HomeMy WebLinkAbout2022-08-17; Planning Commission; ; GPA 2021-0004/ZC 2021-0003/CT 2021-0001/PUD 2021-0004/PUD 2022-0002/SDP 2021-0014 (DEV2020-0116) – JEFFERSON MIXED-USE
Item No.
Application complete date: N/A
P.C. AGENDA OF: August 17, 2022 Project Planner: Lauren Yzaguirre
Project Engineer: Emad Elias
SUBJECT: GPA 2021-0004/ZC 2021-0003/CT 2021-0001/PUD 2021-0004/PUD 2022-0002/SDP
2021-0014 (DEV2020-0116) – JEFFERSON MIXED-USE - Request for a recommendation of
1) approval of a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change to modify of the land use
designation of one parcel totaling 0.16 acres (APN: 203-201-01-00) from a R-15
Residential (8 – 15 du/ac) General Plan land use designation to R-15/O Residential/Office
(8 – 15 du/ac), and to change the zoning from Residential Density-Multiple Zone (RD – M)
to Residential Professional - Qualified Development Overlay (R-P-Q); and 2) approval of a
Tentative Tract Map, Planned Development Permit, Non-Residential Planned
Development Permit, and a Site Development Plan to construct four residential air-space
condominium units and a detached, approximately 897-square-foot office building
located at 2770 and 2754 Jefferson Street within Local Facilities Management Zone 1. The
potential environmental effects of the project were adequately analyzed by a previously
certified Environmental Impact Report (EIR) and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program (MMRP) for the Comprehensive General Plan Update (EIR 13-02) and an
Addendum to the Final EIR was prepared pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15164
because only minor changes and additions to the Final EIR are necessary to address the
project changes and no circumstances exist calling for the preparation of a subsequent or
supplemental EIR pursuant to CEQA Guidelines sections 15162 and 15163.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 7458 RECOMMENDING
ADOPTION of an Addendum to the City of Carlsbad General Plan EIR; ADOPT Planning Commission
Resolution No. 7459 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL of General Plan Amendment (GPA 2021-0004) and
Zone Change (ZC 2021-0003); and ADOPT Planning Commission Resolution No. 7460 RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL of a Tentative Tract Map (CT 2021-0001), Planned Development Permit (PUD 2021-0004) Non-
Residential Planned Development Permit (PUD 2022-0002), and Site Development Permit (SDP 2021-
0014) to the City Council, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein.
II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND BACKGROUND
Project Site/Existing Setting:
The project comprises of two parcels totaling 0.32 acres (APNs 203-201-01, -02), located at 2770 and 2754
Jefferson Street and is currently developed with a single-family residence on each parcel. The project site
is bordered by multi-family residences to the north, south, and east, and Jefferson Street and commercial
uses to the west. The project site is relatively flat and takes access from Jefferson Street. Table “A” below
2
Staff Report
0
GPA 2021-0004/ZC 2021-0003/CT 2021-0001/PUD 2021-0004/PUD 2022-0002/SDP 2021-0014
(DEV2020-0016) – JEFFERSON MIXED USE
August 17, 2022
Page 2
includes the General Plan designations, zoning and current land uses of the project site and surrounding
properties.
TABLE A – SITE AND SURROUNDING LAND USE
Location General Plan Designation Zoning Current Land Use
Site
2770 Jefferson:
R-15/O Residential/Office (8-
15 du/ac))
2754 Jefferson:
R-15 Residential (8-15 du/ac)
2770 Jefferson:
Residential
Professional –
Qualified Development
Overlay (R-P-Q)
2754 Jefferson:
Residential Density-
Multiple Zone (RD-M)
2770 Jefferson:
Single-family residential
2754 Jefferson:
Single-family residential
North R-15 Residential (8-15 du/ac) Residential Density-
Multiple Zone (RD-M)
Multi-family residential
South
R-15/O Residential/Office (8-
15 du/ac)
Residential
Professional –
Qualified Development
Overlay (R-P-Q)
Multi-family residential
East R-15 Residential (8-15 du/ac) Multiple-Family
Residential (R-3)
Multi-family residential
West Village-Barrio (V-B) Village-Barrio V-B Residential and
Commercial
Project Description:
The applicant applied for a Tentative Tract Map, Planned Development Permit, Non-Residential Planned
Development Permit, and a Site Development Permit to demolish the existing two single-family residences
and construct a three-story, four-unit multi-family residential building and a detached, two-story 897-
square-foot office building. The subject application involves two parcels that have different General Plan
land use and zoning designations. To provide a consistent land use designation and zoning for the project,
the two parcels would be merged with the proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change.
Approval of the proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change are necessary to enable the
processing of the land development application to construct four residential units and a detached office
building on one legal lot.
The proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change would not increase the density of the
development allowed on the site. The proposed office building is located on the parcel that allows for
office uses. Table “B” below lists the existing and proposed land use and zoning designation changes.
Exhibit 5 provides a visual of the existing and proposed land use and zoning changes.
TABLE B – EXISTING AND PROPOSED LAND USE AND ZONING
Address Existing Land Use & Zoning Proposed Land Use & Zoning
2770 Jefferson Street GP Land Use: R-15/O
Zone: R-P-Q
No Change
2754 Jefferson Street GP Land Use: R-15
Zone: RD-M
GP Land Use: R-15/O
Zone: R-P-Q
GPA 2021-0004/ZC 2021-0003/CT 2021-0001/PUD 2021-0004/PUD 2022-0002/SDP 2021-0014
(DEV2020-0016) – JEFFERSON MIXED USE
August 17, 2022
Page 3
The proposed project is accessed from a single driveway along Jefferson Street and includes a shared
drive-aisle with four attached condominium units on the north side of the property, and a detached office
building located along Jefferson Street in the southwest corner of the lot. The condominium units are
designed as three-story townhomes and would share common vertical walls. The condominium building
has an overall height of 34 feet and 11 inches, and the office building has a height of 23 feet and nine
inches and both buildings are below the maximum height of 35 feet.
Each residential unit includes three bedrooms, three-and-one-half bathrooms, an enclosed two-car
garage, balconies on the second and third floors, and rear yard areas on the ground floor. Each of the four
floor plans vary in size, ranging from 1,905-square-feet to 2,706-square-feet. Each unit accommodate
private recreational areas (yards and deck space), measuring 352-square-feet (unit 1), 458-quare feet (unit
2), 690-square-feet (unit 3), and-860 square-feet (unit 4). There are two, unenclosed visitor parking spaces
on-site (provided via two carports) for the residential use and the office building has three unenclosed,
on-site parking spaces located to the rear of the building. The architectural design is characterized as a
beach cottage design and includes a stucco finish, hardie plank lap siding, pilasters, rafter tails, and
variation in roof ridges and window elements. The proposed lot would be held in common interest divided
between the four residential condominiums, single office building, and common areas. The common areas
include, but are not limited to, the private drive aisle and landscaped areas. Grading for the proposed
project consists of 202 cubic yards of cut, 80 cubic yards of fill and 122 cubic yards of export.
The requested applications to implement this project include the following:
General Plan Amendment, GPA 2021-0004. An amendment to the General Plan Land Use Map to
reassign the land use designation for one of the two project parcels on the site (APN: 203-201-01-
00) from R-15 Residential to R-15/O Residential/Office, via an adjustment of the boundary
between these two land use designations. The other parcel on site (APN: 203-201-02-00) would
remain a R-15/O Residential/Office General Plan land use designation. The proposed land use
amendment would allow for the office and residential use to be developed on one lot and ensures
both parcels have the same land use designation.
Zone Change, ZC 2021-0003. An amendment to the City-wide Zoning Map to reassign the project
site’s zoning designation from Residential Density-Medium (RD-M) to Residential Professional –
Qualified Development Overlay (R-P-Q), via an adjustment of the boundary between these two
districts. The Zone Change would prevent a split zoned project and would allow for the office and
residential use on one consolidated lot. The Zone Change would also be consistent with the
proposed land use designation and allows for the project to comply with the land use and
development standards of one zoning designation.
Tentative Tract Map, CT 2021-0001. The Tentative Tract Map is requested to merge the lots and
allow for a one lot subdivision for air-space condominiums for the four residential units, office
building, and common areas.
Planned Development Permit, PUD 2021-0004. A Planned Development Permit is requested for
the development of the residential component of the project.
GPA 2021-0004/ZC 2021-0003/CT 2021-0001/PUD 2021-0004/PUD 2022-0002/SDP 2021-0014
(DEV2020-0016) – JEFFERSON MIXED USE
August 17, 2022
Page 4
Non-Residential Planned Development Permit Amendment, PUD 2022-0002. A Non-Residential
Planned Development Permit is requested for separate ownership and development of the office
building.
Site Development Plan, SDP 2021-0014. According to Section 21.06.030 of the Zoning Code, a Site
Development Plan application is required to develop in the Q zone. Since the project is proposing
a Zone Change to bring both parcels into consistency to be zoned as R-P-Q, the development of
the project requires the approval of a Site Development Permit.
Public Outreach
Public outreach was conducted in the city’s review and consideration of the project proposal. The project
application was circulated to various city and local agencies and departments for review, and
modifications were made to the project to address any concerns. No new issues of concern have been
identified. Comments from agencies have either been addressed through the processing of the project or
have been included as conditions of approval in draft Planning Commission Resolution No. 7460.
The proposed project is subject to City Council Policy No. 84, Development Project Public Involvement
Policy. An Enhanced Stakeholder Outreach was held at the Carlsbad Senior Center on December 28, 2021.
One neighboring resident, who lives adjacent to the proposed project site, attended the outreach meeting
and had concerns regarding the shared perimeter wall, ensuring adequate line of sight was maintained
for the project’s driveway and inquired about the possibility of undergrounding utilities. The project
applicant and concerned resident agreed that the applicant would construct a masonry perimeter wall
that would be 42-inches-tall within the front yard and six-feet-tall within the sides and rear yards. The
applicant communicated to the concerned resident, and staff confirmed, that the proposed walls and
project design ensure the project meets the required line of sight for vehicular and pedestrian safety.
Furthermore, the overhead wires serving the proposed project would be placed underground; however,
pursuant to CMC section 20.16.040(D), the existing power poles in front of the project are not required
to be undergrounded or removed, as the half-street section abutting the project site spans less than 600
feet. Therefore, the project would not underground or remove the two existing power poles in front of
the property.
III. ANALYSIS
The proposed project is subject to the following plans, ordinances, standards, and policies:
A. R-15/O Residential/Office General Plan Land Use Designation
B. Residential Professional Zone – Qualified Development Overlay and Planned Development
Ordinance (Carlsbad Municipal Code (CMC) Chapters 21.18, 21.06, and 21.45)
C. Nonresidential Planned Development Ordinance (CMC Chapter 21.47)
D. Subdivision Ordinance (CMC Title 20)
E. Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (CMC Chapter 21.85)
F. Growth Management (CMC Chapter 21.90) – Local Facilities Management Plane Zone 1
The recommendation for approval of this project was developed by analyzing the project’s consistency
with the applicable regulations and policies. The project’s compliance with each of the above regulations
is discussed in the following sections.
GPA 2021-0004/ZC 2021-0003/CT 2021-0001/PUD 2021-0004/PUD 2022-0002/SDP 2021-0014
(DEV2020-0016) – JEFFERSON MIXED USE
August 17, 2022
Page 5
A. R-15/O Residential/Office General Plan Land Use Designation
The General Plan Amendment (GPA) would adjust the boundaries between the two land use designations
to ensure both parcels have the same General Plan land use designation of R-15/O Residential/Office for
the 0.32-acre site. The GPA would amend the General Plan Land Use Map to change the land use
designation for one of the two project parcels on the site (APN: 203-201-01-00) from R-15 Residential to
R-15/O Residential/Office. The other parcel on site (APN: 203-201-02-00) would remain a R-15/O
Residential/Office General Plan land use designation. Concurrent approval of the Tentative Tract Map,
Planned Development Permit, Non-Residential Planned Development Permit, and a Site Development
Plan would enable the applicant to demolish the existing residences and allow for the requested multi-
family residential and office use on one legal lot.
The following Table “C” describes how the proposed project is consistent with the various elements of the
Carlsbad General Plan.
TABLE C – GENERAL PLAN COMPLIANCE
ELEMENT USE, CLASSIFICATION, GOAL,
OBJECTIVE, OR PROGRAM PROPOSED USES & IMPROVEMENTS COMPLY?
Land Use &
Community
Design
Goal 2-G.2
Promote a diversity of compatible
land uses throughout the city, to
enable people to live close to job
locations, adequate and convenient
commercial services, and public
support systems such as transit,
parks, schools, and utilities.
The proposed land use change from
R-15 to R-15/O, would allow for a
mixed-use development that
includes multi-family residential and
an office building. The project would
provide employment opportunities
for residents who live on-site or
within proximity to the site. The
proposed project promotes a
diversity of compatible land uses
onsite and within the existing
neighborhood as the site is
surrounded by other multi-family
residences and commercial office
uses. The project can be adequately
served by existing utilities and is in
close proximity to public transit
opportunities.
Yes
Goal 2-G.3
Promote infill development that
makes efficient use of limited land
supply, while ensuring
compatibility and integration with
existing uses. Ensure that infill
properties develop with uses and
development intensities
supporting a cohesive
development pattern.
The project is an infill development
that makes efficient use of limited
land supply as the existing site has
two single-family residences, and the
proposal would allow for four
residences and an office building. The
project is compatible and integrates
with the existing uses as the project
site is surrounded by multi-family
residences to the north, south and
east and commercial or office uses to
the west. The project is developed at
Yes
GPA 2021-0004/ZC 2021-0003/CT 2021-0001/PUD 2021-0004/PUD 2022-0002/SDP 2021-0014
(DEV2020-0016) – JEFFERSON MIXED USE
August 17, 2022
Page 6
ELEMENT USE, CLASSIFICATION, GOAL,
OBJECTIVE, OR PROGRAM PROPOSED USES & IMPROVEMENTS COMPLY?
the same residential density and
commercial intensity as the
surrounding site which allows for a
cohesive and consistent
development pattern.
Goal 2-G.4
Provide balanced neighborhoods
with a variety of housing types and
density ranges to meet the diverse
demographic, economic, and social
needs of residents, while ensuring
a cohesive urban form with careful
regard for compatibility.
The proposed land use designation
change from R-15 to R-15/O would
allow for the same residential density
range as the existing and surrounding
neighborhood and would meet the
diverse needs of residents with the
construction of new residences.
Yes
Goal 2-G.5
Protect the neighborhood
atmosphere and identity of existing
residential areas.
The proposed land use designation
change from R-15 to R-15/O keeps
the residential density range the
same but allows for an office
component on-site. Because the
density range would remain the same
as the existing, the mix of the existing
multi-family residential and office
atmosphere and identity would be
protected.
Yes
Goal 2-G.6
Allow a range of mixed-use centers
in strategic locations that maximize
access to commercial services from
transit and residential areas.
The proposed residential and office
mixed-use development would allow
for a range of uses on the project site.
The project is in an area that
maximizes access to commercial
services from residential areas as the
site is surrounded by existing multi-
family residences to the north, south,
and east and commercial uses to the
west. The project would promote the
strategic location of mixed uses
within the neighborhood.
Yes
Policy 2-P.1
Maintain consistency between the
General Plan and Title 21 of the
Carlsbad Municipal Code (Zoning
Ordinance and map).
The proposed General Plan
Amendment to change the land use
designation from R-15 to R-15/O
would maintain consistency with the
proposed Zone Change from RD-M to
R-P-Q and would be consistent with
the land use and development
standards contained within Title 21
of the Carlsbad Municipal Code.
Yes
GPA 2021-0004/ZC 2021-0003/CT 2021-0001/PUD 2021-0004/PUD 2022-0002/SDP 2021-0014
(DEV2020-0016) – JEFFERSON MIXED USE
August 17, 2022
Page 7
ELEMENT USE, CLASSIFICATION, GOAL,
OBJECTIVE, OR PROGRAM PROPOSED USES & IMPROVEMENTS COMPLY?
Mobility Policy 3-P.5
Require developers to construct or
pay their fair share toward
improvements for all travel modes
consistent with the Mobility
Element, the Growth Management
Plan, and specific impacts
associated with their development.
The proposed project has been
designed to meet all circulation
requirements, including vehicular
access to and from Jefferson Street.
In addition, the applicant would be
required to pay any applicable traffic
impact fees, prior to building permit
issuance, which would go toward
future road improvements.
The proposed project includes the
improvement of curb, gutter, and
sidewalk along the Jefferson Street
frontage. Though the frontage along
Jefferson Street is currently
improved with a curb, gutter and
sidewalk, the site would update the
frontage improvements to current
development standards.
Yes
Noise Goal 5-G.2
Ensure that new development is
compatible with the noise
environment, by continuing to use
potential noise exposure as a
criterion in land use planning.
Policy 5.P.2
Require a noise study analysis be
conducted for all discretionary
development proposals located
where projected noise exposure
would be other than “normally
acceptable.”
The project consists of four attached
air-space condominium residences
and one detached office building. A
noise study prepared for the project
Eilar Associates, Inc. dated
December 10, 2020, concluded that
the detached office is expected to
comply with the state’s interior
noise regulations of 50 CNEL or less
with typical building construction,
and therefore, no special design
features are required for non-
residential spaces. The four attached
air-space condominium residences
are expected to comply with the
Noise Guidelines Manual and
applicable General Plan policies for
construction noise, operation noise,
and outdoor space noises.
The noise study indicates that within
the dwelling unit’s interiors, the
worst-case traffic noise levels at the
west and south facades of Unit 1
exceeds 60 community noise
equivalent level (CNEL) with
windows open, which is above the
Yes
GPA 2021-0004/ZC 2021-0003/CT 2021-0001/PUD 2021-0004/PUD 2022-0002/SDP 2021-0014
(DEV2020-0016) – JEFFERSON MIXED USE
August 17, 2022
Page 8
ELEMENT USE, CLASSIFICATION, GOAL,
OBJECTIVE, OR PROGRAM PROPOSED USES & IMPROVEMENTS COMPLY?
maximum interior noise level of 45
CNEL pursuant to the City of
Carlsbad Noise Guidelines and the
California Building Code, section
1206.4. Residential units 2-4 are not
expected to exceed 45 maximum
CNEL and therefore do not require
additional project design details to
mitigate for traffic noise. However,
unit 1 has been conditioned to
provide the following construction
features to reduce traffic noise
impacts to below 45 CNEL:
construct exterior walls of stucco
over plywood sheathing over 2x6
wood-studs, with a single layer of
gypsum board on the interior,
exterior windows and glass doors
must have a minimum STC rating of
25, and mechanical ventilation is
required for all habitable spaces
within Unit 1.
With these construction features, all
interior residential space is expected
to comply with City of Carlsbad and
State of California noise
requirements. Units 2, 3, and 4 are
expected to meet interior noise
limits with typical construction
methods, and therefore, no specific
project design features are required
for interior noise control in these
units
Housing Program 2.1
The Inclusionary Housing
Ordinance requires that a
minimum of 15 percent of all
ownership projects of seven units
or more be restricted and
affordable to lower income
households.
Goal 10-G.1
New housing developed with
diversity of types, prices, tenures,
Pursuant to CMC Section 21.85.110,
payment of a fee in lieu of
construction of affordable units is
appropriate for residential
development of less than seven
units. In addition, CMC Section
21.85.030(D)(3) a project may be
exempt from the inclusionary
housing requirement if construction
of a new residential structure
replaces a residential structure that
was demolished within two years
Yes
GPA 2021-0004/ZC 2021-0003/CT 2021-0001/PUD 2021-0004/PUD 2022-0002/SDP 2021-0014
(DEV2020-0016) – JEFFERSON MIXED USE
August 17, 2022
Page 9
ELEMENT USE, CLASSIFICATION, GOAL,
OBJECTIVE, OR PROGRAM PROPOSED USES & IMPROVEMENTS COMPLY?
densities, and locations, and in
sufficient quantity to meet the
demand of anticipated city and
regional growth and to meet or
exceed the city’s established
Regional Housing Needs Allocation
(RHNA).
prior to the application for a building
permit for the new residential
structure.
The project includes the demolition
of two existing single-family
dwellings. The proposal to demolish
the two existing single-family
residences and construct a four-unit
residential condominium project has
been conditioned to pay the
applicable housing in-lieu fee for the
two additional units, or four units if
building permits for the four-unit
project has not been applied for
within two years of demolishing the
existing home(s).
This housing development would
help ensure the city achieves its goal
of contributing housing with
diversity of types, prices, tenures,
densities, and locations, and in
sufficient quantity to meet the
demand of anticipated city and
regional growth and to meet or
exceed the city’s established
Regional Housing Needs Allocation
(RHNA).
Per Government Code Section 65863
(aka No Net Loss Law) a city cannot
approve new housing at significantly
lower densities or at different
income categories than was
projected in the RHNA of the
Housing Element without making
specific findings and identifying
other sites that could accommodate
these units and affordability levels
“lost” as a result of the approval.
The so-called “no net loss”
provisions apply when a site is
included in the jurisdiction’s Housing
Element’s inventory of sites and is
either rezoned to a lower residential
GPA 2021-0004/ZC 2021-0003/CT 2021-0001/PUD 2021-0004/PUD 2022-0002/SDP 2021-0014
(DEV2020-0016) – JEFFERSON MIXED USE
August 17, 2022
Page 10
ELEMENT USE, CLASSIFICATION, GOAL,
OBJECTIVE, OR PROGRAM PROPOSED USES & IMPROVEMENTS COMPLY?
density or is approved at a lower
residential density than shown in the
Housing Element.
The project site is not identified in
the City’s General Plan Housing
Element Residential Sites Inventory
for the 6th RHNA Planning
Cycle. Because the provision of “no
net loss” applies to housing located
on any site listed in the City’s
Housing Element, the City does not
need to determine if this project or a
decision related to this project
would be subject to No Net Loss Law
and its remedies.
Public Safety Goal 6-G.1
Minimize injury, loss of life, and
damage to property resulting from
fire, flood, hazardous material
release, or seismic disasters.
Policy 6-P.6
Enforce the requirements of Titles
18, 20, and 21 pertaining to
drainage and flood control when
reviewing applications for building
permits and subdivisions.
Policy 6-P.34
Enforce the Uniform Building and
Fire codes, adopted by the city, to
provide fire protection standards
for all existing and proposed
structures.
Policy 6-P.39
Ensure all new development
complies with all applicable
regulations regarding the provision
of public utilities and facilities.
The proposed structural
improvements would be required to
be designed in conformance with all
seismic design standards. In
addition, the proposed project is
consistent with all the applicable fire
safety requirements including fire
sprinklers.
Furthermore, the project has been
conditioned to develop and
implement a program of “best
management practices” for the
elimination and reduction of
pollutants which enter into and/or
are transported within storm
drainage facilities.
Yes
B. Residential Professional Zone – Qualified Development Overlay and Planned Development
Ordinance (CMC Chapters 21.18, 21.06, and 21.45)
GPA 2021-0004/ZC 2021-0003/CT 2021-0001/PUD 2021-0004/PUD 2022-0002/SDP 2021-0014
(DEV2020-0016) – JEFFERSON MIXED USE
August 17, 2022
Page 11
The proposed project is required to comply with all applicable use and development standards of the CMC
including the Residential Professional Zone and the Q, Qualified Development Overlay Zone (R-P-Q), CMC
Chapters 21.18, 21.06 and Planned Developments CMC Chapter 21.45. The Q Overlay is intended to
supplement the underlying zone by providing additional regulations for development within designated
areas and provide a process for review and approval of Site Development Plans. Additional findings are
required for development within the Q Overlay Zone which is listed below.
The four-unit residential air-space condominium and office building meets or exceeds the requirements
of the R-P-Q Zone as outlined in Table “D” below. The Planned Development regulations provide most of
the development standards except for those listed in the table below. The project complies with all
applicable development standards for Planned Developments (CMC Chapter 21.45). Please refer to Exhibit
8 for an analysis of project compliance with Tables C and E of the Planned Development regulations and
full compliance with City Council Policy No. 66.
TABLE D – R-P-Q
R-P-Q STANDARDS REQUIRED PROPOSED COMPLY?
Lot Area 7,500 square feet 13,743 square feet Yes
Lot Width 75 feet 146 feet Yes
As analyzed below, the proposed project is consistent with the findings for approval of a Site Development
Plan Amendment, pursuant to CMC Chapter 21.06.
1. The proposed development or use is consistent with the General Plan and any applicable master
plan or specific plan, complies with all applicable provisions of Chapter 21.06 of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code, and all other applicable provisions of this code.
The proposal to demolish two single-family residences to construct four residential air-space
condominium units and a detached, approximately 897-square-foot office building complies with
the requirements of the proposed R-P-Q Residential Professional and Qualified Development
Overlay zones and all other applicable development regulations, including but not limited to
Section 21.05.065 (Combination Zoning). The proposed residential and office uses are consistent
with and implements the proposed R-15/O Residential/Office General Plan Land Use designation.
Mixed uses that include residential and office such as the proposed project are encouraged to
promote commercial services adjacent to residential areas. The project complies with all applicable
land use and development standards of Chapter 21.06 and the Carlsbad Municipal Code such as
setbacks, building height, parking, lot coverage, and open space. The project’s beach cottage
architectural design is compatible with the architectural styles within the neighborhood. Proposed
architectural features include stucco finish, hardie plank lap siding, pilasters, rafter tails, and
variation in roof ridges and window elements, consistent with the architectural requirements of
Chapter 21.45 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. The approved plan set, and conditions of approval
attached thereto, would establish the regulations and development standards of the property.
2. The requested development or use is properly related to the site, surroundings and
environmental settings, will not be detrimental to existing development or uses or to
development or uses specifically permitted in the area in which the proposed development or use
is to be located, and will not adversely impact the site, surroundings or traffic circulation.
GPA 2021-0004/ZC 2021-0003/CT 2021-0001/PUD 2021-0004/PUD 2022-0002/SDP 2021-0014
(DEV2020-0016) – JEFFERSON MIXED USE
August 17, 2022
Page 12
The proposed project complies with the development standards, including building setbacks,
building height, open space, and parking. A total of 13 parking spaces are required and a total of
13 are proposed onsite. Each residential unit has an enclosed two-car garage and there are two
residential visitor parking spaces onsite. In addition, three spaces are provided onsite for the
office use. The project includes residential and an office component as one development, and
both uses are permitted in the proposed R-P-Q zone and is consistent with the surrounding
properties. The project site is surrounded by multi-family residential uses to the north, south, and
east and to the west are commercial uses. The proposed colors, materials and architectural
features are well coordinated and complementary to the site and its surroundings and would
enhance the appearance of the neighborhood. No evidence has been submitted or discovered
that would suggest that the proposed project would cause any material depreciation in
appearance or detriment in value to the surrounding neighborhood. Furthermore, the proposed
project does not create any traffic circulation impacts as Jefferson Street is adequately designed
to accommodate the 45 Average Daily Trips (ADT) being generated.
3. The site for the intended development or use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the
use.
The site for the intended development and use is adequate in size and shape to accommodate
the use in that the Carlsbad Municipal Code requires a minimum width of 75 feet and the project
provides 146 feet, and a minimum lot size of 7,500 square feet and the project has a total of
13,743 square feet. The project site provides adequate onsite circulation by meeting the minimum
on-site drive aisle width suitable for safe vehicular travel and the site is accessed from Jefferson
Street through a shared driveway. Further, the completion of the project would result in two
buildings, which are in scale with the site and the surrounding vicinity. The project complies with
all development standards such as open space, building setbacks, and parking. A total of 13
parking spaces are required for the proposed project and 13 spaces are provided onsite. The
project design and conditions of approval contained within draft Planning Commission Resolution
No. 7460 would help ensure compatibility of the proposed project with adjacent properties.
