The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutSUP 2020-0001; VISTA-CARLSBAD INTERCEPTOR 1; ACCESS ROAD PROJECT; 2019-06-01,, Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor ( Reach 1 ) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist June 2019 Prepared for: Prepared by: City of Vista HOR Engineering, Inc. This page is intentionally blank. Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist Contents ~ Ctn: or VISTA Section 1. Project Description ....................................................................................................................... 1 Background ......................................................................................................................................... 1 Project Goals and Objectives .............................................................................................................. 1 Proposed Project ................................................................................................................................. 2 Construction Details ............................................................................................................................ 8 Discretionary Actions and Approvals ................................................................................................ 11 Section 2. Project-Level Environmental Checklist ...................................................................................... 12 Comprehensive Sewer Master Plan Project Information .................................................................. 12 Supplemental Program Environmental Impact Report Tiering Evaluation ........................................ 13 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected ...................................................................................... 14 Determination .................................................................................................................................... 14 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts ................................................................................................ 15 I. Aesthetics ................................................................................................................... 17 II. Agricultural Resources ............................................................................................... 19 Ill. AirQuality ................................................................................................................... 22 IV. Biological Resources .................................................................................................. 25 V. Cultural Resources ..................................................................................................... 32 VI. Geology and Soils ...................................................................................................... 35 VII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions ...................................................................................... 40 VIII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials ............................................................................. 42 IX. Hydrology and Water Quality ..................................................................................... 47 X. Land Use and Planning .............................................................................................. 54 XI. Mineral Resources ..................................................................................................... 56 XII. Noise .......................................................................................................................... 57 XIII. Population and Housing ............................................................................................. 60 XIV. Public Services ........................................................................................................... 62 XV. Recreation .................................................................................................................. 64 XVI. Transportation/Traffic ................................................................................................. 66 XVI I. Utilities and Service Systems ..................................................................................... 69 XVIII . Energy ........................................................................................................................ 73 XIX. Tribal Cultural Resources ........................................................................................... 74 XX. Wildfire ....................................................................................................................... 76 XXI. Mandatory Findings of Significance ........................................................................... 78 References ........................................................................................................................................ 80 Tables Table 1. Contributing Drainage Flows ........................................................................................................... 8 Table 2. Proposed Temporary Construction Easements .............................................................................. 9 Table 3. Proposed Permanent Easements ................................................................................................... 9 Table 4. Vegetation Community Impacts .................................................................................................... 29 Table 5. Jurisdictional Resource Impacts .................................................................................................. 30 June 2019 I i Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist Figures Figure 1. Regional Map .......................................................... : ...................................................................... 4 Figure 2. Project Area ................................................................................................................................... 5 Figure 3. Proposed Access Road (West) ...................................................................................................... 6 Figure 4. Proposed Access Road (East) ....................................................................................................... 7 Figure 5. Contributing Drainages ................................................................................................................ 10 Figure 6. Federal Emergency Management Agency Floodplain Map ........................................................ 53 Appendices Appendix A 1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (2017) Appendix A2 . Carlsbad Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Resources Guidelines Appendix B. Biological Resources Letter Report Appendix C. Cultural Resources Letter Report ii I June 2019 Section 1. Project Description Background In November 2017, the City of Vista (City) certified the Supplemental Program Environmental Impact Report (SPEIR) for the 2017 Comprehensive Sewer Master Plan (2017 CSMP) (State Clearinghouse No. 2007091072). The 2017 CSMP identifies a set of recommended projects for inclusion in the City's Capital Improvement Program (CIP) and operations and maintenance (O&M) program. The SPEIR analyzed the potential environmental impacts of these improvements, as contemplated in the CSMP and is incorporated by reference, including the adopted mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP). The O&M Program component of the 2017 CSMP provides a continuation of the City's existing condition assessment program consistent with the City's adopted Sanitary Sewer Management Plan (SSMP). The O&M Program also includes the replacement/rehabilitation of the City's existing pumping stations and the repair, upgrade, and rehabilitation of existing access roads. The City maintains multiple easements to facilitate access to the conveyance and pumping facilities within and outside its service area. These easements range from 10 to 20 feet in width to accommodate maintenance equipment. The SPEIR for the 2017 CSMP analyzed the potential environmental impacts associated with the proposed repair, upgrade, and/or rehabilitation of two existing unpaved access roads as part of the O&M Program. One of the two access roads for future maintenance described in the SPEIR is located along the existing Vista-Carlsbad (VC) Interceptor Reach 1 (VC1) and traverses the cities of Oceanside and Carlsbad (Figure 3-20 of the SPEIR). The VC1 pipeline is 36-inches in diameter and conveys approximately eight million gallons per day (MGD) on average. The VC1 pipeline is co-owned by the Cities of Vista and Carlsbad and is the major pipeline that conveys each cities' untreated, wastewater to the Encina Wastewater Authority for treatment and disposal. When VC1 was constructed in 1985, an earthen access road was also constructed to provide maintenance access to sewer manholes, some requiring culverts to convey run -off across the roads. This earthen access road has degraded over time primarily due to erosion from stormwater discharged south from State Route (SR) 78 and contributing drainages to the north. Due to the placement of the existing access road , sedimentation and debris have clogged the culverts, diverting drainages along the access road and resulting in additional erosion. Direct access by way of an improved road is also not provided to a number of manholes within the project area. Project Goals and Objectives The City's goal for implementing the proposed project is to provide all weather access to the manholes for VC1 , including during the 50-year storm event. The project would improve sewer maintenance access by providing the City's O&M staff with reliable access to the VC1 pipeline. Improved and reliable access during large rainfall events is required for the City to clean and maintain the pipeline consistent with its adopted SSMP. Consistent with the City's SSMP, the project would minimize the potential for sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs) into local surface waters, including Buena Vista Creek, in accordance with the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Order June2019 I 1 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist No. 2006-003-DWQ Statewide General Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) for Sanitary Sewer Systems. Proposed Project The City is proposing to upgrade, realign, and rehabilitate the VC1 access road (proposed project). This section presents a detailed description of the project location and associated components. Once constructed, the proposed project would be subject to long-term maintenance activities to maintain the roadway crown and drainage structures. Project Location The proposed project is located on the northwestern edge of the City of Carlsbad in San Diego County, California (Figure 1 ). As shown on Figure 2, the proposed project is generally located south of SR 78, north of Buena Vista Creek, and between the eastern terminus of Haymar Drive (west of College Boulevard) and the western terminus of Haymar Drive (east of El Camino Real). The City of Oceanside is located immediately north with its southern limits roughly corresponding to the southern edge of SR 78. As shown on Figure 2, a majority of the project site is located within the Buena Vista Creek Ecological Reserve, which is a 148-acre property owned by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). The project site is located on Assessor Parcel No. 167- 040-31-00, 167-040-38-00, and 167-040-39-00. Description of the Proposed Project The proposed project involves the upgrading, realigning , and rehabilitation of the existing VC1 access road to provide more reliable access to the VC1 pipeline and manholes for maintenance, including during up to the 50-year rainfall event1. The proposed alignment of the access road is approximately 4,000 feet in length and is shown on Figure 3 and Figure 4. As shown, the proposed project would maintain Vista and Carlsbad's existing roadway alignment along its western end with slight variations. At the eastern end, the roadway alignment would be realigned to the north and disconnected from Oceanside's sewer access easement, which was acquired in conjunction with a previous spill event. As shown on Figure 3, the proposed alignment roughly corresponds with the alignment contemplated in the SPEIR; albeit slight variations. The proposed access road would be constructed with an aggregate or crushed rock to provide a permeable roadway surface, approximately 12 feet in width. The roadway surface would be approximately six inches thick and selected materials will be determined during the final design of the roadway in coordination with CDFW. The City expects that a larger crushed rock will be used for the roadway subgrade to improve the roadway's stability. As proposed, the alignment for the proposed roadway would adhere to the following standards: • a maximum longitudinal slope of 15-percent • a minimum vertical curve length of 100 feet • a maximum horizontal curve radius of 30 feet • a maximum access road cross fall of 4-percent 1 Up stream drainage facilities in SR 78 are approximately sized for the 50-year rainfall event. Extreme western portions of the access road are subject to inundation during the 100-year flood event for Buena Vista Creek. 2 I June 2019 A minimum 10-foot radius of crushed rock base would be provided around each manhole (or MH). This 10-foot radius is measured from the center of manhole cover to the edge of the crushed rock base. Where the manhole is located within the proposed road, the proposed concrete collar and cover would be flush with the crushed rock base surface for drivability. When a manhole is adjacent to the sewer access road or within an area at risk of flooding due to its proximity to an existing creek, a raised concrete manhole collar is proposed per City Standard Drawing SWR-30A at MH27. June 2019 I 3 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist Figure 1. Regional Map CAMP PENDLETON D Proiect Area Miles 2 4 I June 2019 SAN DIEGO COUNTY = LEGEND !I II Proiect Area () D Parcel Boundary r.~ Buena Vista Creek Ecological Reserve O Feet 1,000 June 2019 I 5 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist Figure 3. Proposed Access Road (West) .I LEGEND IOI Proiect Area ----· 2017 O & M Access Road Alignment (from SPEIR) D Proposed Access Road ~-.-::: Buena Vista Creek Ecological Reserve -Vista-Carlsbad Sewer Existing Sewer Manhole --Oceanside Sewer 6 I June 2019 () 0 Feet 200 Figure 4. Proposed Access Road (East) LEGEND jLJI ProJect Area · • • • · 2017 0 & M Access Road Alignment (from SPEIR) D Proposed Access Road ~-.-_-_-: Buena Vista Creek Ecological Reserve -Vista-Carlsbad Sewer Existing Sewer Manhole --Oceanside Sewer () 0 Feet 200 June 2019 I 7 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist The proposed project would include improvements at'five drainage crossings to minimize degradation of the access road surface and roadway crown (Figure 3 and Figure 4). No crossing of Buena Vista Creek is proposed. At each drainage crossing, the City is considering a combination of low-flow (e.g. Arizona crossings) or culvert crossings to convey stormwater across the access road and away from the roadway crown. The final selection will be based on the quantity of flow during the 50-year event in coordination with CDFW and the City of Carlsbad. Drainage ditches along the roadway may also be required to safely convey flows downstream to Buena Vista Creek. Table 5 provides the drainage flows for the upstream culverts in SR 78 based on the rational method in accordance with the 2003 San Diego County Hydrology Manual (SDCHM) procedures and guidelines. Figure 5 illustrates the corresponding contributing drainage areas and the locations of the Caltrans stationing. Table 1. Contributing Drainage Flows -•. . . Culvert Size/Type --·. ·•·· ··•·· • • I •• II II . . A 162+00 40" CSP 51 .6 3.48 3.89 113 127 B 156+70 24" CSP 3.4 4.89 5.48 11 12 C 151+70 48" RCP 147.1 2.94 3.29 260 291 D 148+70 42" RCP 49.9 5.40 6.05 170 190 E 143+00 24" CMP 15.5 5.18 5.80 51 57 Notes: • See Figure 3 and Figure 4 for drainage crossing locations. Figure 5 depicts the contributing drainage areas. Caltrans=California Department of Transportation; cfs=cubic foot per second; CMP=corrugated metal pipe; CSP=corrugated steel pipe; ID=identification; RCP=reinforced concrete pipe Construction Details Project construction would follow the construction methods as described in Chapter 3 of the SPEIR and outlined for access improvements and structural facilities. These activities would include vegetation removal or trimming, grading, limited excavation, soil stockpiling, and roadway compaction. Project-related trip generation during construction would be consistent with that described in the SPEIR with less than 30 daily construction trips. Temporary construction easements of up to 50 feet in width may be required during construction, which would extend beyond the limits of the access road or drainage improvements to provide adequate space for construction and associated grading activities. In sensitive environmental areas, this easement would be restricted to 20 to 30 feet, where feasible. Parcels with proposed permanent and temporary construction easements are identified in Table 2. 8 I June 2019 Table 2. Proposed Temporary Construction Easements [SUBJECT TO REVISION] 167 -040-31-00 167-040-38-00 167-040-39-00 I ' ' Easement Purpose Construction Construction Construction Source: David Evans and Associates, Inc. 201 8 Notes: Property Owner Shelly Hayes Caron CDFW CDFW APN=assessor parcel number; CDFW=California Department of Fish and Wildlife Approximate Easement Requirements (square feet) 9,010 59,074 5,587 Project construction is expected to last up to three months and would be scheduled to avoid coinciding with the bird breeding season, which extends from February 15 through August 15. Based on the anticipated construction disturbance area, the project will require the preparation and implementation of a stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) per the requirements of Construction General Permit (CGP). The City will also require the contractor to prepare a waste management plan to manage construction related debris, including hazardous materials, to facilitate proper interim storage and offsite transport and disposal consistent with the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) adopted for the CSMP (see Appendix A). The City would also comply with the City of Carlsbad's Habitat Management Plan (HMP). Permanent linear easements following the alignment of the proposed access road will also be required to facilitate long-term maintenance of the project. Parcels with proposed permanent easements along with approximate easement requirements are identified in Table 3. Table 3. Proposed Permanent Easements [SUBJECT TO REVISION] 167 -040-31-00 167-040-38-00 167-040-38-00 167-040-39-00 Easement Purpose Access road Sewer line Access road Source: David Evans and Associates, Inc. 2018 Notes: Property Owner Shelly Hayes Caron CDFW CDFW CDFW APN=assessor parcel number; CDFW=California Department of Fish and Wildlife Approximate Easement Requirements (square feet) 1,251 75,416 35,100 3,555 June 2019 I 9 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist Figure 5. Contributing Drainages LEGEND D ProiectArea --2017 0 & M Access Road Alignment D Proposed Access Road -Caltrans Culverts --Vista-Carlsbad Sewer D Drainage Area Boundaries --Oceanside Sewer 10 I June 2019 MAP INDEX □~ () I Feet soo Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist Discretionary Actions and Approvals ~ CJn Of VISTA The following is a list of potential discretionary actions and agency approvals that may be required to implement the proposed project: • U.S Army Corps of Engineers (USAGE), Los Angeles District o Section 404 Individual Permit or Nationwide Permit • San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), Region 9 o Clean Water Act, Section 401 , Water Quality Certification o National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES), General Construction Permit • California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), Region 5, South Coast o Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement o Right of Entry Permit for Construction o Permanent Easement(s) • City of Carlsbad o Encroachment Permit o Minor Grading Permit o Habitat Modification Permit June 2019 I 11 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist Section 2. Project-Level Environmental Checklist This Environmental Checklist (Checklist) provides a mechanism for reviewing and assessing individual sanitary sewer improvement projects identified in the City's 2017 CSMP. The City prepared a Supplemental Program Environmental Impact Report (SPEIR) that considered the potential environmental impacts of these improvements, as contemplated in the CSMP, and proposed mitigation measures as contained in the MMRP. The Checklist follows the procedures provided in Section 15168(c) of the CEQA Gu idelines. The MMRP is incorporated by reference and should be reviewed in conjunction with the completion of this Checklist. Comprehensive Sewer Master Plan Project Information 1. Project title: Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor Reach 1 (VC1) Access Road 2. Contact person and phone number: Elmer Alex, (760) 643-92084 3. Project location: The proposed project is located in the City of Carlsbad in San Diego County, California. The proposed project is generally located south of State Route 78, north of Buena Vista Creek, and between the eastern terminus of Haymar Drive (west of College Boulevard) and the western terminus of Haymar Drive (east of El Camino Real). A majority of the project site is located within the Buena Vista Creek Ecological Reserve, which is a 148- acre property owned and managed by CDFW. 4. 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 proposed project involves the realignment and improvement of the Cities of Vista and Carlsbad's existing access road for the Vista-Carlsbad (VC) Interceptor (or Sewer Trunk), Reach 1 (VC1) to provide more reliable access to facilitate long-term maintenance, including during up to the 50-year rainfall event. The proposed project was contemplated in the City's CSMP and evaluated in the SPEIR Refer to Section 1 of this document for a complete description of the proposed project. 5. Surrounding land uses and setting: The project site is designated as Open Space and Community Facilities by the Carlsbad General Plan. A majority of the project site is located within the Buena Vista Creek Ecological Reserve, which is managed by CDFW. SR 78 borders the north of the project area with existing development located to the east and west. 6. Other public agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.): o U.S Army Corps of Engineers • Section 404 Nationwide Permit o San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board • Clean Water Act, Section 401 , Water Quality Certification ■ NPDES, General Construction Permit o California Department of Fish and Wildlife • Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement 12 I June 2019 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist ■ Right of Entry Permit for Construction ■ Permanent Easement(s) o City of Carlsbad ■ Encroachment Permit ■ Minor Grading Permit ■ Habitat Modification Permit ~ CIT\ or VISTA Supplemental Program Environmental Impact Report Tiering Evaluation 1. Is project identified in one of the four CSMP project categories identified in the SPEIR? D Category 1 -Conveyance (Capacity/Condition) Project (Hardscape Environs) -See Attachment A -SPEIR Tables 3-3 and 3-4 (Hardscape), Appendix B (Hardscape) and Figures 3-7 through 3-17) D Category 2 -Conveyance (Capacity/Condition) Project (Cross County Environs) -See Attachment B -SPEIR, Tables 3-3 and 3-4 (Cross Country), Appendix B (Cross Country) and Figures 3-7 through 3-17) D Category 3 -O&M Program -Attachment C -SPEIR Table 3-5 and Figure 3-18 ~ Category 4 -O&M Access (BC and V/C Interceptor Access) -See Attachment D - SPEIR Figures 3-19 and 3-20 Note: If the project is not identified as a Category 1, 2, 3, or 4 project, this checklist does not apply. For non-applicable projects, determine if project qualifies for a Class 1, 2, or 3 Categorical Exemption (CE) or addendum to the SPEIR. A new CEQA document may be required if none of these conditions are met 2. Is the project similar in scope to that described in the SPEIR (CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a))? ~ Yes -Proceed to #3 D No -Assess project change and determine if changes result in new or more significant impacts than described in the SPEIR: D Changes are within the scope of the SPEIR? D Yes -Proceed to #3 D No -Checklist not applicable 3. Complete Project Review Checklist: Note: This checklist is intended to assist the City of Vista (and Buena Sanitation District [District]) in assessing projects included under the 2017 CSMP according to the procedures provided in Section 15168(c) of the CEQA guidelines (amended December 28, 2018). June 2019 I 13 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist Environmental Factors Potentially Affected The project could potentially result in one or more of the following environmental effects. D Aesthetics D Agriculture and Forestry D Air Quality [gJ Biological Resources C8'.I Cultural Resources D Geology/Soils D Greenhouse Gas Emissions D Land Use/Planning D Population/Housing D Transportation/Traffic C8'.I Tribal Cultural Resources Determination D Hazards & Hazardous Materials D Mineral Resources D Public Services D Utilities/Service Systems D Wildfires On the basis of this initial evaluation: C8'.I Hydrology/Water Quality D Noise D Recreation D Energy D Mandatory Findings of Significance [gJ I find that the proposed project WOULD NOT have any significant effects on the environment that either have not already been analyzed in the prior SPEIR or that are more significant than previously analyzed. