.00 Palomar Airport Road to Island Way SB (2) 3,600 1,004 0.28 A 1,259 0.35 A 1,048 0.29 A 1,325 0.37 A 0.01 0.02 NB (2) 3,600 409 0.11 A 1,077 0.30 A 433 0.12 A 1,104 0.31 A 0.01 0.01 Island Way to Breakwater Road SB (2) 3,600 984 0.27 A 1,207 0.34 A 1,028 0.29 A 1,273 0.35 A 0.02 0.01 NB (2) 3,600 383 0.11 A 1,008 0.28 A 407 0.11 A 1,035 0.29 A 0.00 0.01 Breakwater Road to Poinsettia Lane SB (2) 3,600 933 0.26 A 1,040 0.29 A 977 0.27 A 1,106 0.31 A 0.01 0.02 NB (2) 3,600 382 0.11 A 1,020 0.28 A 406 0.11 A 1,047 0.29 A 0.00 0.01 Poinsettia Lane to Ponto Drive SB (2) 3,600 951 0.26 A 1,042 0.29 A 995 0.28 A 1,108 0.31 A 0.02 0.02 NB (2) 3,600 979 0.27 A 1,061 0.29 A 1,187 0.33 A 1,296 0.36 A 0.06 0.07 Ponto Drive to Beach Way SB (2) 3,600 1,109 0.31 A 1,275 0.35 A 1,333 0.37 A 1,611 0.45 A 0.06 0.10 NB (2) 3,600 769 0.21 A 873 0.24 A 850 0.23 A 990 0.28 A 0.02 0.04 Beach Way to Avenida Encinas SB (2) 3,600 1,172 0.33 A 1,189 0.33 A 1,241 0.34 A 1,288 0.36 A 0.01 0.03 NB (2) 3,600 1,003 0.28 A 1,057 0.29 A 1,223 0.34 A 1,387 0.39 A 0.06 0.10 Avenida Encinas to La Costa Avenue SB (2) 3,600 1,356 0.38 A 1,381 0.38 A 1,553 0.43 A 1,599 0.44 A 0.05 0.06 NB (2) 3,600 461 0.13 A 1,203 0.33 A 521 0.14 A 1,294 0.36 A 0.01 0.03 Carlsbad Blvd. La Costa Avenue to Leucadia Boulevard SB (2) 3,600 1,832 0.51 A 808 0.22 A 1,887 0.52 A 869 0.24 A 0.01 0.02 ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS Table 7-4 continued Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 7-27 August 2007 2010 No Vision Plan A.M. 2010 No Vision Plan P.M. 2010 With Vision Plan A.M. 2010 With Vision Plan P.M. Change in V/C Location Direction (# lanes) Capacity Volume V/C LOS Volume V/C LOS Volume V/C LOS Volume V/C LOS AM PM NB (2) 3,600 412 0.11 A 493 0.14 A 414 0.12 A 495 0.14 A 0.01 0.00 Cannon Road to Palomar Airport Road SB (2) 3,600 253 0.07 A 649 0.18 A 255 0.07 A 653 0.18 A 0.00 0.00 NB (1) 1,800 210 0.12 A 580 0.32 A 213 0.12 A 583 0.32 A 0.00 0.00 Palomar Airport Road to Poinsettia Lane SB (1) 1,800 442 0.24 A 367 0.20 A 445 0.24 A 372 0.20 A 0.00 0.00 NB (2) 3,600 552 0.15 A 594 0.17 A 609 0.17 A 654 0.18 A 0.02 0.01 Poinsettia Lane to Windrose Circle SB 2) 3,600 392 0.11 A 615 0.17 A 450 0.13 A 702 0.20 A 0.02 0.03 NB (1) 1,800 255 0.14 A 339 0.19 A 430 0.24 A 604 0.34 A 0.10 0.15 Avenida Encinas Windrose Circle to Carlsbad Boulevard SB (1) 1,800 294 0.16 A 297 0.17 A 457 0.25 A 468 0.26 A 0.09 0.09 NB (2) 3,600 1,339 0.37 A 591 0.16 A 1,353 0.38 A 606 0.17 A 0.01 0.01 College Boulevard El Camino Real to Palomar Airport Road SB (2) 3,600 451 0.13 A 1,252 0.35 A 466 0.13 A 1,275 0.35 A 0.00 0.00 NB (2) 3,600 980 0.27 A 450 0.13 A 980 0.27 A 450 0.13 A 0.00 0.00 Palomar Airport Road to Poinsettia