4. All yards, setbacks, walls, fences, landscaping, and other features necessary to adjust the
requested development or use to existing or permitted future development or use in the
neighborhood will be provided and maintained.
The proposed project complies with the building setbacks and landscaping requirements outlined
in the Planned Development Ordinance of the Carlsbad Municipal Code. The proposed project
exceeds minimum setback and landscaping requirements by providing a 20-foot landscaped
setback between the residential and office building and the front property line, where 10 feet is
required. The proposed project meets the side and rear yard setbacks by providing a 10-foot side
yard setback where 10 feet is required and a 20-foot setback where 20 feet is required. Enhanced
landscaping is provided throughout the site and is consistent with the city’s Landscape Manual
policies and guidelines. The existing site has fences along the perimeter of the property line
boundary and the project proposes to replace the fence with a masonry block wall in the same
location.
5. The street systems serving the proposed development or use is adequate to properly handle all
traffic generated by the proposed use.
GPA 2021-0004/ZC 2021-0003/CT 2021-0001/PUD 2021-0004/PUD 2022-0002/SDP 2021-0014
(DEV2020-0016) – JEFFERSON MIXED USE
August 17, 2022
Page 13
The site is served by Jefferson Street via Laguna Drive to the north or Grand Avenue to the south.
Primary access to the project site would continue to be provided by one shared driveway serving
the four residential units and office use and is located off Jefferson Street. Pursuant to the Vehicle
Miles Traveled Analysis prepared by Dudek (March 7, 2022), the proposed project generates a
total of 45 average daily trips (ADT). The net difference between the two existing single-family
residences and the proposed four residential units and office use is 25 ADT. Since the proposed
project would generate a total of 45 ADT, which is below the screening criteria of 110 ADT, the
project is considered to have less than significant impacts and the surrounding street system
serving the project is adequate to handle the 45 ADT generated by the project.
C. Nonresidential Planned Development Ordinance (CMC Chapter 21.47)
The office component of the proposed project is required to comply with the requirements of the
Nonresidential Planned Development Ordinance (CMC Chapter 21.47). CMC Chapter 21.47 requires that
any nonresidential planned development to comply with the underlying zone, which is the proposed
Residential Professional – Q, Qualified Development Overlay Zone (R-P-Q). Therefore, the office building
is subject to the applicable standards listed in CMC Chapter 21.18 and 21.06 as outlined in the Table “E”
below.
TABLE E – R-P-Q ZONE COMPLIANCE
STANDARD REQUIRED PROPOSED COMPLY?
Lot Area 7,500 square feet 13,743 square feet Yes
Lot Width 75 feet 146 feet Yes
Front Yard 20 feet 20 feet Yes
Side Yard 10% of lot width, not to exceed 10
feet
10 feet
Rear Yard 20% of lot width, not to exceed 20
feet
20 feet Yes
Separation of
Buildings
10 feet 15 feet Yes
Height Limit 45 feet 23 feet 9 inches Yes
Lot Coverage 60% 43% Yes
Parking Off-
Street
Parking shall not be provided in
required front or side yards
Parking is provided behind
the office building and
outside of the front and side
yard setbacks
Yes
As analyzed below, the proposed project is consistent with the findings for approval of a Non-Residential
Planned Development Permit, pursuant to CMC Chapter 21.47.
1. The granting of this permit will not adversely affect and will be consistent with the code, the
General Plan, applicable specific plans, master plans, and all adopted plans of the city and other
governmental agencies.
The project proposal includes a General Plan Amendment to change the land use from a R-15
Residential (8 - 15 du/ac) to R-15/O Residential/Office (8 - 15 du/ac) and the proposed Zone
Change would designate the zone as R-P-Q to be consistent with the land use designation. The
GPA 2021-0004/ZC 2021-0003/CT 2021-0001/PUD 2021-0004/PUD 2022-0002/SDP 2021-0014
(DEV2020-0016) – JEFFERSON MIXED USE
August 17, 2022
Page 14
project as designed is consistent with the proposed General Plan land R-15/O land use designation
and all applicable development standards of the R-P-Q zone and the Carlsbad Municipal Code
Titles 20 and 21 governing subdivisions and the design of nonresidential planned developments.
The residential and office component meet or exceed all applicable code requirements such as
land use, setbacks, building height, lot coverage, and open space requirements. In addition, the
project would be conditioned to meet the inclusionary housing requirements and to pay the
affordable housing in-lieu fee at the time of building permit issuance.
2. The proposed use at the particular location is necessary and desirable to provide a service or
facility, which will contribute to the general well-being of the neighborhood and the community.
The proposed nonresidential planned development provides for individual ownership of the office
building with the four residential units. The mixed-use project is compatible with the existing
surrounding uses which includes multi-family residences directly adjacent to the project site to
the north, south and east and commercial office buildings to the west. The project would
contribute to the general well-being of the neighborhood and community in that the project
would provide commercial services in a convenient location adjacent to residential uses.
3. Such use will not be detrimental to the health, safety, or general welfare of persons residing or
working in the vicinity, or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity.
The project meets all applicable city standards and ordinances, and all public facilities and services
are already developed. Adequate parking, access, and drainage facilities for the project site would
be provided onsite. The project requires 13 parking spaces, and 13 parking spaces are provided
onsite and meet minimum parking stall dimensions. Vehicular access to and from the site from
Jefferson Street is designed to be adequate for the proposed nonresidential planned
development. Because the project meets all applicable standards, the project is designed to be
compatible with the surrounding development; therefore, the project would not adversely affect
the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity or be injurious
to property or improvements in the vicinity.
4. The proposed nonresidential planned development meets all of the minimum development
standards of the underlying zone.
No variances from the development standards have been requested or are required and the
project is consistent with the Residential Professional and Qualified Development Overlay Zones.
D. Subdivision Ordinance (CMC Title 20)
The Land Development Engineering Division has reviewed the proposed Tentative Tract Map and has
found that the subdivision complies with all applicable requirements of the Subdivision Map Act and the
City’s Subdivision Ordinance (Title 20) for Major Subdivisions. The subdivision is considered major
because it involves the division of land into five or more condominiums (four residential and one office).
The project is conditioned to install all infrastructure related improvements and the necessary easements
for these improvements concurrent with development.
E. Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (CMC Chapter 21.85)
GPA 2021-0004/ZC 2021-0003/CT 2021-0001/PUD 2021-0004/PUD 2022-0002/SDP 2021-0014
(DEV2020-0016) – JEFFERSON MIXED USE
August 17, 2022
Page 15
For all residential development with fewer than seven units, the inclusionary housing requirement may
be satisfied through the payment of an inclusionary housing in-lieu fee. However, pursuant to Carlsbad
Municipal Code Section 21.85.030(D)(3), the construction of a new residential structure which replaces a
residential structure that was destroyed or demolished within two years prior to the application for a
building permit for the new residential structure is exempt from affordable housing requirements.
F. Growth Management (CMC Chapter 21.90) – Zone 1 Local Facilities Management Plan
The proposed project is located within Local Facilities Management Zone 3 in the northwest quadrant of
the city. The impacts on public facilities created by the project, and its compliance with the adopted
performance standards, are summarized in Table “F” below:
TABLE F – LFMP ZONE 1 SUMMARY
STANDARD IMPACTS COMPLIANCE
W/STANDARDS
City Administration 14.15 sq. ft. N/A
Library 7.55 sq. ft. N/A
Wastewater Treatment 5 EDU Yes
Parks 0.03 Yes
Drainage 1 CFS Yes
Circulation Existing: 20
Proposed: 45
Net Increase: 25
Yes
Fire Station No. 1 Yes
Open Space N/A N/A
Carlsbad School District Carlsbad(E=.468/M=.2472/HS=.3156) Yes
Sewer 5 EDU Yes
Water 1,250 GPD Yes
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and CEQA Guidelines, a Program
Environmental Impact Report (PEIR), State Clearinghouse No. 2011011004 (EIR 13-02), was certified as
complete on September 22, 2014 by the City Council for the Comprehensive General Plan Update. The
General Plan Update PEIR evaluated all land development proposed through the application of policies,
regulations, and as logical parts of a long-term plan. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15168, the
request to construct four residential air-space condominium units and an office building is within the
scope of the of the previously certified PEIR. The effects of the project were examined in the PEIR and all
feasible mitigation measures and alternatives developed in the PEIR adequately address the anticipated
adverse effects of the project.
The project requires the processing and approval of a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Tentative
Tract Map, Planned Development Permit, Non-Residential Planned Development Permit, and a Site
Development Permit. When taking subsequent discretionary actions for which an PEIR has been certified,
the Lead Agency is required to determine if later activities are within the scope of the prior environmental
analysis and/or review any changed circumstances or new information to determine whether any of the
GPA 2021-0004/ZC 2021-0003/CT 2021-0001/PUD 2021-0004/PUD 2022-0002/SDP 2021-0014
(DEV2020-0016) – JEFFERSON MIXED USE
August 17, 2022
Page 16
circumstances under Public Resources Code section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines section 15162 require
additional environmental review.
City staff evaluated the details of the request, and all aspects of the changes, in light of the standards for
subsequent environmental review outlined in Public Resources Code section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines
section 15162. City staff concluded that the PEIR fully analyzed and mitigated, where feasible, all
potentially significant environmental impacts, if any, that would result from the construction of four
residential air-space condominium units and an office building, and therefore, no subsequent EIR or
subsequent mitigated negative declaration is required. However, the details of the request also involve
the processing and approval of a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change. Since the types of land uses
permitted were not within the scope of the PEIR, a subsequent EIR, supplement to the EIR, mitigated
negative declaration or negative declaration would have to be prepared. An addendum to a EIR may also
be prepared, if minor changes or additions to the previous EIR are necessary, but none of the conditions
listed in section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines, have occurred.
On that basis, city staff has prepared an Addendum, focusing on the environmental changes caused by
the development project, including planning, construction and operation, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines
section 15164 (see Exhibit 7). The Addendum is appropriate pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15164
because only minor changes and additions to the Final PEIR are necessary to address the project changes
and no circumstances exist calling for the preparation of a subsequent or supplemental PEIR pursuant to
CEQA Guidelines sections 15162 and 15163. The proposed Addendum concluded that there are no
substantial changes to the circumstances under which the proposed project is undertaken that would
require major revisions to the Final PEIR. There is no new information of substantial importance which
was not known or could not have been known at the time the Final PEIR was certified that shows the
proposed project would have significant effects not discussed previously; a substantial increase in severity
of a previously identified significant impact; mitigation measures or alternatives previously found
infeasible that would now be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects; or
mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the Final PEIR
which would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment. The project would
not result in new or more severe impacts beyond those addressed in the Final PEIR and would not meet
any other standards requiring further environmental review under State CEQA Guidelines sections 15162
and 15163. No further analysis or environmental documentation is required.
EXHIBITS:
1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 7458 (CEQA)
2. Planning Commission Resolution No. 7459 (GPA/ZC)
3. Planning Commission Resolution No. 7460 (CT/PUD/PUD/SDP)
4. Location Map
5. Map of Existing and Proposed Land Use and Zoning Changes (Exhibits GPA 2021-0004 and ZC 2021-
0003)
6. Disclosure Statement
7. 15164 Addendum to EIR
8. Planned Development Tables C & E
9. City Council Policy No. 66 Compliance Table
10. Reduced Exhibits
11. Full Size Exhibits “A” – “L” dated August 17, 2022
JE
F
FE
R
SON
S
T
HOME
A
V
MADISON
S
T
ARBU
C
K
L
E
P
L
E
L
C
AMINO
R
E
ALLA COSTA AV
A L G A R DCARLSBAD BL
GPA 2021-0004 / ZC 2021-0003
CT 2021-0001/ PUD 2021-0004
PUD 2022-0002/SDP 2021-0014 (DEV2020-0016)
Jefferson Mixed-Use
SITE MAP
J
SITE!"^
Map generated on: 7/19/2022
EXHIBIT 4
M
A
D
I
S
O
N
S
T
JE
F
F
ER
SO
N
S
T
HOME
A
V
ARBU
C
K
L
E
PL
M
A
D
I
S
O
N
S
T
J
E
F
F
E
RSON
S
T
HOME
A
V
ARBU
C
K
L
E
PL
ZC 2021-0003
July 15, 2022Exhibit "ZC 2021-0003"
PROPOSED
V-B
RD-M
R-3
R-P-Q
EXISTING
Jefferson Mixed-Use
V-B
RD-M
R-3
R-P-Q
V-B
V-B
From:To:
A. 203-201-01-00 RD-M R-P-Q
B. 203-201-02-00 R-P-Q R-P-Q
GPA 2021-0004 / CT 2021-0001 / PUD 2021-0004 / PUD 2022-0002 SDP 2021-0014 (DEV2020-0016)
Zoning Designation Changes
Property
Related Case File No(s):
A
B
A
B
EXHIBIT 5
M
A
D
I
S
O
N
S
T
J
E
F
F
E
R
SON
S
T
HOME
A
V
ARBU
C
K
L
E
PL
M
A
D
I
S
O
N
S
T
J
E
F
F
E
RSON
S
T
HOME
A
V
ARBU
C
K
L
E
PL
GPA 2021-0004 Jefferson Mixed-Use
July 15, 2022Exhibit "GPA 2021-0004"
EXISTING
PROPOSED
V-B
R-15
R-15/O
V-B
R-15
R-15
V-B
R-15
R-15/O
V-B
R-15
R-15
From:To:
A. 203-201-01-00 R-15 R-15/O
B. 203-201-02-00 R-15/O R-15/O
ZC 2021-0003 / CT 2021-0001 / PUD 2021-0004 /PUD 2022-0002 SDP 2021-0014 (DEV2020-0016)
General Plan Land Use Designation Changes
Property
Related Case File No(s):
A
B
A
B
EXHIBIT 6
City of
Cailsbad
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
P-1{A)
Development Services
Planning Division
1635 Faraday Avenue
(760) 602-4610
www.carlsbadca.gov
Applicant's statement or disclosure of certain ownership interests on all applications which will
require discretionary action on the part of the City Council or any appointed Board, Commission
or Committee.
The following information MUST be disclosed at the time of application submittal. Your project
cannot be reviewed until this information is completed. Please print.
1. APPLICANT (Not the applicant's agent)
Provide the COMPLETE, LEGAL names and addresses of & persons having a
financial interest in the application. If the applicant includes a corporation or partnership,
include the names, titles, addresses of all individuals owning more than 10% of the
shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE THAN 10% OF THE SHARES, PLEASE
INDICATE NON-APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE SPACE BELOW. If a publicly-owned
corporation, include the names, titles, and addresses of the corporate officers. (A
separate page may be attached if necessary.)
Person Robert G Richardson Corp/Part ________ _
Title Agent of the owner Title __________ _
Address 614 Calle Vicente, San ,Ci~ente, Ca 92673
2. OWNER (Not the owner's agent)
P-1 (A)
Provide the COMPLETE, LEGAL names and addresses of ALL persons having any
ownership interest in the property involved. Also, provide the nature of the legal
ownership (i.e., partnership, tenants in common, non-profit, corporation, etc.). If the
ownership includes a corporation or partnership, include the names, titles, addresses of
all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares. IF NO INDIVIDUALS OWN MORE
THAN 10% OF THE SHARES, PLEASE INDICATE NON-APPLICABLE (N/A) IN THE
SPACE BELOW. If a publicly-owned corporation, include the names, titles, and
addresses of the corporate officers. (A separate page may be attached if necessary.)
Person Ed & Laura Scarpelli Corp/Part ________ _
Title Owners Title -------------
Address 929 Orchid Way Address _________ _
Carlsbad, Ca 92011
Page 1 of2 Revised 07/10
(
_(
(
3. NON-PROFIT ORGANIZATION OR TRUST
If any person identified pursuant to (1) or (2) above is a nonprofit organization or a trust,
list the names and addresses of ANY person serving as an officer or director of the non-
profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary of the.
Non Profit/Trust________ Non Profit/Trust _________ _
Title Title --------------------------
Address Address ----------------------
4. Have you had more than $500 worth of business transacted with any member of City
staff, Boards, Commissions, Committees and/or Council within the past twelve (12)
months?
D Yes IXI No If yes, please indicate person(s): __________ _
NOTE: Attach additional sheets if necessary.
Ed Scarpelli , Tt-zu$TE£. Robert G Richardson
Print or type name of owner Print or type name of applicant
Signature of owner/applicant's agent if applicable/date
Print or type name of owner/applicant's agent
P-1(A) Page 2 of 2 Revised 07/10
Addendum #3 to the Comprehensive General Plan Update
certified Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR, EIR 13-02)
Prepared for:
City of Carlsbad
1635 Faraday Avenue
Carlsbad, California 92008
Contact: Ms. Jessica Evans
Prepared by:
605 Third Street
Encinitas, California 92024
Contact: Sean Kilkenny
AUGUST 2022
EXHIBIT 7
DUDEK
13583
i January 2022
Table of Contents
SECTION PAGE NO.
ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ............................................................................................................................. III
1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Project Overview ..................................................................................................................................... 3
1.2 Project Planning Setting ......................................................................................................................... 4
1.3 California Environmental Quality Act Compliance ................................................................................ 6
2 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ............................................................................................................................... 7
3 CHECKLIST .................................................................................................................................................... 9
3.1 Aesthetics ............................................................................................................................................ 13
3.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources ................................................................................................... 14
3.3 Air Quality ............................................................................................................................................. 16
3.4 Biological Resources ........................................................................................................................... 18
3.5 Cultural Resources .............................................................................................................................. 20
3.6 Energy .................................................................................................................................................. 23
3.7 Geology and Soils ................................................................................................................................ 25
3.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................................................................ 28
3.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ..................................................................................................... 29
3.10 Hydrology and Water Quality ............................................................................................................... 33
3.11 Land Use and Planning ....................................................................................................................... 38
3.12 Mineral Resources .............................................................................................................................. 39
3.13 Noise .................................................................................................................................................... 40
3.14 Population and Housing ...................................................................................................................... 43
3.15 Public Services .................................................................................................................................... 44
3.16 Recreation ............................................................................................................................................ 46
3.17 Transportation .................................................................................................................................... 47
3.18 Tribal Cultural Resources .................................................................................................................... 50
3.19 Utilities and Service Systems .............................................................................................................. 53
3.20 Wildfire ................................................................................................................................................. 57
4 REFERENCES AND PREPARERS.................................................................................................................. 60
4.1 References Cited ................................................................................................................................. 60
4.2 List of Preparers .................................................................................................................................. 60
ADDENDUM #3 TO THE COMPREHENSIVE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE CERTIFIED FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
(EIR, EIR 13-02)
13583
ii January 2022
APPENDICES
A Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Report
B CAP Checklist
C Stormwater Standards Questionaire (Form E-34)
D Noise Impact Analysis
FIGURES
1 Project Location ................................................................................................................................................ 61
2 Project Site ........................................................................................................................................................ 63
3 General Plan Land Use Designation ................................................................................................................ 65
4 Zoning ................................................................................................................................................................ 67
5 Preliminary Site Plan ......................................................................................................................................... 71
Acronyms and Abbreviations
Acronym/Abbreviation Definition
AQMP Air Quality Management Plan
BANL Base Ambient Noise Level
BESS Battery Energy Storage System
BMP Best Management Practice
BSU Battery Step Up Transformer
CBC California Building Code
CCR California Code of Regulations
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CESA California Endangered Species Act
CFD Community Facilities Districts
CGP Construction General Permit
CNPS California Native Plant Society
CRPR California Rare Plant Rank
DEH Department of Environmental Health
DOC California Department of Conservation
EIR Environmental Impact Report
ESA Environmental Assessment Report
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FESA Federal Endangered Species Act
GHG greenhouse gas
GPU General Plan Update
HCP Habitat Conservation Plan
LHMP Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act
MLD Most Likely Descendant
MRZ Mineral Resource Zone
MS4 Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System
MW megawatt
MWh megawatt-hour
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
PDF Project Design Feature
RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board
SR State Route
SRA State Responsibility Area
SWP State Water Project
SWPPP Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
TCR tribal cultural resource
USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
UWMP Urban Water Management Plan
VHFHSZ Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones
VMT vehicle miles traveled
WM Waste Management
WQMP Water Quality Management Plan
Executive Summary
This Third Addendum to the Final Certified Comprehensive General Plan Update (Addendum #3) has been prepared
by the City of Carlsbad in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, Public Resources Code
section 21000 et seq.), the regulations promulgated thereunder (CEQA Guidelines, 14 California Code of
Regulations section 15000 et seq.), and the city’s environmental review procedures (Chapter 19.04 of the Carlsbad
Municipal Code) to consist of the following (collectively referred to herein as the “Project”):
1. Zoning and land use change to reconcile split zoning; and
2. Construction of four proposed condominium units and professional office space.
As part of its approval of the Comprehensive General Plan Update on Sept. 22, 2015, the City Council adopted City
Council Resolution No. 2015-242, certifying Environmental Impact Report (EIR 13-02) and adopting Findings of
Fact, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Addendum
#1 to the Final EIR was prepared for the 2020 Climate Action Plan Update, and was adopted by City Council
Resolution No. 2020-146 on July 14, 2020. Addendum #2 to the Final EIR was prepared for the updated Housing
Element by City Council Resolution No. 2021-073 on August 6, 2021.
Addendum #3 is associated with the Project, which would reconcile split zoning. The population and economic
growth assumptions under the Project are the same as what was utilized for the Comprehensive General Plan
Update. The Project accommodates growth, rather than inducing it. The purpose of this Addendum is to provide
updated information to the Final Certified EIR. Section 15164(a) of the CEQA Guidelines states that “[t]he lead
agency or a responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or
additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a
subsequent EIR have occurred.”
Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines provides that a subsequent EIR is required when (1) substantial changes
are proposed in the project or circumstances that will require major revisions of the prior EIR due to new significant
environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or (2) new
information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of
reasonable diligence at the time the prior EIR was certified, shows that (a) the project will have one or more
significant effects not discussed in the prior EIR, (b) significant effects previously examined will be substantially
more severe than shown in the prior EIR, (c) mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible
would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project but the
project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative, or (d) mitigation measures or
alternatives that are considerably different from those analyzed in the prior EIR would substantially reduce one or
more significant effects on the environment but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or
alternative.
As discussed in the following sections, the new information and minor technical modifications are not considered
“significant” pursuant to CEQA. Specifically, Addendum #3 to the Final EIR finds that the impacts resulting from
implementation of the General Plan Update as described in the Final EIR remain the same, aside from the Project’s
proposed modification, and the mitigation measures would remain unchanged and are still valid and enforceable.
No considerably different mitigation measures or feasible alternatives have been identified. The Addendum to the
Final EIR finds that the previously identified impacts and mitigation measures, as described in the Final EIR, are
still applicable. Therefore, the Final EIR, as certified, remains adequate and complete.
2 August 2022
All other environmental analysis sections are not contained herein because the original Final EIR for those
environmental areas are still applicable and do not require updated information. CEQA does not require that the
original Final EIR be circulated with the Addendum, but the original Final EIR is available for public review from the
city upon request. Therefore, please refer to the original Final EIR for other environmental topics not contained in
this Addendum.
3 August 2022
1 Introduction
1.1 Project Overview
The Jefferson Mixed Use: Townhome and Professional Office Project (Project) is located within the City of Carlsbad
(city) on two existing lots on Jefferson Street (2754 and 2770 Jefferson Street; see Figure 1 – Project Location).
Each lot is currently developed with a single-family residence (see Figure 2 – Project Site). The proposed project
involves the demolition of the two existing single-family units and development of four condominium units with a
standalone professional office building. The project would also include a Tentative Tract Map to create one, 0.33-
acre lot for air space condominium units and a Zone Change and General Plan Amendment to allow the proposed
office and residential uses on the same parcel as explained below.
Condominium Units
The four proposed condominium units would range in size from 1,905 square feet to 2,076 square feet in three
stories. Each unit would include a two-car garage, and two additional guest parking spaces would be provided.
Maximum building height would be approximately 34 feet and 11 inches. The architectural style of the condo units
is designed to be contemporary beach cottage.
Professional Office
The standalone professional office would be approximately 683 square feet in size, with an additional 214 square
feet of mezzanine, and a maximum building height of approximately 23 feet and 9 inches. The professional office
would include a total of three parking spaces, in accordance with city requirements. The architectural style is
designed to be compatible with the proposed condominium units.
Zoning and Land Use Designation
To accommodate the development of the proposed condominiums and professional office, the Project would
include a Tentative Tract Map, Zone Change, and General Plan Amendment for land use re-designation to allow for
the construction of four residential air-space condominiums and an office use. The Tentative Tract Map will
consolidate two lots and subdivide the project site for residential air-space and commercial condominiums.
The lot addressed as 2770 Jefferson Street has a land use designation of R-15/O and is zoned R-P-Q, which allows
for an office use with residential uses. 2754 Jefferson Street has a land use designation of R-15 and is zoned RD-
M and allows for multi-family residential uses. To avoid a split zone development, the General Plan Amendment and
Zone Change are proposed to change the land use designation to R—15/O and the zone to R-P-Q to allow both
multi-family residential and office on one lot. The proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change would not
increase the density/intensity of development permitted on the project site because the proposed land uses are
located where the existing land use and zoning designations allow for it. More specifically, the proposed office would
occupy the area on 2770 Jefferson Street that currently allows for office uses and residential uses, and the
residential component will span across both lots and allow for multi-family residential uses. Table 1 provides a
breakdown of the existing and proposed zoning and General Plan land use designations for the Project site (see
also Figures 3a, 3b, 4a and 4b).
4 August 2022
Table 1. Existing and Proposed Zoning and Land Uses
Zoning Land Use Designation
Existing
2754 Jefferson RD-M – Residential Density-
Multiple Zone R-15 – Residential
2770 Jefferson R-P-Q– Residential Professional
Zone R-15/O – Residential/Office
Proposed
Project R-P-Q– Residential Professional Zone R-15/O – Residential/Office
Notes:
RD-M: Residential Density-Multiple Zone
R-P-Q: Residential Professional – Qualified Development Overlay Zone R-15: Residential (15 dwelling units/acre) R-15/O: Residential (15 dwelling units/acre and office)
As shown in Table 1, the existing zoning and land use designations of the Project site allow for residential and office
uses, consistent with the uses proposed by the Project. However, the Project would include office uses where the
project site is designated as R-15 (Residential) and residential units where the project site is designated as R-15/O
(Residential and Office). Therefore, because the existing lots have different zoning as shown in Table 1, the Project
would require a Zone Change and General Plan Amendment to be in compliance with the R-P-Q zone; however, the
project would not increase the intensity or density of development.
Construction
Grading associated with Project construction would result in 202 cubic feet of cut and 80 cubic feet of fill, with 122
cubic feet of export or which would balance on-site through compaction. Construction is anticipated to begin in mid
to late 2022 and take approximately 18 months to complete.
Discretionary Actions
The Project would require the processing and approval of the following:
• General Plan Amendment (GPA 2021-0004)
• Zone Change (ZC 2021-0004)
• Tentative Tract Map (CT 2021-0001)
• Planned Development Permit (PUD 2021-0004)
• Nonresidential Planned Development Permit (PUD 2022-002)
• Site Development Plan (SDP 2021-0014)
1.2 Project Planning Setting
The city is located in the northwestern portion of San Diego County (County) and the Project site is located in the
northwestern portion of the city. Specifically, the Project site is approximately 1,500 feet west of Interstate 5 (I-5),
1,700 feet southeast of Buena Vista Lagoon, and 0.6 mile east of the Pacific Ocean. The Project site encompasses
0.33-acres and is an infill lot that is relatively flat (approximately 56 feet above mean sea level). As an existing infill
site developed with existing single-family residential units, there are no significant or sensitive biological or
5 August 2022
environmental resources onsite or in the adjacent vicinity. The Project site is also located outside of the city's
Coastal Zone.