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15168(c), CEQA does not apply to such effects. A Notice of Determination (Section 15094) will be filed. D I find that the proposed project will have effects that either have not been analyzed in the prior SPEIR, or are more significant than described in the prior SPEIR. With respect to those effects that are subject to CEQA, I find that such effects WOULD NOT be significant and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. D I find that the proposed project will have effects that either have not been analyzed in a prior EIR, or are more significant than described in the prior SPEIR. I find that although those effects could be significant, 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. D I find that the proposed project would have effects that either have not been analyzed in a prior SPEIR, or are more significant than described in the prior SPEIR. I find that those effects WOULD be significant, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required to analyze those effects that are subject to CEQA. Signature Date 14 I June 2019 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist Evaluation of Environmental Impacts ~ unorv1sTA 1. A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to projects like the one involved (e.g., the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). 2. All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on- site, cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. 3. For the purposes of this checklist, "prior SPEIR" means the environmental impact report certified for the 2017 CSMP. 4. Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur as a result of an improvement contemplated under the CSMP, then the checklist answers must indicate whether that impact has already been analyzed in the prior SPEIR. If the effect of the project is not more significant than what has already been analyzed, that effect of the project is not subject to CEQA. The brief explanation accompanying this determination should include page and section references to the portions of the prior SPEIR containing the analysis of that effect. The brief explanation shall also indicate whether the prior SPEIR included any mitigation measures to substantially lessen that effect and whether those measures have been incorporated into the project. 5. If all effects of an improvement contemplated under CSMP were analyzed in the prior SPEIR, CEQA does not apply to the project, and the lead agency shall file a Notice of Determination. 6. Effects of an improvement contemplated under CSMP that either has not been analyzed in a prior EIR are subject to CEQA. With respect to those effects of individual improvements contemplated under CSMP that are subject to CEQA, the checklist shall indicate whether those effects are significant, less than significant with mitigation, or less than significant. If there are one or more "Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required. The EIR should be limited to analysis of those effects determined to be significant. (Section 15128). 7. "Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures will reduce an effect of a project that is subject to CEQA from "Significant Impact" to a "Less Than Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how those measures reduce the effect to a less than significant level. If the effects of a project that are subject to CEQA are less than significant with mitigation incorporated, the lead agency may prepare a Mitigated Negative Declaration or Addendum to the EIR. If all of the effects of the project that are subject to CEQA are less than significant, the lead agency may prepare a Negative Declaration or Addendum to the EIR June 2019 I 15 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist 8. The explanation of each issue should identify: a. the significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and b. the mitigation measure identified, if any, to reduce the impact to less than significance. 16 I June 2019 I. Aesthetics Environmental Issue Area Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Would the project: Impact Analyzed in the PEIR or SPEIR IZl IZl IZl I Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist Less Than New Significant Significant Impact due to with Unusual No Impact Mitigation • Circumstances or Less SPEIR or Substantial than Mitigation New Significant Measure(s) Information Impact Applicable D D D D D 181 D -~ D IZl D I a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ~ crrv or VISTA Less Than Significant with Mitigation • New Mitigation Measure(s) Required D D D D Less than Significant Impact. The potential impacts on scenic vistas were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 5, Effects Determined Not to be Significant, page 5-1 ). The SPEIR determined that the CSMP, including the project improvements, would result in a less than significant impact on scenic vistas. The proposed project involves the realignment and improvement of the existing VC1 access road to provide more reliable access to the VC1 pipeline and manholes for maintenance. The proposed above-ground work would include minor cut and fil l to achieve the desired road profile. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. No new significant impacts were identified as part of the project-level evaluation. For these reasons, the conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? No Impact. The potential impacts on scenic resources within a state scenic highway were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 5, Effects Determined Not to be Significant, page 5-1). There are no designated state scenic highways located in the vicinity of the project site. The SPEIR June 2019 I 17 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist determined that the CSMP and project would have no impact on scenic resources within a state scenic highway. The physical conditions in the project area as they relate to designated scenic highways have not changed since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? Less than Significant Impact. The potential impacts on existing visual character or quality were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 5, Effects Determined Not to be Significant, page 5-1). The SPEIR determined that the VC1 access road improvement would result in a less than significant impact associated with the degradation of the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. Construction of the project would generally be restricted from viewers traveling along SR 78 due to the abrupt changes in grade between SR 78 and existing access road. The physical conditions in the project area have not substantially changed since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? No Impact. The potential impacts associated with the creation of a new source of light or glare were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 5, Effects Determined Not to be Significant, pages 5-1 through 5-2). The SPEIR determined that the CSMP, including the project, would not result in a significant impact associated with light and glare. No new permanent lighting fixtures would be installed as part of the project. Nighttime construction activities are not proposed. Based on these circumstances, the operational characteristics of the proposed access road have not changed since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the ·SPEIR and there would be no new impacts. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. 18 I June 2019 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist II. Agricultural Resources Environmental Issue Area Impact Analyzed in the PEIR or SPEIR New Significant Impact due to Unusual Circumstances or Substantial New Information No Impact or Less than Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation -SPEIR Mitigation Measure(s) Applicable ~ U n Ol"VlSlA Less Than Significant with Mitigation -New Mitigation Measure(s) Required In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information complied by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state's inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? ~ □ 181 □ □ --181 □ I □ □ 181 □ □ □ □ ----- 181 □ □ June 2019 I 19 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist II. Agricultural Resources Environmental Issue Area e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? Impact Analyzed in the PEIR or SPEIR D New Significant Impact due to Unusual Circumstances or Substantial New Information D Less Than Less Than Significant Significant with with Mitigation Mitigation No Impact or -SPEIR -New Less than Mitigation Mitigation Significant Measure(s) Measure(s) Impact Applicable Required ►:::◄ D D In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. In determining whether impacts to forest resources, including timberland, are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to information compiled by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection regarding the state 's inventory of forest land, including the Forest and Range Assessment Project and the Forest Legacy Assessment project; and forest carbon measurement methodology provided in Forest Protocols adopted by the California Air Resources Board. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland}, as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use? No Impact. According to the State of California Department of Conservation (DOC), Division of Land Resource Protection's Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program, the project site is designated as "Farmland of Local Importance" (California DOC 2018). According to the Department of Conservation, Farmland of Local Importance is either currently producing, or has the capability of production, but does not meet the criteria of Prime Farmland, Farmland of Statewide Importance, or Unique Farmland (California DOC 2017). Based on local site observations, no active, agricultural cultivation is occurring on the project site. In addition, the Farmland of Local Importance designation is not covered under the definition of "agricultural land" per CEQA Statute Section 21060.1 (a). Based on this context, the conversion of Farmland of Local Importance is not considered significant under CEQA. No impact is identified for this issue area. b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? No Impact. According to the City of Carlsbad's Zoning Map, the project site is not zoned for agricultural use (City of Carlsbad 2017). According to the State of California DOC, Division of 20 I June 2019 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist ~ CITl'.OfVIS1A Land Resource Protection, the project site is not located on Williamson Act contracted land (California DOC 2013). Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract, and no impact would occur. c) Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(9)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))? No Impact. The project site is not zoned for forest land as defined in PRC Section 12220(g), timberland (as defined by PRC Section 4526), or timberland production (as defined by CGC Section 51104(g). There are no existing forest lands, timberlands, or timberland production zones either within the project site or in the immediate vicinity. Therefore, no impact would occur. d) Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? No Impact. There are no existing forest lands either within the project site or in the immediate vicinity. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use and no impact would occur. e) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use? No Impact. The project site is not adjacent to any existing and active agricultural lands. As such, the proposed project would not result in other changes in the existing environment that could result in the conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use. Therefore, no impact would occur. June 2019 I 21 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist Ill. Air Quality Environmental Issue Area Impact Analyzed in the PEIR or SPEIR New Significant Impact due to Unusual Circumstances or Substantial New Information No Impact or Less than Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation - SPEIR Mitigation Measure(s) Applicable Less Than Significant with Mitigation -New Mitigation Measure(s) Required Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or □ □ □ obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality □ □ □ standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a □ □ □ cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions, which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive □ □ □ receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a □ □ □ substantial number of people? 22 I June 2019 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? Less than Significant Impact. The potential impacts associated with conflicts with an applicable air quality plan were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4.1, Air Quality, page 4.1-9). The SPEIR determined that the VC1 access road improvement would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the Regional Air Quality Strategy or State Implementation Plan (SIP) and a less than significant impact would occur. The existing regulatory framework governing air quality planning in the project area has not changed since the certification of the SPEIR. Furthermore, the construction and operational characteristics as described for the proposed access road have not changed since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR and there would be no new significant impacts. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Less than Significant Impact. The potential impacts associated with violation of air quality standards were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4.1, Air Quality, pages 4.1-9 through 4.1-12). The SPEIR determined that the VC1 access road improvement along with other improvements covered under the CSMP would result in a less than significant impact associated with violation of air quality standards. The SPEIR estimated the construction emissions for the overall CSMP using worst-case assumptions, which considered simultaneous construction of multiple projects covered under the CSMP. The construction parameters as described for the project would be contained within the worst-case scenario as described in Section 3.5.4, Construction Methods, of the SPEIR. Based on the fact that programmatic emissions for the CSMP were determined less than significant, it is reasonable conclude that the proposed project, as a sub-component of the CSMP, would not exceed SDPACD's significance thresholds and therefore less than significant. For this reason, no substantial new information has been presented that shows more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR and there would be no new significant impacts. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. The SPEIR concluded that access road improvements would result in no net increase in operational emissions once constructed. The operational characteristics of the proposed access road have not changed since the certification of the SPEIR. The operational emissions associated with the access road were captured in the SPEIR and were determined to be a less than significant impact. Therefore, no substantial new information has been presented that shows more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR and there would be no new impacts. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. June 2019 I 23 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist c) Result in 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 (including releasing emissions, which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? Less than Significant Impact. The potential impacts associated with a cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria pollutants were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4.1, Air Quality, pages 4.1-14 through 4.1-15). The SPEIR determined that the VC1 access road improvement as a sub-component of the CSMP would result in a less than significant impact. The existing air quality conditions, including the local air basins attainment status, have not changed since the certification of the SPEIR. Furthermore, the construction and operational characteristics of the proposed access road have not changed since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR and there would be no new significant impacts. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? Less than Significant Impact. The potential impacts associated with exposure of sensitive receptors to pollutant concentrations were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4.1, Air Quality, page 4.1-13). The SPEIR determined that the VC1 access road improvement, as a sub- component of the CSMP, would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations and a less than significant impact would occur. The physical conditions, as they relate to the location of sensitive receptors and proximity from construction, have not changed since the certification of the SPEIR. The proposed alignment of the access road roughly corresponds with the alignment contemplated in the SPEIR; albeit slight variations. Furthermore, the construction and operational characteristics of the proposed access road have not changed since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR and there would be no new significant impacts. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? Less than Significant Impact. The potential impacts associated with odors were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4.1, Air Quality, pages 4.1-13 through 4.1-14). The SPEIR determined that the VC1 access road improvement would not create objectionable odors and a less than significant impact would occur. The construction and operational characteristics of the proposed access road have not changed since the certification of the SPEIR. The project would improve access to the City's existing sewer infrastructure, which would provide desirable benefits in terms of minimizing and avoiding SSOs and any related odor complaints. No substantial new information has been presented that shows more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR and there would be no new impacts. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. 24 I June 2019 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist IV. Biological Resources Environmental Issue Area Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? Impact Analyzed in the PEIR or SPEIR r8l New Significant Impact due to Unusual Circumstances or Substantial New Information □ □ No Impact or Less than Significant Impact □ ~ □ Less Than Significant with Mitigation • SPEIR Mitigation Measure(s) Applicable □ r8l ~ CIT\' 0 1 VISTA Less Than Significant with Mitigation • New Mitigation Measure(s) Required □ □ □ June 2019 I 25 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist IV. Biological Resources Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Would the project: J ~ D D D I -- D I ~ D D I a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Less than Significant with Mitigation. The project would result in the following impacts, either directly or through habitat modifications, on species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Direct Impacts (Special-status Plant Species). No federally and/or state-listed plant species have been observed in the project area; however, focused plant surveys will be completed at the end of June 2019. The need for project-specific mitigation measures pertaining to federally and/or state-listed species, if found, will be assessed after the focused surveys have concluded. 26 I June 2019 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist Based on the preliminary project design, neither of the two non-listed special-status plant species observed on the project site would be directly impacted by the project, the project would not have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on these non-listed special-status plant species (Appendix B). Direct Impacts (Special-status Wildlife Species). Two federally and/or state-listed wildlife species have been observed in the project area: coastal California gnatcatcher and least Bell's vireo. Based on the preliminary project design, direct impacts would occur to approximately 0.65 acre of suitable coastal sage scrub habitat for coastal California gnatcatcher, 0.20 acre of suitable willow riparian habitat for least Bell's vireo and southwestern willow flycatcher, and 0.03 acre of potentially suitable habitat for San Diego fairy shrimp (Appendix B). Removal of coastal sage scrub could result in direct impacts to coastal California gnatcatcher. If willow riparian habitat removal were to occur during the breeding season for least Bell's vireo or southwestern willow flycatcher (March 15 through September 15 and May 1 through September 15, respectively), there would be potential for direct take of these species. Grading and fill of Road Ruts A, B and C within the existing access road and Depressional Wetland adjacent to the roadway would result in direct impacts to San Diego fairy shrimp if present. Direct impacts to coastal California gnatcatcher, least Bell's vireo, southwestern willow flycatcher and San Diego fairy shrimp would be considered significant prior to implementation of mitigation. Compliance with the MHCP and Mitigation Measures 810-2, BIO-3, BIO-4, and BIO-5 will reduce impacts to less than significant. Also as identified in the SPEIR, direct impacts to nesting birds, including yellow breasted chat, northern harrier, white-tailed kite, long-eared owl or yellow warbler, would be considered significant prior to implementation of mitigation. Compliance with MMRP Mitigation Measure 810-1 will reduce impacts to less than significant. The project is not expected to directly impact arroyo chub habitat, which is limited to the Buena Vista Creek active channel, or roosting habitat for Townsend's big-eared bat, pocketed free- tailed bat or pallid bat roosting habitat (Appendix B). Therefore, no direct impacts are expected to these species. Direct impacts to California glossy snake, orange-throated whiptail, southern California legless lizard, coastal whiptail, red-diamond rattlesnake, coast patch-nosed snake, coast horned lizard, two-striped garter snake, south coast gartersnake, western red bat, Dulzura pocket mouse, northwestern San Diego pocket mouse, western yellow bat, San Diego black-tailed jackrabbit and San Diego desert woodrat could result from grading operations. None of these species is covered by the MHCP, however, based on the small quantities of suitable habitat being impacted (less than one acre distributed over almost a mile), only a very small number of individuals would be impacted, if any. Given the wide range of habitat these species utilize, their wide geographic range and the existing MCP framework, loss of a small number of individuals would not significantly alter these species' future survival. Both western spadefoot toad and southern western pond turtle, however, are dependent upon more limited aquatic habitat. Neither is covered by the MHCP. Direct impacts could occur result from grading and could be significant prior to implementation of mitigation. Mitigation measures recommended in addition to MMRP BIO-1 to reduce impacts to less than significant. Indirect Impacts (Special-Status Plant Species). Implementation of the project would result in indirect impacts on special-status plant species, which may include temporary, construction- related dust effects on flowering of these species. However, standard dust control best June 2019 I 27 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist management practices would minimize dust during construction and dust is not expected to substantially affect the small number of special-status plants observed at the project site. These impacts are consistent with impacts identified in the SPEIR and would not be considered significant. Indirect Impacts (Special-status Wildlife Species). As indicated in the SPEIR, implementation of the project could result in indirect impacts on special-status wildlife species through habitat loss and temporary, construction-related dust, noise and water quality effects (e.g., hazardous materials leaks, such as fuel, hydraulic fluid, and/or lubricants) from equipment working in or around occupied habitat. In particular, indirect impacts to coastal California gnatcatcher, least Bell's vireo, southwestern willow flycatcher and San Diego fairy shrimp, if present, would be considered significant. . These impacts are consistent with impacts identified in the SPEIR. Compliance with the MHCP and MMRP Mitigation Measures 810-2, 810-3, 810-4, and 810-5 will reduce impacts to less than significant. Indirect noise, dust and water quality impacts on other special-status species would be temporary and of relatively brief duration. Wildlife could temporarily move out of the area in response to these temporary construction disturbances. Also, as discussed above, the loss of less than one acre of habitat distributed over a length of almost one mile, is not anticipated to significantly alter the local population dynamics of these species, if present. Therefore, indirect impacts to other special-status species would be less than significant. Operations and Maintenance Impacts (Special-Status Plant Species). Once constructed, ongoing operations and maintenance activities associated with the project would be conducted within the confines of the access road. Therefore, impacts on special-status plant species are unlikely and this impact would be considered less than significant. Operations and Maintenance Impacts (Special-status Wildlife Species). Once constructed, ongoing operations and maintenance activities associated with the project would be conducted within the confines of the access road. Impacts on special-status wildlife species would be limited to indirect effects such as minor dust production and noise and would be considered less than significant. b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Less than Significant. Based on the preliminary project design, construction of the project would result in direct impacts on vegetation communities and other land cover types (Table 4). Impacts on riparian and other sensitive natural communities would be considered significant. Because a discretionary permit from the City of Carlsbad is required for project implementation, the project will need to comply with the Carlsbad HMP and impacts to vegetation communities and habitat for special-status species identified in the Carlsbad HMP will be mitigated per the ratios noted in Table 11 of the HMP (Appendix B). Compliance with the Carlsbad's HMP would avoid conflicts with species conservation goals and a less than significant impact would result. 