Lane SB (2) 3,600 273 0.08 A 1,008 0.28 A 273 0.08 A 1,008 0.28 A 0.00 0.00 NB (2) 3,600 709 0.20 A 583 0.16 A 714 0.20 A 591 0.16 A 0.00 0.00 Aviara Parkway Poinsettia Lane to Batiquitos Drive SB (2) 3,600 362 0.10 A 958 0.27 A 367 0.10 A 963 0.27 A 0.00 0.00 NB (2) 3,600 765 0.21 A 830 0.23 A 767 0.21 A 833 0.23 A 0.00 0.00 Cannon Road to Palomar Airport Road SB (2) 3,600 346 0.10 A 849 0.24 A 349 0.10 A 853 0.24 A 0.00 0.00 NB (1) 1,800 739 0.41 A 620 0.34 A 739 0.41 A 620 0.34 A 0.00 0.00 Paseo del Norte Camino Del Parque to Camino del Las Ondas SB (1) 1,800 330 0.18 A 1,027 0.57 A 330 0.18 A 1,027 0.57 A 0.00 0.00 ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS Table 7-4 continued Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 7-28 August 2007 2010 No Vision Plan A.M. 2010 No Vision Plan P.M. 2010 With Vision Plan A.M. 2010 With Vision Plan P.M. Change in V/C Location Direction (# lanes) Capacity Volume V/C LOS Volume V/C LOS Volume V/C LOS Volume V/C LOS AM PM NB (1) 1,800 90 0.05 A 34 0.02 A 90 0.05 A 34 0.02 A 0.00 0.00 Paseo del Norte Camino del Las Ondas to Poinsettia Lane SB (1) 1,800 28 0.02 A 109 0.06 A 28 0.02 A 109 0.06 A 0.00 0.00 NB (3) 5,400 2,444 0.45 A 1,742 0.32 A 2,444 0.45 A 1,742 0.32 A 0.00 0.00 Faraday Avenue to Palomar Airport Road SB (3) 5,400 1,600 0.30 A 2,221 0.41 A 1,600 0.30 A 2,221 0.41 A 0.00 0.00 NB (3) 5,400 1,807 0.33 A 1,557 0.29 A 1,816 0.34 A 1,567 0.29 A 0.01 0.00 Palomar Airport Road to Camino Vida Roble SB (3) 5,400 1,329 0.25 A 1,820 0.34 A 1,339 0.25 A 1,834 0.34 A 0.00 0.00 NB (2) 3,600 2,145 0.60 A 1,142 0.32 A 2,154 0.60 A 1,152 0.32 A 0.00 0.00 Camino Vida Roble to Cassia Road SB (3) 5,400 1,701 0.32 A 1,268 0.23 A 1,710 0.32 A 1,278 0.24 A 0.00 0.01 NB (3) 5,400 2,377 0.44 A 2,251 0.42 A 2,377 0.44 A 2,251 0.42 A 0.00 0.00 El Camino Real Cassia Road to La Costa Avenue SB (2) 3,600 2,130 0.59 A 2,145 0.60 A 2,130 0.59 A 2,145 0.60 A 0.00 0.00 EB (3) 5,400 598 0.11 A 1,081 0.20 A 609 0.11 A 1,093 0.20 A 0.00 0.00 Avenida Encinas to I-5 WB (3) 5,400 879 0.16 A 1,082 0.20 A 909 0.17 A 1,126 0.21 A 0.01 0.01 EB (3) 5,400 2,658 0.49 A 2,037 0.38 A 2,660 0.49 A 2,041 0.38 A 0.00 0.00 Palomar Airport Road I-5 to Paseo del Norte WB (3) 5,400 1,198 0.22 A 2,993 0.55 A 1,202 0.22 A 2,998 0.56 A 0.00 0.01 EB (3) 5,400 2,629 0.49 A 1,613 0.30 A 2,629 0.49 A 1,614 0.30 A 0.00 0.00 Paseo del Norte to Armada Drive WB (3) 5,400 1,179 0.22 A 2,957 0.55 A 1,180 0.22 A 2,958 0.55 A 0.00 0.00 EB (3) 5,400 2,458 0.46 A 1,923 0.36 A 2,458 0.46 A 1,924 0.36 A 0.00 0.00 Palomar Airport Road Armada Drive to Hidden Valley Road WB (3) 5,400 1,557 0.29 A 2,588 0.48 A 1,558 0.29 A 2,589 0.48 A 0.00 0.00 ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS Table 7-4 continued Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 7-29 August 2007 2010 No Vision Plan A.M. 2010 No Vision Plan P.M. 2010 With Vision Plan A.M. 2010 With Vision Plan P.M. Change in V/C Location Direction (# lanes) Capacity Volume V/C LOS Volume V/C LOS Volume V/C LOS Volume V/C LOS AM PM EB (3) 5,400 2,364 0.44 A 1,799 0.33 A 2,382 0.44 A 1,820 0.34 A 0.00 0.01 Hidden Valley Road to College Boulevard WB (3) 5,400 1,565 0.29 A 2,467 0.46 A 1,586 0.29 A 2,498 0.46 A 0.00 0.00 EB (3) 5,400 1,703 0.32 A 1,361 0.25 A 1,703 0.32 A 1,362 0.25 A 0.00 0.00 College Boulevard to Camino Vida Roble WB (3) 5,400 1,136 0.21 A 1,585 0.29 A 1,137 0.21 A 1,586 0.29 A 0.00 0.00 EB (3) 5,400 1,273 0.24 A 1,360 0.25 A 1,273 0.24 A 1,361 0.25 A 0.00 0.00 Camino Vida Roble to El Camino Real WB (3) 5,400 1,354 0.25 A 1,140 0.21 A 1,355 0.25 A 1,141 0.21 A 0.00 0.00 EB (3) 5,400 1,818 0.34 A 2,874 0.53 A 1,827 0.34 A 2,884 0.53 A 0.00 0.00 El Camino Real to El Fuerte Street WB (3) 5,400 3,115 0.58 A 1,751 0.32 A 3,125 0.58 A 1,766 0.33 A 0.00 0.01 EB (3) 5,400 1,368 0.25 A 3,095 0.57 A 1,377 0.26 A 3,105 0.58 A 0.01 0.01 Palomar Airport Road El Fuerte Street to Melrose Drive WB (3) 5,400 3,146 0.58 A 1,691 0.31 A 3,156 0.58 A 1,706 0.32 A 0.00 0.01 EB (2) 3,600 196 0.05 A 420 0.12 A 380 0.11 A 627 0.17 A 0.06 0.05 Carlsbad Boulevard to Avenida Encinas WB (2) 3,600 339 0.09 A 483 0.13 A 519 0.14 A 752 0.21 A 0.05 0.08 EB (2) 3,600 660 0.18 A 1,006 0.28 A 894 0.25 A 1,265 0.35 A 0.07 0.07 Avenida Encinas to I-5 WB (2) 3,600 770 0.21 A 943 0.26 A 1,001 0.28 A 1,289 0.36 A 0.07 0.10 EB (2) 3,600 1,334 0.37 A 1,603 0.45 A 1,402 0.39 A 1,679 0.47 A 0.02 0.02 I-5 to Paseo del Norte WB (2) 3,600 1,254 0.35 A 1,480 0.41 A 1,329 0.37 A 1,592 0.44 A 0.02 0.03 EB (2) 3,600 965 0.27 A 1,147 0.32 A 1,015 0.28 A 1,203 0.33 A 0.01 0.02 Poinsettia Lane Paseo Del Norte to Batiquitos Drive WB (2) 3,600 951 0.26 A 1,093 0.30 A 1,006 0.28 A 1,175 0.33 A 0.02 0.03 ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS Table 7-4 continued Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 7-30 August 2007 2010 No Vision Plan A.M. 2010 No Vision Plan P.M. 2010 With Vision Plan A.M. 2010 With Vision Plan P.M. Change in V/C Location Direction (# lanes) Capacity Volume V/C LOS Volume V/C LOS Volume V/C LOS Volume V/C LOS AM PM EB (2) 3,600 1,065 0.30 A 855 0.24 A 1,116 0.31 A 911 0.25 A 0.01 0.01 Batiquitos Drive to Aviara Parkway WB (2) 3,600 651 0.18 A 1,311 0.36 A 706 0.20 A 1,394 0.39 A 0.02 0.03 EB (2) 3,600 429 0.12 A 427 0.12 A 475 0.13 A 478 0.13 A 0.01 0.01 Poinsettia Lane Aviara Parkway to El Camino Real WB (2) 3,600 375 0.10 A 700 0.19 A 425 0.12 A 775 0.22 A 0.02 0.03 EB (1) 1,800 