1.3 California Environmental Quality Act Compliance
CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 through 15164 set forth the criteria for determining the appropriate additional
environmental documentation, if any, to be completed when there is a previously adopted ND or a previously
certified EIR for the project. CEQA Guidelines, Section 15162(a) and 15163 state that when an ND has been
adopted or an EIR certified for a project, no Subsequent or Supplemental EIR or Subsequent Negative Declaration
shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in light
of the whole public record, one or more of the following:
1. Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or
Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial
increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.
2. Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which
will require major revisions of the previous EIR or Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new
significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant
effects.
3. New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the
exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the Negative
Declaration was adopted, shows any of the following:
a. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or Negative
Declaration; or
b. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the
previously adopted Negative Declaration or previously certified EIR; or
c. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible,
and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project
proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or
d. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the
previous Negative Declaration or EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on
the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.
CEQA Guidelines, Section 15164(a) states that an Addendum to a previously certified EIR may be prepared if some
changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation
of a Subsequent or Supplemental EIR have occurred.
CEQA Guidelines, Section 15164(b) states that an Addendum to a previously adopted Negative Declaration may be
prepared if only minor technical changes or additions are necessary.
If the factors listed in CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162, 15163, or 15164 have not occurred or are not met, no
changes to the previously certified EIR or previously adopted ND are necessary. See Section 2, Summary of
Findings, for further information.
The Project is consistent with the analysis performed for the city’s General Plan & Climate Action Plan Final
Environmental Impact Report (GP/CAP FEIR) certified in June 2015 (City of Carlsbad 2015a). A comprehensive
environmental evaluation has been completed for the Project as documented in the attached Checklist. This
evaluation concludes that the Project qualifies for an exemption from additional environmental review because it
is both consistent with the land use characteristics established by the city’s General Plan, as analyzed by the
GP/CAP FEIR, and all required findings can be made.
7 August 2022
2 Summary of Findings
The Project is consistent with the analysis performed for the city’s GP/CAP FEIR certified in June 2015. A
comprehensive environmental evaluation has been completed for the Project as documented throughout Chapter
3 of this document. This evaluation concludes that the Project qualifies for an exemption from additional
environmental review because it is consistent with the development density and land use characteristics
established by the city’s General Plan, as analyzed by the city’s GP/CAP FEIR, and all required findings can be made.
CEQA: 15162. Subsequent EIRs and Negative Declarations
15162. (a) When an EIR has been certified or a
negative declaration adopted for a project, no
subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project
unless the lead agency determines, on the basis
of substantial evidence in the light of the whole
record, one or more of the following:
(1) Substantial changes are proposed in the
project which will require major revisions of the
previous EIR or negative declaration due to the
involvement of new significant environmental
effects or a substantial increase in the severity of
previously identified significant effects;
The project does not propose substantial changes
compared to the analysis contained in the GP/CAP
FEIR. While the project would include a Zone
Change and General Plan Amendment, the
underlying uses would be consistent with the
development type and intensity anticipated by the
General Plan. The Project would include a Tentative Tract Map, Zone Change, and General Plan Amendment for land use re-designation to allow for
the construction of four residential air-space
condominiums and an office use. The Tentative
Tract Map will consolidate two lots and subdivide
the project site for residential air-space and
commercial condominiums. To avoid a split zone
development, the General Plan Amendment and
Zone Change are proposed to change the land use
designation to R—15/O and the zone to R-P-Q to
allow both multi-family residential and office on one lot. As explained in Section 3.1, below, such changes would not result in new significant
environmental effects or a substantial increase in
the severity of previously identified significant
effects.
(2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of
the previous EIR or Negative Declaration due to
the involvement of new significant environmental
effects or a substantial increase in the severity of
previously identified significant effects;
Since adoption of the GP/CAP FEIR, CEQA has been updated to provide for new or revised guidelines related to energy, cultural resources/tribal cultural
resources, transportation, and wildfire. As
described in Section 3, below, the proposed project
would be consistent with the development type and
intensity anticipated by the General Plan and would
not result in new significant environmental effects
or a substantial increase in the severity of
previously identified significant effects.
Or
(3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been
8 August 2022
known with the exercise of reasonable diligence
at the time the previous EIR was certified as
complete or the Negative Declaration was
adopted, shows any of the following:
(A) The project will have one or more significant
effects not discussed in the previous EIR or
negative declaration;
As described below, all project impacts would be
less than significant.
(B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the
previous EIR;
As described below, all project impacts would be less than significant.
(C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously
found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project
proponents decline to adopt the mitigation
measure or alternative; or
As described below, all project impacts would be
less than significant and no measures that would have previously been considered infeasible are required.
(D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but
the project proponents decline to adopt the
mitigation measure or alternative.
As described below, all project impacts would be less than significant and no measures that were previously declined to be implemented are required.
3 Checklist
1. Project title:
Jefferson Mixed Use: Townhome and Professional Office Project
2. Lead agency name and address:
City of Carlsbad,
1635 Faraday Avenue
Carlsbad, California 92008
3. Contact person and phone number:
Ms. Lauren Yzaguirre, (442) 339-2634
4. Project location:
The Project site is located at 2754 and 2770 Jefferson Street, Carlsbad, CA 92008.
5. Project sponsor’s name and address:
Mr. Ed Scarpelli, (760) 685-0947
6. General plan designation:
Northern lot (2754 Jefferson): R-15 (15 du/acre)
Southern lot (2770 Jefferson): R-15/O (15 units/acre and office)
7. Zoning:
Northern lot (2754): RD-M (Residential Density-Multiple)
Southern lot (2770): R-P-Q (Residential Professional Qualified Development Overlay Zone)
8. Description of project. (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the
project, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional
sheets if necessary):
The project proposes the demolition of two, existing single-family homes and the construction of four,
attached townhomes and an 897 square foot office space. See Figure 5, Preliminary Site Plan. The project
would include the following components:
• Tentative Tract Map
• General Plan Amendment
• Zone Change
10 August 2022
• Planned Development Permit
• Nonresidential Planned Development Permit
• Site Development Plan
9. Surrounding land uses and setting (Briefly describe the project’s surroundings):
The Project is surrounded on the north, northeast, and east by multi-family housing; single family homes to
the south, and Jefferson Street and professional/office uses to the west.
10. Other public agencies whose discretionary approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or
participation agreement):
N/A.
11. Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area requested
consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1? If so, is there a plan for consultation
that includes, for example, the determination of significance of impacts to tribal cultural resources,
procedures regarding confidentiality, etc.?
Yes, please refer to Section 3.18.
11 August 2022
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact
that is a “Potentially Significant Impact,” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
Aesthetics Agriculture and
Forestry Resources
Air Quality
Biological Resources Cultural Resources Energy
Geology and Soils Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
Hazards and Hazardous
Materials
Hydrology and Water Quality Land Use and
Planning
Mineral Resources
Noise Population and
Housing
Public Services
Recreation Transportation Tribal Cultural Resources
Utilities and Service Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of
Significance
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
12 August 2022
Determination (To be completed by the Lead Agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not
be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the
project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL
IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless
mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier
document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures
based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is
required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all
potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or
mitigated pursuant to that earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including
revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.
Signature
Date
□
□
□
□
13 August 2022
3.1 Aesthetics
Since the previous EIR was certified, are there any changes in the project, changes in circumstances under
which the project is undertaken and/or "new information of substantial importance" that cause one or more
effects to aesthetic resources including: scenic vistas; scenic resources including, but not limited to, trees,
rock outcroppings, or historic buildings within a state scenic highway; existing visual character or quality of
the site and its surroundings; or day or nighttime views in the area?
YES NO
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts to scenic vistas would be less than significant. Scenic vistas in the
city consist of the scenic corridors and views to and from the coastline, open spaces, and hillsides. The
city’s General Plan regulates development of these areas, and contains policies to ensure that opportunities
to enjoy scenic views are either preserved or enhanced. The majority of land uses introduced in the city’s
General Plan and analyzed in the GP/CAP FEIR, including the Project site, focused development in infill
areas to relieve pressure on development of open space and agricultural areas. Future development within
the city would generally result in the intensification of existing urban uses, as well as conversion of vacant
land into urban uses.
The Project site is located on a previously disturbed infill site with two existing single-family residences and
is immediately surrounded by single and multi-family residential and commercial/office uses. There are no
scenic vistas or scenic corridors in the immediate Project vicinity. The Project would be consistent with the
uses, aesthetic, and scale surrounding the Project site. Thus, impacts would be less than significant.
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded there to be no impact related to state scenic highways. The city does not
contain officially designated State Scenic Highways. The closest eligible State Scenic Highway is I-5, located
approximately 1,500 feet east of the Project site (Caltrans 2021). The Project site is an infill site surrounded
by existing development similar to that proposed by the Project (multi-family residential and office uses).
Existing development within the city between the Project site and I-5 disrupts any potential views of the
eligible state scenic highway from the Project site and immediate vicinity. Thus, because the Project site is
not visible from any scenic highway and does not contain scenic resources including trees, rock
outcroppings or historic buildings, no impact to scenic resources within a state scenic highway would occur.
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts to consistency with applicable zoning and other regulations governing
scenic quality would be less than significant. The General Plan directs new development into underutilized
or previously developed areas, where any proposed changes in land use and physical design are intended
to increase visual quality. The General Plan also seeks to ensure that any development or redevelopment
observes design guidelines to ensure visual compatibility with the surrounding environment. Accordingly,
the GP/CAP FEIR determined that because the General Plan recognizes the sensitivity of preserving the
visual character of the existing neighborhoods and open spaces throughout the city, development in
accordance with General Plan land use designations would be unlikely to result in visual degradation of the
city or surroundings (City of Carlsbad 2015a).
The Project site is designated as R-15 (Residential) and R-15/O (Residential and Office) and zoned RD-M
(Residential Density-Multiple Zone) and R-P-Q (Residential Professional – Qualified Development Overlay
14 August 2022
Zone). The Project would include a Tentative Tract Map, Zone Change, and General Plan Amendment for land
use re-designation to allow for the construction of four residential air-space condominiums and an office use.
The Tentative Tract Map will consolidate two lots and subdivide the project site for residential air-space and
commercial condominiums. To avoid a split zone development, the General Plan Amendment and Zone
Change are proposed to change the land use designation to R—15/O and the zone to R-P-Q to allow both
multi-family residential and office on one lot.. Thus, upon approval of the proposed Zone Change and General
Plan Amendment, the proposed uses would comply with the zoning and land use designations on the Project
site. In addition, upon approval, the Project would be consistent with the city’s Zoning Ordinance and General
Plan and would be visually compatible with surrounding development including the residential and office uses
in the immediate vicinity. The Project would be constructed pursuant to development standards contained in
the Zoning Ordinance, including building setbacks, building heights, lot coverage, land uses, grading, and
parking. Thus, because the Project would not conflict with land use designation and zoning of the site upon
approval, would be consistent with surrounding uses, and would adhere to city’s development standards in
the Zoning Ordinance; impacts would be less than significant.
The GP/CAP FEIR impact to light and glare would be less than significant. Development pursuant to the
General Plan would introduce new sources of light into the city including residential and non-residential
interior and exterior lighting, parking lot lighting, commercial signage lighting, and lamps for streetscape
and public recreational areas. Although all new development pursuant to the General Plan would
incrementally contribute to light pollution throughout the city, new development would take place in or near
developed and urbanized areas, where moderate light and glare already exist. The General Plan includes
polices related to buffering between development and sensitive habitats, and between commercial,
residential, and industrial uses. New development would also be required to comply with the city’s Zoning
Ordinances regulating light and glare and development buffers (City of Carlsbad 2015a).
Through adherence to the applicable city standards, the Project would not generate excessive light or glare.
The Project would introduce new development consistent with the existing development surrounding the
Project site. Lighting associated with the Project would consist of typical residential and commercial lighting,
such as internal lighting and external building lighting for security purposes. Windows included in the Project
could result in some minimal glare. However, such glare would be typical of surrounding uses and would
not be substantial. Lighting on the Project site would also comply with applicable zoning ordinance
development standards. Finally, the Project site is surrounded by existing development, and not subject to
Habitat Management Plan or Local Coastal Program lighting requirements. Therefore, impacts associated
with light and glare would be less than significant.
3.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Since the previous EIR was certified or previous ND was adopted, are there any changes in the project,
changes in circumstances under which the project is undertaken and/or "new information of substantial
importance" that cause one or more effects to agriculture or forestry resources including: conversion of
Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to a non-agricultural use, conflicts
with existing zoning for agricultural use or Williamson Act contract, or conversion of forest land (as defined
in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section
4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))?
15 August 2022
YES NO
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts to Farmland be less than significant.
According to the California Department of Conservation California Important Farmland Finder, the Project site
is designated as Urban and Built-Up Land (DOC 2018). The Project site is also designated and zoned for
residential and office uses and is surrounded by existing residential and commercial/office uses. The Project
would include a Tentative Tract Map, Zone Change, and General Plan Amendment for land use re-designation
to allow for the construction of four residential air-space condominiums and an office use. The Tentative Tract
Map will consolidate two lots and subdivide the project site for residential air-space and commercial
condominiums. To avoid a split zone development, the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change are
proposed to change the land use designation to R—15/O and the zone to R-P-Q to allow both multi-family
residential and office on one lot. However, it is noted that the proposed uses are consistent with the intensity
and density allowed under the existing zoning and land use designations of the Project site. Thus, because
the Project would not convert agricultural land and is consistent with the designated land use and zoning of
the site, no impact would occur.
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts related to conflicts with existing agricultural zoning or Williamson Act
contracts would be less than significant. The only Williamson Act contract within the city is located at the
Flower Fields property and the General Plan does not include any new land uses that would affect the status
of the Flower Fields Williamson Act contract.
The Project site is designated and zoned for residential and office uses and currently contains existing
single-family residences. The Project site is also surrounded by existing residential and commercial uses
and there are no agriculturally zoned lands in the project vicinity. Therefore, the Project would not conflict
with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract and no impact would occur.
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded no impact would occur to forest land, timberland, or timberland production.
There are no properties within the city that are zoned for forest land, timberland, or timberland production
(City of Carlsbad 2019).
The GP/CAP FEIR also concluded no impact would occur due to the loss or conversion of forest land. There
are no forest lands within the city (City of Carlsbad 2019).
No forestland timberland, or timberland production exists within the city, including the Project site;
therefore, no impact would occur.
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded this impact related to changes to the existing environmental which could result
in the conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural uses would be less than significant.
The Project site is designated and zoned for residential and office uses and the Project proposes
development of four condominiums, a professional office, and associated parking consistent with the
existing zoning and land use designations. Therefore, the Project would not result in the conversion of any
farmland to non-agricultural use or forest land to non-forest use. Therefore, no impact would occur.
16 August 2022
3.3 Air Quality
Since the previous EIR was certified, are there any changes in the project, changes in circumstances under
which the project is undertaken and/or "new information of substantial importance" that cause one or more
effects to air quality including: conflicts with or obstruction of implementation of the San Diego Regional Air
Quality Strategy or applicable portions of the State Implementation Plan (SIP); violation of any air quality
standard or substantial contribution to an existing or projected air quality violation; a cumulatively
considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an
applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard; exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial
pollutant concentrations; or creation of objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?
YES NO
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts to conflicts or obstruction of implementation of the applicable air
quality plans would be less than significant. The San Diego Air Pollution Control District (SDAPCD) and San
Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) are responsible for developing and implementing the clean
air plan for attainment and maintenance of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and
California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) in the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB). The San Diego County
Regional Air Quality Strategy (RAQS) relies on information from California Air Resources Board (CARB) and
SANDAG, including mobile and area source emissions, as well as information regarding projected growth
in San Diego County and the cities in the county, to project future emissions and then determine from that
the strategies necessary for the reduction of emissions through regulatory controls. CARB mobile source
emission projections and SANDAG growth projections are based on population, vehicle trends, and land
use plans developed by San Diego County and the cities in the county as part of the development of their
general plans (City of Carlsbad 2015a).
If a project proposes development that is greater than that anticipated in the local general plan and
SANDAG’s growth projections, the project might be in conflict with the RAQS and may contribute to a
potentially significant cumulative impact on air quality. The proposed project would be consistent with the
zoning and land use designation of the site. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with
SANDAG’s growth projections or the RAQS, and the project would not conflict with or obstruct
implementation of the applicable air quality plan. Impacts would be less than significant.
A comparison between the project and the GP/CAP FEIR analysis was conducted to determine whether the
project’s construction and operation would result in a cumulatively considerable net increase in emissions
of criteria air pollutants for which the SDAB is designated as nonattainment under NAAQS or CAAQS
compared to the previous CEQA analysis.
Construction
The Project would include a Tentative Tract Map, Zone Change, and General Plan Amendment for land use
re-designation to allow for the construction of four residential air-space condominiums and an office use. The
Tentative Tract Map will consolidate two lots and subdivide the project site for residential air-space and
commercial condominiums. To avoid a split zone development, the General Plan Amendment and Zone
Change are proposed to change the land use designation to R—15/O and the zone to R-P-Q to allow both
17 August 2022
multi-family residential and office on one lot. However, it is noted that the proposed uses are consistent with
the intensity and density allowed under the existing zoning and land use designations of the Project site.
Therefore, the construction emissions associated with grading, building construction, architectural coating,
and asphalt paving are determined to be adequately addressed in the GP/CAP EIR. Furthermore, it is
anticipated that equipment and vehicle emissions would decrease compared to emissions evaluated in the
GP/CAP FEIR due to more stringent standards for in-use off-road equipment and heavy-duty trucks, as well
as fleet turnover replacing older equipment and vehicles in later years. The project would be subject to
SDAPCD Rule 55, Fugitive Dust Control, which requires the project take steps to restrict visible emissions
of fugitive dust beyond the property line. Compliance with Rule 55 would limit fugitive dust (PM10 and PM2.5)
generated during grading and construction activities. The project would also be subject to SDAPCD Rule
67.0.1 – Architectural Coatings, which establishes maximum VOC contents of 50 and 100 grams per liter
for flat and non-flat coatings, respectively. Accordingly, due to the project’s consistency with zoning and
land use designation of the site, as well as implementation of more stringent requirements associated with
construction, the project would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria
pollutant during construction.
Operations
As discussed above, the Project would include a Tentative Tract Map, Zone Change, and General Plan
Amendment for land use re-designation to allow for the construction of four residential air-space
condominiums and an office use. The Tentative Tract Map will consolidate two lots and subdivide the project
site for residential air-space and commercial condominiums. To avoid a split zone development, the General
Plan Amendment and Zone Change are proposed to change the land use designation to R—15/O and the
zone to R-P-Q to allow both multi-family residential and office on one lot.. However, it is noted that the
proposed uses are consistent with the intensity and density allowed under the existing zoning and land use
designations of the Project site. Therefore, the operational emissions associated with project operation are
addressed in the GP/CAP EIR. The project would result in 45 average daily trips (ADT), and the existing
single-family homes generate 20 ADT, therefore, the proposed project would generate the addition of
approximately 25 ADT (net) at the project site, which is considered to be a minimal amount and would not
result in requirement of a TDM plan or measures as explained in Section 3.17, below. Furthermore, it is
anticipated that vehicle emissions would decrease compared to emissions assumed in the GP/CAP FEIR
due to increased vehicle emission control technologies, more stringent standards specifically for heavy-
duty trucks, and fleet turnover replacing older vehicles. In addition, energy emissions associated with the
project are anticipated to decrease compared to emissions associated with the older residential structures
currently present at the project site, due to increased building efficiency, availability of technology, and
more stringent building codes. Accordingly, due to reduced emissions associated with mobile sources
(vehicle trips), area, and energy sources (building operation), the project would not generate additional
pollutant emissions or create an additional impact not previously addressed in the GP/CAP FEIR. Impacts
would be less than significant.
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts to sensitive receptors from substantial pollutant concentrations would
be less than significant because construction of projects pursuant to the General Plan would be short-term
and diesel exhaust particulate matter emissions from off-road construction equipment and trucks would
be controlled through compliance with airborne toxic control measures (ATCMs) adopted by CARB (City of
Carlsbad 2015a). Sensitive receptors are those individuals more susceptible to the effects of air pollution
than the population at large. People most likely to be affected by air pollution include children, older people,
and people with cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases. Sensitive receptors include residences,
18 August 2022
schools, playgrounds, childcare centers, athletic facilities, long-term healthcare facilities, rehabilitation
centers, convalescent centers, and retirement homes.
Construction activities associated with the Project would result in temporary sources of on-site fugitive dust
and construction equipment emissions. The nearest sensitive receptors are the multi-family and single-
family residences located directly adjacent to the northern and southern boundaries of the Project site,
respectively. Construction activities would be those typical of building construction, and would not require
the extensive use of heavy-duty construction equipment, which is subject to a CARB Airborne Toxics Control
Measure (ATCM) for in-use diesel construction equipment to reduce diesel particulate emissions. While the
Project could expose these adjacent sensitive receptors to pollutant concentrations from construction
activities, construction would be temporary and would be required to comply with CARB adopted ATCMs to
reduce air emissions from mobile and stationary sources. Therefore, through compliance with existing
regulations, the project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations and
impacts would be less than significant.
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded odor impacts would be less than significant. Odors would be potentially
generated from vehicles and equipment exhaust emissions during construction of the Project. Potential
odors produced during construction would be attributable to concentrations of unburned hydrocarbons
from tailpipes of construction equipment and asphalt pavement application. Such odors would disperse
rapidly from the Project site and generally occur at magnitudes that would not affect substantial numbers
of people. Therefore, impacts associated with odors during construction would be less than significant.
Land uses and industrial operations associated with odor complaints include agricultural uses, wastewater
treatment plants, food-processing plants, chemical plants, composting operations, refineries, landfills,
dairies, and fiberglass molding facilities (City of Carlsbad 2015a). The Project would include four
condominiums and a professional office which would not create any new sources of odor during operation.
Therefore, Project operations would result in an odor impact that would be less than significant.
3.4 Biological Resources
Since the previous EIR was certified, are there any changes in the project, changes in circumstances under
which the project is undertaken and/or "new information of substantial importance" that cause one or more
effects to biological resources including: adverse effects on any sensitive natural community (including
riparian habitat) or species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in a local or
regional plan, policy, or regulation, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service; adverse effects to federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean
Water Act; interference with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or
with wildlife corridors, or impeding the use of native wildlife nursery sites; and/or conflicts with the
provisions of any adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Communities Conservation Plan, or other
approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan, policies or ordinances?
YES NO
As discussed in the GP/CAP FEIR, direct impacts to special-status species could result from the conversion
of habitat either temporarily, as a result of grading, excavation, and construction activities, or permanently
□ ~
19 August 2022
from the ongoing operation and/or maintenance of a project or plan. Indirect impacts could result from
elevated dust or noise levels or increased sediment loads in runoff from construction activities. Indirect
impacts could also result from permanent alterations to hydrology upstream of habitats supporting
sensitive species, including increased runoff, sedimentation, or pollutant loads, and increased human
activity. However, most new development expected to occur pursuant to the General Plan would be within
existing developed areas.
Jurisdictional wetlands and waters occur within the city primarily in the vicinity of the Batiquitos, Agua
Hedionda, and Buena Vista lagoons with other wetland habitats occurring along creeks and drainages.
Vernal pools occur in several scattered locations throughout the city on marine terraces. As such,
development on or adjacent to these areas could potentially affect these resources either directly through
fill or indirectly through the alteration of the hydrologic regime. However, if jurisdictional resources are
determined to be potentially impacted by a project, all such future development projects would require
Clean Water Act Section 404/401 Permits from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) and Regional
Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), respectively, and a 1600-Series Streambed Alteration Agreement
with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). Future projects potentially affecting
jurisdictional wetlands and waters would comply with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS),
CDFW, and ACOE “no net loss” policy and would require mitigation, including wetland creation and
restoration/enhancement. Finally, the city’s HMP is supplemented by the city’s Guidelines for Riparian and
Wetland Buffers, which provides buffer design recommendations and identifies allowable uses and land
use restrictions for riparian/wetland buffer zones. The guidelines also include minimization and mitigation
measures designed to protect riparian and wetland habitats from pre-construction and construction
activities. Therefore, implementation of the General Plan Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation
Element goals and policies, and compliance with the measures listed in the Guidelines for Wetland and
Riparian Buffers, and with applicable federal, state, and local regulations was determined to reduce
impacts to federally protected wetland to below a level of significance (City of Carlsbad 2015a).
Under existing conditions, the Project site is currently developed with two single-family residences and does
not contain any candidate, sensitive, or special status species or habitat areas which would support such
species. Further, the Project site is surrounded by existing development in all directions and no natural
habitat areas exist in the Project vicinity. The Project site and surrounding area is also designated as
Urban/Disturbed land within the HMP (City of Carlsbad 2004). As such, redevelopment of the Project site
would result in less than significant impacts to candidate, sensitive, and special-status species.
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts to conflicts with local policies and ordinances protecting biological
resources would be less than significant. The city has developed a set of guidelines to aid in the
implementation of the HMP. These include the Guidelines for Biological Studies, Guidelines for Preserve
Management, Guidelines for Habitat Creation and Restoration, and Guidelines for Riparian and Wetland
Buffers. The General Plan was developed to promote consistency with other city plans and ordinances
that provide policy direction for the preservation of biological resources in the city. Therefore,
implementation of the General Plan Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation Element goals and
policies was determined to ensure consistency with the HMP guidelines, resulting in a less than
significant impact (City of Carlsbad 2015a).
The Project site and surrounding area is designated as Urban/Disturbed land within the HMP (City of
Carlsbad 2004). While the Project site contains some trees scattered around the property, which may be
removed during construction of the Project, the city does not have a tree preservation policy for trees on
20 August 2022
private property. Consistent with the GP/CAP FEIR, the Project would not conflict with local policies or
ordinances related to biological resources. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts due to conflicts with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, NCCP or other approval habits conservation plan would be less than significant. The city
implements the HMP, which serves as the city’s subarea plan under the MHCP. All future development
projects pursuant to the HMP are required to comply the conditions of the HMP. Therefore, implementation
of the General Plan Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation Element goals and policies was determined
to ensure that impacts related to conflicts with the adopted HMP would be less than significant (City of
Carlsbad 2015a).
The Project site is developed with two single-family residences and is not identified as a conservation area
within the HMP. Further, the Project site and surrounding area is designated as Urban/Disturbed land within
the HMP (City of Carlsbad 2004). As such, redevelopment of the Project site would not result in conflicts
with the provisions of the HMP and impacts would be less than significant.
3.5 Cultural Resources
Since the previous EIR was certified, are there any changes in the project, changes in circumstances under
which the project is undertaken and/or "new information of substantial importance" that cause one or more
effects to cultural resources including: causing a change in the significance of a historical or archaeological
resource as defined in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5; destroying a unique paleontological
resource or site or unique geologic feature; and/or disturbing any human remains, including those interred
outside of formal cemeteries?
YES NO
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded a total of five properties within the city were potentially eligible for nomination
to the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and seven properties were identified as potential
California Historical Landmarks. The General Plan includes goals and policies to minimize or avoid impacts
to historical resources by requiring the protection and preservation of such resources. Additionally, historic
resources within the city are subject to the city’s Historic Preservation Ordinance (Municipal Code Title 22),
which includes criteria for including resources in the city’s historic resources inventory, historic site and
landmark designation procedures, and historic district designation procedures. The City of Carlsbad Tribal,
Cultural, and Paleontological Resources Guidelines are also in place to help protect historic resources
within the city (City of Carlsbad 2017). Therefore, any development pursuant to the General Plan would be
required to comply with the city’s Historic Preservation Ordinance, Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological
Resources Guidelines, and applicable General Plan goals and polices to ensure impacts would be less than
significant (City of Carlsbad 2015a).