28 I June 2019 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist ~ on:orVISTA Table 4. Vegetation Community Impacts Vegetation Community or Other Land Cover Type Coastal sage scrub 1 Non-native grassland2 Non-native herbaceous stand Non-native shrub land Freshwater marsh Willow riparian forest Non-native woodland2 Disturbed habitat Urban/Developed Total Notes: Alliance level Vegetation Community Type California sagebrush scrub California sagebrush-black sage scrub Coyote brush scrub California brittle bush scrub Menzies's golden bush scrub Annual brome grassland Red brome grassland Upland mustard stand Poison hemlock patch3 Bristly ox-tongue patch3 Butterfly bush patch Cattail marsh Mixed willow riparian Eucalyptus woodland Disturbed habitat Urban/Developed -. 0.02 0.05 0.52 0.06 0.01 0.62 0.36 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.004 0.00004 0.20 0.002 0.55 0.002 2.59 Riparian or Other Sensitive Natural Community? Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No No No No No Yes Yes No No No 1 All types of coastal sage scrub are considered sensitive because they provide potential breeding, foraging, or dispersal habitat for coastal California gnatcatcher. 2 Although non-native grassland and eucalyptus woodland are not considered sensitive natural communities, impacts to these communities require mitigation per the Carlsbad HMP. 3 Although these vegetation types are not typically considered a sensitive natural community for CEQA analysis, they are dominated by wetland plants and will be included in the jurisdictional impact assessment. Implementation of the project would result in indirect impacts on riparian habitats and other sensitive natural communities that are consistent with the impacts identified in the SPEIR. These impacts could be significant. Mitigation Measures HWQ-1 and HWQ-2 in the SPEIR are proposed to mitigate this impact. No other project-specific mitigation measures are recommended. Operations and maintenance activities associated with the project would be conducted within the confines of the access road and, therefore, would be consistent with the assumptions for these activities as identified and analyzed in the SPEIR. These activities would be conducted in accordance with issued permits. Therefore, impacts would be considered less than significant. c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? June 2019 I 29 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist Less than Significant with Mitigation. Implementation of the project would result in direct impacts on state or federally protected wetlands and other waters of the U.S. and state (Table 5). Per the MHCP and regulatory requirements, the project has been designed to minimize impacts to wetland and riparian habitat to the maximum extent feasible by utilizing the existing access road alignment where crossing aquatic features and implementing alternative technologies, such a cellular concrete block where feasible. Based on the 50 percent design, unavoidable impacts to these resources would include up to 0.12 acre of USACE waters of the U.S./RWQCB waters of the State, including 0.06 acre of wetland waters of the U.S./RWQCB Waters of the State, and up to 0.19 acre of CDFW riparian and unvegetated streambed, which are less than with the impacts identified in the SPEIR. These impacts would be considered significant and require mitigation. Compliance with the MHCP, Mitigation Measures BIO-3 and BIO-5 and SWRCB and USACE wetland mitigation policies, impacts to wetlands will be mitigated to ensure no let loss of aquatic value and function. Table 5. Jurisdictional Resource Impacts Jurisdictional Type Impact (acres) USACE Wetland Waters of the U.S. USACE Non-wetland Waters of the U.S. Total USACE 0.06 0.06 0.12 CDFW Unvegetated Streambed CDFW Riparian 0.05 0.14 0.19 Total CDFW Notes: CDFW=California Department of Fish and Wildlife; U.S.=United States; USACE=U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Implementation of the project would result in indirect impacts on state or federally protected wetlands that are consistent with the impacts identified in the SPEIR. These impacts could be significant. Mitigation Measures HWQ-1 and HWQ-2 in the SPEIR are proposed to mitigate this impact. No other project-specific mitigation measures are recommended. Operations and maintenance activities would be conducted in accordance with issued permits. Therefore, impacts on state or federally protected wetlands would be considered less than significant. d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? Less than Significant Impact. Construction of the access road may have a temporary impact to the movements of some terrestrial wildlife during construction, as noted in the SPEIR. However, construction of the project would not result in any permanent barriers to the movement of terrestrial species. Additionally, based on the history of disturbance in the project area and fragmentation by existing development impacts to migratory corridors are considered less than significant. 30 I June 2019 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist Implementation of the project would not result in new growth or secondary projects that could otherwise result in indirect impacts to wildlife corridors. For this reason, this impact would be less than significant. Operations and maintenance activities associated with the project would be conducted within the confines of the access road and, therefore, would be consistent with what was identified in the SPEIR. These activities would not interfere with the movement of any native wildlife species or wildlife corridors or nursery sites. In this context, the project would result in a less than significant impact to existing wildlife corridors. e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Less than Significant Impact. Access road improvements associated with the project would be required to maintain conformance with applicable Carlsbad HMP standards, including implementation of minimum buffer widths. Compliance with these requirements would be a condition of approval prior to the pruning or removal of protected trees within the City of Carlsbad. Based on these preexisting regulations, this impact is less than significant. Implementation of the project would not result in secondary activities, not otherwise considered in the SPEIR that could conflict with local plans and polices adopted for the purpose of protecting biological resources. For this reason, this impact would be less than significant. Ongoing operations and maintenance activities would be conducted within the confines of the access road. Compliance with the Carlsbad HMP requirements would be a condition of approval prior to the pruning or removal of protected trees, if required as part of ongoing operations and maintenance, within the City of Carlsbad. f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Less than Significant Impact. The project is a covered activity under the Carlsbad HMP. Therefore, all impacts to biological resources will be mitigated in compliance with the requirements identified in the HMP, as noted in the SPEIR. Although the subarea plan of the MHCP for the project region has not been adopted, the project would be consistent with draft sub area plan of MHCP. Implementation of the project would not result in land use changes or secondary effects that could otherwise result in conflicts with an adopted HCP or NCCP. For this reason, this impact would be less than significant. Ongoing operations and maintenance activities are included as a covered activity under the Carlsbad HMP. Ongoing operations and maintenance activities would be conducted within the confines of the access road and consistent with the requirements of the HMP. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant. June 2019 I 31 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist V. Cultural Resources Environmental Issue Area Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Would the project: Impact Analyzed in the PEIR or SPEIR - - New Significant Impact due to Unusual Circumstances or Substantial New Information D D D No Impact or Less than Significant Impact D D D t ! Less Than Significant with Mitigation -SPEIR Mitigation Measure(s) Applicable - Less Than Significant with Mitigation -New Mitigation Measure(s) Required □ D D D a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? Less than Significant with Mitigation. As provided in Section 4.3 of the SPEIR, project construction activities could include the use of equipment that could generate high levels of vibration. The highest vibration levels for construction identified in the SPEIR was that associated with the operation of a vibratory rol ler (0.210 peak particle velocity [PPV) at 25 feet). This assumption would remain accurate for the project in that no blasting is proposed to facilitate realignment of the roadway as proposed. Based on criteria presented in the Federal Transit Administration's (FTA) Noise and Vibration Manual (2006), "fragile buildings" are subject to damage when vibration exceeds 0.20 PPV. As provided in the SPEIR, historic structures are often considered in this category due to their age of construction and the building codes enacted at the time of construction. As a resu lt, construction activities within 25 feet of fragile structures could result in damaging vibration levels for historic structures, where present and eligible for the NRHP or CRHR. As provided in the SPEIR, the CRHR eligible Rancho Buena Vista adobe ranch house is located in close proximity to the project with actual work proposed at approximately 100 feet of the onsite 32 I June 2019 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist ~----Un orVIS1A structure. However, it is possible that one or more contributing elements could be located in closer proximity and therefore be subject to potentially significant vibration-related impacts. Mitigation Measure CUL T-1 is proposed to minimize construction-related vibration impacts to historic structures to a level of less than significant. b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? Less than Significant with Mitigation. As described in Section 4.3 of the SPEIR, the City applied probable work limits for construction for the Category 4 improvements, including the project. This included approximating the area of direct impact for construction, adjacent staging areas, and/or other temporary work areas and averages 50 feet in width. These areas are now defined in Figure 4 and Figure 5 for VC1 at the project level. Based on the project APE, four previously recorded sites were identified within the area of direct impact (Appendix C). CA-SDl-5652 is a multi-component site consisting of the Marron- Hayes Adobes Historic District, historic and prehistoric artifact scatter, and prehistoric shell midden deposit. A subsurface testing program implemented by Gallegos and Associates in 1998 confirmed the presence of buried shell midden deposit within the study area. The Marron- Hayes Adobes Historic District was nominated by ASM Affiliates to the NRHP in 2015. The Marron-Hayes Adobe is a contributing historic resource to the historic district and is itself eligible for the CRHR and NRHP under Criteria Band C. The structure is within 500 feet of the APE. Additionally, the prehistoric component of the site should be treated as eligible for the CRHR and the NRHP under Criterion D (Appendix C). Construction of the access road will have a direct adverse effect on the site. Any ground disturbing activity within the vicinity of the site may encounter additional buried archaeological deposits. Prior to any ground disturbing activities a protection plan should be implemented to mitigate adverse effects on buried cultural resources. HDR also recommends that Mitigation Measure CULT-3, Archaeological Monitoring, be implemented for all activities within the historic district. In addition, compliance with Carlsbad's Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Resources Procedures (2017) would also be required. CA-SDl-9472, CA-SDl-9473, and CA-SDl-9474 contain prehistoric surface scatters consisting of lithic artifacts and shell debris (Appendix C). CA-SDl-9474 additionally contains a historic artifact scatter and structural debris. The significance of these sites has not been fully evaluated. Subsurface testing would be necessary to determine the significance and eligibility of the sites under Criterion D. Unless demonstrated to be otherwise, these sites should be treated as potentially eligible. HOR therefore recommends subsurface testing and evaluation of the portions of the site directly impacted by construction of the access road. HDR also recommends that Mitigation Measure CUL T-3, Archaeological Monitoring, be implemented for all ground disturbing activities within the vicinity of these sites. To remain consistent with the prior SPEIR analysis and based on the results of the archaeological survey, the project has potential to cause significant impacts to cultural resources eligible for listing on the CRHR and NRHP. Excavation within the archaeological resources may cause the destruction, relocation, or alteration of buried archaeological deposits that may be likely to yield information important to prehistory or history. Thus, construction related to improvements to the VC1 access road has the potential to cause substantial adverse change in the significance of archaeological resources CA-SDl-5652, CA- June 2019 I 33 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist SDl-9472, CA-SDl-9473, and CA-SDl-9474. This is considered a potentially significant impact and Mitigation Measure CUL T-3 is required. c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Less than Significant with Mitigation. According to Section 4.3 of the SPEIR, substantial grading at depths greater than 10 feet in areas characterized with a moderate to high sensitivity for paleontological resources could result in a significant impact on paleontological resources. The project would be constructed in an areas with moderate sensitivity for paleontological resources and therefore, has the potential to directly destroy paleontological resources during excavation activities. This potential impact could be significant. Mitigation Measure CUL T-4 is proposed to reduce these potential impacts to paleontological resources to a less than significant level. d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Less than Significant with Mitigation. As provided in Section 4.3 of the SPEIR, construction of the improvements proposed under the 2017 CSMP, including the project, would occur at the vicinity of existing facility locations. However, during the construction of these facilities, the potential for the unexpected discovery of interred human remains, either prehistoric or historic, is a possibility. The potential then increases in areas that have supported prehistoric and historic settlements, including the project area. These direct impacts could be significant. Mitigation Measure CUL T-5 is proposed to reduce these potential impacts to the unexpected discovery of interred human remains. 34 I June 2019 VI. Geology and Soils Environmental Issue Area Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving: i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv. Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project and . potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist New Less Than Significant Significant Impact due to with Unusual Mitigation Impact Circumstances No Impact or · SPEIR Analyzed in or Substantial Less than Mitigation the PEIR or New Significant Measure(s) SPEIR Information Impact Applicable D ~ [gJ D 0 D I I I - ~ D [gJ D 0 D 0 D 0 D ~ □ 0 □ 0 □ □ 0 □ ~ cm orVtSTA Less Than Significant with Mitigation -New Mitigation Measure(s) Required D - D D D □ □ ...... D June 2019 I 35 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist VI. Geology and Soils Environmental Issue Area : -. . ... expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? Would the project: Impact Analyzed in the PEIR or SPEIR ■ New Significant Impact due to Unusual Circumstances or Substantial New Information ■ □ Less Than Less Than Significant Significant with with Mitigation Mitigation No Impact or • SPEIR -New Less than Mitigation Mitigation Significant Measure(s) Measure(s) Impact Applicable Required ►~ ■ ■ □ □ a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving: i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. No Impact. The potential impacts associated with exposure of people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects involving rupture of an earthquake fault were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 5.0, Effects Determined Not to be Significant, page 5-2). The SPEIR determined that surface rupture as a result of seismic activity is unlikely and no impact would occur. The physical geologic conditions, as they relate to existing seismicity and earthquake faulting, have not changed in the project area since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR and there would be no new impacts. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? Less than Significant Impact. The potential impacts associated with exposure of people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects involving strong seismic shaking were analyzed in the SPE IR (Section 5.0, Effects Determined Not to be Significant, page 5-2). The SPEIR determined that the VC1 access road improvement would not exacerbate existing hazards related to strong seismic shaking. The project would be required to comply with the 36 I June 2019 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist ~---Cr!YOI VISTA City's engineering standards and standard engineering practices, which will include the preparation of a project-specific geotechnical report. As a result, this impact would be less than significant. The physical geologic conditions in the project area, including related faulting, have not changed since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. No new significant impacts were identified as part of the project level analysis. For these reason, the conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? Less than Significant Impact. The potential impacts associated with exposure of people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects involving seismic-related ground failure were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 5.0, Effects Determined Not to be Significant, page 5-2). The SPEIR determined that the VC1 access road improvement would result in a less than significant impact and would not exacerbate existing hazards related to seismic-related ground failure. The project would be required to comply with the City's standards and standard engineering practices, including the preparation of a project-specific geotechnical investigation. The physical geologic conditions, as they relate to exposure of people to seismic-related ground failure, have not substantially changed in the project area since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. No new significant impacts were identified as part of the project level analysis. For these reasons, the conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. iv. Landslides? Less than Significant Impact. The potential impacts associated with exposure of people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects involving landslides were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 5.0, Effects Determined Not to be Significant, page 5-2). The SPEIR determined that the CSMP would result in a less than significant impact associated with landslides. The project would be required to comply with the City's engineering standards along with Carlsbad's grading requirements, which would minimize any hazards related to cut and fill slopes and related landslide hazards. These requirements combined with the completion of a project specific geotechnical investigation and incorporation of any project- specific recommendations would minimize any impacts to less than significant. The physical geologic and soil conditions in the project area have not substantially changed since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows more significant impacts would occur than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. No new significant impacts were identified as part of the project level analysis. For these reasons, the conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Less than Significant Impact. The potential impacts associated with soil erosion were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 5.0, Effects Determined Not to be Significant, page 5-2). The June 2019 I 37 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist SPEIR determined that the VC1 access road improvement would result in a less than significant impact associated with soil erosion. Project construction activities would be regulated under the NPDES General Permit for Discharges of Storm Water Runoff Associated with Construction Activity (General Construction Permit, NPDES Order No. 2012-0006-DWQ). In addition, the City would comply with applicable grading ordinance(s) and/or erosion control requirements of the local jurisdiction. Compliance with existing regulations would minimize the potential for erosion during construction such that the impact is considered less than significant. The physical soil conditions in the project area have not substantially changed in the project area since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. No new significant impacts were identified as part of this analysis. For these reason, the conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project and potentially result in on-or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? Less than Significant Impact. The potential impacts associated with unstable geologic units or soils were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 5.0, Effects Determined Not to be Significant, page 5-2). The SPEIR determined that the VC1 access road improvement would result in a less than significant impact associated with unstable geologic units or soils. The project would be required to comply with City standards and standard engineering practices, which will include the preparation of a project-specific geotechnical investigation. Compliance with existing state and local regulations combined with the incorporation of any recommendations from the geotechnical investigation would minimize potential impact to less than significant. The physical geologic and soil conditions in the project area have not substantially changed since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. No new significant impacts were identified as part of the project level analysis. For these reasons, the conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? Less than Significant Impact. The potential impacts associated with expansive soils were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 5.0, Effects Determined Not to be Significant, page 5-2). The SPEIR determined that the VC1 access road improvement would result in a less than significant impact associated with expansive soils. The project would be required to comply with the City's standards and standard engineering practices, which would include a project- specific geotechnical investigation. In addition to complying with existing state and local regulations, the City would incorporate any project-specific recommendations from the geotechnical investigation. The physical soil conditions in the project area have not substantially changed since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. 