551 0.31 A 737 0.41 A 692 0.38 A 893 0.50 A 0.07 0.01 Carlsbad Boulevard to Vulcan Avenue WB (1) 1,800 655 0.36 A 632 0.35 A 815 0.45 A 872 0.48 A 0.08 0.14 EB (1) 1,800 715 0.40 A 809 0.45 A 856 0.48 A 965 0.54 A 0.08 0.09 Vulcan Avenue to I-5 WB (1) 1,800 887 0.49 A 1,327 0.74 C 1,047 0.58 A 1,567 0.87 D 0.09 0.13 EB (2) 3,600 1,583 0.44 A 1,562 0.43 A 1,620 0.45 A 1,603 0.45 A 0.01 0.02 I-5 to Piraeus Street WB (2) 3,600 1,465 0.41 A 1,518 0.42 A 1,505 0.42 A 1,578 0.44 A 0.01 0.02 EB (2) 3,600 1,578 0.44 A 1,455 0.40 A 1,615 0.45 A 1,496 0.42 A 0.01 0.02 Piraeus Street to El Camino Real WB (2) 3,600 1,337 0.37 A 1,136 0.32 A 1,377 0.38 A 1,196 0.33 A 0.01 0.01 EB (2) 3,600 542 0.15 A 981 0.27 A 579 0.16 A 1,022 0.28 A 0.01 0.01 La Costa Ave. East of El Camino Real WB (2) 3,600 923 0.26 A 722 0.20 A 963 0.27 A 782 0.22 A 0.01 0.02 NB (1) 1,800 102 0.06 A 150 0.08 A 243 0.13 A 307 0.17 A 0.11 0.09 Ponto Drive Carlsbad Boulevard to Avenida Encinas SB (1) 1,800 9 0.00 A 221 0.12 A 152 0.08 A 435 0.24 A 0.08 0.12 ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 7-31 August 2007 Figure 7-1 Cumulative Projects Map \ ... , \ • \• ►~\ .•• , •• ----~_\. r .# ... •·~ 11· ,.~"8~~·~# :t.;:;~~•--::x--~---...... .'C:. -__ --:__ .. ,•_fllil.,. •·--. .. , ,\ • '--.-,\. • -~ . ... • ---. ' .,. t,,...., \...-• ' \ • • \ '-r i ---.~ --.. -'.It': . '."t ,,, ., \ .., • . . ~ / , ---. . ~A ~ ._ ·. •·.·I I" " ',;.... ' , I ~-• , · · ~-~ -. · \ · ::·· . • 4~ i I ._..,.._,, -t7 . ·-. . ', \ , . -' . . . . -, ,,,.. . ,--.• ---"' • • \ a . . . • . . . -:: . . -.._ . ,. ·~ ~, . . -~,. •.. . \ ..... \ .... ~ V -J.~ ~ •• \ ' •"" • • . -. "' t I \ ,,;J '-": \\-' , ,,;s \ ·" : •. "1'.; .,.~ ' : --:11• l ..... ,a-,:, ·y,;i • ~:1 g' ~ .. · ,_ll __ . '1: ... ·-\\~ \' \, . ., ,.:, w--''"'"' -~ t:. .,,, ·, ~.. ;r--'., .. •• \ ~ • I t • 78 °' ~ _ :'9 -.II • •• • ,_ :.:-~~~~ ,, ";1 \ , • , , \ ,. • , r .... •·)~ I -•• .I I ... ... • -~~-~ . , • . \ -~~O \• • ~'(,_ _ ..... .• ~~.,:~,, • ._,..J,.1\~I• , 4'•,._,.,, \·! ,,· '! ~ ,· \.'t, \ =-=··~ .· _Palom~r A_i_rport Rd ,,. C , . , • ,. '." <.· ~ ~'-~ ♦ ♦ : tq • • • t,I •· _._·',\1' '_. . ~ N' ... . . .. ..... • ' t· ♦, , .,,, I • •• -,. ,. .,, ·. . " II • •-•~• • . « • ' . lo •. • •• .,, ~ '-' -, .... I , • ~-' \.,, \ ~-• ,. 1 • . • . . •• • , -I I -,, ~·-. . . . . . . . ~ •~~E~ -~ \.\ ... . ... , ... ~-~-' ... _.. ... -~ ,.~ ✓-• .-.' ·., '-' \~~~ "' ·•., '.· ;_.,.·;\~, , "--•• ~' ~l:.J I :.1 , ~' Ol '4···•·-, t ' •P le , .• ,.,,..,,. _ _.·_-<> ~--·'~ . ,.; ···.-· :\ l'l ill 111'11 '.\'·, ..... ·-.. -... 1,.-;.~--:~..,':.""""• .·,. ' ,r. ·--,1.-•1' \ ,~,.o--~\ --•, '•' .. ·-··-•0)-. --·-•.••• , ... - I \...,. ,, • . .. _,. .. • . . ..• \ \ ,;.:: .. ·. \~ .;.