The Project site is currently developed with two single-family residences. Although implementation of the
Project would result in demolition of the existing on-site residences. An assessment of these residences
was performed to determine their eligibility for listing as historic resources. The historic architecture survey
indicated that the two structures are standard 2-x-4-inch wood-frame houses set on reinforced concrete
foundations. Background research and survey work indicate that neither property is eligible on local, state,
□ ~
21 August 2022
or federal registries. (Appendix A, Loveless Linton, Inc, April 2021) Therefore, the Project would not cause
a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to §15064.5 and no
impact would occur.
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts to archaeological resources would be less than significant
Approximately 480 prehistoric sites were recorded in the city during the 1990 Cultural Resources Survey;
therefore, there is potential for archaeological sites to be found within Carlsbad due to the existence of
previously identified sites. More specifically, future development projects pursuant to the General Plan may
involve grading, excavation, or other ground-disturbing activities, which could disturb or damage unknown
archaeological resources. However, the General Plan includes goals and policies to minimize or avoid
impacts to archaeological resources by requiring the protection and preservation of such resources.
Additionally, the city’s Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Resources Guidelines are also in place to help
protect archeological resources within the city (City of Carlsbad 2017). Therefore, any development
pursuant to the General Plan would be required to comply with the city’s Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological
Resources Guidelines and applicable General Plan goals and polices to ensure impacts would be less than
significant (City of Carlsbad 2015a).
Under existing conditions, the Project site is currently developed with two single-family residences. No areas
on the Project site contain undisturbed land. A pedestrian survey of the project site did not reveal any
cultural resources (Loveless Linton, Inc April 2021) Therefore, the likelihood that intact archeological
resources exist on the Project site is low due to previous site disturbance. The city’s Tribal, Cultural, and
Paleontological Resources Guidelines also identify fully developed areas of the city as having low
archeological resource sensitivity. Nonetheless, as recommended in Appendix A, due to the lack of
subsurface testing, it is recommended to have a qualified Archaeological Principal managing the project
and a qualified archaeological monitor present. Per the City of Carlsbad Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological
Guidelines (Carlsbad, 2017), the project shall implement Standard Treatment 5 for construction
monitoring, which requires the following:
Standard Treatment 5: Construction Monitoring
Monitoring by a qualified professional archaeologist, Native American monitor, and/or tribal representative
shall only be used after reasonable and good-faith efforts, as determined by the City and through
consultation, have been made to identify eligible cultural resources or significant tribal cultural resources
prior to project approval. Monitoring can also be used to ensure avoidance of eligible cultural resources or
significant tribal resources during ground-disturbing activities. Monitoring is appropriate in the following
circumstances (and shall follow the requirements and provisions of Section 8.2.2.4 when tribal cultural
resources are involved):
• when buried archaeological or known or potential tribal cultural resources are likely in the vicinity,
but their specific location is unknown;
• when ground-disturbing activities will come within 100 feet of a recorded non-tribal eligible cultural
resource;
• When within, or within close proximity to, a known or potential TCR;
• when installing or verifying the placement and integrity of temporary exclusionary (orange barrier
or silk) fencing around resources that must be avoided; and/or
22 August 2022
• when “pioneering” (breaking ground for) temporary/preliminary access roads for geotechnical
trenching or boring.
Monitoring is considered a last resort to minimizing or mitigating adverse effects and is not the default
treatment for all projects. Any monitoring required must be justified and balanced by a reporting schedule.
Should the City determine that monitoring is not an appropriate mitigation, then the City, with permission
from the landowner, may extend an opportunity to members of the public or consulting parties to visit the
project during construction on a volunteer basis, provided that the visitors receive safety training and sign
liability release waivers. The City shall not have the authority to grant property access to private property
over the objections of the landowner
This recommendation is consistent with General Plan Policy 7-P.8 and 7-p.9, which state:
7-P.8 During construction of specific development projects, require monitoring of grading,
ground-disturbing, and other major earthmoving activities in previously undisturbed areas
or in areas with known archaeological or paleontological resources by a qualified
professional, as well as a tribal monitor during activities in areas with cultural resources of
interest to local Native American tribes. Both the qualified professional and tribal monitor
shall observe grading, ground-disturbing, and other earth-moving activities.
7-P.9 Ensure that treatment of any cultural resources discovered during site grading complies
with the City of Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidelines. Determination of the significance
of the cultural resource(s) and development and implementation of any data recovery
program shall be conducted in consultation with interested Native American tribes. All
Native American human remains and associated grave goods shall be returned to their
most likely descendent and repatriated. The final disposition of artifacts not directly
associated with Native American graves shall be negotiated during consultation with
interested tribes; if the artifact is not accepted by Native American tribes, it shall be offered
to an institution staffed by qualified professionals, as may be determined by the City
Planner. Artifacts include material recovered from all phases of work, including the initial
survey, testing, indexing, data recovery, and monitoring
Therefore, with compliance with the General Plan, implementation of the Project would not cause a
substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5.
Impacts would be less than significant.
Human remains, particularly those interred outside formal cemeteries, could be disturbed during grading,
excavation, or other ground-disturbing activities associated with future development pursuant to the
General Plan. However, Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 includes specific provisions for the
protection of human remains in the event of discovery.
Under existing conditions, the Project site is currently developed with two single-family residences. No areas
on the Project site contain undisturbed land. Therefore, the likelihood that human remains exist on the
Project site is low due to previous site disturbance. Moreover, the city’s Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological
Resources Guidelines also identify fully developed areas of the city as having low archeological resource
23 August 2022
sensitivity. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in disturbance of any human remains,
including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries. Impacts would be less than significant.
Further, Health and Safety Code § 7050.5, CEQA Guidelines § 15064.5(e), and PRC § 5097.98 mandate
the regulatory process to be followed in the unlikely event of an accidental discovery of any human remains
in a location other than a dedicated cemetery. Specifically, the process is as follows:
The San Diego County Coroner must be notified within 24 hours of the discovery of potentially
human remains. The Coroner must then determine within two working days of being notified if the
remains are subject to his or her authority. If the Coroner recognizes the remains to be Native
American, he or she must contact the NAHC by phone within 24 hours. The NAHC then designates
a Most Likely Descendant (MLD) with respect to the human remains within 48 hours of notification.
The MLD will then have the opportunity to recommend to the Project proponent means for treating
or disposing, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and associated grave goods within 24
hours of notification.
Although unlikely, there is the possibility of human remains being discovered during ground disturbing
activities on the Project site. Project compliance with Health and Safety Code § 7050.5, CEQA Guidelines
§ 15064.5(e), and PRC § 5097.98 would ensure potential impacts to human remains would not result in
any peculiar or site-specific impacts than were already identified in the GP/CAP FEIR.
3.6 Energy
Since the previous EIR was certified, are there any changes in the project, changes in circumstances under
which the project is undertaken and/or "new information of substantial importance" that cause one or more
effects to energy including: resulting in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful,
inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation,
and/or conflicts with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
YES NO
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary energy consumption
would be less than significant. Development pursuant to the General Plan would increase future energy
consumption within the city, resulting in additional demand for electricity and natural gas supply and
services. The General Plan contains policies to ensure energy efficient designs in new development and
encourage energy efficiency upgrades in existing development, both of which would minimize wasteful,
inefficient energy consumption. Further, all projects are required to comply with existing California Building
Code (CBC), include Title 24 which ensures new structures achieve ever-increasing energy efficiency
standards. Therefore, required compliance with Title 24 energy performance standards and General Plan
energy conservation policies was determined to ensure less than significant impacts in the GP/CAP FEIR
(City of Carlsbad 2015a).
Construction
During construction, temporary electric power use would be required for as-necessary lighting and electronic
equipment. Fuels for construction would primarily consist of diesel and gasoline, which would be consumed
□
24 August 2022
throughout construction of the Project by construction equipment and vehicles traveling to and from the Project
site. Due to the relatively small size of the Project and temporary nature of construction, energy used during
construction would be minimal in comparison to regional energy consumption. Additionally, the Project would be
required to CARB’s ATCMs to reduce air emissions as discussed above in Section 3.3, Air Quality. Compliance
with CARB’s ATCMs would also reduce energy usage such as through limits on idling time. Finally, the
construction of the project is considered previously accounted for in the GP/CAP FEIR because the uses
are consistent with the underlying land use designation and zoning. Therefore, the Project would not result
in the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources during construction. Impacts
would be less than significant.
Operation
During operation, the Project would require electricity for multiple purposes including, but not limited to,
building heating and cooling, lighting, appliances, refrigeration, electronics, and other uses associated with
the Project’s land uses. Natural gas would not be used. Petroleum used during Project operation would
primarily consist of Project residents, employees, and customers traveling to and from the Project site.
Although the Project would utilize energy during project operation, the project would be designed to maximize
energy performance and would comply with Title 24 energy performance standards. More specifically, the
proposed project would comply with efficiency standards regarding roofing, ceilings, and insulation; comply
with wet appliance energy efficiency standards; utilize low-pollutant emitting exterior and interior finish
materials, such as adhesives, sealants, caulks, paints and coatings, carpet systems, and composite wood
products; and comply with energy efficiency requirements for dry appliances and lighting. Additionally,
regarding petroleum, over the lifetime of the Project, the fuel efficiency of the vehicles being used by the
residents, employees, and customers is expected to increase. As such, the amount of petroleum consumed
as a result of vehicular trips to and from the Project site during operation would decrease over time. Finally,
the Project site is currently developed with two single-family residences which utilize energy on the Project
site. Therefore, redevelopment of the Project site would result in less net energy usage than development on
a vacant lot. Implementation of the Project would not result in the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources during operation. Impacts would be less than significant.
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts due to conflicts with state or local plans for renewable energy or
energy efficiency would be less than significant. As discussed in the GP/CAP FEIR, all future development
pursuant to the General Plan would be required to comply with the latest California Building Code (CBC)
requirements, including CBC Energy Efficiency Standards, as well as all federal, state, and local rules and
regulations pertaining to energy consumption and conservation. The General Plan also includes goals and
policies which emphasize citywide energy reduction strategies. Therefore, through implementation of the
city’s General Plan policies, and concurrent implementation of the city’s Climate Action Plan (CAP), the
GP/CAP FEIR determined the General Plan would assist the city in meeting energy reduction goals and GHG
emission reduction targets resulting in a less than significant impact related to conflicts with state or local
plans for renewable energy or energy efficiency (City of Carlsbad 2015a).
The Project would comply with Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, which contains energy
efficiency standards for residential and non-residential buildings based on a state mandate to reduce
California’s energy demand. Specifically, Title 24 addresses a number of energy efficiency measures that
impact energy used for lighting, water heating, heating, and air conditioning, including the energy impact of
the building envelope such as windows, doors, skylights, wall/floor/ceiling assemblies, attics, and roofs.
Part 6 of Title 24 specifically establishes energy efficiency standards for residential and non-residential
25 August 2022
buildings constructed in the State of California in order to reduce energy demand and consumption. The
Project would comply with Title 24, Part 6, per state regulations. In addition, Title 24, Part 11, contains
mandatory energy measures that are applicable to the Project under the CALGreen Code.
The Project would result in an increased demand for electricity, and petroleum. In accordance with Title 24
mandatory compliance, the Project would comply with efficiency standards regarding roofing, ceilings, and
insulation; comply with wet appliance energy efficiency standards; utilize low-pollutant emitting exterior and
interior finish materials, such as adhesives, sealants, caulks, paints and coatings, carpet systems, and
composite wood products; and comply with energy efficiency requirements for dry appliances and lighting.
Compliance with all of these mandatory measures would decrease the consumption of electricity and
petroleum. Because the Project would comply with Title 24, no conflict with existing energy standards and
regulations would occur. Impacts would be less than significant.
3.7 Geology and Soils
Since the previous EIR was certified, are there any changes in the project, changes in circumstances under
which the project is undertaken and/or "new information of substantial importance" that result in one or
more effects from geology and soils including: exposure of people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault,
seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction, strong seismic ground shaking, or landslides; result
in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil; produce unstable geological conditions that will result in
adverse impacts resulting from landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse; being
located on expansive soil creating substantial risks to life or property; and/or having soils incapable of
adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers
are not available for the disposal of wastewater.
YES NO
A preliminary geotechnical investigation was prepared for the proposed project by GeoSoils Inc. in
December 2020 and has been incorporated as Appendix B of this document. The results of the preliminary
geotechnical investigation have been incorporated into the analysis below.
Seismic activity is to be expected in Southern California. However, the city is not listed as being affected by
an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone (City of Carlsbad 2015a). As the Project site is located within the
city, implementation of the Project would result in no impact related to rupture of a known earthquake fault,
as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map.
Although the Project site and city are not listed as being affected by an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault
Zone, the potential for seismic ground shaking still exists as the city is located within a seismically active
region. The nearest known faults are the Rose Canyon and Newport-Inglewood faults, located approximately
3.8 miles west and approximately 4 miles northwest of the city’s western boundary, respectively (City of
Carlsbad 2015a). Per the preliminary geotechnical investigation, the project site is subject to moderate to
strong ground shaking should an earthquake occur along any of a number of the regional, Holocene-active
fault systems. However, future development pursuant to the General Plan would be required to comply with
the city’s Building Codes and Regulations (Municipal Code Title 18) and the most recent building design
standards of the CBC, which require all structures to be designed and constructed to resist the effects of
□ ~
26 August 2022
earthquake motions. In addition, the project would be required to comply with the recommendations
outlined in the preliminary geotechnical investigation, such as foundation design requirements and
retaining wall design parameters, which would ensure impacts associated with seismic ground shaking
would be less than significant.
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts due to seismic related ground failure including liquefaction would be
less than significant. As discussed therein, while some areas of the city have a higher risk of liquefaction
due to the presence of hydric soils or soils that are often saturated or characteristic of wetlands, most of
the city has a low liquefaction risk. For all future development pursuant to the General Plan, and particularly
development in areas with higher liquefaction risk, new buildings would be constructed in compliance with
the city’s Building Codes and Regulations, the CBC, and the General Plan policies to reduce risk of seismic-
related ground failure, including from liquefaction. According to the GP/CAP FEIR, the Project site is not
located within a potential liquefaction hazard area (City of Carlsbad 2015a). The Project would also be
required to comply with the city’s Building Codes and Regulations, the CBC, General Plan policies, and the
recommendations of the preliminary geotechnical investigation, to reduce risk of seismic related ground
failure, including from liquefaction. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts due to landslides would be less than significant. As discussed therein,
landslide risk is determined by steep slopes that have 25 percent or greater incline, soil series data, and
soil-slip susceptibility. The city does not include any areas identified as being susceptible to landslides and
the overall risk of landslides is low. The Project site and surrounding area are relatively flat (i.e., slopes far
below 25%) and not located near any hills, the susceptibility of the proposed project to significant landslide
events is considered low. In addition, the Project would also be required to comply with the city’s Building
Codes and Regulations, the CBC, General Plan policies, and the recommendations of the preliminary
geotechnical investigation, which would also reduce risks associated with landslides. Therefore, no impact
due to landslides would occur.
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts due to substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil would be less than
significant. As discussed therein, the city has the potential for erosion from water, wind, and
agricultural/development tillage, as well as coastal erosion from storms and rising sea-levels. However,
future development pursuant to the General Plan would be required to comply with the city’s Grading
Ordinance (Municipal Code Chapter 15.16), which establishes minimum requirements for grading,
including the requirement to obtain a grading permit. The grading permit requires a stormwater
maintenance program, construction stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP), and other such
documentation and information as may be necessary to demonstrate that the grading work will be carried
out in substantial compliance with all city codes and standards, and the requirements of the city’s
Landscape Manual. The city also has a designated Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone where
additional protection efforts are necessary. Through compliance with city regulations, codes, and
ordinances, impacts related to soil erosion or the loss of topsoil were determined to be less than significant
(City of Carlsbad 2015a).
The Project site is located on disturbed land that is currently developed with two single-family residences
and is not located within the city’s Coastal Zone (City of Carlsbad 2019). Soil erosion and/or the loss of
topsoil would be likely to occur when soil is exposed during construction activities. Wind and water are the
two main methods of erosion, and human activities that remove vegetation or otherwise disturb soil are
the biggest influence on erosion potential. Per the preliminary geotechnical investigation, soils present at
the project site are considered erosive. However, the proposed project would be required to comply with
27 August 2022
the recommendations outlined in the preliminary geotechnical investigation, which includes temporary
erosion control measures and design of site drainage to eliminate the potential of concentrated flows along
the ground surface (Appendix B). Further, the Project would be required to obtain a grading permit, and
comply with subsequent grading requirements, which would reduce soil erosion during construction. The
Project would require submittal of a SWPPP for review and approval by city staff. The SWPPP describes the
erosion and sediment control Best Management Practices (BMPs) to be used during the construction
phase. Thus, impacts would be less than significant.
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts to geologic units being unstable would be less than significant. As
discussed therein, the city does not include any areas identified as being susceptible to landslides, and the
overall risk of landslides is low. Subsidence risk is also low in the County due to the prevalence of granitic
soils. Although some areas of the city have higher risk of liquefaction, liquefaction risk is considered low in
most of the city. Future development pursuant to the General Plan would be required to comply with the
city’s Grading Ordinance, which requires a geotechnical investigation as part of the grading permit
application process that would identify potential hazards and provide recommendations consistent with
city standards (City of Carlsbad 2015a).
The Project site and surrounding area are relatively flat and not located near any hills. Thus, per the
preliminary geotechnical investigation, potential landslide impacts are considered low. Additionally, the
Project site is not located in a potential liquefaction hazard area as identified by the GP/CAP FEIR (City of
Carlsbad 2015a) and the preliminary geotechnical investigation indicated that potential for liquefaction on-
site is relatively low. The Project site is also not located in an area of subsidence risk.
Consistent with the determination in the GP/CAP FEIR, the Project would be required to obtain a grading
permit, which requires a geotechnical investigation as part of the grading permit application process that
would identify potential hazards and provide recommendations consistent with city standards. Per the
preliminary geotechnical investigation, undocumented artificial fill is present on-site. In addition, perched
groundwater was encountered on-site, which could result in geotechnical hazards. However, the proposed
project would be required to comply with the recommendations outlined in the preliminary geotechnical
investigation to address potential soil hazards associated with artificial fill and perched groundwater on-
site. More specifically, artificial fill would be removed to expose the underlying weathered old paralic
deposits, and then be reused as compacted fills in accordance with the recommendations of the
geotechnical investigation. To address potential issues associated with perched groundwater,
recommendations in the geotechnical investigation include installation of concrete cut-off barriers or
vertically installed impermeable membranes along the perimeter of the project’s driveway; placement of a
subgrade enhancement geotextile (SEG) atop the driveway subgrade; increased fill compaction to 95
percent of the laboratory standard (per ASTM D 1557); deepening footings to extend at least 1 foot below
the pavement subgrade; and implementation of low permeability concrete is in the construction of the
building foundations and slab-on-grade floor. Therefore, compliance with grading permit requirements and
the recommendations outlined in the preliminary geotechnical investigation would ensure impacts would
be less than significant.
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts due to expansive soils would be less than significant. As discussed
therein, most of the soils in the city have low shrink-swell potential. However, future projects pursuant to
the General Plan may be located on expansive soils. Compliance with the city’s Grading Ordinance, which
requires a geotechnical investigation as part of the grading permit application process that would identify
potential hazards and provide recommendations consistent with city standards, was determined to ensure
28 August 2022
impacts associated with expansive soils would be less than significant (City of Carlsbad 2015a). Consistent
with the determination of the GP/CAP FEIR, the Project would be required to comply with the city’s Grading
Ordinance, and subsequent grading permit requirements, which would reduce risks to life and property
associated with expansive soils. Additionally, the Project would be required to comply with the CBC including
Title 24. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Finally, the Project would connect to the existing sewer system and does not propose use of septic tanks.
Therefore, no impact due to the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems would occur.
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts to paleontological resources would be less than significant. As
discussed therein, geologic formations in the city are primarily the Lusardi Formation of the Cretaceous Age
as well as the Santiago Formation and Del Mar Formation of the Tertiary Age that overlie the Lusardi
Formation. These formations are known to produce significant fossils or have the potential to contain
fossils. Therefore, future development pursuant to the General Plan could result in direct or indirect impacts
to paleontological resources, and specifically during grading, excavation, and ground-disturbing activities.
However, the majority of development anticipated pursuant to the General Plan, such as the proposed
project, would involve redevelopment of or new development within existing developed areas. Compliance
with the General Plan policies would minimize or avoid impacts to paleontological resources, in addition to
subsequent measures to be implemented as applicable (City of Carlsbad 2015a).
Under existing conditions, the Project site is currently developed with two single-family residences. No areas
on the Project site contain undisturbed land. Therefore, the likelihood that intact paleontological resources
exist on the Project site is low due to previous site disturbance. Further, the project includes a total of
approximately 200 cubic yards of cut, which is a small amount of excavation and not likely to encounter
depths that were not disturbed by previous grading and development activity. Nonetheless, as
recommended in Appendix A, due to the lack of paleontological evaluation within the high sensitivity area,
it is recommended to consult with and conduct a record search with the San Diego Natural History Museum
prior to all earth-moving activities within the project area. This recommendation is consistent with General
Plan Policy 7-P.8, which states:
7-P.8 During construction of specific development projects, require monitoring of grading,
ground-disturbing, and other major earthmoving activities in previously undisturbed areas
or in areas with known archaeological or paleontological resources by a qualified
professional, as well as a tribal monitor during activities in areas with cultural resources of
interest to local Native American tribes. Both the qualified professional and tribal monitor
shall observe grading, ground-disturbing, and other earth-moving activities.
Therefore, with compliance with the General Plan Policy 7-P.8, implementation of the Project would not
directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature. Impacts
would be less than significant.
3.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Since the previous EIR was certified, are there any changes in the project, changes in circumstances under
which the project is undertaken and/or "new information of substantial importance" that result in one or
more new significant effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant
29 August 2022
effects associated with greenhouse gas emissions or compliance with applicable plans, policies or
regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing greenhouse gas emissions?
YES NO
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts due to the generation of greenhouse gas emissions that may have a
significant effect on the environment would be less than significant. The city prepared its CAP in September
2015, which was subsequently revised and updated in May 2020. city
A CAP Consistency Checklist was prepared for the proposed project by Rincon Consultants, Inc in January
2021 and incorporated as Appendix C of this document. Per the CAP Consistency Checklist, the proposed
project would be consistent with the city’s CAP, through implementation of features such as light emitting
diode (LED) lighting in outdoor areas; not exceeding 90 percent of the energy budget per Title 24, Part 6,
Energy Budget for the Standard Design Building; implementation of on-site photovoltaic systems; use of
steel framing for the non-residential component of the project; installation of water heating systems that
meet the criteria outlined in city Ordinances CS-348 and CS-347 and Sections 150.1(c)8A and 120.11 of
the California Energy Code; installation of an electric vehicle charging system (Level II) in each residential
garage and one electric vehicle charging system (Level II) for employee parking (Appendix C). Therefore,
impacts would be less than significant.
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts to conflicts with applicable plans, policies or regulations adopted for
reducing GHG emissions would be less than significant. Through implementation of city policies as
delineated in the proposed General Plan, and implementation of the CAP, the proposed General Plan would
support the 2009 San Diego RES renewable energy goals and the CARB passenger vehicle GHG emissions
reduction targets through measures that would reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) throughout the city.
Additionally, CARB’s LCFS, which aims to reduce the carbon intensity of the life-cycle of gasoline and diesel
fuels by 10 percent by 2020, would further assist in meeting energy reduction goals and GHG emission
reduction targets.
As discussed above, the proposed project would be consistent with the city’s CAP. In addition, the project
would be consistent with the zoning and land use designation of the project site. Therefore, GHG emissions
associated with the project have been accounted for in existing documents, including the city’s CAP. Lastly,
the project would comply with all applicable regulations to the extent required by law and would implement
General Plan policies aimed towards reducing GHG emission. Therefore, the project would not generate
conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of
GHGs. Impacts would be less than significant.
3.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Since the previous EIR was certified, are there any changes in the project, changes in circumstances under
which the project is undertaken and/or "new information of substantial importance" that result in one or
more effects from hazards and hazardous materials including: creation of a significant hazard to the public
or the environment through the routine transport, storage, use, or disposal of hazardous materials or
wastes; creation of a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment;
□ ~
-
-
30 August 2022
production of hazardous emissions or handling hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or
waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school; location on a site which is included on a
list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 creating a
hazard to the public or the environment; location within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has
not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport; within the vicinity of a private
airstrip resulting in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area; impair implementation
of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan; and/or
exposure of people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including
where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands?
YES NO
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts due to the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials
would be less than significant. Future development pursuant to the General Plan would potentially include
land uses that would require the routine use, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials and waste
within the city. Future construction activities associated with development pursuant to the General Plan
may also generate hazardous materials and waste, such as fuels and oils from construction equipment and
vehicles. However, the transport, storage, use, and disposal of hazardous materials and wastes is
extensively regulated by federal, state, and local policies, which provide a high level of protection to the
public. Regulations associated with using, transporting, or disposing of hazardous materials include
Resource Conversion and Recovery Act (RCRA), the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act,
the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act, California Health and Safety Code, CCR Title 22, CCR Title 27,
SB 1889, and the Consolidated Fire Code. The city continues to maintain permitting requirements, as
administered by the County of San Diego’s DEH requirements, for all land uses that handle, store, or
generate hazardous waste. Compliance with General Plan policies and federal and state regulations was
determined to ensure impacts associated with the routine use, transport, and disposal of hazardous
materials would be less than significant (City of Carlsbad 2015a).
The Project would involve demolition of the two existing single-family residences onsite and development
of four condominiums, a professional office, and associated parking. Construction of the Project would
involve the transport of commonly used hazardous substances, such as gasoline, diesel fuel, lubricating
oil, grease, and solvents. However, as previously described, hazardous materials are highly regulated in
California, including the methods by which they are transported, used, and stored. All such uses of these
substances would be subject to applicable and required regulatory controls. Additionally, construction is
temporary and use of these materials would cease upon completion. The use of these materials for their
intended purpose would not pose a significant risk to the public or environment. Therefore, impacts would
be less than significant during construction.
During Project operation, the transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials would be limited to consumer
products such as household cleaning products, landscaping chemicals and fertilizers, and other substances
associated with household and office uses, similar to the existing land uses. However, as previously described,
hazardous materials are highly regulated in California, including the methods by which they are transported,
used, and stored. All such uses of these substances would be subject to applicable and required regulatory
controls. Additionally, transport, use, and disposal of consumer product by future project occupants would
not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment as these are regularly used and typically
obtained in small quantities. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
□ ~
31 August 2022
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts due to upset or accident conditions involving the release of hazardous
materials into the environment would be less than significant. As discussed therein, future development
pursuant to the General Plan could involve the use, transportation, disposal, and storage of hazardous
materials in the city. Accordingly, accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the
environment could occur. However, the County DEH, Hazardous Material Division is the designated Certified
Unified Program Agency (CUPA) for the County. With proper implementation of CUPA programs, in
conjunction with other state and federal regulations, impacts of reasonably foreseeable accidents and/or
upset conditions involving the release of hazardous materials were determined to be less than significant
(City of Carlsbad 2015a).
Construction of the Project would result in the transport of commonly used hazardous substances, such as
gasoline, diesel fuel, lubricating oil, grease, and solvents. However, hazardous materials are highly
regulated in California, including the methods by which they are transported, used, and stored. Compliance
with applicable regulations would reduce potential for reasonably foreseeable upset and accident of such
hazardous substances during construction. Additionally, construction is temporary and use of these
materials would cease upon completion.