38 I June 2019 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist ~ on or v1sTA No new significant impacts were identified as part of the project level analysis. As a result, the conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? No Impact. The potential impacts associated with septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 5.0, Effects Determined Not to be Significant, page 5-2). Similar to the CSMP, alternative wastewater disposal systems and septic tanks are not a component of the project and, therefore, no impact would result. June 2019 I 39 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist VII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Environmental Issue Area Would the project: a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have an adverse effect on the environment? b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Would the project: Impact Analyzed in the PEIR or SPEIR New Significant Impact due to Unusual Circumstances or Substantial New Information D D Less Than Less Than Significant Significant with with No Impact Mitigation Mitigation or Less · SPEIR -New than Mitigation Mitigation Significant Measure(s) Measure(s) Impact Applicable Required D D D D a) Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have an adverse effect on the environment? Less than Significant Impact. The potential impacts associated with the generation of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions were analyzed in the SPEIR for the City's CSMP (Section 4.4, GHG and Energy, pages 4.4-11 through 4.4-12). The SPEIR determined that the VC1 access road improvement, a sub-component of the CSMP, would result in a less than significant impact associated with the generation of GHG emissions. The SPEIR estimated the approved project's combined GHG emissions from construction and operations using worst-case assumptions (consistent with the assumptions described in Section 4.1, Air Quality, of the SPEIR). Based on the worst-case maximum annual GHG emissions, the CSMP would not exceed the "Bright Line" threshold of 1,185 MTC02e. The GHG emissions associated with the construction and operation of the project were captured in the SPEIR for the overall CSMP and the impact was determined to be less than significant. Therefore, no substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. No new, significant impacts were identified as part of the project level analysis. As a result, the conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. b) Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Less than Significant Impact. The SPEIR included consideration of the CSMP and its potential to conflict with applicable GHG reduction plans, policies, and regulations (Section 4.4, GHG and Energy, pages 4.4-12 through 4.4-13). The SPEIR determined that the CSMP, including the VC1 access road improvement, would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation designed to reduce the emissions of GHGs. 40 I June 2019 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist Existing conditions, as they relate to plans and policies adopted for the purposes of reducing GHG emissions, have not substantially changed in the project area since the certification of the SPEIR. Furthermore, the proposed project would be constructed and operated in a manner consistent with the assumptions contained in the SPEIR for the overall CSMP. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. No new significant impacts were identified as part of the project level analysis. For these reasons, the conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. June 2019 I 41 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist VIII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials New Significant Impact due to Impact Unusual Analyzed Circumstances in the or Substantial PEIR or New Environmental Issue Area SPEIR Information Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard D to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard D to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions D or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 0.25 mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which D is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within D an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? 42 I June 2019 Less Than Less Than Significant Significant with with No Impact Mitigation Mitigation or Less -SPEIR -New than Mitigation Mitigation Significant Measure(s) Measure(s) Impact Applicable Required D D D D D D D D D D Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist ~ VIII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials Environmental Issue Area f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Impact Analyzed in the PEIR or SPEIR 181 -h) Expose people or 181 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? Would the project: New Significant Impact due to Unusual Circumstances or Substantial New Information D D D Less Than Less Than Significant Significant with with No Impact Mitigation Mitigation or Less -SPEIR -New than Mitigation Mitigation Significant Measure(s) Measure(s) Impact Applicable Required 181 D D D D ~ -----D 181 D a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Less than Significant Impact. The potential impacts associated with the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4.5, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, page 4.5-8). The SPEIR determined that the CSMP, including the project as a sub-component, would result in a less than significant impact associated with the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. The project would be subject to federal, state, and local regulations and requirements regarding the transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials. The existing regulatory requirements governing the transport and use of hazardous materials have not substantially changed since the certification of the SPEIR. Furthermore, the construction and operational characteristics of the proposed access road have not changed since the certification of the SPEIR. Similar to the CSMP, the project would also be subject to federal, state, and local regulations regarding the transport and disposal of hazardous materials. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. No new significant impacts were identified as part of the project level analysis. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. June 2019 I 43 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation. The potential impacts associated with the unforeseeable release of hazardous materials were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4.5, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, page 4.5-9 through 4.5-10). Access road reconstruction would involve excavation and grading activities, which could encounter documented and unreported contaminated soils and/or groundwater during excavation activities. The SPEIR determined that the CSMP, including the VC1 access road improvement, could result in potentially significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment. Implementation of the following mitigation measures were determined to reduce impacts to a level less than significant: • Mitigation Measure HWQ-1: Assess Project Risk, Receiving Water Vulnerability, and Implement a Water Quality Protection Strategy • Mitigation Measure HAZ-1: Halt Construction Work if Potentially Hazardous Materials are Encountered Based on a review of the California Department of Toxic Substances Control's (DTSC) public database(s), the physical conditions within the project area have not changed since the certification of the SPEIR and no documented sources of contamination are identified in the immediate project area (DTSC 2019). Notwithstanding this circumstances, the construction of the proposed project has the potential to encounter unreported contaminated soils, hazardous waste (e.g. dumping), and/or groundwater during excavation activities. Mitigation Measure HWQ-1 and HAZ-1 remain applicable to the proposed project. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would resu lt in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. No new significant impacts were identified as part of the project level analysis. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 0.25 mile of an existing or proposed school? No Impact. The potential impacts associated with emitting hazardous emissions or handling hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 0.25 mile of an existing or proposed school were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4.5, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, pages 4.5-10 through 4.5-11). There are no schools located within 0.25 miles of the project. The SPEIR determined that the CSMP would have no impact associated with the generation of hazardous emissions within 0.25 mile of a school. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962. 5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? Less than Significant Impact. The potential impacts associated with the disturbance of listed hazardous materials sites were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4.5 Hazards and Hazardous 44 I June 2019 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist ~ CHY Of VISTA Materials, page 4.5-11 ). There are no listed hazardous materials sites within the project area (DTSC 2019). Therefore, construction of the access road would not encounter listed hazardous materials sites. The project alignment roughly corresponds with the alignment contemplated in the SPEIR. The existing conditions in the project area have not changed in the project area since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. No new significant impacts were identified as part of the project level analysis. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? No Impact. The potential impacts associated with airport safety hazards were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4.5, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, pages 4.5-12 through 4.5-13). There are no public airports within two miles of the project. The SPEIR determined that no impact would occur. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? No impact. The potential impacts associated with safety hazards in the vicinity of a private airstrip were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4.5, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, pages 4.5-12 through 4.5-13). There are no private airstrips within two miles of the project. The SPEIR determined that no impact would occur. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation. The potential impacts associated with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4.5 Hazards and Hazardous Materials, page 4.5-13). The SPEIR determined that the CSMP would result in potentially significant impacts associated with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Mitigation Measure TR-1 (Prepare and Implement a Traffic Control Plan) was proposed to reduce these impacts to a level less than sig nificant. The project alignment is generally located off the public roadway, thereby avoiding direct impacts to emergency response and access. However, a residence is located near the eastern end of the project alignment. To prevent access disruptions to this residence, including by emergency vehicles, Mitigation Measure TR-1 remains applicable to the proposed project. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. June 2019 I 45 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wild/and fires, including where wild/ands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wild/ands? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation. The potential impacts associated with exposure of people or structures to significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4.5 Hazards and Hazardous Materials, pages 4.5- 13 through 4.5-14). The project is located on undeveloped land containing potentially flammable materials such as brush, grass, or trees that could pose a risk to wildland fires during construction. The SPEIR determined that the risk of wildfire was a potentially significant impact and proposed Mitigation Measures HAZ-3 (Keep Construction Area Clear of Combustible Materials) and HAZ-4 (Provide Accessible Fire Suppression Equipment) to reduce this impact to a level less than significant. The physical conditions, as they relate to wildland fires, have not changed in the project area since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. Mitigation Measures HAZ-3 and HAZ-4 remain applicable to the proposed project The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. 46 I June 2019 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist IX. Hydrology and Water Quality New Less Than Significant Significant Impact due to with Impact Unusual No Impact Mitigation Analyzed Circumstances or Less • SPEIR in the or Substantial than Mitigation PEIR or New Significant Measure(s) Environmental Issue Area SPEIR Information Impact Applicable Would the project: a) Violate any water quality □ □ standards or waste discharge requirements? b) Substantially deplete □ □ groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted? c) Substantially alter the □ □ 181 existing drainage pattern of area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site? d) Substantially alter the □ □ existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on-or off- site? e) Create or contribute runoff □ □ water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? ~ CITYOrVISl:A Less Than Significant with Mitigation -New Mitigation Measure(s) Required □ □ I □ □ □ June 2019 I 47 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist IX. Hydrology and Water Quality New Less Than Less Than Significant Significant Significant Impact due to with with Impact Unusual No Impact Mitigation Mitigation Analyzed Circumstances or Less -SPEIR -New in the or Substantial than Mitigation Mitigation PEIR or New Significant Measure(s) Measure(s) Environmental Issue Area SPEIR Information Impact Applicable Required I -• ·~ ■ ■ ·~ ~◄ . -.... --• - g) Place housing within a IZl □ ►!j □ □ 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100-year □ □ □ flood hazard area structures, which would impede or redirect flood fl ows? i) Expose people or □ □ □ structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, □ □ □ tsunami, or mudflow? Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation. The potential impacts associated with the CSMP improvements to result in a violation of water quality standards or waste discharge requirements were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4.6, Hydrology and Water Quality, pages 4.6-7 through 4.6-9). The project is located adjacent to and parallels Buena Vista Creek on the north. During construction, there is potential for sediment and other construction-related contaminants to enter Buena Vista Creek. The SPEIR determined that the CSMP would result in potentially significant water quality impacts and Mitigation Measure HWQ-1 was proposed to reduce these impacts to a level less than significant. I The physical watershed conditions in the project area and regulations governing water quality have not changed since the certification of the SPEIR. The construction and operational characteristics of the proposed access road have not substantially changed since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR and there would be no new impacts. Mitigation Measure HWQ-1 remains applicable to the proposed project. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. 48 I June 2019 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist ~----Un orVISlA b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted? Less than Significant Impact. The potential impacts associated with the CSMP improvements to result in depletion of groundwater supplies were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4.6, Hydrology and Water Quality, page 4.6-9). Construction activities associated with the CSMP, including the project, may require temporary dewatering; however, no long-term groundwater pumping is proposed. The SPEIR determined that the CSMP would result in a less than significant impact associated with depletion of groundwater supplies. The construction and operational characteristics of the project have not substantially changed since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation. The potential impacts associated with the CSMP improvements potential to result in alteration of existing drainage patterns and flood hazards were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4.6, Hydrology and Water Quality, pages 4.6- 10 through 4.6-11 ). Access road and drainage improvements would involve grading, re- surfacing, and/or vegetation trimming or removal activities, and could result in temporary changes to existing drainage patterns during construction. As shown on Figure 6, the project improvements intersects the limits of the Buena Vista Creek 100-year flood area. The SPEIR determined that the CSMP, including the project, would result in potentially significant impacts associated with the alteration of existing drainage patterns and could be subjected to flood hazards. Mitigation Measures HWQ-1 and HWQ-2 were proposed to reduce impacts to a level less than significant. The existing drainage patterns and flood hazards in the project area have not changed since the certification of the SPEIR. The construction and operational characteristics of the project have not substantially changed since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. Mitigation Measures HWQ-1 and HWQ-2 remain applicable to the proposed project and, therefore, the conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on-or off-site? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation. The potential impacts associated with CSMP improvements potential to result in alteration of existing drainage patterns and flood hazards were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4.6, Hydrology and Water Quality, pages 4.6-10 through 4.6-11). Access road and drainage improvements would involve grading, re-surfacing, and/or vegetation trimming or removal activities, and could result in temporary changes to existing June 2019 I 49 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist drainage patterns during construction. As shown on Figure 6, the project improvements intersects the limits of the Buena Vista Creek 100-year flood area. The SPEIR determined that the CSMP, including the project, would result in potentially significant impacts associated with the alteration of existing drainage patterns and could be subjected to flood hazards. Mitigation Measures HWQ-1 and HWQ-2 were proposed to reduce impacts to a level less than significant. The existing drainage patterns and flood hazards in the project area have not changed since the certification of the SPEIR. The construction and operational characteristics of the project have not substantially changed since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. Mitigation Measures HWQ-1 and HWQ-2 remain applicable to the proposed project and, therefore, the conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. e) 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? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation. The potential impacts associated with water quality and storm water drainage system capacities were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4.6, Hydrology and Water Quality, page 4.6-12). During construction, the project has the potential to use and transport contaminants that could be entrained in surface runoff and discharged to Buena Vista Creek. The SPEIR determined that the CSMP, including the project, would result in potentially significant water quality impacts and proposed Mitigation Measure HWQ-1 to reduce impacts to a level less than significant. The existing watershed conditions, as they relate to water quality and storm water drainage system capacities, have not substantially changed in the project area since the certification of the SPEIR. The construction and operational characteristics of the project have not substantially changed since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. Mitigation Measure HWQ-1 remains applicable to the proposed project and the conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation. The potential impacts associated with water quality and storm water drainage system capacities were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4.6, Hydrology and Water Quality, page 4.6-12). During construction, the project has the potential to use and transport contaminants that could be entrained in surface runoff and discharged to Buena Vista Creek. The SPEIR determined that the CSMP, including the project, would result in potentially significant water quality impacts and proposed Mitigation Measure HWQ-1 to reduce impacts to a level less than significant. The existing watershed conditions, as they relate to water quality and storm water drainage system capacities, have not substantially changed in the project area since the certification of the SPEIR. The construction and operational characteristics of the project have not substantially changed since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. Mitigation Measure HWQ-1 remains applicable to the 50 I June 2019 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist proposed project and the conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. g) Place housing within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? No Impact. The potential impact associated with placement of housing within a 100-year flood hazard area was analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4.6, Hydrology and Water Quality, page 4.6- 7). The CSMP, including the project, does not include new structures for human occupation. Therefore, the SPEIR determined no impact would occur. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. h) Place within a 100-year flood hazard area structures, which would impede or redirect flood flows? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation. The potential impacts associated with alteration of existing drainage patterns and flood hazards were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4.6, Hydrology and Water Quality, pages 4.6-10 through 4.6-11). Access road and drainage improvements would involve grading, re-surfacing, and/or vegetation trimming or removal activities, and could result in temporary changes to existing drainage patterns during construction. As shown on Figure 6, the project improvements intersects the limits of the Buena Vista Creek 100-year flood area. The SPEIR determined that the CSMP, including the project, would result in potentially significant impacts associated with the alteration of existing drainage patterns and could be subjected to flood hazards. Mitigation Measures HWQ-1 and HWQ-2 were proposed to reduce impacts to a level less than significant. The existing drainage patterns and flood hazards in the project area have not changed since the certification of the SPEIR. The construction and operational characteristics of the project have not substantially changed since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. Mitigation Measures HWQ-1 and HWQ-2 remain applicable to the proposed project and, therefore, the conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? Less than Significant Impact. The potential impacts associated with exposure of people or structures to significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4.6, Hydrology and Water Quality, page 4.6-12). The SPEIR determined that the CSMP, including the project, would result in a less than significant impact associated with exposure of people or structures to significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding. The physical watershed and geologic conditions have not changed in the project area since the certification of the SPEIR. The project features do not include large areas of impervious surfaces that could otherwise the timing and duration of peak flows to large rainfall events. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR and there would be no new impacts. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. June 2019 I 51 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? No Impact. The potential impacts associated with inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4.6, Hydrology and Water Quality, page 4.6-7). The project is in an elevated and distant from the Pacific Ocean and associated lagoons to avoid tsunami or seiche inundation. No impact would result and the conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. 52 I June 2019 Figure 6. Federal Emergency Management Agency Floodplain Map LEGEND JOI Proiect Area E;:f! FEMA Flood Zone AE ~ FEMA Flood Zone AE in Floodway f ;:::::J FEMA Flood Zone X Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist ~ cm or v1,rA () 0 Feet 1.000 June 2019 I 53 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist X. Land Use and Planning Environmental Issue Area Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural communities' conservation plan? Would the project: Impact Analyzed in the PEIR or SPEIR [8:1 [8:1 New Significant Impact due to Unusual Circumstances or Substantial New Information □ □ □ a) Physically divide an established community? Less Than Less Than Significant Significant with with No Impact Mitigation Mitigation or Less -SPEIR -New than Mitigation Mitigation Significant Measure(s) Measure(s) Impact Applicable Required [8:1 □ ~ □ □ □ □ No Impact. The potential impacts associated with division of an established community were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4.7, Land Use and Planning, pages 4.7-14 through 4.7-15). The SPEIR determined that the CSMP, including the project, would not divide an established community. The project would be constructed on lands managed by the State and within the City of Carlsbad and parallel to existing sanitary sewer infrastructure. These land use conditions remain unchanged with the project. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with j urisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted fo r the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? No Impact. The potential conflicts with applicable land use plans, policies, and regulations adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating adverse environmental impacts were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4.7, Land Use and Planning, pages 4.7-15 through 4.7-17). The SPEIR determined that the CSMP would not conflict with an applicable land use plan, policy or regulation. The project would be constructed within the City of Carlsbad and adhere 54 I June 201 9 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist ~ CJ!YOI VISTA to Carlsbad's local requirements and is required to maintain consistency with the City's SSMP. In addition, the project would follow CDFW's regulations governing the Buena Vista Reserve. These regulatory requirements were contemplated in the SPEIR and have not substantially changed since its certification. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural communities' conservation plan? Less than Significant Impact. The potential impacts associated with conflict with an applicable habitat conservation plan or natural communities conservation plan were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4.7, Land Use and Planning, pages 4.7-17 through 4.7-18). The SPEIR determined that the CSMP would not conflict with an applicable habitat conservation plan or natural communities conservation plan. The project would be constructed on lands administered by CDFW as contemplated in the SPEIR. The regulatory framework governing I Buena Vista Reserve have not substantially changed since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. June 2019 I 55 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist XI. Mineral Resources Environmental Issue Area Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally- important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? Would the project: Impact Analyzed in the PEIR or SPEIR New Significant Impact due to Unusual Circumstances or Substantial New Information D D Less Than Less Than Significant Significant with with No Impact Mitigation Mitigation or Less • SPEIR -New than Mitigation Mitigation Significant Measure(s) Measure(s) Impact Applicable Required D D D D a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? No Impact. The potential impacts associated with mineral resources were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 5.0 Effects Determined Not to be Significant, pages 5-2 through 5-3). The SPEIR determined that the CSMP, including the project, would not result in the loss of availability of known mineral resources and no impact would occur. The physical geological conditions and landownership context in the project area have not changed since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? No Impact. The potential impacts associated with mineral resources were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 5.0 Effects Determined Not to be Significant, pages 5-2 through 5-3). The SPEIR determined that the CSMP, including the project, would not result in the loss of availability of known mineral resources and no impact would occur. The physical geological conditions and landownership context in the project area have not changed since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. 56 I June 2019 XII. Noise Environmental Issue Area Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist Impact Analyzed in the PEIR or SPEIR ~ ~ ~ I I New Significant Impact due to Unusual Circumstances or Substantial New Information □ □ □ □ □ □ No Impact or Less than Significant Impact □ D ~ ~ Less Than Significant with Mitigation -SPEIR Mitigation Measure(s) Applicable □ □ □ □ ~ CITY or VISTA Less Than Significant with Mitigation -New Mitigation Measure(s) Required □ □ □ □ □ □ June 2019 I 57 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation. The potential impacts associated with exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of established standards were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4.8, Noise and Vibration, pages 4.8-9 through 4.8-10). The SPEIR determined that construction activities associated with the CSMP, including the project, may result in temporary increases in ambient noise levels above existing conditions. Mitigation Measure NV-1 (Construction Noise Reduction Measures) was proposed to reduce these impacts to a level less than significant. No new sensitive receptors are located in the project area since the certification of the SPEIR. The construction characteristics for the project would be the same as those described for the CSMP and the local noise standards within the project area have not changed since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. Mitigation Measure NV-1 would remain effective in minimize noise-related impacts during construction. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. b} Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels? Less than Significant Impact. The potential impacts associated with excessive ground borne vibration were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4.8, Noise and Vibration, page 4.8-11 ). Although the SPEIR determined that the CSMP could result in vibration-related impacts during construction, the SPEIR concluded that the O&M Program including the project improvements would result in a less than significant impact. Based on the absence of structures and buildings adjacent to the project alignment, the physical conditions in the project area have not substantially changed since the certification of the SPEIR. Furthermore, construction would be setback a minimum of 120 feet from the nearby residential structure, which remains unchanged since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Less than Significant Impact. The potential impacts associated with a permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4.8, Noise and Vibration, pages 4.8-9 through 4.8-10). The SPEIR determined that following construction, ongoing maintenance activities along the access road would be similar to existing activities and would generate similar noise levels. For this reason, long-term operational noise impacts for the O&M Program, including the project, were determined less than significant. The physical conditions within the project area and operational characteristics for the project have not substantially changed since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts 58 I June 2019 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist ~ CIT\ or VISTA than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation. The potential impacts associated with exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of established standards were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4.8, Noise and Vibration, pages 4.8-9 through 4.8-10). The SPEIR determined that construction activities associated with the CSMP, including the project, may result in temporary increases in ambient noise levels above existing conditions. Mitigation Measure NV-1 (Construction Noise Reduction Measures) was proposed to reduce these impacts to a level less than significant. No new sensitive receptors relocated to the project area sine~ the certification of the SPEIR. The construction characteristics for the project would be the same as those described for the CSMP and the local noise standards within the project area have not changed since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. Mitigation Measure NV-1 would remain effective in minimizing noise-related impacts during construction. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within 2 miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact. The potential impacts associated with exposure of people to excessive noise levels near public or private aircraft were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4.8, Noise and Vibration, pages 4.8-1 1 through 4.8-12). Based on the actions described in the CSMP, the SPEIR determined the CSMP would result in no significant impact associated with exposure of people to excessive noise levels near public or private aircraft. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? No Impact. The potential impacts associated with exposure of people to excessive noise levels near public or private aircraft were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4.8, Noise and Vibration, pages 4.8-11 through 4.8-12). Based on the actions described in the CSMP, the SPEIR determined the CSMP would result in no significant impact associated with exposure of people to excessive noise levels near public or private aircraft. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. June 2019 I 59 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist XIII. Population and Housing Environmental Issue Area Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes • and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Would the project: Impact Analyzed in the PEIR or SPEIR New Significant Impact due to Unusual Circumstances or Substantial New Information □ □ □ Less Than Less Than Significant Significant with with No Impact Mitigation Mitigation or Less -SPEIR -New than Mitigation Mitigation Significant Measure(s) Measure(s) Impact Applicable Required □ □ □ □ □ □ a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? No Impact. The proposed project involves the realignment and improvement of the existing VC1 access road to provide more reliable access to the VC1 pipeline and manholes for maintenance. The proposed project would not directly or indirectly induce growth, but rather minimize risk of SSOs while accommodating the demands of the population, consistent with the City of Vista's SSMP and adjacent jurisdictions General Plans and zoning requirements. Based on these considerations, no impact would result. b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact. The proposed project involves the rehabilitation and improvement of the existing VC1 access road to provide more reliable access to the VC1 pipeline and manholes for maintenance. The proposed project would not displace existing housing or people necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. No impact would occur. 60 I June 2019 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist ~ Ctn or VISTA c) Displace substantial numbers of people necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? No Impact. The proposed project involves the rehabilitation and improvement of the existing VC1 access road to provide more reliable access to the VC1 pipeline and manholes for maintenance. The proposed project would not displace existing housing or people necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. No impact would occur. June 2019 I 61 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist XIV. Public Services New Less Than Less Than Significant Significant Significant Impact due to with with Impact Unusual No Impact Mitigation Mitigation Analyzed Circumstances or Less · SPEIR -New in the or Substantial than Mitigation Mitigation PEIR or New Significant Measure(s) Measure(s) Environmental Issue Area SPEIR Information Impact Applicable Required Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, 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 public services: a) Fire Protection? 181 D 121 D D b) Police Protection? 121 D 121 D D c) Schools? 181 D 121 D D d) Parks? 121 D 121 D D e) Other public facilities? 121 D 181 D D Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, 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 public services: a) Fire Protection? Less than Significant Impact. The potential impacts to fire protection services as a result of implementing the CSMP were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 5.0, Effects Determined Not to be Significant, page 5-3). The SPEIR determined that the CSMP, including the project, would not require new services for fire protection. The physical conditions within the project area and actions proposed in conjunction with the project have not substantially changed since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. b) Police Protection? Less than Significant Impact. See response (a). Implementation of the project would result in a less than significant impact to police protection services. c) Schools? Less than Significant Impact. See response (a). Implementation of the project would result in a less than significant impact to schools and education services. d) Parks? Less than Significant Impact. See response (a). Implementation of the project would result in a less than significant impact to parks and recreational facilities. 62 I June 2019 e) Other public facilities? Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist ~ CITY or VISTA Less than Significant Impact. The potential impacts associated with public services were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 5.0, Effects Determined Not to be Significant, page 5-3). The SPEIR determined that the CSMP, including the project, would not require new services for fire protection, police protection, schools and parks. The physical conditions within the project area and actions proposed in conjunction with the project have not substantially changed since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. June 2019 I 63 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist XV. Recreation Environmental Issue Area Would the project: a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Would the project: Impact Analyzed in the PEIR or SPEIR New Significant Impact due to Unusual Circumstances or Substantial New Information D D No Impact or Less than Significant Impact Less Than Significant with Mitigation -SPEIR Mitigation Measure(s) Applicable D D Less Than Significant with Mitigation -New Mitigation Measure(s) Required D □ a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? No Impact. The potential impacts associated with an increase use of existing recreational facilities were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 5.0, Effects Determined Not to be Significant, page 5-3). As provided, the CSMP would not result in new residential or commercial growth that could otherwise lead to substantial physical deterioration of local parks and recreational facilities. This circumstance would remain unchanged under the project and no impact would result. b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? No Impact. The potential impacts associated with recreational facilities were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 5.0, Effects Determined Not to be Significant, page 5-3). The project does not propose the construction of new or expanded recreational facilities, which could result in adverse physical effects to the environment. The Buena Vista Ecological Service remains closed to public access and , therefore, the physical conditions within the project area have not substantially changed since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those 64 I June 2019 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist ~ u norY1STA originally analyzed in the SPEIR. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. June 2019 I 65 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist XVI. Transportation/Traffic Impact Analyzed in the PEIR or Environmental Issue Area SPEIR Would the project: a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non- motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including , but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or change in location that result in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? 66 I June 2019 New Less Than Less Than Significant Significant Significant Impact due to with with Unusual No Impact Mitigation Mitigation Circumstances or Less -SPEIR -New or Substantial than Mitigation Mitigation New Significant Measure(s) Measure(s) Information Impact Applicable Required D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D ,, . XVI . Transportation/Traffic Environmental Issue Area f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities? Would the project: Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist New Less Than Significant Significant Impact due to with Impact Unusual No Impact Mitigation Analyzed Circumstances or Less • SPEIR in the or Substantial than Mitigation PEIR or New Significant Measure(s) SPEIR Information Impact Applicable 1:81 D 1:81 I D I ~ CrlY or VISTA Less Than Significant with Mitigation -New Mitigation Measure(s) Required D a) Conflict with an applicable plan, ordinance or policy establishing measures of effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant components of the circulation system, including but not limited to intersections, streets, highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit? I Less than Significant. The potential impacts associated with the performance of the circulation system were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4.9, Transportation and Circulation, page 4.9-7). The SPEIR determined that the O&M Program component of the CSMP, including the project, would not result in significant impacts to roadway operations or capacity. This conclusion is based on the project's location, which is off the public roadway right-of-way. This basis remains unchanged since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. b) Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited to level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? No Impact. The potential impacts associated with conflict with an applicable congestion management plan were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4.9, Transportation and Circulation, page 4.9-6). The SPEIR determined that the CSMP, including the project, would not conflict with an applicable congestion management plan and no impact would occur. The basis for this conclusion remain unchanged since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. June 2019 I 67 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or change in location that result in substantial safety risks? No Impact. The potential impacts associated with air traffic patterns were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4.9, Transportation and Circulation, pages 4.9-7). The SPEIR determined that the CSMP would have no effect or changes in local air traffic patterns and no impact would occur. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. d} Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation. The potential impacts associated with hazards due to a design feature were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4.9, Transportation and Circulation, pages 4.9-8 through 4.9-9). The SPEIR determined that impacts associated with the CSMP would be locally significant in certain circumstances. Mitigation Measure TR-1 (Prepare and Implement a Traffic Control Plan) was proposed to reduce impacts related to temporary traffic related hazards and local driveway access to a level less than significant. The project and conditions in the project area have not substantially changed since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. Mitigation Measure TR-1 remains applicable to the proposed project to maintain access for the existing residence and businesses on Haymar Drive. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. e) Result in inadequate emergency access? Less than Significant Impact. The potential impacts associated with emergency access were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4.9, Transportation and Circulation, pages 4.9-9 through 4.9- 10). The project would be located within an undeveloped area and outside the public roadway right-of-way. In this context, impacts to emergency access would be considered less than significant. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. f) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, bicycle, or pedestrian facilities, or otherwise decrease the performance or safety of such facilities ? Less than Significant Impact. The potential impacts associated with conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs regarding alternative transportation were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4. 9, Transportation and Circulation, page 4. 9-10). The project would be located outside the public roadway right-of-way. Due to the nature of the project, construction activities would be short-term and would not disrupt access for non-motorized form of transportation. This impact would be less than significant and the conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. 68 I June 2019 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist XVII. Utilities and Service Systems New Less Than Significant Significant Impact due to with Impact Unusual No Impact Mitigation Analyzed Circumstances or Less -SPEIR in the or Substantial than Mitigation PEIR or New Significant Measure(s) Environmental Issue Area SPEIR Information Impact Applicable Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater □ □ treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the □ □ construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the □ □ construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water □ □ supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? - e) Result in a determination □ IL?J □ by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand I in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with □ IL?J □ sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? ~ c 1~orV1S1A Less Than Significant with Mitigation -New Mitigation Measure(s) Required □ □ □ □ - □ ' □ June 2019 I 69 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist XVII. Utilities and Service Systems g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Would the project: I I I □ ~ □ □ ------I a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? No Impact. The potential impacts associated with wastewater treatment requirements were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 5.0, Effects Determined Not to be Significant, pages 5-3 through 5-4). The SPEIR determined that the CSMP would not exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board and no impact would occur. The project features and conditions in which they were considered have not substantially changed since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? No Impact. The potential impacts associated with water or wastewater facilities were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 5.0, Effects Determined Not to be Significant, page 5-4). The SPEIR determined that the CSMP would not require the expansion or construction of new water treatment facilities which could otherwise cause significant environmental effects. This circumstance has not changed since the certification of the SPEIR and, therefore, no impact would occur. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? Less than Significant Impact. The potential impacts associated with storm water facilities were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 5.0, Effects Determ ined Not to be Significant, page 5-4). The SPEIR determined that the CSMP would not require the expansion or construction of stormwater drainage facilities which could otherwise cause significant environmental effects. Drainage along western sections of the existing VC1 access road is currently impacted by upstream drainage facilities associated with SR 78, which flow into Buena Vista Creek. The project would not alter these existing facilities or significantly change the timing of runoff to and from these facilities or to Buena Vista Creek. In this content, this impact is less than significant. 70 I June 2019 . •' ' . Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist ~'-Un Of VISTA The drainage conditions in the project area and anticipated project features have not substantially changed since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? Less than Significant Impact. The proposed project involves the realignment and improvement of the existing VC1 access road. Minimal water would be required to support project-related construction for dust control. Once constructed, the proposed project would not increase existing water demands within the ecological reserve. This impact is considered less than significant. e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? No Impact. The potential impacts associated with wastewater treatment capacity were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 5.0, Effects Determined Not to be Significant, pages 5-3 through 5-4). The SPEIR determined that the wastewater treatment provider, Encina Wastewater Authority, has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments. This circumstance has not changed since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? Significant Impact. The potential impacts associated with solid waste were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 5.0, Effects Determined Not to be Significant, page 5-4). The SPEIR determined that the CSMP, including the project, would be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity and would comply with solid waste regulations. The project is not expected to generate substantial amounts of solid waste and construction debris would be recycled per City ordinance. Solid waste disposal capacity within the project area has not changed since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Less than Significant Impact. The potential impacts associated with solid waste were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 5.0, Effects Determined Not to be Significant, page 5-4). The SPEIR determined that the CSMP, including the project, would be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity and would comply with solid waste regulations. The project is not expected to generate substantial amounts of solid waste and construction debris would be recycled per City ordinance. Solid waste disposal capacity within the project area has not changed since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been June 2019 I 71 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. 72 I June 2019 • • XVIII. Energy Environmental Issue Area Would the project: a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? I Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist New Less Than Significant Significant Impact due to with Impact Unusual No Impact Mitigation Analyzed Circumstances or Less -SPEIR in the or Substantial than Mitigation PEIR or New Significant Measure(s) SPEIR Information Impact Applicable l8l □ l8l □ ---- □ □ ~ Ur\ orV1S1A Less Than Significant with Mitigation -New Mitigation Measure(s) Required □ □ Would the project: a) Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation? Less than Significant Impact. The potential impacts associated with energy consumption and efficiency were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4.4, Greenhouse Gases and Energy, pages 4.4-13 through 4.4-14). The SPEIR determined that the CSMP would not result in the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy and concluded a less than significant impact. The construction and operational characteristics of the project have not substantially changed since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. b) Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? Less than Significant Impact. The potential impacts associated with energy consumption and efficiency were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4.4, Greenhouse Gases and Energy, pages 4.4-13 through 4.4-14). The SPEIR determined that the CSMP would not result in the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy and concluded a less than significant impact. The construction and operational characteristics of the project have not substantially changed since the certification of the SPEIR. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. June 201 9 I 73 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist XIX. Tribal Cultural Resources Impact Analyzed in the PEIR or Environmental Issue Area SPEIR New Significant Impact due to Unusual Circumstances or Substantial New Information Less Than Less Than Significant Significant with with No Impact Mitigation Mitigation or Less -SPEIR -New than Mitigation Mitigation Significant Measure(s) Measure(s) Impact Applicable Required Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1 (k)? b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe? D D D D D D Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is: a) Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020. 1 (k)? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation. California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the area containing the site of the proposed project requested consultation pursuant to PRC Section 21080.3.1, and consultation was initiated by the City. As provided in IV(b), the project would result in direct impacts to CA-SDl-5652, which is a multi-component site consisting of the Marron-Hayes Adobes Historic District, and includes historic and prehistoric artifact scatter. This impact could include a substantial adverse change in the significance of a Tribal Cultural Resource pending further consultation with interested 74 I June 2019 , . Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist ~ U lYOfVISTA tribes. Implementation of Mitigation Measure CULT-2 and compliance with Carlsbad's Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Resources Procedures (2017) is required. b) A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024. 1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe? Less than Significant Impact with Mitigation. See response to (a). June 2019 I 75 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist XX. Wildfire Impact Analyzed in the PEIR or Environmental Issue Area SPEIR New Significant Impact due to Unusual Circumstances or Substantial New Information Less Than Less Than Significant Significant with with No Impact Mitigation Mitigation or Less -SPEIR -New than Mitigation Mitigation Significant Measure(s) Measure(s) Impact Applicable Required If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project: a) Substantially impair an □ □ l2SI □ □ adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? b) Due to slope, prevailing □ □ □ □ winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? c) Require the installation or □ □ □ □ maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? d) Expose people or D □ □ □ structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? If located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, would the project: a) Substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? No Impact. According to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection and as depicted in Figure 4.5-1 of the SPEIR, the project site is not located within a state responsibility area or in an area classified as a very high fire hazard severity zone (California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection 2007). Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a significant impact associated with wildfire. 76 I June 2019 . .. . Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist ~ (_Jr, or VISlA b) Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire? No Impact. According to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection and as depicted in Figure 4.5-1 of the SPEIR, the project site is not located within a state responsibility area or in an area classified as a very high fire hazard severity zone (California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection 2007). Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a significant impact associated with wildfire. c) Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment? No Impact. According to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection and as depicted in Figure 4.5-1 of the SPEIR, the project site is not located within a state responsibility area or in an area classified as a very high fire hazard severity zone (California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection 2007). Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a significant impact associated with wildfire. d) Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes? No Impact. According to the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection and as depicted in Figure 4.5-1 of the SPEIR, the project site is not located within a state responsibility area or in an area classified as a very high fire hazard severity zone (California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection 2007). Therefore, the proposed project would not result in a significant impact associated with wildfire. June 201 9 I 77 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist XXI. Mandatory Findings of Significance Impact Analyzed Environmental Issue Area Would the project: a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? in the SPEIR b) Does the project have t8I impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Authority: Public Resources Code 21083 78 I June 2019 t8I I - New Significant Impact due to Unusual Circumstances or Substantial New Information D D D Less Than Less Than Significant Significant with with No Impact Mitigation Mitigation or Less · SPEIR -New than Mitigation Mitigation Significant Measure(s) Measure(s) Impact Applicable Required □ □ □ t8I D --_J -~ t8I t8I D Would the project: Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Less than Significant with Mitigation. Sections 4.2 and 4.3 of the SPEIR included consideration of potential cumulative impacts to biological and cultural resources. The physical improvements proposed in conjunction with VC1 have not substantially changed since the certification of the SPEIR. The City would comply with Carlsbad's HMP. No substantial new information has been presented that shows the project would result in more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR. No new significant impacts were identified as part of the project level analysis. As a result, the conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the project. b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) Less than Significant with Mitigation. The project's potential cumulative impacts were analyzed in the SPEIR (Section 4.1 through Section 4.9). The SPEIR determined that no unavoidable significant environmental impacts would occur with implementation of the proposed project. All impacts would be mitigated to a level less than significant. Compliance with the proposed mitigation measures would ensure that no residually significant impacts would result with implementation of the project either directly or indirectly. In the absence of residually significant impacts, the incremental accumulation of effects would not be cumulatively considerable. No substantial new information has been presented that shows more significant impacts than those originally analyzed in the SPEIR and there would be no new significant impacts. The conclusion identified in the SPEIR remains accurate and applicable to the proposed project. c) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Less than Significant Impact. The project would be constructed within the Buena Vista Reserve, which is managed by CDFW. No substantial adverse impacts would result to human beings by the project. By implementing the project, the City would be able to continue to comply with its adopted SSMP and protect public health and safety. June 2019 I 79 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist References California Department of Conservation. 2013. San Diego County Williamson Act 2013/2014. ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dlrp/wa/San Diego w 13 14 WA.pdf --2017. Farmland of Local Importance. https://www.conservation.ca.gov/dlrp/fmmp/Documents/Farmland of Local Importance 201 6.pdf --2018. San Diego County Important Farmland 2016. ftp://ftp.consrv.ca.gov/pub/dlrp/FMMP/pdf/2016/sdq 16 w. pdf California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. 2007. Fire Hazard Severity Zones in SRA, San Diego County. http://frap.fire.ca.gov/webdata/maps/san diego/fhszs map.37.pdf California Department of Toxic Substances Control. 2019. EnviroStor Database. https://www. envirostor. dtsc. ca.gov/public/ City of Carlsbad. 2017. Zoning Map. Updated February 2017. http://www.carlsbadca.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?Blob1D=24153 80 I June 2019 Vista-Carlsbad Interceptor (Reach 1) Access Road Project Project-Level Environmental Checklist This page is intentionally blank. ~----unorVtSM. June 2019 I 81 Appendix A 1. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (2017) This page is intentionally blank. Vista CSMP Supplemental Program EIR Appendix A /'~---On orVIHA. Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program 1. Introduction The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires a lead or responsible agency to adopt a mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP) when approving or carrying out a project (Section 21081.6 of the California Public Resources Code). The purpose of this program is to ensure that the mitigation measures identified in an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) or a mitigated negative declaration are implemented as detailed in the environmental document. As lead agency for the Comprehensive Sewer Master Plan (CSMP) Update, the City of Vista (City) is responsible for implementation of this MMRP per the requirements of the (CEQA). In this context, this MMRP was prepared to provide a monitoring guide to facilitate the implementation of the adopted mitigation measures and related compliance reporting. Once the City adopts the MMRP, the mitigation monitoring/reporting requirements will be incorporated into the appropriate permits and construction documents (i.e., engineering specifications, engineering and construction plans, etc.). In accordance with the aforementioned requirements, this MMRP lists each mitigation measure, describes the methods for implementation and verification, and identifies the responsible party or parties as detailed below in Section 3. 2. Monitoring and Reporting Procedures This MMRP was developed for each of the improvement categories identified for the City's CSMP (State Clearinghouse Number 2007091072). The MMRP will be in place through all phases of the CSMP, including design, construction, and operation of individual improvements, and will facilitate the implementation of mitigation measures proposed to avoid, minimize, or reduce significant environmental effects. The City will be responsible for administering the MMRP and ensuring that all parties, including its contractors, comply with its provisions. The City may delegate implementation and monitoring activities to staff, consultants, or contractors. The City will require that its construction contractors submit an environmental compliance plan for approval by the City and construction manager prior to the beginning construction activities. This plan shall document how the contractor intends to comply with all measures applicable to the contract, including the application of best management practices (BMPs) in accordance with instructions listed in the construction specifications. The City also will ensure that monitoring is documented through systematic compliance verification and reporting and that deficiencies are promptly corrected. 3. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Implementation This MMRP was prepared to verify compliance with individual mitigation measures proposed in the Final SPEIR for the 2017 CSMP. Table 1 of this MMRP identifies each mitigation measure by discipline, the entity responsible for its implementation, and the improvement category in which the measure applies. Certain inspections and reports may require preparation by qualified individuals June 2019 I A-1 Vista CSMP Supplemental Program EIR Appendix A and these are specified as needed. The timing and method of verification for each measure are also specified. June 2019 I A-2 Table 1. MMRP Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES BI0-1 -MBT A Nest Avoidance. If construction activities occur between January 15 and September 15, a preconstruction survey (within seven days prior to construction activities) shall be conducted by a qualified biologist to determine if active nests are present within or adjacent to the area proposed for development in order to avoid the nesting activities of breeding birds/raptors. The results of the surveys shall be submitted to the City (and made available to the Wildlife Agencies, upon request) prior to initiation of any construction activities. If nesting activities within 200 feet of the proposed won< area are not detected, construction activities may proceed. If nesting activities are confirmed, construction activities shall be delayed within an appropriate buffer (e.g., 300-feet to 500 feet contingent on the species observed) from the active nest until the young birds have fledged and left the nest or until the nest is no longer active as determined by a qualified biologist. The size of the appropriate buffer shall be determined by a qualified biologist based on field conditions. The results of all biological monitoring shall be submitted to the City (and made available to the Wildlife Agencies, upon request). BI0-2 -Habitat Assessment and Focused Surveys for Special-Status Species and Sensitive Habitats. Prior to the issuance of project-specific construction documents for CIP Capacity and Condition Projects (Cross-County) and Out-of- Service Access Roads, a habitat assessment shall be conducted by a qualified biologist to determine the potential for special- status species to occur within the anticipated construction area. If the habitat assessment identifies potentially suitable habitat for threatened and endangered species, focused surveys shall be conducted by a qualified biologist to determine their presence or absence. Sensitive vegetation communities shall be documented as part of the habitat assessment. If threatened and endangered species are observed/detected, project specific mitigation measures shall be developed to Timing Prior to and during construction Prior to and during construction; post- construction if compensatory mitigation is proposed Project Category1 1,2,3,4 2,4 Vista CSMP Supplemental Program EIR Appendix A Primary Responsible Party City of Vista Engineering Department City of Vista Engineering Department Secondary Responsible Party California Deportment of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) CDFW, USFWS; City of Carlsbad ~ c,n orVtn" Verification June 2019 I A-3 Table 1. MMRP Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure mitigate impacts on threatened and endangered species to below a level of significance. Specific measures shall include, but are not limited to: • Early consultation with the wildlife agencies (i.e., USFWS, CDFW) for ESA-and CESA-listed species to ensure avoidance to the greatest extent feasible and appropriate "take" authorization. • Provision of a qualified biological monitor on site during all earth disturbing activities to ensure avoidance of impacts on listed species. • The use of fencing or flagging to identify sensitive areas that support the listed species and to ensure that the areas are protected from direct and indirect impacts. • Implementation of noise reduction measures (e.g., noise attenuation structures) within habitats occupied by listed avian species, and noise monitoring during the breeding season. • Identification and transplantation of listed plant species populations in accordance with best practices. • Impacts to federally listed species covered by the City of Carlsbad's HMP will be required to be consistent with those authorized under the HMP and coordinated with the City of Carlsbad and USFWS. • Avoidance of the breeding seasons for listed species such as: o Arroyo toad-March 1 to September 30 o Least Bell's vireo-March 1 to September 30 o Willow flycatcher (all subspecies)-March 1 to September 30 o Coastal California gnatcatcher-March 1 to September 30 Timing Project Category1 Vista CSMP Supplemental Program EIR Appendix A Primary Responsible Party Secondary Responsible Party ~ Verification June 2019 I A-4 Table 1. MMRP Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure If no threatened or endangered species are observed or detected during focused surveys, but potentially suitable habitat for non- threatened and non-endangered plant or wildlife species is present, a site-specific determination shall be made as to whether the potential impacts are significant based on the degree of threat and the size of the population/occupied habitat to be impacted. B10-3 -Fonnal Wetland Delineation and Pennit Acquisition. If the habitat assessment identifies potential federal and/or state jurisdictional wetlands, a formal jurisdictional delineation shall be prepared. This document shall map the jurisdictional wetlands present and overlay it on the grading footprint of the project, thereby allowing a calculation of the total impacts. If jurisdictional wetlands would be impacted, mitigation shall be required at a minimum 1: 1 ratio; however, coordination with USACE (through the 404 process) and CDFW (through the Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement process) may determine a higher ratio is required. Mitigation shall be achieved through a combination of in-kind creation, restoration, and/or enhancement as determined to be appropriate for each site through consultation with the Resource Agencies. Mitigation shall first be considered on-site, then with an approved mitigation bank, and thirdly through offsite mitigation. The appropriate permit applications shall be submitted to state and federal regulatory agencies. The permits issued by these agencies would finalize the mitigation requirements. B10-4 -Avoid and Minimize Direct and Indirect Impacts to Least Bell's Vireo and Southwestern Willow Flycatcher. Consistent with the HMP, the City shall adhere to the following measures to avoid or reduce impacts: a) The removal of native vegetation and habitat shall be avoided and minimized to the maximum extent practicable. Determination of adequate avoidance and minimization of impacts shall be consistent with Sections 0-6 of the HMP. Deviations from these guidelines shall require written concurrence of USFWS and CDFW. For temporary impacts, Timing Prior to and during construction; post- construction if compensatory mitigation is proposed Prior to and during construction; post- construction if compensatory mitigation is proposed Project Category1 2,4 4 (VC1 ) Vista CSMP Supplemental Program EIR Appendix A Primary Responsible Party City of Vista Engineering Department City of Vista Engineering Department Secondary Responsible Party CDFW, USFWS CDFW, USFWS ~ ..... cm or v111, Verification June 2019 I A-5 Table 1. MMRP Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure the work site shall be returned to pre-existing contours and revegetation with appropriate native species. All revegetation for temporary and permanent impacts shall occur at the ratios specified in applicable permits (e.g., 404 or 1603). Revegetation specifications shall ensure creation and restoration of riparian woodland vegetation to vireo quality. All revegetation plans shall be prepared and implemented consistent with Section F-2 {Habitat Restoration and Revegetation) of the HMP and shall require written concurrence of USFWS and CDFW. If written objections are not provided by the wildlife agencies within 30 days of receipt of written request for concurrence by the local jurisdiction, then the deviation may proceed as approved by the local agency. The wildlife agencies shall provide written comments specifying wildlife agency concerns. b) Contractor shall to the maximum extent practicable avoid impacts during the breeding season of least Bell's vireo (generally March 15 -September 15). Projects that cannot be conducted without placing equipment or personnel in or adjacent to sensitive habitats shall be timed to ensure that habitat is removed prior to the initiation of the breeding season (generally before March 15). c) Construction noise levels at the riparian canopy edge shall be kept below 60 dBA Leq (Measured as Equivalent Sound Level) from 5 a.m. to 11 a.m. during the peak nesting period of March 15 to July 15. For the balance of the day/season, the noise levels shall not exceed 60 decibels, averaged over a one-hour period on an A-weighted decibel {dBA) (i.e., 1 hour Leq/dBA). Noise levels shall be monitored and monitoring reports shall be provided to the jurisdictional city, USFWS, and CDFW. Noise levels in excess of this threshold shall require written concurrence from USFWS and CDFW and may require additional minimization/mitigation measures. d) Brown-headed cowbirds and other exotic species which prey upon least Bell's vireo shall be removed from the site. For new developments adjacent to preserve areas that create conditions attractive to brown-headed cowbirds, jurisdictions Timing Project Category1 Vista CSMP Supplemental Program EIR Appendix A Primary Responsible Party Secondary Responsible Party ~ .... C1n Of\'°l)lA Verification June 2019 I A-6 Table 1. MMRP Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure shall require monitoring and control of cowbirds. e) Biological buffers of at least 100 feet shall be maintained adjacent to occupied least Bell's vireo habitat, measured from the outer edge of riparian vegetation. Within this 100-foot buffer, no new development shall be allowed, and the area shall be managed for natural biological values as part of the preserve system. Buffers less than 100 feet shall require written concurrence of the USFWS and CDFW within 30 days of receipt of written request for concurrence by the local jurisdiction. 