•,· _'; . : . ~.·,"'-:_~ '"'0":'1 .. ....... --~·,. •\ __ . 'cl .,, ·i \~ . ·. ·. . '· ~ . -. . . . . \ - I ,\ -. ~· • ~ , :.::} .\\\•.\.·:" t /~ ,::: :• ·' -'>) ;: .. ¢ ~c-- {1 \ ... ,.~tt,·.~-.· . 'l . ,.-. ,(') .. ':',,. ... -• • . . . . • • ,r • . ;,, I • • .!' ~ • Q'! .~ .;;\\'i,~ \ . ':, ·::--·'·,._e -. -; :~ ~. . ...,. ·1· \\ '·'. .. ,· ~ -~-. ' .,, . ~:✓ 'I. -:, •,i"\ ' . ,., ····" .,, .... _ .. ·: .. , 0) 3 ---. . ' ,,,,., ' cf~'\. \ ,, ·. ' "!'--~""-o> 4.1, , ,;~\)'J/ . -~ / 0-~\ -\. ~ ' , . ··· .. Project Name Project Reference No. i ~-. << .. -~'et'i•~--~_=; .. / c.·· .¢\,' ~0"' l j,~.., 19 : . ·. 2 ' -1rr.' . . 'I . , "'-· '-· 1-·1b · M • o,· • -I· '·'.J. · · i ;~ • · ""·. '• • · CAR':;SBAD · · -........... · 0-• .° .-;;;,~ \ . ,·,·. .. _L_ -~ c,;_,r ..... \, ~\~ X '\ . . • • ~-. . •• x Hole! PrOJOCI. C,1y of Enemas 99-001: 04-268; 93-172 Pomsetba Sinele-f amity Res CT 05-10 Catva,y Chopel CUP04-05 Bressi Ranch CT 02-14; CT 02-15; CT 03-03; CT 02-19 ~ ·. ~,·--~:--,\:, ·.. ._ :. ~-· :. -.~. . .= t l ~-.... , .i~ =-~\·._-'·;,'!:;:.: :.··· '\ -• '(•' • L•·-~ \18 ---~\ \\_ •-... .:. -I ,· , . • '-. fJ,l( ,k ou .. m 5 La Cosa Town Square Pro,ect CT 01-09 6 Shoreline Resort, City of EncWl1tas 00-207 C«at Cove TM, City of Encinitas 03-090 ' •y · ~I~,\'.,, . ~ I •,~---~---'\.'. ·,",: .: ___ ~·•,t -,• •.:'-<7:_., ·.·.,·•,;,;: •. ~--\·•.):-•~.. .,_.,,., PROJECT i; ---. · · '~\ . ~J ·· . · ·" . ,· w:.. , ,-i-._. -,;--.• ~ \' . ' : . : .-. \~ -·"' f ,, . . ::. . • . . . .. : LOCATION lt ,\. . ':-'. . " '-. . ~: :::, -· ~:::;:,,_ '.'~-~-: "-\L .,: .. -~-, ~ . ;! ,,. .../,_._. . . I ,.. CONSULTING 25101fll/195I t:aOOltj [IMl'OIWNfUI trc>,K1 CD Not to Sule ·:{_; \.\ ---",_ ... . '~. " _=:--~·:: ,_ \ .. ./ . .. - Bat1q111to'., Lagoon -: ?•.. ; ·. ,_·, .. •:: ... !. '.'1.-... .. -"\.. . ·-. .. .. :-.,..; -.... ~-:-r..:;·~r:~_ ... ., .. .,,. I ---1. ''. ,._ •· Cumulative Projects Map Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR ' ~.;:I': .. -,,,. ... ... ~ --~ ·• ... .. ,:, .,,. 'ot\'lle • e,os\'3 · . \.,'3 _ . ·5~~ • ~a~e •• J, c,7>~ ti . ., . \.:...''O ... ~ ~ . r; )~ .. . (:-~ _, Figure 7-1 ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 7-33 August 2007 Figure 7-2 Near-Term (2010) ADT Volumes -----.. .. ------.. --.. -.. .. ----.. .. ------------ LEGEND: Breakwater Rd. 6,097·•--- 24,800-------- Avenida Encinas X,XXX Average Dally Traffic 0 NOTTO SCALE C □N9ULTINO 251 DI 951/l 951 &•040 ... E°",ro,nmentll irriPlct . .. ~ .-· __ .\.···· 1,400 12500 i IV . Near Term (2010) ADT Volumes Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR 67,100 61 oo 19,300 Figure 7-2 ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 7-35 August 2007 Figure 7-3 Near-Term (2010) with Vision Plan ADT Volumes ------------------ -------... ----------- B,600 .J>' ...