Once Project construction is complete, the transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials would be
limited to consumer products such as household cleaning products, landscaping chemicals and fertilizers,
and other substances associated with household and office uses. Furthermore, all hazardous materials
would be transported and handled in accordance with all federal, state, and local laws regulating the
management and use of hazardous materials, reducing the potential for reasonably foreseeable upset and
accident of such hazardous substances during construction. Additionally, potential upset and accident
conditions from consumer products used by future project occupants would not create a significant hazard
to the public or the environment as these are regularly used products and typically obtained in small
quantities. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts due to emissions or handling of hazardous materials within one
quarter mile of an existing or proposed school would be less than significant. As discussed therein, future
development could result in the handling of hazardous materials or generation of hazardous emissions
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. However, individual users of hazardous materials
would continue to be regulated by local disclosure, permitting, and notification requirements of the
“Disclosure of Hazardous Materials” program consistent with all federal, state, and local laws. Additionally,
the General Plan encourages compatibility of adjacent land uses, which would limit the ability for users of
substantial amounts of hazardous materials, such as industrial uses, from operating near a school (City of
Carlsbad 2015a). The Project site is located approximately 0.45 miles southwest of the nearest school
(Buena Vista Elementary School). Therefore, the Project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of a school.
Impacts would be less than significant.
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts due to projects included on the Cortese list that could create a
significant hazards to the public or the environment would be less than significant. As discussed therein,
there are a number of sites in the city that are included on a list of hazardous material sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 or that need further investigation. However, the General
Plan contains policies designed to lessen the impact of sites contaminated with hazardous materials.
Therefore, implementation of General Plan policies was determined to ensure the impact of posing a
significant hazard to the public or environment through a project’s location on a site included on a list of
32 August 2022
hazardous material sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 would be less than
significant. The Project site is not contained on any lists compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 or on the
California DTSC (EnviroStor) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) (GeoTracker) databases
for contaminated sites (DTSC 2021; SWRCB 2021). Therefore, no impact would occur.
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts due to project located within an airport land use plan or within two
miles of a public airport would be less than significant. As discussed in the GP/CAP FEIR, the General Plan
guides future development to be consistent with the land use compatibility policies of the McClellan-
Palomar Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP). The city also requires review of all proposed
development projects within the Airport Influence Area (AIA) to ensure consistency with the ALUCP (City of
Carlsbad 2015a). The Project site is located approximately 4.25 miles northwest of the McClellan-Palomar
Airport and is not within the AIA. Therefore, the Project would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise
for people residing or working in the Project area and no impact would occur.
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts to emergency response and evacuation plans would be less than
significant. As discussed therein, the city has adopted the City of Carlsbad Emergency Operations Plan
(EOP) prepared in conjunction with the Unified San Diego County Emergency Services Organization.
Although future development pursuant to the General Plan could affect implementation of the city’s EOP,
implementation of General Plan policies and required compliance with the city’s EOP was determined to
ensure impacts would be less than significant (City of Carlsbad 2015a).
The Project would result in development of 4 condominiums, a professional office, and associated parking
on an infill site. During Project construction, a temporary, slight increase in traffic on roadways surrounding
the Project site may occur due to increased truck loads or the transport of construction equipment to and
from the Project site during demolition of the existing single-family residences and construction of the
Project. However, all construction activities including staging would occur in accordance with city
requirements, which would ensure that adequate emergency access to the Project site in the event of an
emergency or evacuation order would be provided during construction of the Project. Additionally, as
discussed in Section 3.17, the Project would result in the net addition of 25 average daily trips (ADT) during
Project operation, which is minimal and would not be expected to interfere with emergency response or
evacuation. This anticipated increase is consistent with the General Plan. Therefore, the Project would not
impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response or emergency
evacuation plan, including the city’s EOP. Impacts would be less than significant.
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts due to exposure of people and structures to wildland fires would be
less than significant. Due to natural vegetation areas located within and adjacent to the city, the city is a
medium fire hazard area for wildland fires which threaten both developed and undeveloped property,
primarily in the eastern portion of the city. However, much of the new development pursuant to the General
Plan would replace existing structures built before modern building codes for fire safety and building
systems were in place. Thus, projected buildout would replace older facilities with newer facilities that would
comply with modern building code requirements, including Chapter 9 (Fire Protection Systems) of the
California Building Code, which requires such improvements as fire sprinkler systems and fire alarms. In
addition, urban wildland fire risk will be reduced through the adoption of the Uniform Fire Code
implemented by the city, which states all portions of a building shall be within 150 feet of a serviceable fire
access road. In addition, the Carlsbad Fire Department provides adequate service to city residents in the
event of fire hazards in wildlands and urban areas. Lastly, General Plan Policies 6-P.33 and 6-P.35 would
33 August 2022
reduce potential impacts associated with the risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires (City of
Carlsbad 2015).
The Project site is not located within a fire hazard severity zone. A “moderate” threat fire hazard severity
zone is located approximately 700 feet north of the Project site (City of Carlsbad 2015a). Nonetheless, due
to distance of this area and intervening development, the Project would not expose people or structures to
a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to
urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands. In addition, the Project would be
required to comply with existing regulations, such as the Uniform Fire Code and the California Building
Code, to prevent the spread of wildfire, and would implement General Plan Policies 6-P.33 and 6-P.35,
directed to reduce impacts associated with wildfire. Therefore, the Project would not expose people or
structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires.
Impacts would be less than significant.
3.10 Hydrology and Water Quality
Since the previous EIR was certified, are there any changes in the project, changes in circumstances under
which the project is undertaken and/or "new information of substantial importance" that cause one or more
effects to hydrology and water quality including: violation of any waste discharge requirements; an increase
in any listed pollutant to an impaired water body listed under section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act; cause
or contribute to an exceedance of applicable surface or groundwater receiving water quality objectives or
degradation of beneficial uses; substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with
groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local
groundwater table level; substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area in a manner
which would result in substantial erosion, siltation or flooding on- or off-site; create or contribute runoff
water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems; provide
substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; place housing or other structures which would impede or
redirect flood flows within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or
Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map, including County Floodplain Maps; expose
people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a
result of the failure of a levee or dam; and/or inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow?
YES NO
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded that impacts to surface or ground water quality would be less than significant.
Water quality standards and waste discharge requirements set out in Municipal Permit Order No. Order R9-
2015-0100 (MS4 Permit), National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Permit No.
CAS0109266, issued by the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). As NPDES Permit
CAS0100266 is based on the federal Clean Water Act, the Porter–Cologne Water Quality Control Act
(Division 7 of the Water Code, commencing with Section 13000), applicable state and federal regulations,
all applicable provisions of statewide water quality control plans and policies adopted by the State Water
Resources Control Board (SWRCB), the Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin adopted by the
RWQCB, the California Toxics Rule, the SIP , and NPDES compliance would ensure compliance with other
applicable plans and regulations pertaining to water quality. The General Plan would allow for additional
development within the city that would increase the amount of impervious surfaces and could therefore
□ ~
34 August 2022
increase the amount of runoff and associated pollutants during both construction and operation. However,
the city’s Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) Manual, included as Volume 4 of the city’s
Engineering Standards, requires every construction activity within the city that has the potential to
negatively affect water quality to prepare a construction (SWPPP). The SWPPP requirements ensure
compliance with the City of Carlsbad Stormwater Ordinance and the Municipal Permit. Projects that would
result in the disturbance of one acre or more of land or would create more than 5,000 square feet of
impervious surfaces are subject to the post-construction priority development project requirements in the
city’s SWPPP Manual and must prepare a storm water management plan in conformance with city
standards. Projects that are limited to trenching and resurfacing associated with utility work that do not
disturb more than one acre are subject to the post-construction standard storm water requirements.
Standard storm water requirements are located in Volume 4 and Volume 5 of the city’s Engineering
Standards. The SWPPP accommodates the requirements of the city’s NPDES Permit, thereby ensuring
NPDES compliance.
In addition, the GP/CAP FEIR determined that the General Plan incorporates various goals and policies
pertaining to water quality and promote the protection of the city’s natural water bodies, prevent water
pollution from agricultural run-off and other sources, ensure preparation and implementation of applicable
water quality plans, require incorporation of BMPs, and otherwise ensure compliance with the city’s NPDES
Permit and other related regulations. These goals and policies include Goal 4-G-12, Policy 5-P.56, 4-P.57, 4-
P.58, 4-P.59, 4-P.60, 4-P.61, 4-P.62, 4-P.63, 4-P.64. Overall, the GP/CAP FEIR concluded that the General
Plan policies would promote improved water quality in the city and continued compliance with federal, state,
and local water quality regulations, and would ensure that water quality is protected to the maximum extent
practicable. Therefore, implementation of the General Plan and the city’s SWPPP ensures that impacts to
hydrology and water quality are less than significant (City of Carlsbad 2015).
The proposed project would result in disturbance of approximately 0.32 acres, including creating 0.16 acres
of new impervious surface. The city’s Engineering Standards requires every construction activity within the
city that has the potential to negatively affect water quality to prepare a construction SWPPP. Therefore,
the proposed project would be required to prepare a SWPPP prior to construction and comply with the
SWPPP requirements to ensure construction runoff was property treated.
Projects that do not disturb more than one acre are subject to the post-construction standard storm water
requirements. In addition, projects must meet, at a minimum, standard storm water requirements,
including LID requirements. To address post-development pollutants that may be generated from the
proposed projects, Form E-34, Stormwater Standards Questionnaire and E-36, Standard Project
Requirement Checklist were prepared for the proposed, which incorporates Permanent Storm Water Best
Management Practices (BMPs) into the project design per the City of Carlsbad BMP Design Manual. The E-
34 Stormwater Standards Questionnaire and E-36 Standard Project Requirement Checklist have been
incorporated as Appendix D.
Per the E-34 Stormwater Standards Questionnaire, the proposed project is a standard project and is subject
to Standard Project subject to Trash Capture Requirements and must comply with Trash Capture
Requirements of the Carlsbad BMP Design Manual, and would also be required to incorporate LID
strategies. The project would implement the following LID strategies per Form E-36:
• Sidewalk and walkways would direct runoff to pervious areas
35 August 2022
• Parking areas/lots, driveways and patios/decks/courtyards would be constructed of permeable
materials,
• Rooftops would install BMPs to direct runoff to impervious areas
• Sustainable landscaping would be installed; and
• Trash and refuse storage would have overhead covering and wind protection
The proposed project would be required to comply with all existing regulations related to water quality,
including NPDES Permit No. CAS0109266. Lastly, the proposed project would comply with existing General
Plan policies, including Goal 4-G-12, Policy 5-P.56, 4-P.57, 4-P.58, 4-P.59, 4-P.60, 4-P.61, 4-P.62, 4-P.63,
4-P.64, implemented to promote water quality. Therefore, the project would not violate any water quality
standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water
quality. Impacts would be less than significant.
The GP/CAP EIR concluded impacts to groundwater would be less than significant. The only groundwater
basin located within the city is the Batiquitos Lagoon Valley Groundwater Basin. The groundwater in this basin
is not considered a good source of irrigation or municipal use due to the high content of chloride, sulfate, and
total dissolved solids. The primary purveyor of water for the city is the Carlsbad Municipal Water District
(CMWD), which currently does not utilize any local groundwater or surface water supplies to serve the city.
The city’s Storm Water Standards Manual contains numerous goals and policies to prevent stormwater
pollution that could affect groundwater quality. In addition, various General Plan policies, including 9-P.5
and 9-P.6, would help to reduce water usage and future demands for groundwater. Overall, impacts on
groundwater associated with the General Plan were determined to be less than significant (City of
Carlsbad 2015).
The Project would not propose groundwater extraction during construction or operational activities. Because
the proposed would be consistent with the zoning and General Plan land use designation of the project site,
the project has been accounted for in the projected growth of the city and as such would not result in a
significant increase of water of groundwater use in the city. In addition, the proposed project would result in
redevelopment of the project site, and therefore would not introduce a substantial increase in impervious
surfaces, that could result in significant impacts to groundwater recharge. Additionally, the project would
adhere to General Plan goals and policies that are aligned with sustainable groundwater management, as
well as existing regulations, such as the city’s SWPPP, to prevent stormwater pollution that could affect
groundwater quality. Therefore, the project would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere
substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater
management of the basin. Impacts would be less than significant.
The GP/CAP EIR concluded impacts due to the alteration of existing drainage patterns that would either result
in substantial erosion or siltation, or a substantial increase in the rate or amount of runoff would be less than
significant. Increases to impervious surfaces, such as roofs, patios, driveways, and parking areas would lead to
increased stormwater flow. An increase in runoff volumes could result in hydromodification effects to the creek
systems within the city, which occur when rainfall runoff is increased from impervious areas above the natural
rainfall rate that would otherwise occur. However, any development that would occur under the General Plan
would be subject to the erosion and runoff control provisions contained in the city’s SWPPP, Jurisdictional
Runoff Management Plan (JRMP) and the city’s Grading and Drainage Ordinances. Specific development
occurring during buildout of the General Plan would also comply with flood damage prevention measures
36 August 2022
contained in Chapter 21.110 of the city’s Municipal Code. These measures restrict development in areas
of special flood hazards and control erosion, which would in turn limit and control the alteration of existing
drainage patterns. Adherence to local regulations would ensure that, in the course of development under
the General Plan, watercourses and drainage patterns would not be altered in a manner that would
significantly increase the rate or amount of either runoff or erosion, thereby causing on- or off-site flooding.
In addition, the General Plan goals and policies, including 4-P.56, 4-P.57, and 4-P.63, are intended to
preserve natural watercourses or naturalized drainage channels, and to ensure future development
incorporates BMPs to reduce runoff from a site. For these reasons, erosion and siltation impacts associated
with the General Plan would be less than significant (City of Carlsbad 2015).
The proposed project would be subject to existing regulations, including the erosion and runoff control
provisions contained in the city’s SWPPP, JRMP, the city’s Grading and Drainage Ordinances, and flood
damage prevention measures contained in Chapter 21.110 of the city’s Municipal Code. In addition, the
project would include redevelopment of the project site, which is surrounded by development an all sides;
as such, the development of the Project would not cause a significant change to surface bodies of water in
a manner that could cause siltation or erosion, thereby causing on- or off-site flooding. Upon completion of
construction, the project would result in a slight increase of impervious areas on-site; thus, the project
would reduce potential erosion or siltation from occurring on the site. In addition, the proposed project
would be required to comply with the recommendations outlined in the preliminary geotechnical
investigation, which includes temporary erosion control measures and design of site drainage to eliminate
the potential of concentrated flows along the ground surface (Appendix B). Lastly, the project would
implement General Plan goals and policies, including 4-P.56, 4-P.57, and 4-P.63, which are intended to
preserve natural watercourses or naturalized drainage channels, and to ensure future development
incorporates BMPs to reduce runoff from a site. Therefore, the project would not substantially alter the
existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or
river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion
or siltation on or off site. Impacts would be less than significant.
The GP/CAP EIR concluded impacts due to runoff which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff would be less than
significant. Future development/redevelopment allowed under the General Plan could impact the existing
drainage system. Increases to impervious surfaces, such as roofs, patios, driveways, and parking areas would
lead to increased stormwater flow. However, the City of Carlsbad’s Grading and Drainage Ordinances and
SWPPP Manual ensure compliance with NPDES permit requirements, as well as with applicable state and
federal laws. Additionally, every construction activity within the city that has the potential to negatively affect
water quality must prepare a construction SWPPP. The SWPPP requirements in the SWPPP Manual ensure
compliance with the Carlsbad Grading and Drainage Ordinance. Projects that would result in the disturbance of
one acre or more of land or would create more than 5,000 square feet of impervious surfaces are subject to the
post-construction priority development project requirements in the city’s SWPPP Manual and must prepare a
SWPPP. Projects that are limited to trenching and resurfacing associated with utility work that do not disturb
more than one acre are subject to the post-construction standard storm water requirements.
Furthermore, the proposed General Plan, which would guide development in the city over the next 20 years,
contains goals and policies pertaining to water quality, including Goal 4-G.12 and Policies 4-P.48 and 4-P.56,
through 4-P.63. The proposed goals and policies promote the protection of the city’s natural water bodies,
prevent water pollution from agricultural run-off and other sources, ensure preparation and implementation
of applicable water quality plans, require incorporation of BMPs, and otherwise ensure compliance with the
37 August 2022
city’s NPDES Permit and other related regulations. Overall, the proposed General Plan goals and policies
would promote improved water quality in the city and continued compliance with federal, state, and local
water quality regulations, and would ensure that water quality is protected to the maximum extent practicable.
Compliance with the city’s current regulations and the General Plan policies such as Goal 4-G.12 and Policies
4-P.48 and 4-P.56, through 4-P.63 would ensure that the runoff as a result of future development under the
General Plan would not exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm drain systems or generate substantial
pollutant runoff. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant (City of Carlsbad 2015).
During construction, the proposed project would be required to prepare a SWPPP to ensure the project does
not negatively affect water quality. In addition, the project would result in a slight increase of impervious areas
on-site. However, the proposed project would be required to implement BMPs and LID requirements in order
to reduce the volume of runoff from impervious surfaces and increase the amount of natural filtration of
pollutants from storm water occurring on site. All runoff generated by the project would discharge into the
city’s storm drain system. Lastly, the project would implement General Plan goals and policies, to ensure the
Project would not exceed the capacity of drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff. Therefore, through compliance with existing regulations, the project would not create or
contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems
or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. Impacts would be less than significant.
The GP/CAP EIR concluded impacts due to impeding or redirecting flood flows would be less than
significant. The city requires a special use permit for any development proposed in areas of special flood
hazards and areas of flood-related erosion hazards (Municipal Code Chapter 21.110). The Floodplain
Management Regulations restrict or prohibit land uses considered unsafe in a floodplain. Developments
that are not subject to the Floodplain Management Regulations are also reviewed by the City of Carlsbad
Land Development Engineering Division for flooding potential. Proposed grading and drainage
improvements are analyzed to ensure that drainage is not diverted from its natural drainage basin to
another basin that was not designed to take that additional flow. In addition, General Plan goal and policies
such as Goal 6-G.1 and Policies 6-P.4 through 6-P.11 would further reduce any potential impacts
associated with structures located within flood hazard areas. Therefore, compliance with the city’s
regulations regarding building within flood hazard areas and General Plan policies, would ensure that flood
impacts associated with the General Plan would be less than significant (City of Carlsbad 2015).
As shown in Figure 3.8-1 of the GP/CAP EIR, the proposed project would not be located within a 100-year
floodway or floodplain of a 500-year floodplain (City of Carlsbad 2015). In addition, as discussed above,
the project has been reviewed by the City of Carlsbad Land Development Engineering Division for flooding
potential. Therefore, the project would not impede or redirect flood flows, and impacts would be less than
significant.
The GP/CAP EIR concluded impacts due to the release of pollutants due to project inundation in flood
hazard, tsunami and seiche zones would be less than significant. Figure 3.8-1 of the GP/CAP EIR, show
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)-designated 100-year and 500-year flood hazard zones
within the city (City of Carlsbad 2015). The city requires a special use permit for any development proposed
in areas of special flood hazards and areas of flood-related erosion hazards (Municipal Code Chapter
21.110). Developments that are not subject to the Floodplain Management Regulations are also reviewed
by the City of Carlsbad Land Development Engineering Division for flooding potential. As shown in Figure
3.8-3 or the GP/CAP EIR, the only areas identified within the city as having risk for tsunami run-up are the
immediate vicinity of the Buena Vista, Agua Hedionda, and Batiquitos Lagoons. Seiches are defined as
38 August 2022
wave-like oscillatory movements in enclosed or semi-enclosed bodies of water such as lakes of reservoirs.
Potential effects from seiches include flooding damage and related hazards in surrounding areas from
spilling or sloshing waves, as well as increased pressure on containment structures. The County of San
Diego maps zones of high risk for dam inundation throughout the county. The high-risk areas are located
east of the Agua Hedionda and Batiquitos Lagoons (City of Carlsbad 2015).
Per Figure 3.8-3 of the city’s GP/CAP EIR, the project would not be located within a tsunami projected runup
zone (City of Carlsbad 2015). In addition, the project is not located east of the Agua Hedionda and Batiquitos
Lagoons and is not adjacent to the ocean. Therefore, potential for seiche is not considered high in the vicinity
of the project site. Therefore, the project is not located in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, and would
not the risk release of pollutants due to project inundation. Impacts would be less than significant.
Since the adoption of the GP/CAP FEIR in 2015, the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Environment Checklist
was updated to include conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or
sustainable groundwater management plan as an additional threshold to be analyzed. Therefore, this
threshold was not previously explicitly analyzed in the GP/CAP FEIR. However, the GP/CAP EIR determined
impacts associated with water quality and groundwater management be less than significant (see
Thresholds a and b, above, respectively).
The proposed project would comply with all applicable provisions of statewide water quality control plans
and policies adopted by the SWRCB, the Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin adopted by the
RWQCB, the California Toxics Rule, the SIP, and NPDES compliance would ensure compliance with other
applicable plans and regulations pertaining to water quality. In addition, the only groundwater basin within
the city is the Batiquitos Lagoon Valley Groundwater Basin. The groundwater in this basin is not considered
a good source of irrigation or municipal use due to the high content of chloride, sulfate, and total dissolved
solids. The Batiquitos Lagoon Valley Groundwater Basin is considered a very low priority basin and therefore
implementation of a or sustainable groundwater management plan is not required (Department of Water
Resources 2019).
3.11 Land Use and Planning
Since the previous EIR was certified, are there any changes in the project, changes in circumstances under
which the project is undertaken and/or "new information of substantial importance" that cause one or more
effects to land use and planning including: physically dividing an established community; and/or conflicts
with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project
adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
YES NO
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded there to be no impact due to the physical division of an establish community.
Implementation of the General Plan was determined to improve connectivity within and between existing
neighborhoods and provide more linkages within the city and the region (City of Carlsbad 2015a).
The Project would result in development of 4 condominiums, a professional office, and associated parking
on an infill site within an established community as contemplated by the General Plan. While the project
□ ~
39 August 2022
would include a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change, these actions would not result in development
that would be inconsistent with the underlying planned and permitted uses, would not introduce different
uses to an area, and would not divide the community. Impacts would be less than significant.
The GP/CAP FEIR determined no impact to result from the division of an established community. As the
Project would have no impact for the reasons detailed above, the Project would be consistent with the
analysis provided within the GP/CAP FEIR because it would not result in project-specific peculiar impacts
not identified within the GP/CAP FEIR.
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts due to conflicts with land use plans, policies, or regulations adopted
for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect would be less than significant. As
discussed in the GP/CAP FEIR, the General Plan was determined not to conflict with any other agencies’
applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect, and the preparation of amendments to other city policies and regulations where
required was incorporated into the General Plan (City of Carlsbad 2015a).
The Project site is designated as R-15 (Residential) and R-15/O (Residential and Office) and zoned RD-M
(Residential Density-Multiple Zone) and R-P-Q (Residential Professional – Qualified Development Overlay
Zone). The proposed uses would comply with the existing zoning and land use designations on the Project
site; however, the Project would include a Tentative Tract Map, Zone Change, and General Plan Amendment
for land use re-designation to allow for the construction of four residential air-space condominiums and an
office use. The Tentative Tract Map will consolidate two lots and subdivide the project site for residential
air-space and commercial condominiums. To avoid a split zone development, the General Plan Amendment
and Zone Change are proposed to change the land use designation to R—15/O and the zone to R-P-Q to
allow both multi-family residential and office on one lot. However, it is noted that the proposed uses are
consistent with the intensity and density allowed under the existing zoning and land use designations of the
Project site. Upon approval, the Project would be consistent with the city’s Zoning Ordinance and General
Plan and would be compatible with surrounding development including the residential and office uses in
the immediate vicinity. The Project would be constructed pursuant to development standards contained in
the Zoning Ordinance, including building setbacks, building heights, lot coverage, land uses, grading, and
parking. Finally, as discussed throughout this Checklist, the Project would not result in any significant and
unavoidable environmental impacts. Thus, because the Project would not result in any environmental
impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect, impacts would be less than significant.
3.12 Mineral Resources
Since the previous EIR was certified, are there any changes in the project, changes in circumstances under
which the project is undertaken and/or "new information of substantial importance" that cause one or more
effects to mineral resources including: the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of
value to the region and the residents of the state; and/or loss of locally-important mineral resource recovery
site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
YES NO
□ ~
40 August 2022
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded there to be no impacts due to the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of value to the region and residents of the state or the loss of availability of a locally
important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use
plan. As discussed therein, no mineral resources of economic value to the region and the residents of the
state have been identified in the city. Additionally, the city has not been delineated as a locally important
mineral recovery site (City of Carlsbad 2015a). The Project would result in development of 4 condominiums,
a professional office, and associated parking on an infill site within the city. No impact would occur.
3.13 Noise
Since the previous EIR was certified, are there any changes in the project, changes in circumstances under
which the project is undertaken and/or "new information of substantial importance" that result in one or
more effects from noise including: exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of
standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other
agencies; exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise
levels; a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project; a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project
vicinity above levels existing without the project; for projects located within an airport land use plan or,
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, or for
projects within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the
project area to excessive noise levels?
YES NO
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts due substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise
levels would be less than significant. As discussed therein, noise sources associated with implementation of
the General Plan include temporary construction noise mainly generated by on-site construction equipment
and the transportation of equipment, materials, and workers to and from construction sites, and permanent
noise associated with traffic from new development and increased land use intensity. Regarding temporary
construction noise, the GP/CAP FEIR, concluded compliance with the city’s Noise Ordinance and General Plan
Noise Element goals and policies would reduce noise levels from construction traffic and activities to less
than significant levels. Additionally, future development pursuant to the General Plan would undergo
environmental review for individual projects, where additional mitigation would be implemented as required
to maintain less than significant noise levels from construction (City of Carlsbad 2015a).
Construction
The city’s Noise Ordinance exempts noise sources associated with construction activities from 7:00 a.m.
to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays. Typical noise
limitations apply on Sundays and federal holidays. In accordance with the city’s Noise Ordinance,
construction of the Project would occur during the permissible hours, and the amount and type of
construction would be consistent with the amount of construction anticipated in the General Plan.
Therefore, noise associated with construction of the Project would be less than significant.
Operation
□ ~
41 August 2022
Regarding permanent noise from traffic and increased land use intensity, additional traffic noise would vary
depending on a combination of factors such as variations in daily traffic volumes, shielding provided by
existing and proposed structures, intervening ground properties and meteorological conditions. However,
similarly to temporary construction noise, noise associated with future traffic and development pursuant to
the General Plan would also be required to comply with the city’s Noise Ordinance and General Plan Noise
Element goals and policies to maintain less than significant noise levels. Specifically, the Noise Element’s
Land Use and Noise Compatibility Policies encourage development of compatible land uses and requires
the use of project design techniques such as increasing setbacks and using non-sensitive buildings to
shield noise-sensitive outdoor spaces from noise (City of Carlsbad 2015a).
Outdoor Spaces
During Project operation, the Project would be required to comply with the city’s noise regulations, which
require exterior noise levels of 65 CNEL or less at outdoor use areas of mixed-use developments and interior
noise levels of 45 CNEL or les in residential space. As determined in the Acoustical Analysis Report for
Townhouse Duplexes and Professional Office Mixed Use, December 2020, prepared by Eilar Associates,
Inc. (Appendix E), all private outdoor use areas would have noise impacts of 65 CNEL or less, in compliance
with the city’s noise standards. Additionally, worst-case traffic noise impacts were calculated at building
facades and were found to range from 46 CNEL at the east facade of the commercial building to 65 CNEL
at the west facade of Unit 1 (Appendix E). Therefore, noise levels at outdoor spaces would meet city noise
standards and impacts would be less than significant.