8 10-5 -Implement Biological Resource Protection Measures During Construction. The City will implement the following best management practices (BMPs), which are consistent with BMPs in the HMP, during construction to minimize direct and indirect impacts on special-status species. a) Prior to the commencement of construction, the City shall designate a Project Biologist (a person with, at minimum, a bachelor's degree in biology, ecology, or environmental studies with familiarity with federally and/or state listed plant and wildlife species and other, non-listed special-status plant and wildlife species with the potential to be impacted by the project) who shall be responsible for overseeing compliance with protective measures for biological resources during vegetation clearing and work activities within and adjacent to areas of native habitat. The Project Biologist shall be familiar with the local habitats, plants, and wildlife, and shall maintain communications with the contractor to ensure that issues relating to biological resources are appropriately and lawfully managed. The Project Biologist may designate qualified biologists or biological monitors to help oversee project compliance or conduct pre-construction surveys for special- status species. These biologists shall have familiarity with the species for which they would be conducting pre-construction surveys or monitoring construction activities. b) The Project Biologist or designated qualified biologist shall Timing Prior to and during construction; post- construction if compensatory mitigation is proposed I . Pro1ect Category1 4 (VC1 ) Vista CSMP Supplemental Program EIR Appendix A Primary Responsible Party City of Vista Engineering Department Secondary Responsible Party CDFW, USFWS ~ Cm orVIHA Verification June 2019 I A-7 Table 1. MMRP Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure review final plans, designate areas that need temporary fencing (e.g., environmentally sensitive area [ESA] fencing}, and monitor construction activities within and adjacent to areas with native vegetation communities or special-status plant and wildlife species. The qualified biologist shall monitor activities within designated areas during critical times such as vegetation removal, initial ground-disturbing activities, and the installation of BMPs and fencing to protect native species, and shall ensure that all wildlife and regulatory agency permit requirements, conservation measures, and general avoidance and minimization measures are properly implemented and followed. The qualified biologist shall check construction barriers or exclusion fencing and shall provide corrective measures to the contractor to ensure that the barriers or fencing are maintained throughout construction. The qualified biologist shall have the authority to stop work 1f a special-status wildlife species is encountered within the project area during construction. Construction activities shall cease until the Project Biologist or qualified biologist determine(s) that the animal will not be harmed or that it has left the construction area on its own. The appropriate regulatory agency(ies) shall be notified within 24 hours of sighting of a special-status wildlife species. c) Prior to the start of construction, all project personnel and contractors who will be on site during construction shall complete mandatory training conducted by the Project Biologist or a designated qualified biologist. Any new project personnel or contractors that come on board after the initiation of construction shall also be required to complete the mandatory WEAP training before they commence with work. The training shall advise workers of potential impacts to sensitive habitat and federally and/or state-listed and other special-status species, and the potential penalties for impacts to such habitat and species. At a minimum, the training shall include the following topics: ( 1) occurrences of the special- status species and sensitive vegetation communities in the project area (including vegetation communities subject to USACE, CDFW, and RWQCB jurisdiction}, (2) the purpose Timing Project Category1 Vista CSMP Supplemental Program EIR Appendix A Primary Responsible Party Secondary Responsible Party ' I ~ ..... CITY Of \.UTA Verification June 2019 I A-8 Table 1. MMRP Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure for resource protection; (3) a physical description, life history, and habitat requirements of least Bell's vireo, southwestern willow flycatcher, and coastal California gnatcatcher; (4) sensitivity of the species to human activities; (5) protective measures to be implemented in the field, including strictly limiting activities, vehicles, equipment, and construction materials to the fenced to avoid sensitive resource areas in the field (i.e., avoided areas delineated on maps or on the project site by fencing); (6) environmentally responsible construction practices; (7) the protocol to resolve conflicts that may arise at any time during the construction process; and (8) the general provisions of the federal or state ESA, the need to adhere to the provisions of federal and state laws, and the penalties associated with violating federal or state laws; (9) reporting requirements and procedures to follow should a federally and/or state-listed species be encountered during construction; and, (10) avoidance and minimization measures designed to reduce the impacts to federally and/or state-listed and other special-status species. d) The training program shall include color photos of federally and/or state-listed species and sensitive vegetation communities. Following the education program, the photos shall be posted in the contractor and resident engineer's office, where the photos shall remain throughout the duration of project construction. Photos of the habitat in which sensitive species are found shall be posted onsite. The contractor shall be required to provide the City with evidence of the employee training (e.g., a sign-in sheet) on request. Project personnel and contractors shall be instructed to immediately notify the Project Biologist or designated biologist of any incidents that could affect sensitive vegetation communities or special-status species. Incidents could include fuel leaks or injury to any wildlife. The Project Biologist shall notify the City of any incident and the City shall notify the USFWS within 24 hours of being noticed. e) The Project Biologist shall request that the resident engineer halt work, if necessary, and confer with the City prior to Timing Project Category1 Vista CSMP Supplemental Program EIR Appendix A Primary Responsible Party Secondary Responsible Party ~---CITY or \IISlA Verification June 201 9 I A-9 Table 1. MMRP Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure contacting the Carlsbad Fish and Wildlife Office (CFWO) and CDFW to ensure the proper implementation of species and habitat protection measures. The Project Biologist shall report any non-compliance issue to the City and the City will notify the CFWO and CDFW within 24 hours of its occurrence. f) The Project Biologist shall monitor the Project site immediately prior to and during construction to identify the presence of invasive weeds and shall recommend measures to avoid their inadvertent spread in association with the project. Such measures may include inspection and cleaning of construction equipment and use of eradication strategies. All heavy equipment shall be washed and cleaned of debris prior to entering sensitive habitat areas to minimize the spread of invasive weeds. g) ESA fencing shall be placed along the perimeter of the identified work area. Work areas shall be clearly marked in the field and shall be confirmed by the Project Biologist or designated biologist prior to any clearing, and the marked boundaries shall be maintained throughout the duration of the work. Staging areas, including lay down areas and equipment storage areas, shall be flagged and fenced with ESA fencing. h) All native or sensitive habitat areas outside of and adjacent to the designated project limits of disturbance shall be designated as Environmentally Sensitive Areas (ESAs) on project maps. Prior to construction, the Contractor shall delineate the project limits, including construction, staging, lay-down, and equipment storage areas, and erect the construction boundary, with fencing or flagging, along the perimeter of the identified construction area to protect adjacent sensitive habitats and sensitive plant populations. ESAs shall be clearly delineated with fencing or flagging or other BMPs prior to construction to inform construction personnel where the ESAs are located. ESAs fencing may include orange plastic snow fence, orange silt fencing, or stakes and flagging in areas of flowing water. No personnel, Timing Project Category1 Vista CSMP Supplemental Program EIR Appendix A Primary Responsible Party Secondary Responsible Party ~ Verification June 2019 I A-1 O Table 1. MMRP Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure equipment, or debris shall be allowed within the ESAs. Fences and flagging shall be installed by Contractor in a manner that does not impact habitats to be avoided and such that it is clearly visible to personnel on foot and operating heavy equipment. Ten days prior to initiating construction, the Contractor shall submit to the City final plans for initial clearing and grubbing of habitat and project construction. At least five days prior to initiating construction (except for impacts resulting from clearing to install temporary fencing), The City shall submit to the CFWO and CDFW for approval, , the final plans for initial clearing and grubbing of habitat and project construction. These final plans shall include photographs that show the fenced and flagged ESA limits and all areas to be impacted or avoided. If work occurs beyond the fenced or demarcated limits of impact, all work shall cease until the problem has been remedied to the satisfaction of the City, the CFWO, and CDFW. Temporary construction fences and markers shall be maintained in good repair by the Contractor and shall be removed upon completion of project construction. i) No work activities, materials or equipment storage or access shall be permitted outside the project limits without permission from the City. All parking and equipment storage by the contractor related to the Project shall be confined to the project limits. Undisturbed areas and sensitive habitat outside and adjacent to the project limits shall not be used for parking or equipment storage. Project-related vehicle traffic shall be restricted to the project limits and established roads and construction access points. j) Construction activities shall be limited to daylight hours to the extent feasible. If nighttime activities are unavoidable, then workers shall direct all lights for nighttime lighting into the work area and shall minimize the lighting of natural habitat areas adjacent to the work area. The contractor shall use light glare shields to reduce the extent of illumination into sensitive habitats. If the work area is located near surface waters, the lighting shall be shielded such that it does not Timing Project Category1 Vista CSMP Supplemental Program EIR Appendix A Primary Responsible Party Secondary Responsible Party ~ Verification June 2019 I A-11 Table 1. MMRP Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure shine directly into the water. k) Clearing shall be confined to the minimal area necessary to facilitate construction activities. Cleared vegetation and spoils shall be disposed of daily at a permanent offsite spoils location or at a temporary onsite location that will not create habitat for special-status wildlife species. Spoils and dredged material shall be disposed of at an approved site or facility in accordance with all applicable federal, state, and local regulations. I) Food-related and other garbage shall be disposed of in wildlife-proof containers and shall be removed from the project area daily during the construction period. Vehicles carrying trash shall be required to have loads covered and secured to prevent trash and debris from falling onto roads and adjacent properties. m) All construction equipment used for the Project shall be maintained in accordance with manufacturer's recommendations and requirements and shall be maintained to comply with noise standards (e.g., exhaust mufflers, acoustically attenuating shields, shrouds, or enclosures). n) The Contractor shall implement noise reduction measures (e.g., noise attenuation structures) within habitats occupied by federally and/or state-listed bird species, and shall conduct noise monitoring during the bird breeding season per B10-4. o) The Contractor shall store all construction-related vehicles and equipment in the designated staging areas. These areas shall not contain native or sensitive vegetation communities and shall not support sensitive plant or wildlife species. p) The Contractor shall avoid wildlife entrapment by completely covering or providing escape ramps for all excavated steep- walled holes or trenches more than 1 foot deep at the end of each construction work day. The qualified biologist shall inspect open trenches and holes and shall remove or release any trapped wildlife found in the trenches or holes prior to Timing Project Category1 Vista CSMP Supplemental Program EIR Appendix A Primary Responsible Party Secondary Responsible Party ~ Verification June 2019 I A-12 Table 1. MMRP Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure filling by the construction contractor. q) Special-status wildlife can be attracted to den-like structures such as pipes and may enter stored pipes and become trapped or injured. All construction pipes, culverts, or similar features; construction equipment; or construction debris left overnight in areas that may be occupied by special-status species that could occupy such structures shall be inspected by a qualified biologist prior to being used for construction. Such inspections shall occur at the beginning of each day's activities for those materials to be used or moved that day. If necessary, and under the direct supervision of the biologist, the structure may be moved up to one time to isolate it from construction activities, until the special-status species has moved from the structure of their own volition, has been captured and relocated, or has otherwise been removed from the structure. r) Capture and relocation of trapped or injured wildlife listed under ESA or CESA can only be performed by personnel with appropriate state and/or federal permits. Any sightings and any incidental take shall be reported to the City via email within one working day of the discovery. A follow-up report shall be sent to the regulatory agencies, including dates, locations, habitat description, and any corrective measures taken to protect special-status species encountered. For each special-status species encountered, the biologist shall submit a completed California Natural Diversity Data Base field survey form (or equivalent) to CDFW no more than 90 days after completing the last field visit to the project site. s) The City shall be notified within one working day of the discovery of, injury to, or mortality of a special-status species that results from project-related construction activities or is observed at the project site. Notification shall include the date, time, and location of the incident or of the discovery of an individual special-status species that is dead or injured. For a special-status species that is injured, general I information on the type or extent of injury shall be included. The location of the incident shall be clearly indicated on a Timing Project Category1 Vista CSMP Supplemental Program EIR Appendix A Primary Responsible Party Secondary Responsible Party ~ ..... Crn-or VISTA Verification June 2019 I A-13 Table 1. MMRP Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure USGS 7.5-minute quadrangle and/or similar map at a scale that will allow others to find the location in the field, or as requested by the City. The biologist is encouraged to include any other pertinent information in the notification. t) The spread of dust from work sites to sensitive natural communities or sensitive species habitats on adjacent lands shall be minimized by use of a water truck. Dirt access roads, haul roads, and spoils areas shall be watered at least twice each day when being used during construction dry periods. u) The Contractor shall strictly limit their activities, vehicles, equipment, and construction materials to established roads and the project disturbance limits. Posted speed limit signs on local roads and a 15 mile-per-hour speed limit along ingress and egress routes shall be observed. Extra caution shall be used when special-status reptile species may be basking on roads. v) To avoid injury or death to wildlife, no firearms shall be allowed on the Project site except for those carried by authorized security personnel or local, state, or federal law enforcement officials. w) To prevent harassment, injury, or mortality of sensitive wildlife by dogs or cats, no canine or feline pets shall be permitted in the active construction area. x) Plastic monofilament netting or similar material shall not be used for erosion control because smaller wildlife may become entangled or trapped in it. Acceptable substitutes include coconut coir matting or tackifier hydroseeding compounds. This limitation shall be communicated to the contractor through specifications or special provisions included in the construction bid solicitation package. y) Rodenticides and herbicides shall be used in accordance with the manufacturer recommended uses and applications and in such a manner as to prevent primary or secondary poisoning of special-status fish, wildlife, and plant species and depletion of prey populations upon which they depend. Timing I Project Category1 Vista CSMP Supplemental Program EIR Appendix A Primary Responsible Party Secondary Responsible Party ~ Verification June 2019 I A-14 Table 1. MMRP Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure All uses of such compounds shall observe label and other restrictions mandated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the California Department of Pesticide Regulation, and other appropriate state and federal regulations, as well as additional project-related restrictions imposed by the City. z) Hazardous materials and equipment stored overnight, including small amounts of fuel to refuel hand-held equipment, shall be stored within secondary containment when within 50 feet of open water to the fullest extent practicable. Secondary containment shall consist of a ring of sand bags around each piece of stored equipmenUstructure. A plastic tarp/visqueen lining with no seams shall be placed under the equipment and over the edges of the sandbags, or a plastic hazardous materials (HazMat) secondary containment unit shall be used by the Contractor. aa) The Contractor shall be required to conduct vehicle refueling in upland areas where fuel cannot enter waters of the U.S. or state and in areas that do not have potential to support federally and/or state-listed species. Any fuel containers. repair materials including creosote-treated wood, and/or stockpiled material that is left onsite overnight shall be secured in secondary containment within the work area and staging/assembly area, and covered with plastic at the end of each work day. bb) In the event that no activity is to occur in the work area for the weekend and/or a period of time greater than 48 hours, the Contractor shall ensure that all portable fuel containers are removed from the Project site. cc) Equipment and containers will be inspected daily for leaks. Should a leak occur, contaminated soils and surfaces will be cleaned up and disposed of following the guidelines identified in the Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), Materials Safety Data Sheets, and any specifications required by other permits issued for the Project. dd) The Contractor shall utilize off-site maintenance and repair shops as much as possible for maintenance and repair of Timing Project Category1 Vista CSMP Supplemental Program EIR Appendix A Primary Respon~b~ Party Secondary Responsible Party ~ .... CITY Of Vl)"fA Verification June 2019 I A-15 Table 1. MMRP Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure equipment ee) If maintenance of equipment must occur onsite, fuel/oil pans, absorbent pads, or appropriate containment shall be used to capture spills/leaks within all areas. Where feasible, maintenance of equipment shall occur in upland areas where fuel cannot enter waters of the U.S. or state and in areas that do not have potential to support federally and/or state-listed species. CULTURAL RESOURCES CUL T-1 Construction-Related Vibration. Prior to the issuance of project-specific construction documents for CIP Capacity and Condition Projects (Hardscape Environs), the City Engineer shall determine whether construction activities would occur within 25 feet of a NRHP or CRHR eligible or listed historic structure. For structures that have not been previously evaluated, the City Engineer shall consult with a qualified Architectural Historian approved by the City to conduct an evaluation of the structure. If the structure is determined eligible or already eligible or listed in the NRHP or CRHR, a structural evaluation shall be conducted by a Professional Structural Engineer to identify maximum allowable levels of vibration during construction. If a historic determination is required, the engineer shall provide recommendations on approaches to stabilization in conjunction with vibration monitoring. Permanent stabilization measures shall follow the Secretary of the Interior's