•••• •···· ~ ... ·· .. ... ·· 31,622 • • • • • • • •••••• Avenida Encinas 2,461 19,603 LEGEND: x,xxx Average Dally Traffic 0 NOTTO SCALE CONSULTINB 2S!0l %l/l 9Slax()(l.a, Em11ronme11101 .,,~,ct 50 Near Term (2010) With Vision Plan ADT Volumes Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR Figure 7-3 ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 7-37 August 2007 Figure 7-4 Near-Term (2010) AM Level of Service LEGEND • Acceptable (LOS A or B) Q · Marginal (LOS C or D) • • Failure (LOS E or F) CCN!!IULTING 2510!9~ 1/19510042.11 [l'IY1f0f'Vne,U•llffloKt Near Term (2010) AM Level of Service Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR Figure 7-4 ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 7-39 August 2007 Figure 7-5 Near-Term (2010) PM Level of Service LEGEND • -Acceptable (LOS A or B) Q -Marginal (LOS C or D) • -Failure (LOS E or F) 0 NOT TO SCALE CONSU LTING 2!>1019~1/1951 nOAJ.ei [nw.-orwnental Impact Near Term (2010) PM Level of Service Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR Figure 7-5 ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 7-41 August 2007 Figure 7-6 Near-Term (2010) with Vision Plan – AM Level of Service LEGEND • -Acceptable (LOS A or B) Q -Marginal (LOS C or D) • -Failure (LOS E or F) 0 Mn TTn c::.rtt.1 C CON SULTING 251019Sl/19Slh.0U 11 [1'!¥11onmtt1t,J ll'rnct Near Term (2010) With Vision Plan AM Level of Service Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR Figure 7-6 ANALYSIS OF LONG-TERM EFFECTS Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 7-43 August 2007 Figure 7-7 Near-Term (2010) with Vision Plan - PM Level of Service LEGEND • Acceptable (LOS A or B) Q · Marginal (LOS C or D) • -Failure (LOS E or F) CONSULTING 25101951/l~lt•Oot5 • [1'¥!f0Nnlftl .. lmp«t Near Term (2010) With Vision Plan PM Level of Service Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR Figure 7-7 REFERENCES Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 8-1 August 2007 8.0 REFERENCES 8.1 Persons Responsible for Preparation of the EIR This Environmental Impact Report was prepared for the City of Carlsbad Planning Department. The following professional staff participated in the preparation of the EIR. Lead Agency City of Carlsbad Planning Department 1635 Faraday Avenue Carlsbad, California 92008 Christer Westman – Project Manager/Senior Planner Bob Johnson – Traffic Division City of Carlsbad Department of Housing and Redevelopment 2965 Roosevelt Street, Suite B Carlsbad, California 92008 Deborah Fountain – Director Preparers of the EIR RBF Consulting 9755 Clairemont Mesa Boulevard, Suite 100 San Diego, California 92124 Alex Jewell, AICP