Interior Residential Spaces
Within dwelling unit interiors, calculations show that worst-case traffic noise levels at the west and south
facades of Unit 1 exceed 60 CNEL; therefore, interior noise levels may exceed 45 CNEL with windows open
at Unit 1. Façade noise impacts at Units 2, 3, and 4 are not expected to exceed 60 CNEL however, and
therefore they are expected to meet the 45 CNEL limit. Accordingly, only Unit 1 was further analyzed in
Appendix E. The exterior wall is proposed to be constructed of stucco over plywood sheathing over 2x6
wood-studs, with a single layer of gypsum board on the interior. This assembly was evaluated for the interior
noise analysis conducted in all rooms within Unit 1. With the proposed exterior wall and exterior windows
and glass doors with a minimum STC rating of 25 in place, interior noise levels were determined to remain
below 45 CNEL in all rooms within Unit 1 with windows and exterior doors closed. However, noise levels
would exceed 45 CNEL with windows open. Accordingly, mechanical ventilation is proposed for all habitable
spaces within Unit 1. In instances where interior habitable space is exposed to noise levels greater than 45
CNEL with all windows and patio doors in the open position, appropriate means of air circulation and
provision of fresh air must be present to allow windows to remain closed for extended intervals of time so
that acceptable levels of noise can be maintained on the interior. With the proposed exterior wall assembly,
exterior glazing with an STC rating of 25, and mechanical ventilation in Unit 1, all interior residential space
is expected to comply with City of Carlsbad and State of California noise requirements. Units 2, 3, and 4
are expected to meet interior noise limits with typical construction methods, and therefore, no specific
project design features are required for interior noise control in these units (Appendix E). Impacts would be
less than significant.
42 August 2022
Interior Professional Office
CALGreen requires that nonresidential structures that are exposed to greater than 65 dBA during any hour
of operation must control interior noise levels to be 50 dBA or less. Contemporary exterior building
construction is expected to achieve at least 15 decibels of exterior-to-interior noise attenuation with
windows open. As a result, exterior noise levels of more than 65 dBA can result in interior conditions that
fail to meet the 50 dBA requirement for nonresidential space. As calculated in Appendix E, noise impacts
at non-residential building facades are not anticipated to exceed 65 CNEL. Therefore, all non-residential
spaces on-site are expected to comply with the state’s interior noise regulations of 50 CNEL or less with
typical building construction, and therefore, no special design features are required for non-residential
spaces (Appendix E). Impacts would be less than significant.
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts due to the generation of excessive groundborne vibration would be
less than significant. As discussed therein, sources of groundborne vibration and noise associated with
implementation of the General Plan include construction activities, heavy vehicles traveling on roadways
and trains on nearby sensitive land uses, and operation of heavy equipment associated with certain
industrial operations. However, construction of development pursuant to the General Plan would be
required to comply with noise limitations specified in the city’s Noise Ordinance. Additionally, sensitive land
uses are not anticipated to be sited within distances susceptible to significant vibration from heavy vehicles
traveling on roadways (i.e. primarily freeways) and railroads. The city’s Municipal Code (Planned Industrial
Zone, Chapter 21.34.090, Performance Standards) also contains requirements for limitations on the
operation of heavy vibration-causing equipment. Accordingly, construction and operation of future
development pursuant to the General Plan was determined to result in a less than significant impact upon
compliance with the city’s Municipal Code (City of Carlsbad 2015a).
The Project could result in temporary groundborne vibration and/or noise during construction activities.
However, heavy machinery associated with more conventional construction activities (such as bulldozers,
heavy trucks, etc) typically produces negligible levels of groundborne vibration beyond a distance of
approximately 25 feet. Additionally, as described above, the city’s Noise Ordinance exempts noise
associated with construction activities from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and from 8:00
a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays. In accordance with the city’s Noise Ordinance, construction of the Project
would occur during the permissible hours. Further, the project includes a limited amount of earthwork, and
due to the smaller size of the project site (approximately 1/3 of an acre), smaller construction equipment
would be anticipated to be employed. Therefore, groundborne vibration and noise associated with
construction of the Project would be less than significant. Operation of the Project would not result in any
ongoing activities that would induce groundborne vibration or noise. Therefore, no groundborne vibration
or noise impacts would occur during operation.
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts to projects located within the vicinity or a private airstrip or airport
land use plan would be less than significant. McClellan-Palomar Airport ALUCP includes development
policies regarding the compatibility of development areas and exposure to noise. Additionally, the General
Plan Noise Element includes goals and policies to encourage development of compatible land uses within
the AIA as depicted in the ALUCP. Therefore, compliance with the city’s General Plan Noise Element and
the ALUCP was determined to ensure less than significant impacts (City of Carlsbad 2015a).
43 August 2022
The Project site is located approximately 4.25 miles northwest of the McClellan-Palomar Airport and is not
within the AIA. Therefore, the Project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels and no impact would occur.
3.14 Population and Housing
Since the previous EIR was certified, are there any changes in the project, changes in circumstances under
which the project is undertaken and/or "new information of substantial importance" that result in one or
more effects to population and housing including displacing substantial numbers of existing housing or
people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
YES NO
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts due to unplanned growth would be less than significant. As discussed
therein, buildout of the General Plan would increase the city’s buildout from the existing 46,382 dwelling
units to approximately 54,599 dwelling units for a total buildout population of approximately 135,000. The
city’s share of the county population is expected to increase slightly, from 3.4 percent in 2013 to 3.6
percent in 2035. The estimated population growth resulting from the General Plan was determined to be
consistent with or below the growth assumptions of the city’s Growth Management Plan (City of Carlsbad
2015a).
Since adoption of the General Plan, the City Council adopted the Housing Element Update in May 2021.
The Housing Element provides for opportunities for the city to provide more housing in compliance with the
city’s latest Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) allocation. The Housing Element Update also
comports with recent revisions in state law providing for the production or more housing, including
compliance with SB 330 which limits local agencies ability to restrict housing development.
The Project would result in the development of four condominiums and a professional office at intensities
that are consistent with the plan intensities under the General Plan. Moreover, the Project site currently
contains two single-family residences so the net increase of the project would amount to two condominium
units or 5.2 persons (based on 2.61 persons per housing as identified in the May 2021 Housing Element
Update). Therefore, the net housing and population inducement amount to less than on the Project site
would be negligible. Impacts would be less than significant.
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded there to be no impact due to displacement of a substantial number of people
or housing. As discussed therein, implementation of the General Plan would not directly displace any
housing units, businesses, or people. Redevelopment of existing uses would likely occur; however, such
development would take place over time and development pursuant to the General Plan would facilitate
anticipated growth within the city (City of Carlsbad 2015a).
The Project would involve demolition of the two existing single-family residences on the Project site and
development of four condominiums. Due to the relatively small scale of the proposed development, the
Project would not result in the displacement of a substantial number of existing people or housing. Rather,
the Project would redevelop the Project site to include more housing than existing conditions. Impacts
would be less than significant.
□ ~
44 August 2022
3.15 Public Services
Since the previous EIR was certified, are there any changes in the project, changes in circumstances under
which the project is undertaken and/or "new information of substantial importance" that result in one or
more substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities or the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of
which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios,
response times or other performance objectives for any of the following public services: fire protection,
police protection, schools, parks, or other public facilities?
YES NO
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impact to fire service to be less than significant. Fire stations 1 and 2 were
determined to need remodeling or reconstruction. Station 3 was already planned to be relocated to the
Robertson Ranch Master Plan area. Although these stations were identified as needing upgrades, the
GP/CAP FEIR determined that renovation or relocation of existing facilities would cause a minimal increase
to the city’s built footprint and would not result in significant effects on the environment. Additionally,
policies contained in the General Plan serve to keep service demand increases to a minimum and new
development would occur in areas already well-served by fire protection services. Accordingly, impacts were
determined to be less than significant (City of Carlsbad 2015a). Since adoption of the 2015 General Plan,
the planned relocation of Station 3 was completed.
The Project would result in development of four condominiums and a professional office, which would
require fire protection services. However, the Fire Department already serves the Project site as two existing
single-family residences exist on-site. The closest Fire Station is Station 1, located approximately 0.4 mile
east of the Project site. Redevelopment of the project site would increase the land use intensity of the site,
which may slightly increase demand for fire protection services. However, the Project site is already located
in a well-served area and would not significantly increase demand for fire services to the extent that new
facilities would be required to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance
objectives. Finally, the Project would be required to pay development impact fees in accordance with the
city’s most recently adopted Master Fee Schedule. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts to police protection would be less than significant. As discussed
therein, in order to accommodate increases in demand from population growth, the city’s Police
Department expects the need to grow. The Police Department has been considering relocating some or all
of its services within the Public Safety and Service Center or to other facilities in order to meet the space
needs of additional staff and equipment. Relocating services to and from this space or nearby facilities
would not necessitate new construction, and therefore would have minimal effects on the environment.
However, it was also considered to expand the Public Safety and Service Center, which would require new
construction. The General Plan contains policies which serve to mitigate any increases in demand for police
services and any physical alterations of the Public Safety and Service Center would have limited impact on
the city’s built environment. Ultimately, the GP/CAP FEIR concluded that compliance with existing building
and construction codes, as well as General Plan policies, would ensure impacts are less than significant
(City of Carlsbad 2015a).
□ ~
45 August 2022
The Project would result in development of four condominiums and a professional office, which would
require police protection services. However, the Police Department already serves the Project site as two
existing single-family residences exist on-site. Redevelopment of the project site would increase the land
use intensity of the site, which may slightly increase demand for police protection services. However, the
Project site is already located in a well-served area and would not significantly increase demand for police
services to the extent that new facilities would be required to maintain acceptable service ratios, response
times, or other performance objectives. Finally, the Project would be required to pay development impact
fees in accordance with the city’s most recently adopted Master Fee Schedule. Therefore, impacts would
be less than significant.
The GPU EIR concluded impacts to schools would be less than significant. As discussed therein, the city’s
student population is expected to remain relatively stable or decline in three of the four school districts
serving the city. Although development pursuant to the General Plan would result in additional students
from new housing units, ongoing demographic trends are causing reductions in the population of school-
aged children in the city. Projected changes in enrollment and capacity based on buildout of the General
Plan were also determined to be adequately served by existing school capacity.
The Project would result in development of four condominiums and a professional office, which may induce
new student populations within the city. However, due to the relatively small scale of the Project, in addition
to the GP/CAP FEIR’s determination that student populations in the city would be served by existing school
capacity, any potential students generated by the Project would be minimal and would be served by existing
schools within the Carlsbad Unified School District (CUSD). Additionally, the Project would be required to
pay developer fees in accordance with the CUSD’s most recently adopted fee rates. Therefore, impacts
would be less than significant.
For the GP/CAP FEIR analysis on parks see Section 3.16(a) below. In summary, given the existing park
facilities and planned parkland within the city, and General Plan policies that support the city’s Growth
Management Plan, a surplus of parkland was anticipated to accommodate the buildout population of the
General Plan without any resulting deterioration of existing parks. Impacts to parks and recreation facilities
were determined to be less than significant (City of Carlsbad 2015a).
The Project would generate population growth on the site as discussed in Section 3.14 above. However,
the net population increase from demolition of the existing two single-family residences and construction
of four condominiums and a professional office would be minimal. As determined in the GP/CAP FEIR, a
surplus of parkland was also anticipated to accommodate development pursuant to the General Plan.
Additionally, the Project would be required to pay development impact fees in accordance with the city’s
most recently adopted Master Fee Schedule. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts to other public facilities would be less than significant. An increase in
population from the new addition of two new condominium units will cause a nominal increase in demand
for public services, including libraries. Buildout of the General Plan is anticipated by the GP/CAP FEIR to
result in a deficit in library space, though the deficit is expected to occur gradually over the planning horizon.
If new or expanded library facilities are planned and constructed in the future, such a project would have
to demonstrate compliance with CEQA, and would be subject to building and construction codes that would
ensure construction activities have minimal effects on the environment. Additionally, as discussed in the
GP/CAP FEIR, the city would have a surplus of administrative space at buildout of the General Plan for other
public facilities. Should additional space become necessary, these needs could be met through the leasing
46 August 2022
or purchase of existing space rather than through new construction. Finally, the General Plan includes
policies that promote ongoing development of library facilities and complement the Growth Management
Plan in such a way that new residential development could not be permitted unless adequate services and
facilities were guaranteed. Such policies include charging impact fees on new development to fund the
future construction of public facilities. Accordingly, impacts were determined to be less than significant (City
of Carlsbad 2015a).
The Project would generate population growth on the site as discussed in Section 3.14 above. However,
the net population increase from demolition of the existing two single-family residences and construction
of four condominiums and a professional office would be minimal. Therefore, population induced by the
Project would not result in the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, including library
facilities and other public facilities. Impacts would be less than significant.
3.16 Recreation
Since the previous EIR was certified, are there any changes in the project, changes in circumstances under
which the project is undertaken and/or "new information of substantial importance" that result in an
increase in the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated; or that include recreational
facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse
physical effect on the environment?
YES NO
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts due to deterioration of recreational facilities due to increase use
would be less than significant. Development associated with future land uses consistent with the General
Plan would increase population in the form of new residents in the city. These new residents are expected
to use park and recreational facilities, and this additional use may result in greater demands on parks and
recreational facilities in the city such that deterioration of these facilities could occur or be accelerated.
Applying the city’s current park standard of 3.0 acres per 1,000 population in each city quadrant, projected
demand for parkland at buildout would be an additional 393.5 acres citywide. Meanwhile, development of
planned parks under the General Plan would increase the city’s parkland by 443.9 acres, resulting in a
surplus distributed among all four of the city’s quadrants. Therefore, park provision under the General Plan
would be more than sufficient to accommodate demand from future residents and impacts were
determined to be less than significant (City of Carlsbad 2015a).
The Project would result in minor population growth on the site. The net population increase from demolition
of the existing two single-family residences and construction of four condominiums and a professional
office would be minimal. As determined in the GP/CAP FEIR, a surplus of parkland was also anticipated to
accommodate development pursuant to the General Plan. Additionally, the Project would be required to
pay development impact fees in accordance with the city’s most recently adopted Master Fee Schedule,
including park fees. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts due to the construction or expansion of recreation facilities would be
less than significant. At buildout of the General Plan, the city would have a surplus in parkland to
□ ~
47 August 2022
accommodate anticipated increased population. The General Plan also contains policies that complement
the facilities performance standards established by the citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan and
ensure the continued maintenance of park quality. General Plan policies directly reference the Growth
Management Plan park standard, and describe specific implementation guidelines for achieving it. The
policies also require that new and existing parks are assessed for their abilities to meet the recreational
needs of nearby residents in terms of amenities and accessibility. They also seek to ensure that new parks
are developed or existing parks are improved concurrently with any development that would generate an
increase in park users in the vicinity (City of Carlsbad 2015a). Finally, future development of parks and
recreation facilities in the city would be required to comply with building and construction codes, and
undergo environmental review as required.
The Project would include development of four condominiums and a professional office and would not
include any recreational facilities. Additionally, as previously described, the city would have a surplus of
parkland at buildout of the General Plan. Therefore, the Project would not require the construction of new
or expanded recreational facilities. Finally, the Project would be required to pay development impact fees
in accordance with the city’s most recently adopted Master Fee Schedule, including park fees. Therefore,
impacts would be less than significant.
3.17 Transportation
Since the previous EIR was certified, are there any changes in the project, changes in circumstances under
which the project is undertaken and/or "new information of substantial importance" that cause effects to
transportation/traffic including whether the project would result in: conflicts with a program, plan,
ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian
facilities; conflicts or inconsistency with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b); substantial
increase in hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g., farm equipment); and/or inadequate emergency access?
YES NO
The GP/CAP EIR concluded this impact to be significant and unavoidable. In summary, the General Plan
would improve pedestrian, bicycle, and transit infrastructure and would implement goals and policies that
would further reduce impacts to those facilities. The General Plan is not inconsistent with nor does it conflict
with any policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, roadway, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities or
the performance or safety of those facilities (City of Carlsbad 2015).
The project site is currently developed with a single-family rental residence. The project involves the
demolition of the existing two existing single-family rental units and development of four condominium units
with a standalone professional office building. Therefore, the amount of vehicle trips generated as a result
of the Project would be negligible and would not result in a significant increase of trips at the project site
that would result in a conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system,
including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. Additionally, the project would be consistent
with the General Plan’s adopted goals and policies. Consistent with development pursuant to the General
Plan, the Project would not conflict with any policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, roadway,
□ ~
48 August 2022
bicycle, golf cart network, or pedestrian facilities or the performance or safety of those facilities. Impacts
would not occur.
Since the time of adoption of the GP/CAP EIR, state law has required that transportation impacts be based
on vehicle miles traveled (VMT) instead of LOS. In 2013, the California Legislature adopted Senate Bill 743
(SB 743), which amended CEQA to require transportation impacts to be determined using a threshold that
balances congestion management with greenhouse gas reductions by measuring vehicle miles traveled (VMT)
and directed the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to revise the CEQA Guidelines to reflect this change.1
The resulting CEQA Guideline section setting VMT as the transportation significance metric requires the
change to be implemented by July 1, 2020.2 In January 2019, California’s Natural Resources Agency
finalized updates to the CEQA Guidelines including the incorporation of the SB 743 modifications. The
changes were approved by the Office of Administrative Law and are now in effect. As such, as of July 1,
2020, LOS can no longer be the basis for determining an environmental effect under CEQA, and the analysis
of impacts to transportation is now based on VMTs.
Per the SANDAG Not So Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates for the San Diego Region,
condominium projects (or any multi-family project of 6 to 20 dwelling unit per acre) is anticipated to
generate approximately 8 ADT per dwelling unit. Therefore, the four proposed units would generate 32 ADT.
Single-tenant office use is anticipated to generate approximately 14 ADT per 1,000 square feet of office
use (SANDAG 2002). Using the 14 ADT per 1,000 square foot of office trip generation, a total of 13 ADT is
expected from the office use.
Combined, the proposed project would generate approximately 45 ADT (32 ADT from the residential uses
and 13 ADT from the office use). The two existing single-family homes would generate 20 ADT (10 trips per
home); therefore, the net increase is 25 ADT.
TDM requirements for new developments vary by development type and the expected average daily employee
trips (see Table 2-1 TDM Plan Applicability). All developments that meet the threshold of 110 employee ADT
are required to submit a TDM plan using the TDM Plan template for the respective tier (TDM Plan Templates
for Non-Residential Projects) and are subject to the same monitoring and reporting schedule described in
section 2.7. The proposed project would generate a total of 45 ADT, which is below the Screening Criteria of
110 ADT. Therefore, the proposed project is screened out from additional VMT analysis under Section 3.2.1.
Small Projects, under the City’s VMT Guidelines. Therefore, the proposed project would be exempt from a TDM
plan (City of Carlsbad 2019). As such, because vehicle trips generated by the Project would be negligible, the
Project would not conflict with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b). Thus, impacts would be less
than significant.
1 Public Resources Code Section 21099(b)(2) provides that “automobile delay, as described solely by level of service or similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion shall not be considered a significant impact on the environment pursuant to this division.”
2 CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3(b)(1), (b)(4), and (c) provide that “Vehicle miles traveled exceeding an applicable threshold of
significance may indicate a significant impact. . . . A lead agency has discretion to choose the most appropriate methodology to evaluate a project’s vehicle miles traveled, including whether to express the change in absolute terms, per capita, per household or any other measure. A lead agency may use models to estimate a project’s vehicle miles traveled. . . . Beginning on July 1, 2020, the provisions
of this section shall apply statewide
49 August 2022
As the Project would have less than significant impacts for the reasons detailed above, the Project would
be consistent with the analysis provided within the GP/CAP EIR because it would not increase impacts
identified within the GP/CAP EIR and would not result in project-specific peculiar impacts not identified in
the GP/CAP EIR.
The GP/CAP EIR concluded this impact to be less than significant. Per the GP/CAP EIR, various policies,
including policy 3-P.10, 3-P.12, 3-P.13, and 3-P.16, have been implemented into the proposed General
Plan in order to ensure that design hazards would not occur and that impacts would be less than significant.
Policies identified in the GP that support the reduction of hazards or incompatible uses include, but are not
limited to: design new streets, and explore funding opportunities for existing streets, to minimize traffic
volumes and/or speed, as appropriate, within residential neighborhoods without compromising
connectivity for emergency first responders, bicycles, and pedestrians consistent with the city’s Carlsbad
Active Transportation Strategies (Policy 3-P.12); consider innovative design and program solutions to
improve the mobility, efficiency, connectivity, and safety of the transportation system. Innovative design
solutions include, but are not limited to, traffic calming devices, roundabouts, traffic circles, curb
extensions, separated bicycle infrastructure, pedestrian scramble intersections, high visibility pedestrian
treatments and infrastructure, and traffic signal coordination (Policy 3-P.13); engage Caltrans, the Public
Utilities Commission, transit agencies, the Coastal Commission, and railroad agency(s) regarding
opportunities for improved connections within the city (Policy 3-P.16). Therefore, with compliance with
existing laws, rules and regulations, the Project, pursuant to the GP, would not substantially increase
hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses (City of Carlsbad 2015).
Access to the Project site would be provided via Jefferson Street. The Project does not include any
substantial changes to the geometry of streets or intersections. Additionally, the Project would adhere to
the aforementioned policies of the GP and would comply with existing laws, rules and regulations.
Therefore, impacts associated with hazardous design features would be less than significant.
The GP/CAP EIR concluded this impact to emergency response be less than significant. Per the GP/CAP
EIR, emergency accessibility typically is assessed at a project-level. Implementation of the following
proposed Policies identified in the GP that support the reduction of potential impacts associated with
emergency access include, but are not limited: design new streets, and explore funding opportunities for
existing streets, to minimize traffic volumes and/or speed, as appropriate, within residential neighborhoods
without compromising connectivity for emergency first responders, bicycles, and pedestrians consistent
with the city’s Carlsbad Active Transportation Strategies (Policy 3-P.12); encourage physical planning and
community design practices that deter crime and promote safety (Policy 6-P.29); maintain close
coordination between planned improvements to the circulation system within the city and the location of
fire stations to assure adequate levels of service and response times to all areas of the community (6-
P.30); and enforce the Uniform Building and Fire codes, adopted by the city, to provide fire protection
standards for all existing and proposed structures (Policy 6-P.33) (City of Carlsbad 2015).
As discussed above, access to the Project site would be provided via Jefferson Street. The Project driveways
would be designed and constructed according to city standards under the direction of a licensed and
qualified engineer. The Project site would be accessible to emergency responders during construction and
operation of the Project. Additionally, the Project would adhere to GP policies and implementation actions
related to emergency access. Finally, the net increase of approximately 25 ADT would not result in traffic
generation that may impede emergency access. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
50 August 2022
3.18 Tribal Cultural Resources
Since the previous EIR was certified, are there any changes in the project, changes in circumstances under
which the project is undertaken and/or "new information of substantial importance" that cause one or more
effects to tribal cultural resources including: causing a change in the significance of a tribal cultural
resource as defined in Public Resource Code §21074?
YES NO
Since the adoption of the GP/CAP FEIR in 2015, the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Environment Checklist
was updated to include tribal cultural resources as an additional resource area to be analyzed. Therefore,
tribal cultural resources were not previously explicitly analyzed in the GP/CAP FEIR. Cultural resources were
already evaluated within the Cultural Resources section of the GP/CAP FEIR. The GP/CAP FEIR determined
that development of the GP/CAP would result in less than significant impacts associated with the cultural
resources (see Section 3.5, above).
Tribal cultural resources include “sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with
cultural value to a California Native American tribe that are eligible for inclusion in the California Register of
Historical Resources or included in a local register of historical resources.” Lead agencies have discretion to
determine, based on substantial evidence, whether a resource qualifies as a tribal cultural resource.
As described in Section 3.5, above, under existing conditions, the Project site is currently developed with
two single-family residences. No areas on the Project site contain undisturbed land. Furthermore, the
project only proposes a limited amount of cut, approximately 200 cubic yards. Therefore, the likelihood that
intact archeological resources exist on the Project site is low due to previous site disturbance. Nonetheless,
there is potential for other archaeological sites to be found within Carlsbad due to the existence of
previously identified sites throughout the city.
Accordingly, a request was made to the Native American Heritage Committee (NAHC) on March 5, 2021, to
conduct a search of the Sacred Lands File (SLF) to determine if any sacred sites or landforms were recorded
within the vicinity of the parcel (Appendix A). The NAHC indicated that the SLF search was positive for the
project area and recommended that the La Jolla Band of Luiseño Indians and the San Luis Rey Band of
Mission Indians be contacted in addition to twenty eight recommended contacts (see Appendix A). Letters
were drafted and emailed to the NAHC recommended Native American tribal representatives, hard-copy
letters were mailed to each contact and follow-up emails and phone calls were made. The following
information was collected regarding this project.
Viejas Band of Mission Indians stated that the project area may contain sacred sites to the Kumeyaay
people and requested these sacred sites be avoided with adequate buffer zones. Additionally, Viejas
requested, as appropriate, that all NEPA/CEQA/NAGPRA laws be followed, and that Viejas should be
contacted immediately if there are any changes to the project description or inadvertent discoveries.
Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians stated that they have specific concerns that the project may impact tangible
Tribal Cultural Resources (TCRs), Traditional Cultural Landscapes (TCLs), and potential Traditional Cultural
Properties (TCPs). The Rincon Band recommended conducting an archaeological/cultural resources study,
□ ~
51 August 2022
to include an archeological record search and complete intensive survey of the property. Additionally, they
ask for a professional Tribal monitor from the Rincon Band to accompany the archaeologist during the
survey.
The city also reached out to the Tribes to conduct AB 52 consultation. The Rincon Band requested to
consult directly with the lead agency regarding project impacts to cultural resources, and agreed with the
proposed mitigation measures, and found that the mitigation measures satisfied Rincon Band’s concerns.
Further, the San Luis Rey Band also requested consultation with the city regarding the project and reviewed
the proposed mitigation measures and found that mitigation measures satisfy the San Luis Rey Band’s
concerns.
As anticipated by the General Plan/CAP FEIR, future development projects pursuant to the General Plan
may involve grading, excavation, or other ground-disturbing activities, which could disturb or damage
unknown archaeological resources. However, the General Plan includes goals and policies to minimize or
avoid impacts to archaeological resources by requiring the protection and preservation of such resources.
Additionally, the city’s Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Resources Guidelines are also in place to help
protect archeological resources within the city (City of Carlsbad 2017). Therefore, any development
pursuant to the General Plan would be required to comply with the city’s Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological
Resources Guidelines and applicable General Plan goals and polices to ensure impacts would be less than
significant (City of Carlsbad 2015a).
Accordingly, a project-specific Historical and Archaeological Inventory Report was prepared for the proposed
project (Appendix A). The following measure was recommended regarding Tribal Cultural Resources:
Due to the interest and concerns form the local Native American community, it is recommended to further
consult with interested tribal representatives, which should include, but is not limited to, sharing project
construction plans and timelines, further consulting on specific concerns, and hiring a qualified local tribal
representative for Native American Monitoring. The proposed project would implement Section 8.2.2.4,
Tribal Monitoring, from the City’s Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines which provides for the
following:
Prior to the commencement of any ground-disturbing activities, including but not limited to exploratory
geotechnical investigations/borings for contractor bidding purposes, the project developer shall enter into
a Pre-Excavation Agreement, otherwise known as a Tribal Cultural Resources Treatment and Tribal
Monitoring Agreement, with the SLRBMI or other Luiseño tribe. This agreement will contain provisions to
address the proper treatment of any tribal cultural resources and/or Luiseño Native American human
remains inadvertently discovered during the course of the project. The agreement will outline the roles and
powers of the Luiseño Native American monitors and the archaeologist, and may include the following
provisions. In some cases, the language below may be modified in consultation with SLRBMI if special
conditions warrant.
1. A Luiseño Native American monitor shall be present during all ground disturbing activities.
Ground disturbing activities may include, but are not be limited to, archaeological studies,
geotechnical investigations, clearing, grubbing, trenching, excavation, preparation for utilities and
other infrastructure, and grading activities.
2. Any and all uncovered artifacts of Luiseño Native American cultural importance shall be returned
to the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians, and/or the Most Likely Descendant, if applicable,
52 August 2022
and not be curated, unless ordered to do so by a federal agency or a court of competent
jurisdiction.
3. The Luiseño Native American monitor shall be present at the project’s preconstruction meeting to
consult with grading and excavation contractors concerning excavation schedules and safety
issues, as well as to consult with the archaeologist PI concerning the proposed archaeologist
techniques and/or strategies for the project.
4. Luiseño Native American monitors and archaeological monitors shall have joint authority to
temporarily divert and/or halt construction activities. If tribal cultural resources are discovered
during construction, all earth-moving activity within and around the immediate discovery area
must be diverted until the Luiseño Native American monitor and the archaeologist can assess the
nature and significance of the find.
5. If a significant tribal cultural resource(s) and/or unique archaeological resource(s) are discovered
during ground-disturbing activities for this project, the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians shall
be notified and consulted regarding the respectful and dignified treatment of those resources.
Pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 21083.2(b) avoidance is the preferred
method of preservation for archaeological and tribal cultural resources. If, however, the Applicant
is able to demonstrate that avoidance of a significant and/or unique cultural resource is
infeasible and a data recovery plan is authorized by the City of Carlsbad as the lead agency, the
San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians shall be consulted regarding the drafting and finalization of
any such recovery plan.
6. When tribal cultural resources are discovered during the project, if the archaeologist collects such
resources, a Luiseño Native American monitor must be present during any testing or cataloging of
those resources. If the archaeologist does not collect the tribal cultural resources that are
unearthed during the ground disturbing activities, the Luiseño Native American monitor may, at
their discretion, collect said resources and provide them to the San Luis Rey Band of Mission
Indians for dignified and respectful treatment in accordance with their cultural and spiritual
traditions.
7. If suspected Native American human remains are encountered, California Health and Safety Code
Section 7050.5(b) states that no further disturbance shall occur until the San Diego County
Medical Examiner has made the necessary findings as to origin. Further, pursuant to California
Public Resources Code Section 5097.98(b) remains shall be left in place and free from
disturbance until a final decision as to the treatment and disposition has been made. Suspected
Native American remains shall be examined in the field and kept in a secure location at the site.
A Luiseño Native American monitor shall be present during the examination of the remains. If the
San Diego County Medical Examiner determines the remains to be Native American, the Native
American Heritage Commission (NAHC) must be contacted by the Medical Examiner within 24
hours. The NAHC must then immediately notify the “Most Likely Descendant” about the discovery.
The Most Likely Descendant shall then make recommendations within 48 hours, and engage in
consultation concerning treatment of remains as provided in Public Resources Code 5097.98.
8. In the event that fill material is imported into the project area, the fill shall be clean of tribal
cultural resources and documented as such. Commercial sources of fill material are already
permitted as appropriate and will be culturally sterile. If fill material is to be utilized and/or
exported from areas within the project site, then that fill material shall be analyzed and confirmed
by an archeologist and Luiseño Native American monitor that such fill material does not contain
tribal cultural resources.
53 August 2022
9. No testing, invasive or non-invasive, shall be permitted on any recovered tribal cultural resources
without the written permission of the SLRBMI.
10. Prior to the release of the grading bond, a monitoring report and/or evaluation report, if
appropriate, which describes the results, analysis and conclusions of the monitoring program
shall be submitted by the archaeologist, along with the Luiseño Native American monitor’s notes
and comments, to the City of Carlsbad for approval. Said report shall be subject to confidentiality
as an exception to the Public Records Act and will not be available for public distribution.
Such measures are consistent with the following General Plan policies:
7-P.8 During construction of specific development projects, require monitoring of grading,
ground-disturbing, and other major earthmoving activities in previously undisturbed areas
or in areas with known archaeological or paleontological resources by a qualified
professional, as well as a tribal monitor during activities in areas with cultural resources of
interest to local Native American tribes. Both the qualified professional and tribal monitor
shall observe grading, ground-disturbing, and other earth-moving activities.
7-P.9 Ensure that treatment of any cultural resources discovered during site grading complies
with the City of Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidelines. Determination of the significance
of the cultural resource(s) and development and implementation of any data recovery
program shall be conducted in consultation with interested Native American tribes. All
Native American human remains and associated grave goods shall be returned to their
most likely descendent and repatriated. The final disposition of artifacts not directly
associated with Native American graves shall be negotiated during consultation with
interested tribes; if the artifact is not accepted by Native American tribes, it shall be offered
to an institution staffed by qualified professionals, as may be determined by the City
Planner. Artifacts include material recovered from all phases of work, including the initial
survey, testing, indexing, data recovery, and monitoring
7-P.10 Require consultation with the appropriate organizations and individuals (e.g., Information
Centers of the California Historical Resources Information Systems [CHRIS], the Native
American Heritage Commission [NAHC], and Native American groups and individuals) to
minimize potential impacts to cultural resources that may occur as a result of a proposed
project.
7-P.11 Prior to occupancy of any buildings, a cultural resource monitoring report identifying all
materials recovered shall be submitted to the City Planner.
Therefore, with compliance with the General Plan, implementation of the Project would not cause a
substantial adverse change in the significance of a Tribal Cultural Resource. Impacts would be less than
significant.
3.19 Utilities and Service Systems
Since the previous EIR was certified, are there any changes in the project, changes in circumstances under
which the project is undertaken and/or "new information of substantial importance" that cause effects to
54 August 2022
utilities and service systems including: exceedance of wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable
Regional Water Quality Control Board; require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater
treatment facilities, new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction
of which could cause significant environmental effects; require new or expanded entitlements to water
supplies or new water resources to serve the project; result in a determination by the wastewater treatment
provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected
demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments; be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted
capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs; and/or noncompliance with federal,
state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste?
YES NO
Wastewater Facilities
The GP/CAP EIR finds that future growth envisioned by the city would result in less than significant impacts
to wastewater facilities. Three wastewater districts provide sewer services to the city’s planning area:
Carlsbad Wastewater Division (CWWD), Leucadia Wastewater District (LWWD), and Vallecitos Water District
(VWD) (City of Carlsbad 2015). The proposed project site is located within CWWD’s service area.
Wastewater generated within the CWWD’s sewer service area is treated at the EWPCF. Carlsbad’s current
ownership capacity for treatment at the Encina Water Pollution Control Facility (EWPCF) is 9.24 million
gallons per day (mgd) (average flow). The 2012 Sewer Master Plan projected future 2035 wastewater flows
to be approximately 10.0 mgd, based on growth estimates prior to the proposed General Plan. The city has
requested an additional 1.02 mgd for a total of 10.26 mgd, which is currently pending. Buildout under the
proposed General Plan would result in additional wastewater that would need to be treated at the EWPCF.
The proposed General Plan would allow for additional growth beyond the CWWD growth projections. Current
regulations require compliance with water quality standards and would not allow development without
adequate utility capacity, including water or wastewater treatment capacity. Future development projects
allowed under the proposed General Plan would be reviewed by the city and the applicable water and
wastewater providers to determine that sufficient capacity exists to serve the development (City of Carlsbad
2015). In addition, the city’s Sewer System Management Plan has been updated in 2019 updated to reflect
the proposed General Plan growth projections (City of Carlsbad 2019). Lastly, the proposed General Plan
contains goals and policies that promote sustainability and reduce impacts associated with construction of
new facilities by limiting the need for additional water supplies. More specifically, Goals 2-G.22 and 2-G.23,
and Policies 2-P.8, and 2-P.55 through 2-P.58, P-G.4, and 9-P.3 through 9-P.7, reduce impacts related to
the construction of water and wastewater treatment facilities. As discussed in Section 1.1, above, the
proposed project would include a Tentative Tract Map, Zone Change, and General Plan Amendment for
land use re-designation to allow for the construction of four residential air-space condominiums and an
office use. The Tentative Tract Map will consolidate two lots and subdivide the project site for residential
air-space and commercial condominiums. To avoid a split zone development, the General Plan Amendment
and Zone Change are proposed to change the land use designation to R—15/O and the zone to R-P-Q to
allow both multi-family residential and office on one lot. Therefore, the proposed project has already been
accounted for in future planning documents and the amount of wastewater required for both the construction
phase and the operations phase would not require any expansion of existing wastewater facilities.
Therefore, the proposed project would not result in additional adverse physical effects associated with
wastewater facilities beyond those already identified in other sections of this environmental analysis.
□ ~
55 August 2022
Water Facilities
The GP/CAP EIR finds that future growth envisioned by the city would result in less than significant impacts
to water facilities. Three water districts provide water service within Carlsbad: Carlsbad Municipal Water
District (CMWD), Olivenhain Municipal Water District (OMWD), and Vallecitos Water District (VWD). The
CMWD provides water service to the project site (CMWD 2021). The majority of the future growth generated
by the proposed General Plan would be located within the CMWD service area. The city has identified efforts
to conserve water, increase use of recycled water, and continue to consider new alternative sources of
water. The proposed General Plan would require an update to the CMWD Water Master Plan (City of
Carlsbad 2015). CMWD’s Potable Water Master Plan was updated in 2019 to correspond with the new
General Plan (CMWD 2019). As discussed above, the proposed project would include a Tentative Tract
Map, Zone Change, and General Plan Amendment for land use re-designation to allow for the construction
of four residential air-space condominiums and an office use. The Tentative Tract Map will consolidate two
lots and subdivide the project site for residential air-space and commercial condominiums. To avoid a split
zone development, the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change are proposed to change the land use
designation to R—15/O and the zone to R-P-Q to allow both multi-family residential and office on one lot.
Therefore, the proposed project has already been accounted for in future planning documents and the amount
of wastewater required for both the construction phase and the operations phase would not require any
expansion of existing wastewater facilities. In addition, as discussed above, the proposed General Plan
contains goals and policies that promote sustainability and reduce impacts associated with construction of
new facilities by limiting the need for additional water supplies. More specifically, Goals 2-G.22 and 2-G.23,
and Policies 2-P.8, and 2-P.55 through 2-P.58, P-G.4, and 9-P.3 through 9-P.7, reduce impacts related to
the construction of water and wastewater treatment facilities. Therefore, the proposed project would not
result in additional adverse physical effects associated with water facilities beyond those already identified
in other sections of this environmental analysis.
Electric Power Facilities
The GP/CAP EIR finds that, despite the overall increase in future energy use associated with the General
plan, the state’s current and future energy code and the proposed General Plan policies would ensure
energy efficient designs in new development and encourage energy efficiency upgrades in existing
development. The project site is already served by existing electric power and would not result in relocation
or construction of new or expanded electric facilities. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in
additional adverse physical effects associated with electric facilities beyond those already identified in
other sections of this environmental analysis.
Natural Gas
The project site would not use natural gas and therefore, would not result in relocation or construction of
new or expanded natural gas facilities. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in additional
adverse physical effects associated with natural gas facilities beyond those already identified in other
sections of this environmental analysis.
Telecommunication Facilities
Under existing conditions, the Project site is developed with two existing residences. Therefore, the project
site is already served by existing telecommunication facilities and would not result in relocation or
56 August 2022
construction of new or expanded telecommunication facilities. Therefore, the proposed project would not
result in additional adverse physical effects associated with telecommunication facilities beyond those
already identified in other sections of this environmental analysis.
Water Supply
The GP/CAP EIR concluded impacts to water supply would be less than significant. As described above, the
proposed project is located within CMWD’s service area. According to the 2010 WMP, CMWD expects to
have adequate water supply available to meet the projected demand within their jurisdictions to 2035, due
to future projects and/or meeting SB X7-7 water conservation goals. These improvements may include the
need to utilize local groundwater and surface water supplies. CMWD updated their UWMP in June 2021.
Per the 2021 UWMP, CMWD’s projected supplies in normal, single-dry years, and multiple-dry years (CMWD
2021). In addition, the proposed General Plan goals and policies are intended to ensure that future
development occurs according to the city’s Growth Management Plan and is coordinated with availability
of public facilities, including water supply.
As discussed above, the Project would include a Tentative Tract Map, Zone Change, and General Plan
Amendment for land use re-designation to allow for the construction of four residential air-space
condominiums and an office use. The Tentative Tract Map will consolidate two lots and subdivide the
project site for residential air-space and commercial condominiums. To avoid a split zone development, the
General Plan Amendment and Zone Change are proposed to change the land use designation to R—15/O
and the zone to R-P-Q to allow both multi-family residential and office on one lot. Therefore, the proposed
project has already been accounted for in future planning documents, as it relates to water supply.
Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Wastewater
The GP/CAP EIR concluded impact related to wastewater treatment capacity would be less than significant.
The city’s current ownership capacity for treatment at the EWPCF is 9.24 mgd (average flow). The 2012
Sewer Master Plan projected future 2035 wastewater flows to be approximately 10.0 mgd, based on growth
estimates prior to the proposed General Plan. The city has requested an additional 1.02 mgd for a total of
10.26 mgd, which is currently pending. The proposed General Plan includes goals and policies that would
help reduce impacts, including Goals 2-G.22 and 2-G.23, and Policies 2-P.8, 2-P.56 through 2-P.59, 9-P.10,
and 9-P.11. The proposed project would be consistent with the existing zoning and land use designations of
the project site currently allow for residential and office uses, consistent with the uses proposed by the project.
Therefore, the proposed project has already been accounted for in future planning documents and the amount
of wastewater required for both the construction phase and the operations phase would not result in a
significant increase in wastewater treatment beyond the provider’s existing commitments. Under existing
conditions, the Project site is developed with two existing residences. Therefore, the project site is already
served by existing wastewater treatment facilities. Therefore, the Project would not result in significant
increase of wastewater services at the site and would not impact any wastewater treatment provider.
Solid Waste
The GP/CAP EIR concluded impacts related to generating solid waste in excess of the capacity of local
infrastructure would be less than significant. The city provides solid waste hauling services via a contract
with Waste Management of North County. Solid waste is collected by Waste Management and transported
57 August 2022
to the Sycamore Canyon and Otay landfills for disposal. Assembly Bill (AB) 939 requires local governments
to divert 50 percent of their community’s solid waste, and the recent goal that has been set by CalRecycle
of 75 percent recycling, composting, or source reduction of solid waste by 2020.
The proposed project would be consistent with the existing zoning and land use designations of the project
site currently allow for residential and office uses, consistent with the uses proposed by the project.
Therefore, the proposed project has already been accounted for in future planning documents and the
amount of solid waste generated by the proposed project. Additionally, with adherence to the appliable
waste management plans and regulations set by the state and local jurisdiction, as well as compliance with
General Plan goals and policies related to solid waste disposal, impacts to solid waste generated by the
project would be less than significant.
The GP/CAP EIR concluded impacts to compliance with reduction strategies and regulations related to solid
waste be less than significant. Development of future land uses, as designated in the proposed General
Plan would be required to comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid
waste. Furthermore, the policies provided in the proposed General Plan regarding solid waste disposal,
recycling, etc., would further ensure compliance with applicable regulations (City of Carlsbad 2015). The
Project would deposit all solid waste at a permitted solid waste facility. Additionally, the Project would
adhere to the requirements of AB 939, as well as comply with GP/CAP goals, policies, and implementation
actions related to solid waste disposal. Impacts would be less than significant.
3.20 Wildfire
Wildland fire hazards were previously evaluated within the Hazards and Hazardous Materials section of the
GP/CAP FEIR. The GP/CAP FEIR determined that development of the GP/CAP would result in less than significant
impacts associated with the risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires (see Section 3.8, above).
Since the adoption of the GP/CAP FEIR in 2015, the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Environment Checklist
was updated to include wildfire as an additional resource area to be analyzed. Specifically, the significance
thresholds were established relative to projects located in or near state responsibility areas or lands
classified as very high fire hazard severity zones. Because the project site is neither located in or near a
state responsibility area or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, impacts from the
proposed project would be less than significant. Nonetheless, the following analysis is provided for
informational purposes.
Implementation of the General Plan would result in new development and population growth, resulting in
an increase in demand for emergency services, which could affect the implementation of adopted
emergency response and evacuation plans. However, the city has adopted the City of Carlsbad Emergency
Operations Plan (EOP) prepared in conjunction with the Unified San Diego County Emergency Services
Organization, which addresses the city’s planned response to extraordinary emergency situations
associated with any type of natural disaster, technological incident, or state of war emergency. The EOP
includes the city as part of the Statewide Emergency Management System. With the compliance of the
emergency EOP and proposed General Plan goal and policies, including Goal 6-G.3 and Policies 6-P.31, 6-
P.34, 6-P.36, and 6-P.37, the potential to impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted
emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan, associated with the GP/CAP, would be less than
significant (City of Carlsbad 2015).
58 August 2022
The proposed project would be developed on a site that is already developed with existing residences. As
discussed in Section 3.17, the proposed project would result in the addition of 45 ADT “(or a net increase
of 25 ADT), which is minimal and is not expected to impair emergency response. Therefore, the project
would not substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.
Impacts would be less than significant.
The project site is not located within a fire hazard severity zone. A “moderate” threat fire hazard severity
zone is located approximately 700 feet north of the project site (City of Carlsbad 2015). Nonetheless, due
to distance of this area and the intervening developed nature of surrounding land uses, the proposed
project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland
fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with
wildlands. In addition, the proposed project would be required to comply with existing regulations, such as
the Uniform Fire Code and the California Building Code, to prevent the spread of wildfire, and would
implement General Plan Policies 6-P.33 and 6-P.35, directed to reduce impacts associated with wildfire.
Therefore, the proposed project would not exacerbate wildfire risks and thereby expose project occupants
to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire. Therefore, impacts
would be less than significant.
As discussed above, the project site is not located within a fire hazard severity zone. The project would not
introduce additional infrastructure which may exacerbate wildfire risk as no off-site or on-site infrastructure
improvements are proposed or required. In addition, the proposed project would be required to comply with
existing regulations, such as the Uniform Fire Code and the California Building Code, to prevent the spread
of wildfire, and would implement General Plan Policies 6-P.33 and 6-P.35, directed to reduce impacts
associated with wildfire. Accordingly, it is not anticipated that the Project would exacerbate fire risk through
the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure. Impacts would be less than significant.
As previously discussed, the Project site is not located in a fire hazard severity zone, nor is it adjacent to
steep hillsides or drainages which may experience flooding or landslides post-wildfire. Rather, the project
site and surrounding area is generally flat and development of the project site would not result in changes
to the existing topographical or drainage conditions of the project area. Thus, the Project would not expose
people or structures to a significant risk, including downslopes or downstream flooding or landslides, as a
result of runoff, post-fire instability, or drainage changes. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
59 August 2022
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
4 References and Preparers
4.1 References Cited
14 CCR 15000–15387 and Appendices A through L. Guidelines for Implementation of the California
Environmental Quality Act, as amended.
City of Carlsbad. 2015a. City of Carlsbad General Plan & Climate Action Plan Final Environmental Impact Report.
Adopted June 2015. Accessed June 2021.
https://www.carlsbadca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/3396/637434858512530000
City of Carlsbad. 2020. City of Carlsbad Climate Action Plan. Adopted September 2015. Updated May 2020.
https://www.carlsbadca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/4192/637446665168800000 4.2 List of Preparers
City of Carlsbad
Jessica Evans, Associate Planner
Cliff Jones, Principal Planner
DUDEK
Sean Kilkenny, Project Manager
Vanessa Currie, Environmental Planner
Iulia Roman, Environmental Planner
Joe Harrison, Environmental Planner
Hannah Wertheimer, Editor
Felisa Pugay, Publications Specialist
61 August 2022
Figure 1 Project Location
Project Location
Carlsbad Seaside Village Condos Project
SOURCE: SANGIS 2021; Bing MapsDate: 6/30/2021 - Last saved by: agreis - Path: Z:\Projects\j1358301\MAPDOC\DOCUMENT\Figure1-ProjectLocation.mxd02,0001,000 Feet
Project Boundary
FIGURE 1
Chula Vista
Solana Beach
Encinitas
San Diego
Carlsbad
Oceanside
La Mesa
Santee
Poway
San Marcos
Escondido
Vista
ImperialBeach
Del Mar
Coronado
Riverside
County
Mexico
905
209
75
52
94125
241
9854
73
274
195
56
86 111
67
74
74
76 79
78
805
215
15
5 8
Project Site
Project Site
DUDEK •
S°' ·"
~ <fc-n a ~ %~ Q '~ ~ '-·~ o/, :;p_,,. ll ,P ..:ii ~ ~~" u;:-:., \.~ <J). •
~ d'OJ: ~ S°' ~ ~ Go}"" S~-1.
' e,'f:> ~ '1)_,,. l-/, -4.S
<J). ¾' a..+~"\; S°' ~ ~
IX''& 1<"' ,;, " +~"0 s
~~ ~'?--?--::,.'%:>
~
?,, <J).
'Q ~ ~
N.~ <'.)<2 --
~+'f ~ "P2 ~~I\ 't ' ~ d'. -~ ~ ~ '(\,-
B
RI/' C1:, <'.).""' VQ '¥~ ~%~ I,~ -t-"'"'c Rttsr o,p ,s ~en? ...,q._ ?'.) ">'·,. r
l>--e,'<-1>-VE
-<,\>-~\>-~ ~ (/>
~
~
ls
/.JJ _,
f!2
62 August 2022
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
63 August 2022
Figure 2 Project Site
Date: 6/30/2021 - Last saved by: agreis - Path: Z:\Projects\j1358301\MAPDOC\DOCUMENT\Figure2-ProjectSite.mxdJ
E
F
F
E
R
S
O
N
S
T
M
A
D
I
S
O
N
S
T ARBUCKLE
PL
HOME
A
VE
Project Site
Carlsbad Seaside Village Condos Project
SOURCE: SANGIS 2020, 2021
0 200100Feet
Project Boundary
FIGURE 2
64 August 2022
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
65 August 2022
Figure 3a Existing General Plan Land Use Designation
Date: 7/1/2021 - Last saved by: agreis - Path: Z:\Projects\j1358301\MAPDOC\DOCUMENT\Figure3a-Existing_GPLU.mxdV
V
V
V
V
R-15
R-15
R-15/O
R-15/O
J
E
F
F
E
R
S
O
N
S
T
M
A
D
I
S
O
N
S
T ARBUCKLE
PL
HOME
A
VE
Existing General Plan Land Use Designations
Carlsbad Seaside Village Condos Project
SOURCE: City Carlsbad 2021; SANGIS 2020, 2021
0 10050Feet
Project Boundary
Existing General Plan Land Use
R-15, Residential 8-15 du/ac
R-15/O, Residential 8-15 du/ac/Office
V, Village
FIGURE 3a
66 August 2022
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
67 August 2022
Figure 3b Proposed General Plan Land Use Designation
Date: 1/26/2022 - Last saved by: agreis - Path: Z:\Projects\j1358301\MAPDOC\DOCUMENT\Figure3b-Proposed_GPLU.mxdV
V
V
V
V
R-15
R-15
R-15/O
R-15/O
R-15/O
J
E
F
F
E
R
S
O
N
S
T
M
A
D
I
S
O
N
S
T ARBUCKLE
PL
HOME
A
VE
Proposed General Plan Land Use Designations
Carlsbad Seaside Village Condos Project
SOURCE: City Carlsbad 2021; SANGIS 2020, 2021
0 10050Feet
Project Boundary
Proposed General Plan Land Use
R-15, Residential 8-15 du/ac
R-15/O, Residential 8-15 du/ac/Office
V, Village
FIGURE 3b
68 August 2022
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
69 August 2022
Figure 4a Existing Zoning
Date: 7/1/2021 - Last saved by: agreis - Path: Z:\Projects\j1358301\MAPDOC\DOCUMENT\Figure4a-Existing_Zoning.mxdRD-M
V-BV-B
V-B
V-B
V-B
R-3
R-3
R-P-Q
R-P-Q
J
E
F
F
E
R
S
O
N
S
T
M
A
D
I
S
O
N
S
T ARBUCKLE
PL
HOME
A
VE
Existing Zoning
Carlsbad Seaside Village Condos Project
SOURCE: City Carlsbad 2021; SANGIS 2020, 2021
0 10050Feet
Project Boundary
Existing Zoning
R-3, Multi-Family Residential
R-P-Q, Residential Professional (Qualified Overlay Zone)
RD-M, Residential Density-Multiple
V-B, Village-Barrio
FIGURE 4aIll
70 August 2022
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
71 August 2022
Figure 4b Proposed Zoning
Date: 7/1/2021 - Last saved by: agreis - Path: Z:\Projects\j1358301\MAPDOC\DOCUMENT\Figure4b-Proposed_Zoning.mxdRD-M
V-BV-B
V-B
V-B
V-B
R-3
R-3
R-P-Q
R-P-Q
J
E
F
F
E
R
S
O
N
S
T
M
A
D
I
S
O
N
S
T ARBUCKLE
PL
HOME
A
VE
Proposed Zoning
Carlsbad Seaside Village Condos Project
SOURCE: City Carlsbad 2021; SANGIS 2020, 2021
0 10050Feet
Project Boundary
Proposed Zoning
R-3, Multi-Family Residential
R-P-Q, Residential Professional (Qualified Overlay Zone)
RD-M, Residential Density-Multiple
V-B, Village-Barrio
FIGURE 4bIll
72 August 2022
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
73 August 2022
Figure 5 Preliminary Site Plan
8383835 ()*DUDJH*DUDJH*DUDJH*DUDJH8QLW8QLW8QLW8QLWYLVLWRUSDUNLQJSDUNLQJ
YLVLWRUSDUNLQJ&RPPHUFLDO8QLW%XLOGLQJVHWEDFNOLQH3URSHUW\OLQH3URSHUW\OLQH%XLOGLQJVHWEDFNOLQH%XLOGLQJVHWEDFNOLQH3URSHUW\OLQH3URSHUW\OLQHDERYHXQLWIORRUHOHYDWLRQ6ORSH 6 ORS H IOXVKZLWKXQLWIORRUHOHYDWLRQIOXVKZLWKXQLWIORRUHOHYDWLRQ6ORSH
6:
6 (
6(
1
:
-())(5 6 2 1 6 75 ((7
6LWH3ODQ1RWHV
KLJKPDVRQU\ZDOOPD[LPXPKHLJKWPDVRQU\ZDOO
KLJKYLQ\OIHQFHDQG
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
*UDSKLF6FDOH LQFK IHHW1'(6,*1&2'(7KH HGLWLRQRI&DOLIRUQLD&RGHRI5HJXODWLRQV7LWOHLQFOXGHV 3DUW &DOLIRUQLD%XLOGLQJ6WDQGDUGV$GPLQLVWUDWLYH&RGH 3DUW9ROXPHDQG &DOLIRUQLD%XLOGLQJ&RGH3DUW &DOLIRUQLD(OHFWULFDO&RGH3DUW &DOLIRUQLD0HFKDQLFDO&RGH3DUW &DOLIRUQLD3OXPELQJ&RGH3DUW &DOLIRUQLD(QHUJ\&RGH 3DUW &DOLIRUQLD+LVWRULFDO%XLOGLQJ&RGH3DUW &DOLIRUQLD)LUH&RGH3DUW &DOLIRUQLD([LVWLQJ%XLOGLQJ&RGH3DUW &DOLIRUQLD*UHHQ%XLOGLQJ6WDQGDUGV&RGH3DUW &DOLIRUQLD5HIHUHQFH6WDQGDUGV&RGH/RFDO0XQLFLSDO&RGHVPreliminary Site PlanCarlsbad Seaside Village Condos ProjectFIGURE 5Z:\Projects\j1358301\MAPDOC\DOCUMENTSOURCE: Karnak Planning & Design, 2022/
., ., /
., ., /
., ., /
., ., /
., .,
/
/
., .,
., .,
,
., .,
/
., .,
., ., ,
~
w
C ::::,
C
74 August 2022
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Appendix A
Historical and Archaeological Inventory Report Scarpelli Property Redevelopment Project Carlsbad, San Diego County, California 92008
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Appendix B
Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Appendix C
CAP Checklist
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Appendix D
Stormwater Standards Questionnaire (Form E-34)
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
Appendix E
Noise Impact Analysis
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
GPA 2021-0004/ZC 2021-0003/CT 2021-0001/PUD 2021-0004/PUD 2022-0002/SDP 2021-0014
(DEV2020-0016) – JEFFERSON MIXED USE
PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS (CMC SECTION 21.45.060)
TABLE C: GENERAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
APPLICABLE TO ALL PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS
REF.