EIR Project Manager Nicole Marotz, AICP Environmental Planner/Lead EIR Preparer Monica Kling Environmental Analyst Danielle Putnam Senior Planner Kimberly Butts CADD Designer Liz Sears Graphics Jonathon Henderson CADD Drafter Richard Hendrickson GIS Hilary Ellis Word Processor REFERENCES Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 8-2 August 2007 Persons and Organizations Contacted RBF Consulting Hydrology and Water Quality Marc Schulte Richard Lucera Scott Cartwright Traffic Analysis Dawn Wilson, P.E. Stephanie Cheng Tim Strow Noise and Air Quality Analyses Eddie Torres Maria Cadiz Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Richard Beck Kristen Hurley Biological Resources Assessment Derek Langsford Seekey Cacciatore Helix Environmental Planning 8100 La Mesa Boulevard, Suite 150 La Mesa, CA 91941-6452 Geotechnical Consultants Barry Bevier Scott Rugg Kleinfelder, Inc. 5015 Shoreham Place San Diego, CA 92122 Cultural Resources Analysis Brian F. Smith Larry Pierson Brian F. Smith and Associates 14010 Poway Road Poway, CA 92064 REFERENCES Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 8-3 August 2007 8.2 Technical Reports and Supporting Documents The following documents associated with the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR are available for review at the City of Carlsbad, Department of Planning, 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad, California, 92008. Draft Environmental Initial Study for the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan - City of Carlsbad Department of Planning, Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan. March 1, 2005. Notice of Preparation of an Environmental Impact Report and Notice of Scoping Meeting for the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan (EIR 05-05), City of Carlsbad. Filed June 9, 2006. Technical Reports Prepared for the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR Air Quality Conformity Assessment. Prepared by RBF Consulting. November 2006. (Included as Section 5.1 of this EIR). An Archaeological Survey for the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan Project. Prepared by Brian F. Smith & Associates. July 31, 2006. Biological Technical Report. Prepared by Helix Environmental. November 2006. Geologic Hazards Evaluation. Prepared by Kleinfelder, Inc. July 20, 2006. Revised March 2007. Acoustical Site Assessment. Prepared by RBF Consulting. November 2006. (Included as Section 5.5 of this EIR). Phase I Environmental Site Assessment. Prepared by RBF Consulting. July 13, 2006. Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan (Draft). Prepared by RBF Consulting. May 2005. Storm Water Mitigation Plan and Preliminary Hydrology Study. Prepared by RBF Consulting. October 30, 2006. Revised March 20, 2007. Traffic Impact Analysis. Prepared by RBF Consulting. November 2006. Revised March 2007. Year 2006 Protocol Coastal California Gnatcatcher Survey Report. Helix Environmental Planning, Inc. October 10, 2006. Technical Reports Prepared for the Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan Cultural Resource Constraints Study of the Ponto Specific Plan. Prepared by RECON. June 17, 2003. Existing Conditions Report for the Ponto Land Use Strategy and Vision Project. Prepared by RECON. December 8, 2003. Traffic Constraints Analysis. Prepared by RBF Consulting. 2005. Wetland Delineation Report for the Ponto Land Use Strategy and Vision Project. Prepared by RECON. December 8, 2003. REFERENCES Ponto Beachfront Village Vision Plan EIR City of Carlsbad Final EIR 8-4 August 2007 Other References Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan, McClellan-Palomar Airport. Carlsbad, California. Amended October 4, 2004. City of Carlsbad Emergency Operations Plan. Prepared by City of Carlsbad. July 9, 2003. City of Carlsbad Local Coastal Program. Prepared by the City of Carlsbad. 1996. City of Carlsbad Local Facilities Management Plan (Zone 9). 1989. Updated September 1993. City of Carlsbad Local Facilities Management Plan (Zone 22). 1988. Updated August 1, 1997. City of Carlsbad. Municipal Code, Title 21: Zoning Ordinance. City of Carlsbad. Scenic Corridor Guidelines. July 1, 1988. City of Carlsbad. Landscape Manual. Adopted November 13, 1990. Final Environmental Impact Report for the Catarini / Holly Springs Developments (EIR 02- 20). Prepared by Mooney & Associates. October 2004. Five-Year Implementation Plan – Carlsbad Housing and Redevelopment Commission, South Carlsbad Coastal Redevelopment Area. Adopted July 19, 2005. Local Coastal Program – Mello II Segment. City of Carlsbad. 1996. Amended 2003. North 101 Corridor Specific Plan. City of Encinitas. May 21, 1997. Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration. Prepared by the City of Carlsbad. Published March 18, 2005. Open Space and Conservation Resource Management Plan. City of Carlsbad. Prepared by Wallace, Roberts & Todd. June 1992. Poinsettia Properties Specific Plan. November 27, 1998. Poinsettia Shores Master Plan. October 20, 1993. Redevelopment Plan - South Carlsbad Coastal Redevelopment Project. Prepared by Carlsbad Housing and Redevelopment Commission. February 4, 2000. Robertson Ranch Master Plan Final Program EIR. Prepared by BRG Consulting, Inc. April 2006. San Diego Coastal State Park System General Plan – South Carlsbad State Beach. June 1984. South Carlsbad Coastal Redevelopment Area (SCCRA) Redevelopment Plan. July 2000.