NO. SUBJECT DEVELOPMENT STANDARD COMPLIANCE COMMENT
C.1 Density
Per the underlying General Plan designation. When two or more general
plan land use designations exist within a planned development, the
density may be transferred from one general plan designation to another
with a general plan amendment.
N/A
C.2 Arterial
Setbacks
All dwelling units adjacent to any arterial road shown on the Circulation
Element of the General Plan shall maintain the following minimum
setbacks from the right-of-way:
Prime Arterial 50 Feet
Major Arterial 40 Feet
Secondary Arterial 30 Feet
Carlsbad Boulevard 20 Feet
N/A
Half (50%) of the required arterial setback area located closest to the
arterial shall be fully landscaped to enhance the street scene and buffer homes from traffic on adjacent arterials, and:
• Shall contain a minimum of one 24” box tree for every 30 lineal
feet of street frontage; and
• Shall be commonly owned and maintained
N/A
Project perimeter walls greater than 42 inches in height shall not be
located in the required landscaped portion of the arterial setback, except
noise attenuation walls that:
• Are required by a noise study, and
• Due to topography, are necessary to be placed within the required
landscaped portion of the arterial setback.
N/A
C.3
Permitted
Intrusions
into
Setbacks/
Building
Separation
Permitted intrusions into required building setbacks shall be the same as
specified in Section 21.46.120 of this code. The same intrusions specified
in Section 21.46.120 shall be permitted into required building separation.
All balconies, overhangs, and
architectural projections comply
with the maximum two-foot
allowance per CMC Section
21.46.120.
C.4 Streets
Private
Minimum right-of-way width 56 feet
N/A
Minimum curb-to-curb width 34 feet
Minimum parkway width
(curb adjacent) 5.5 feet, including curb
Minimum sidewalk width 5 feet (setback 6 inches from
property line)
Public
Minimum right-of-way width 60 feet
N/A
Minimum curb-to-curb width 34 feet
Minimum parkway width
(curb adjacent) 7.5 feet, including curb
Minimum sidewalk width 5 feet (setback 6 inches from
property line)
Street
Trees
within parkways
One-family dwellings and
twin homes on small-lots
A minimum of one street tree
(24-inch box) per lot is required
to be planted in the parkway along all streets.
N/A
EXHIBIT 8A
GPA 2021-0004/ZC 2021-0003/CT 2021-0001/PUD 2021-0004/PUD 2022-0002/SDP 2021-0014
(DEV2020-0016) – JEFFERSON MIXED USE
Condominium projects
Street trees shall be spaced no
further apart than 30 feet on
center within the parkway.
Street trees are shown on the
conceptual landscape plan and will
be approved with the final
landscape plan check.
Tree species should be selected to create a unified image for
the street, provide an effective canopy, avoid sidewalk damage
and minimize water consumption.
See above.
C.5 Drive-aisles
3 or fewer
dwelling
units
Minimum 12 feet wide when the drive-aisle is not required for
emergency vehicle access, as determined by the Fire Chief. N/A If the drive-aisle is required for emergency vehicle access, it
shall be a minimum of 20 feet wide.
4 or more
dwelling
units
Minimum 20 feet wide. Drive-aisles are 24 feet and exceeds
this requirement.
All
projects
No parking shall be permitted within the minimum required
width of a drive-aisle.
Yes – all parking is outside of drive
aisles.
A minimum 24-foot vehicle back-up/maneuvering area shall be
provided in front of garages, carports or uncovered parking
spaces (this may include driveway area, drive-aisles, and
streets).
A 24-foot vehicle back-up is
provided in front of garages and
uncovered parking spaces.
Additional width may be required for vehicle/emergency
vehicle maneuvering area. TBD
Parkways and/or sidewalks may be required. TBD
No more than 24 dwelling units shall be located along a single-
entry drive-aisle. N/A
All drive-aisles shall be enhanced with decorative pavement. Driveway will be enhanced with
decorative pavers.
C.6
Number of
Visitor
Parking Spaces
Required (1)
Projects with 10 units or fewer A .30 space per each unit. Project proposes four units. At .30
space per unit, the project requires
two visitor spaces (1.2, rounded to
the nearest whole numbers).
Project provides two visitor parking
spaces on-site.
Projects 11 units or more A .25 space per each unit.
When calculating the required number of visitor parking spaces, if the
calculation results in a fractional parking space, the required number of
visitor parking spaces shall always be rounded up to the nearest whole
number.
C.7
Location of
Visitor
Parking
On
Private/
Public
Streets
On-street visitor parking is permitted on private/public streets,
subject to the following:
• The private/public street is a minimum 34-feet wide (curb-
to-curb)
• There are no restrictions that would prohibit on-street
parking where the visitor parking is proposed
• The visitor parking spaces may be located:
o Along one or both sides of any private/public street(s)
located within the project boundary, and
o Along the abutting side and portion of any existing
public/private street(s) that is contiguous to the project
boundary
N/A
In parking bays along public/private streets within the project
boundary, provided the parking bays are outside the minimum
required street right-of-way width.
N/A
GPA 2021-0004/ZC 2021-0003/CT 2021-0001/PUD 2021-0004/PUD 2022-0002/SDP 2021-0014
(DEV2020-0016) – JEFFERSON MIXED USE
When visitor parking is provided as on-street parallel parking,
not less than 24 lineal feet per space, exclusive of
driveway/drive-aisle entrances and aprons, shall be provided
for each parking space, except where parallel parking spaces
are located immediately adjacent to driveway/drive-aisle
aprons, then 20 lineal feet may be provided.
N/A
Within the Beach Area Overlay Zone, on-street parking shall not
count toward meeting the visitor parking requirement.
N/A
On Drive-
aisles
Visitor parking must be provided in parking bays that are
located outside the required minimum drive-aisle width.
Yes – outside of drive aisles.
On a
Driveway
Outside
the Beach
Area
Overlay
Zone
One required visitor parking space may be credited
for each driveway in a project that has a depth of
40 feet or more.
N/A
For projects with 10 or fewer units, all required
visitor parking may be located within driveways
(located in front of a unit’s garage), provided that
all dwelling units in the project have driveways with
a depth of 20 feet or more.
N/A
Within
the Beach
Area
Overlay
Zone
One required visitor parking space may be credited
for each driveway in a project that has a depth of
40 feet or more.
N/A
If the streets within and/or adjacent to the project
allow for on-street parking on both sides of the
street, then visitor parking may be located in a
driveway, subject to the following:
• All required visitor parking may be located
within driveways (located in front of a unit’s
garage), provided that all dwelling units in the
project have driveways with a depth of 20 feet or more.
• If less than 100% of the driveways in a project
have a depth of 20 feet or more, then a .25
visitor parking space will be credited for each
driveway in a project that has a depth of 20 feet
or more (calculations resulting in a fractional
parking space credit shall always be rounded
down to the nearest whole number).
N/A
All
projects
The minimum driveway depth required for visitor
parking (20 feet or 40 feet) applies to driveways for
front or side-loaded garages, and is measured from
the property line, back of sidewalk, or from the
edge of the drive-aisle, whichever is closest to the
structure.
N/A
Compact
Parking
For projects of more than 25 units, up to 25% of visitor parking
may be provided as compact spaces (8 feet by 15 feet). No
overhang is permitted into any required setback area or over
sidewalks less than 6 feet wide.
N/A
For all projects within the Beach Area Overlay Zone, up to 55%
of the visitor parking may be provided as compact spaces (8
feet by 15 feet).
N/A
GPA 2021-0004/ZC 2021-0003/CT 2021-0001/PUD 2021-0004/PUD 2022-0002/SDP 2021-0014
(DEV2020-0016) – JEFFERSON MIXED USE
Distance
from unit
Visitor parking spaces must be located no more than 300 feet
as measured in a logical walking path from the entrance of the
unit it could be considered to serve.
Yes – within 300 ft. of all units
C.8
Screening
of Parking
Areas
Open parking areas should be screened from adjacent residences and
public rights-of-way by either a view-obscuring wall, landscaped berm, or
landscaping, except parking located within a driveway.
All open spaces are located to the
rear of the site and is screened
from view from public right-of-way.
C.9
Community
Recreational
Space (1)
Community recreational space shall be provided for all projects of 11 or
more dwelling units, as follows:
N/A Minimum community
recreational space
required
Project is NOT within
R-23 general plan
designation
200 square feet per unit
Project IS within R-23
general plan
designation
150 square feet per unit
Projects with 11 to
25 dwelling units
Community recreational space shall be provided as
either (or both) passive or active recreation
facilities.
N/A
Projects with 26 or
more dwelling units
Community recreational space shall be provided as
both passive and active recreational facilities with a
minimum of 75% of the area allocated for active
facilities.
N/A
Projects with 50 or
more dwelling units
Community recreational space shall be provided as
both passive and active recreational facilities for a
variety of age groups (a minimum of 75% of the
area allocated for active facilities).
N/A
For projects consisting of one-family dwellings or
twin homes on small-lots, at least 25% of the
community recreation space must be provided as
pocket parks.
• Pocket park lots must have a minimum width of
50 feet and be located at strategic locations
such as street intersections (especially “T-
intersections”) and where open space vistas
may be achieved.
N/A
All projects
(with 11 or more
dwelling units)
Community recreational space shall be located and
designed so as to be functional, usable, and easily
accessible from the units it is intended to serve.
N/A
Credit for indoor recreation facilities shall not
exceed 25% of the required community recreation
area.
N/A
Required community recreation areas shall not be
located in any required front yard and may not
include any streets, drive-aisles, driveways, parking
areas, storage areas, slopes of 5% or greater, or
walkways (except those walkways that are clearly
integral to the design of the recreation area).
N/A
Recreation Area
Parking
In addition to required resident and visitor parking,
recreation area parking shall be provided, as
follows: 1 space for each 15 residential units, or
fraction thereof, for units located more than 1,000
feet from a community recreation area.
N/A
GPA 2021-0004/ZC 2021-0003/CT 2021-0001/PUD 2021-0004/PUD 2022-0002/SDP 2021-0014
(DEV2020-0016) – JEFFERSON MIXED USE
The location of recreation area parking shall be
subject to the same location requirements as for
visitor parking, except that required recreation
area parking shall not be located within a
driveway(s).
N/A
Examples of recreation facilities include, but are not limited to, the following:
Active
Swimming pool area
Children’s playground equipment
Spa
Courts (tennis, racquetball, volleyball, basketball)
Recreation rooms or buildings
Horseshoe pits
Pitch and putt
Grassy play areas with a slope of less than 5% (minimum area of 5,000 square feet and a
minimum dimension of 50 feet)
Any other facility deemed by the City Planner to satisfy the intent of providing active
recreational facilities
Passive
Benches
Barbecues
Community gardens
Grassy play areas with a slope of less than 5%
C.10 Lighting Lighting adequate for pedestrian and vehicular safety shall be provided.
Lighting is provided throughout the
site for pedestrian and vehicular
safety.
C.11 Reserved
C.12
Recreational
Vehicle (RV) Storage (1)
Required for projects with 100 or more units, or a master or specific plan
with 100 or more planned development units. Exception: RV storage is
not required for projects located within the R-15 or R-23 land use
designations.
N/A 20 square feet per unit, not to include area required for driveways and
approaches.
Developments located within master plans or residential specific plans
may have this requirement met by the common RV storage area provided
by the master plan or residential specific plan.
RV storage areas shall be designed to accommodate recreational vehicles
of various sizes (i.e. motorhomes, campers, boats, personal watercraft,
etc.).
N/A
The storage of recreational vehicles shall be prohibited in the front yard
setback and on any public or private streets or any other area visible to the
public. A provision containing this restriction shall be included in the
covenants, conditions and restrictions for the project. All RV storage areas
shall be screened from adjacent residences and public rights-of-way by a
view-obscuring wall and landscaping.
N/A
C.13 Storage
Space
480 cubic feet of separate storage space per unit.
See comment below. If all storage for each unit is located in one area, the space may be reduced
to 392 cubic feet.
Required storage space shall be separately enclosed for each unit and be
conveniently accessible to the outdoors.
Two-car garage satisfies
requirement and garage space is
enclosed and accessible to the outdoors.
GPA 2021-0004/ZC 2021-0003/CT 2021-0001/PUD 2021-0004/PUD 2022-0002/SDP 2021-0014
(DEV2020-0016) – JEFFERSON MIXED USE
Required storage space may be designed as an enlargement of a covered
parking structure provided it does not extend into the area of the required
parking stall and does not impede the ability to utilize the parking stall (for
vehicle parking).
N/A
A garage (12’x20’ one-car, 20’x20’ two-car, or larger) satisfies the required
storage space per unit.
Each unit has a 20 ft. x 20 ft. two-
car garage and satisfies this
requirement.
This requirement is in addition to closets and other indoor storage areas. See above.
(1) This standard does not apply to housing for senior citizens (see Chapter 21.84 of this code).
PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS (CMC SECTION 21.45.080)
TABLE E: CONDOMINIUM PROJECTS
REF.
NO. SUBJECT DEVELOPMENT STANDARD COMPLIANCE COMMENT
E.1
Livable
Neighborhood
Policy
Must comply with City Council Policy 66, Principles for the Development
of Livable Neighborhoods. See separate compliance chart
E.2 Architectural
Requirements
One-family and
two-family
dwellings
Must comply with City Council Policy 44, Neighborhood
Architectural Design Guidelines N/A
Multiple-family
dwellings
There shall be at least three separate building planes on
all building elevations. The minimum offset in planes
shall be 18 inches and shall include, but not be limited
to, building walls, windows, and roofs.
The project provides at least three
separate building planes on all building
elevations with balconies, varied roofs, and building articulations located on all
elevations.
All building elevations shall incorporate a minimum of
four complimentary design elements, including but not
limited to:
•A variety of roof planes;
•Windows and doors recessed a minimum of 2 inches;
•Decorative window or door frames;
•Exposed roof rafter tails;
•Dormers;
•Columns;
•Arched elements;
•Varied window shapes;
•Exterior wood elements;
•Accent materials such as brick, stone, shingles, wood,
or siding;
•Knee braces; and
•Towers.
The project provides at least four
complimentary design elements on all
building elevations including varied
roof planes, siding, varied window size
and shapes, stone, and exposed rafter
tails.
E.3 Maximum
Coverage 60% of total project net developable acreage. 43%
E.4 Maximum
Building Height
Same as required by the underlying zone, and not to exceed three stories
(1)(7)
The project is required to have a
maximum height of 35 feet and has an
overall height of 34 ft. and 11 in.
Projects
within the R-
23 general
plan
designation
(1)(7)
40 feet, if roof pitch is 3:12 or greater
N/A
35 feet, if roof pitch is less than 3:12
Building height shall not exceed three stories
E.5
Minimum
Building
Setbacks
From a
private or
public
street(2)(3)
Residential
structure 10 feet Jefferson Street is a public street. The
residential structures are setback at
least 10 feet as measured from the
outside edge of the ultimate street
right-of-way. No direct entry garages
are proposed from the street.
Direct entry
garage 20 feet
From a drive-
aisle(4)
Residential
structure
(except as
specified
below)
5 feet, fully landscaped (walkways
providing access to dwelling entryways
may be located within required
landscaped area)
N/A
EXHIBIT 8B
PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS (CMC SECTION 21.45.080)
TABLE E: CONDOMINIUM PROJECTS
REF.
NO. SUBJECT DEVELOPMENT STANDARD COMPLIANCE COMMENT
Residential
structure –
directly
above a
garage
0 feet when projecting over the front of a
garage. N/A
Garage
3 feet
N/A Garages facing directly onto a drive-aisle
shall be equipped with an automatic
garage door opener.
Projects of 25
units or less
within the R-
15 and R-23
general plan
designations
0 feet (residential structure and garage) The project has a zero-foot setback
from the drive aisle.
Garages facing directly onto a drive-aisle
shall be equipped with an automatic
garage door opener.
Each unit is equipped with an
automatic garage door opener.
Balconies/deck
s (unenclosed
and
uncovered)
0 feet
Portions of the balconies and building
cantilever over the drive-aisle;
however, the buildings maintain
required setbacks, minimum building
separation, and meet fire and
engineering requirements.
May cantilever over a drive-aisle,
provided the balcony/deck complies with
all other applicable requirements, such
as:
• Setbacks from property lines
• Building separation
• Fire and Engineering Department requirements
From the perimeter property
lines of the project site (not
adjacent to a public/private
street)
The building setback from an interior side
or rear perimeter property line shall be
the same as required by the underlying
zone for an interior side or rear yard
setback.
The underlying zoning proposed for
the project is R-P-Q. The required
interior side yard setback is 10 feet.
The required rear yard setback is 20
feet and the project has a rear yard
setback of approximately 20 feet.
E.6
Minimum
Building
Separation
10 feet The buildings are separated by at least
15 feet.
E.7 Resident
Parking (6)
All dwelling
types
If a project is located within the R-23 general plan
designation, resident parking shall be provided as
specified below, and may also be provided as follows:
• 25% of the units in the project may include a tandem
two-car garage (minimum 12 feet x 40 feet).
• Calculations for this provision resulting in a fractional
unit may be rounded up to the next whole number.
N/A
One-family
and two-
family
dwellings
2 spaces per unit, provided as either:
• a two-car garage (minimum 20 feet x 20 feet), or
• 2 separate one-car garages (minimum 12 feet x 20
feet each)
• In the R-W Zone, the 2 required parking spaces may
be provided as 1 covered space and 1 uncovered
space (5)
N/A
Multiple-
family
dwellings
Studio and
one-bedroom
units
1.5 spaces per unit, 1 of which must be
covered (5) N/A – each unit has more than one
bedroom. When calculating the required number of
parking spaces, if the calculation results
in a fractional parking space, the
EXHIBIT 8B
PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS (CMC SECTION 21.45.080)
TABLE E: CONDOMINIUM PROJECTS
REF.
NO. SUBJECT DEVELOPMENT STANDARD COMPLIANCE COMMENT
required number of parking spaces shall
always be rounded up to the nearest
whole number.
Units with two
or more
bedrooms
2 spaces per unit, provided as either:
• a one-car garage (12 feet x 20 feet)
and 1 covered or uncovered space; or
(5)
• a two-car garage (minimum 20 feet x
20 feet), or
• 2 separate one-car garages (minimum
12 feet x 20 feet each)
• In the R-W Zone and the Beach Area
Overlay Zone, the 2 required parking
spaces may be provided as 1 covered
space and 1 uncovered space (5)
The four residential units contains
more than two bedrooms and
therefore requires eight parking
spaces. The project proposes an
enclosed, two-car garage with a
minimum dimension of 20 feet by 20
feet for each unit, for a total of eight
spaces.
Required parking may be provided within an enclosed
parking garage with multiple, open parking spaces,
subject to the following:
• Each parking space shall maintain a standard stall size
of 8.5 feet by 20 feet, exclusive of supporting
columns; and
• A backup distance of 24 feet shall be maintained in
addition to a minimum 5 feet turning bump-out
located at the end of any stall series.
N/A
Required resident parking spaces shall be located no
more than 150 feet as measured in a logical walking
path from the entrance of the units it could be
considered to serve.
An enclosed, two-car garage is
attached to each unit.
E.8
Private
Recreational
Space
One-family,
two-family,
and multiple-
family
dwellings
Required private recreational space shall be designed so
as to be functional, usable, and easily accessible from
the dwelling it is intended to serve.
Each unit has two balconies and a yard
area in the rear of each unit on the
ground floor.
Required private recreational space shall be located
adjacent to the unit the area is intended to serve.
The balcony and ground floor yard
area is located adjacent and is
accessed within each unit.
Required private recreational space shall not be located
within any required front yard setback area, and may not
include any driveways, parking areas, storage areas, or
common walkways.
The required private recreational space
is not located within any required front
yard setback area, driveways, parking
areas, storage areas or common
walkways.
One-family
and two-
family
dwellings
Minimum
total area
per unit
Projects not within the R-
15 or R-23 general plan
designations
400 square
feet
N/A Projects within the R-15 or
R-23 general plan
designations
200 square
feet
May consist of more than one recreational space. N/A
May be provided at ground level and/or as a
deck/balcony on a second/third floor or roof. N/A
If provided
at ground
level
Minimum
dimension
Not within
the R-15 or R-
23 general
15 feet N/A
EXHIBIT 8B
PLANNED DEVELOPMENTS (CMC SECTION 21.45.080)
TABLE E: CONDOMINIUM PROJECTS
REF.
NO. SUBJECT DEVELOPMENT STANDARD COMPLIANCE COMMENT
plan
designations
Within the R-
15 or R-23
general plan
designations
10 feet
Shall not have a slope gradient greater
than 5%. N/A
Attached solid patio covers and
decks/balconies may project into a
required private recreational space,
subject to the following:
• The depth of the projection shall not
exceed 6 feet (measured from the
wall of the dwelling that is contiguous
to the patio/deck/balcony).
The length of the projection shall not be
limited, except as required by any
setback or lot coverage standards.
N/A
Open or lattice-top patio covers may be
located within the required private
recreation space (provided the patio
cover complies with all applicable
standards, including the required
setbacks).
N/A
If provided
above ground
level as a
deck/ balcony
or roof deck
Minimum dimension 6 feet
N/A Minimum area 60 square
feet
Multiple-family
dwellings
Minimum total area per unit (patio,
porch, or balcony)
60 square
feet
Each unit provides for two balconies
and private open space on the ground
floor, in the rear of each unit. The
private open space ranges from 352 square feet up to 860 square feet.
Minimum dimension of patio, porch or
balcony 6 feet
Each unit provides at least one balcony
that has a minimum dimension of 6
feet and a private rear yard on the
ground floor that exceeds 6 feet.
Projects of 11 or more units that are within the R-23
general plan designation may opt to provide an
additional 75 square feet of community recreation space
per unit (subject to the standards specified in Table C of
this Chapter), in lieu of providing the per unit private
recreational space specified above.
N/A
(1) If a project is located within the Beach Area Overlay Zone, building height shall be subject to the requirements of Chapter
21.82 of this code.
(2) See Table C in Section 21.45.060 for required setbacks from an arterial street.
(3) Building setbacks shall be measured from the outside edge of the required street right-of-way width, whichever is closest to
the building.
EXHIBIT 8B
(4) Building setbacks shall be measured from one of the following (whichever is closest to the building): a) the outside edge of
the required drive-aisle width; b) the back of sidewalk; or c) the nearest side of a parking bay located contiguous to a drive-
aisle (excluding parking located in a driveway in front of a unit’s garage).
(5) Any uncovered required parking space in the R-W zone may be located within a required front yard setback and may be
tandem.
(6) This standard does not apply to housing for senior citizens (see Chapter 21.84 of this code).
(7) Protrusions above the height limit shall be allowed pursuant to Section 21.46.020 of this code. Such protrusions include
protective barriers for balconies and roof decks.
CITY COUNCIL POLICY 66 – LIVABLE NEIGHBORHOODS
Principle Compliance Comments
1 Building Facades, Front Entries, Porches
Facades create interest and character and should be varied
and articulated to provide visual interest to pedestrians.
Clearly identifiable front doors and porches enhance the
street scene and create opportunities for greater social
interaction within the neighborhood. Building entries and
windows should face the street. Front porches, bay
windows, courtyards and balconies are encouraged.
The project proposes a well-
articulated front façade with
multiple architectural features and
multiple complimentary finishes
creating visual interest. The front
doors for all units are oriented
towards Jefferson Street to the
greatest extent possible. Project
complies.
2 Garages
Homes should be designed to feature the residence as the
prominent part of the structure in relation to the street. A
variety of garage configurations should be used to improve
the street scene. This may include tandem garages, side-
loaded garages, front-loaded garages, alley-loaded garages
and recessed garages.
The project proposes a driveway
that curves around from Jefferson
Street towards the south side yard.
This curved driveway allows for a
side-loading garages and front-
loading garages. Project complies.
3 Street Design
An interconnected, modified (grid) street pattern should be
incorporated into project designs when there are no
topographic or environmental constraints. Interconnected
streets provide pedestrians and automobiles many
alternative routes to follow, disperse traffic and reduce the
volume of cars on any one street in the neighborhood. Streets
should be designed to provide both vehicular and pedestrian
connectivity by minimizing the use of cul-de-sacs.
The street network should also be designed to create a
safer, more comfortable pedestrian and bicycling
environment. Local residential streets should have travel
and parking lanes, be sufficiently narrow to slow traffic,
provide adequate access for emergency and service vehicles
and emergency evacuation routes for residents and include
parkways with trees to form a pleasing canopy over the
street. Local residential streets are the public open space in
which children often play and around which neighborhoods
interact. Within this context, vehicular movement should be
additionally influenced through the use of City-accepted
designs for traffic calming measures.
The proposed project is a four-unit
attached condominium with a
detached office within a 0.32-acre
lot. Street design is not applicable
to this project.
EXHIBIT 9
4 Parkways
Street trees should be planted in the parkways along all
streets. Tree species should be selected to create a unified
image for the street, provide an effective canopy, avoid
sidewalk damage and minimize water consumption.
A conceptual landscape plan has
been reviewed and deemed
complete by the city. The project is
conditioned to require final
landscape plan approval and
comply with all applicable
requirements.
5 Pedestrian Walkways
Pedestrian walkways should be located along or visible from
all streets. Walkways (sidewalks or trails) should provide
clear, comfortable and direct access to neighborhood
schools, parks/plazas and transit stops. Primary pedestrian
routes should be bordered by residential fronts, parks or
plazas. Where street connections are not feasible (at the
end of cul-de-sacs), pedestrian paths should also be
provided.
The proposed project includes the
improvement of curb, gutter, and
sidewalk along the Jefferson Street
frontage. Though the frontage
along Jefferson Street is currently
improved with a curb, gutter and
sidewalk, the site would update the
frontage improvements to current
development standards.
6 Centralized Community Recreation Areas
Park or plazas, which serve as neighborhood meeting places
and as recreational activity centers should be incorporated
into all planned unit developments. As frequently as
possible, these parks/plazas should be designed for both
active and passive uses for residents of all ages and should
be centrally located within the project. Parks and plazas
should not be sited on residual parcels, used as buffers from
surrounding developments or to separate buildings from
streets.
The proposed project is a four-unit
attached condominium with a
detached office within a 0.32-acre
lot. Centralized community
recreation areas are not applicable
to this project.