guidelines for the treatment of historic properties. If the buildings are temporarily stabilized for the duration of construction activities, when removed, the buildings shall be restored to their pre-construction condition when the stabilization measures are removed. Timing Prior to and following construction Project Category1 1, 2 Vista CSMP Supplemental Program EIR Appendix A Primary Responsible Party City of Vista Engineering Department Secondary Responsible Party Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) ~--CITYor\lJ>f• Verification June 2019 I A-16 Table 1. MMRP Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure CUL T-2 -Project-Specific Archaeological Survey. Prior to the issuance of project-specific construction documents for CIP Capacity and Condition Projects (Hardscape and Cross County Environs). Pump Station Rehabilitations, and Out-of-Service Area Projects, a Qualified Archaeologist approved by the City shall contact the NAHC regarding a Sacred Lands File Search for the project area. In addition, the City shall request a written response from the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians (SLR Band) (a tribe traditionally and culturally affiliated with the site) regarding whether the site of the 2017 CSMP improvement project may potentially affect Native American resources. If the NAHC and/or the SLR Band confirms potential known resources, a pedestrian survey (i.e., physical walk over) shall first be conducted by the Qualified Archaeologist and a TCA (traditionally and culturally affiliated) Native American Monitor. Should the pedestrian survey identify Native American cultural resources, the Qualified Archeologist shall, in consultation with the TCA Native American monitor and the SLR Band, make an immediate written evaluation of the significance and appropriate treatment of the resource, including any avoidance measures, additional testing and evaluations, or data recovery plans, and Pre-Excavation Agreements with the Tribe. If the SLR Band confirms, in consultation with the Qualified Archaeologist, that there is a potential for unknown resources to be uncovered during construction activities, then Mitigation Measure CUL T-3, Archaeological Monitoring, shall be implemented. CUL T-3 Archaeological Monitoring. Cultural resource mitigation monitoring shall be conducted to provide for the identification, evaluation, treatment, and protection of any cultural resources that are affected by or may be discovered during the construction of the proposed project. The monitoring shall consist of the full-time presence of a Qualified Archaeologist and a TCA (traditionally and culturally affiliated) Native American Monitor. and the monitoring activities shall be identified and defined in a Pre-Excavation Agreement between the City's Engineering Department and the San Luis Rey Band. The purpose of this agreement shall be to formalize protocols and procedures for the Timing Prior to construction During construction Project Category1 1,2, 3,4 1, 2, 3,4 Vista CSMP Supplemental Program EIR Appendix A Primary Responsible Party City of Vista Engineering Department City of Vista Engineering Department Secondary Responsible Party NAHC NAHC ~---CITY or VISTA Verification June 2019 I A-17 Table 1. MMRP Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure protection, treatment, and disposition of, but not limited to, such items as Native American human remains, funerary objects, cultural and religious landscapes, ceremonial items, traditional gathering areas and cultural items, located and/or discovered through the cultural resource mitigation monitoring program in conjunction with the construction of the proposed project, including additional archaeological surveys and/or studies, excavations, geotechnical investigations, soil surveys, grading, or any other ground disturbing activities. Other tasks of the monitoring program shall include the following: • The requirement for cultural resource mitigation monitoring shall be noted on all applicable construction documents, including demolition plans, grading plans, etc. • The Qualified Archaeologist and TCA Native American Monitor shall attend all applicable pre-construction meetings with the Contractor and/or associated Subcontractors. • The Qualified Archaeologist shall maintain ongoing collaborative consultation with the TCA Native American Monitor during all ground disturbing or altering activities, as identified above. • The Qualified Archaeologist and/or TCA Native American Monitor may halt ground-disturbing activities if archaeological artifact deposits or cultural features are discovered. In general, ground-disturbing activities shall be directed away from these deposits for a short time to allow a determination of potential significance, the subject of which shall be determined by the Qualified Archaeologist and the TCA Native American Monitor, in consultation with the San Luis Rey Band. Ground disturbing activities shall not resume until the Qualified Archaeologist, in consultation with the TCA Native American Monitor, deems the cultural resource or feature has been appropriately documented and/or protected. At the Qualified Archaeologist's discretion, the location of ground disturbing activities may be relocated elsewhere on the project site to avoid further disturbance of cultural resources. Timing Project Category1 Vista CSMP Supplemental Program EIR Appendix A Primary Responsible Party Secondary Responsible Party ~---CITYOf\.'1511\ Verification June 2019 I A-18 Table 1. MMRP Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure • The Qualified Archaeologist and/or TCA Native American Monitor may also halt ground disturbing activities around known archaeological artifact deposits or cultural features if, in their respective opinions, there is the possibility that they could be damaged or destroyed. • The avoidance and protection of discovered unknown and significant cultural resources and/or unique archaeological resources is the preferable mitigation for the proposed project. If avoidance is not feasible, a Data Recovery Plan may be authorized by the City as the Lead Agency under CEQA. If data recovery is required, then the San Luis Rey Band shall be notified and consulted in drafting and finalizing any such recovery plan. • Prior to the release of any Bonds associated with the construction of improvements noted in the 2017 CSMP, a Monitoring Report and/or Evaluation Report, which describes the results. analysis and conclusions of the cultural resource mitigation monitoring efforts (such as, but not limited to, a Data Recovery Program) shall be submitted by the Qualified Archaeologist, along with the TCA Native American Monitor's notes and comments, to the City's Director of Community Development for approval. CUL T-4 Paleontological Monitoring. Monitoring during construction grading or trenching shall be required for all CIP conveyance projects (Hardscape and Cross-Country Environs) that would excavate to a depth of ten feet or more. Prior to the issuance of project specific construction documents, the City Engineer shall retain a Professional Paleontologist to observe all earth-disturbing activities. All fossil materials recovered during mitigation monitoring shall be cleaned, identified, cataloged, and analyzed in accordance with standard professional practices. The results of the field work and laboratory analysis shall be submitted in a technical report and the entire collection transferred to an approved facility. Timing During constriction Project Category1 1,2, 3,4 Vista CSMP Supplemental Program EIR Appendix A Primary Responsible Party City of Vista Engineering Department Secondary Responsible Party NAHC ~ Cln or VU-TA Verification June2019 I A-19 Table 1. MMRP Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure CUL T-5 Disturbance to Human Remains. As specified by California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, if human remains are found on the project site during construction or during archaeological work, the person responsible for the excavation, or his or her authorized representative, shall immediately notify the San Diego County Coroner's office by telephone. No further excavation or disturbance of the discovery or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains (as determined by the Qualified Archaeologist and/or the TCA (traditionally and culturally affiliated) Native American Monitor) shall occur until the Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code 5097.98. If such a discovery occurs, a temporary construction exclusion zone shall be established surrounding the area of the discovery so that the area would be protected (as determined by the Qualified Archaeologist and/or the TCA Native American Monitor), and consultation and treatment could occur as prescribed by law. As further defined by State law, the Coroner would 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 shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours. The NAHC would make a determination as to the Most Likely Descendent. If Native American remains are discovered, the remains shall be kept "in situ" ("in place"), or in a secure location in close proximity to where they were found, and the analysis of the remains shall only occur on-site in the presence of the TCA Native American Monitor. Timing During construction I Project Category1 1,2, 3,4 Vista CSMP Supplemental Program EIR Appendix A Primary Responsible Party City of Vista Engineering Department Secondary Responsible Party NAHC, San Diego County I ' ~ Verification June 2019 I A-20 Table 1. MMRP Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS HAZ-1 -Halt Construction Work if Potentially Hazardous Materials are Encountered. All construction contractors shall immediately stop all surface or subsurface activities in the event that potentially hazardous materials are encountered, an odor is identified, or considerably stained soil is visible. Contractors shall follow all applicable local, state, and federal regulations regarding discovery, response, disposal, and remediation for hazardous materials encountered during the construction process. These requirements shall be included in the contractor specifications. If any hazardous materials, waste sites, or vapor intrusion risks are identified prior to or during construction, a qualified professional, in consultation with appropriate regulatory agencies, will develop and implement a plan to remediate the contamination and properly dispose of the contaminated material. If material imports are proposed, the contractor shall furnish the City will appropriate documentation certifying that the imported materials are free of contamination. HAZ-2 -Hazardous Materials Surveys. Prior to the issuance of a building permit that includes demolition of on-site structures and prior to commencement of demolition or rehabilitation activities, a Hazardous Materials Assessment (surveys) would be performed to determine the presence or absence of ACMs/LBP located in the structure(s) to be demolished. Suspect materials that would be disturbed by the demolition or rehabilitation activities would be sampled and analyzed for asbestos content, or assumed to be asbestos containing. All lead containing materials scheduled for demolition must comply with applicable regulations for demolition methods and dust suppression. Lead containing materials shall be managed in accordance with applicable regulations. The ACM survey would be conducted by a person certified by the California Division of Occupational Safety and Health (Cal/OSHA). The LBP survey would be conducted by a person certified by the California Department of Health Services. Copies of the surveys would be provided to SDCDEH and SDCAPCD once completed. Timing During construction Prior to construction Project Category1 1,2, 3,4 1, 2, 4 Vista CSMP Supplemental Program EIR Appendix A Primary Responsible Party City of Vista Engineering Department City of Vista Engineering Department Secondary Responsible Party ~---cm orv,sr, Verification June 2019 I A-21 Table 1. MMRP Mit igation Measures Mitigation Measure HAZ-3 -Keep Construction Area Clear of Combustible Materials. During construction, construction contractors shall ensure that staging areas, welding areas, or areas slated for construction using spark-producing equipment shall be cleared of combustible vegetation or other materials that could serve as fire fuel. All vegetation clearing shall be coordinated with a qualified biologist and any required permits prior to removal. The contractor shall keep these areas clear of combustible materials in order to maintain a firebreak. Any construction equipment that normally includes a spark arrester shall be equipped with an arrester in good working order. This includes, but is not limited to, vehicles, heavy equipment, and chainsaws. HAZ-4 • Provide Accessible Fire Suppression Equipment. Work crews shall be required to have sufficient fire suppression equipment readily available to ensure that any fire resulting from construction activities is immediately extinguished. All off-road equipment using internal combustion engines shall be equipped with spark arrestors. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY HWQ-1 • Assess Project Risk, Receiving Water Vulnerability, and Implement a Water Quality Protection Strategy. The construction contractor will assess the receiving water vulnerability and develop a SWPPP that complies with the requirements of the NPDES General Construction Permit (Order 2009-0009-DWQ as amended by 2010 0014-DWQ and 2012- 006-DWQ) based on the project-specific risk level subject to the City Engineer's approval. The SWPPP shall identify specific actions and BMPs relating to the prevention of stormwater pollution from project-related construction sources by identifying a practical sequence for site restoration, BMP implementation, contingency measures, responsible parties, and agency contacts. The SWPPP shall reflect localized surface hydrological conditions. local jurisdictional requirements. and shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer prior to commencement of Timing During construction During construction Prior to, during, and following construction Project Category1 1, 2, 4 1,2,4 1,2, 3,4 Vista CSMP Supplemental Program EIR Appendix A Primary Responsible Party City of Vista Engineering Department City of Vista Engineering Department City of Vista Engineering Department Secondary Responsible Party Cities of Carlsbad, San Marcos, Oceanside; San Diego County; Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), Region 9 ~ CITYOfVIHA Verification June 2019 I A-22 Table 1. MMRP Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure work. The SWPPP shall be prepared by a qualified SWPPP developer with BMPs selected to achieve maximum pollutant removal and that represent the best available technology that is economically achievable: BMPs for soil stabilization and erosion control practices and sediment control practices will also be required. Performance and effectiveness of these BMPs shall be determined either by visual means where applicable (i.e., observation of above-normal sediment release), or by actual water sampling in cases where verification of contaminant reduction or elimination, (e.g., inadvertent petroleum release) is required to determine adequacy of the measure. The SWPPP shall also address other project-specific water quality threats, as required for individual improvements including but not limited to, temporary dewatering, hydrostatic testing, and other resources permits as required under the Federal Clean Water Act, County Grading Ordnance, and State Fish and Game Code, as applicable. Construction and post-construction BMPs will be designed to avoid the creation of standing water and potential mosquito breeding habitat. HWQ-2 -Prepare and Implement a Flow Diversion Plan For Construction. The construction contractor shall develop a Flow Diversion Plan(s) for in-channel construction activities. The contractor shall incorporate measures to minimize changes to flood flow elevation(s) during construction, address accumulation of floating debris, provide measures that minimize sedimentation to surface waters, and include contingency measures in the event of substantial rainfall. NOISE AND VIBRATION NV-1 -Construction Noise Reduction Measures. The Construction Contractor shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City Engineer that the following noise control techniques are implemented during the clearing, demolition. grading and construction phases of projects identified in the 2017 CSMP Timing Prior to and during construction Prior to and during construction Project Category1 1, 4 1,2, 3,4 Vista CSMP Supplemental Program EIR Appendix A Primary Responsible Party City of Vista Engineering Department City of Vista Engineering Department Secondary Responsible Party RWQCB Cities of Carlsbad, San Marcos, Oceanside; San Diego County ~---Cm orv1>1A Verification June 2019 I A-23 Table 1. MMRP Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure within 200 feet of noise-sensitive land uses. • Heavy equipment repair and contractor staging shall be conducted at sites as far as practical from nearby residences. • Construction equipment, including vehicles, generators and compressors, shall be maintained in proper operating condition and shall be equipped with manufacturers' standard noise control devices or better (e.g., mufflers, acoustical lagging, and/or engine enclosures). • Temporary sound barriers (or curtains), stockpiles of excavated materials, or other effective shielding or enclosure techniques shall be used where construction noise would exceed 90 dBA within less than 50 feet from a noise sensitive receptor. • Construction work, including on-site equipment maintenance and repair, shall be limited to the hours specified in the noise ordinance of the affected jurisdiction(s). • Electrical power shall be supplied from commercial power supply, wherever feasible, in order to avoid or minimize the use of engine-driven generators. • Electrically powered equipment shall be used instead of pneumatic or internal-combustion powered equipment, where feasible. • Unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines (i.e., in excess of 5 minutes) shall be prohibited. • Operating equipment shall be designed to comply with all applicable local, state, and federal noise regulations. • Construction site and access road speed limits shall be established and enforced during the construction period. • If lighted traffic control devices are to be located within 500 feet of residences, the devices shall be powered by batteries, solar power, or similar sources, and not by an internal combustion engine. I Timing Project Category1 Vista CSMP Supplemental Program EIR Appendix A Primary Responsible Party Secondary Responsible Party I ~ .... CITY Of VISTA Verification June 2019 I A-24 Table 1. MMRP Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure • The use of noise-producing signals, including horns. whistles, alarms, and bells, shall be for safety warning purposes only. • No project-related public address or music system shall be audible at any adjacent sensitive receptor. • The construction contractors shall provide advance notice, between 2 and 4 weeks prior to construction, by mail to all residents or property owners within 200 feet of the alignment. The announcement shall state specifically where and when construction will occur in the area. If construction delays of more than 7 days occur, an additional notice shall be made, either in person or by mail. The City shall publish a notice of impending construction on the City website, stating when and where construction will occur. • The construction contractors shall identify and provide a public liaison person before and during construction to respond to concerns of neighboring residents about noise and other construction disturbance. The construction contractors shall also establish a program for receiving questions or complaints during construction and develop procedures for responding to callers. Procedures for reaching the public liaison officer via telephone or in person shall be included in notices distributed to the public in accordance with the information above. TRANSPORTATION AND CIRCULATION Mitigation Measure TR-1 -Prepare and Implement a Traffic Control Plan. The construction contractor shall prepare a Traffic Control Plan for roadways and intersections affected by individual 2017 CSMP improvements for approval by the City Engineer. The Traffic Control Plan will comply with local agency requirements (e.g., Vista, Carlsbad, Caltrans, etc.) with jurisdiction over project construction. The Traffic Control Plan will include, but not be limited to, the following elements based on local site and roadway conditions: Timing Prior to and during construction Project Category1 1, 2, 4 Vista CSMP Supplemental Program EIR Appendix A Primary Responsible Party City of Vista Engineering Department Secondary Responsible Party Cities of Carlsbad, San Marcos, Oceanside; San Diego County ~ .... C1rv or VISTA Verification June 2019 I A-25 Table 1. MMRP Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure • Provide street layout showing location of construction activity and surrounding streets to be used as detour routes, including ·special signage." Post a minimum 72-hour advance warning of construction activities within affected roadways to allow motorists to select alternative routes. • Restrict delivery of construction materials to non-peak travel periods (9 a.m. -3 p.m.) as appropriate. Weekend and night work shifts will be allowed in non-residential areas only. • Maintain the maximum travel-lane capacity during non- construction periods and provide flagger-control at construction sites to manage traffic control and flows. • Limit the construction work zone in each block tb a width that, at a minimum, maintains alternate one-way traffic flow past the construction zone. • Maintain access for driveways and private roads, except for brief periods of construction, in which case property owners will be notified. • Require temporary steel-plate trench crossings, as needed, to maintain reasonable access to homes, businesses. and streets. When required by the applicable encroachment permit, maintain the existing lane configuration during nonworking hours by covering the trench or jack pit with steel plates or by using temporary backfill. • Require appropriate warning signage and safety lighting for construction zones. • Access for emergency vehicles shall be maintained at all times. Police, fire, and emergency services shall be notified of the timing, location, and duration of construction activities that could hinder and/or delay emergency access through the construction period. • Coordinate with NCTD to plan, as needed, for the temporary relocation of bus stops and/or detour of transit routes on affected pipeline alignments. I Timing Project Category1 Vista CSMP Supplemental Program EIR Appendix A Primary Responsible Party Secondary Responsible Party ~ Verification June 2019 I A-26 Table 1. MMRP Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measure ■ • Identify detours, where available, for bicyclists and pedestrians in areas potentially affected by project construction. • Provide adequate off-street parking locations for worke vehicles and construction equipment in those areas wl on-street parking availability is insufficient. • Repair or restore the roadway ROW to its original cond or better upon completion of work. Project categories identified in the CSMP SPEIR include: " Project Timing Category1 - Vista CSMP Supplemental Program EIR Appendix A Primary Secondary Responsible Responsible Party Party 7---- I I I I I I I I ~ ..... Cm Of\blA Verification Category 1: CIP Capacity and Condition Projects (Hardscape Environs). Tables 3-3 and 3 4 in Chapter 3 identify the near-term and build out CIP capacity-related projects included within this category. Figures 3-7 and 3-8 illustrate the locations of the capacity improvements. Table 1 in Appendix B of this SPEIR includes a list of CIP condition Projects included within this category. Figures 3-9 through 3-17 illustrate the location of the condition relate improvements. Category 2: CIP Capacity and Condition Projects (Cross-Country Environs). Tables 3-3 and 3-4 identify the near-term and build out CIP capacity- related projects included within this category. Figures 3-7 and 3-8 illustrate the locations of the capacity improvements. Table 2 in Appendix B of this SPEIR includes a list of CIP condition projects included in this category. Figures 3-9 through 3-17 illustrate the location of the condition-relate improvements. Category 3: O&M Program Operations and Pump Station Rehabilitation. Table 3-5 in Chapter 3 of this SPEIR includes a list of the O&M Program improvements included within this category. Category 4: Out-of-Service Area Projects. Figures 3-19 and 3-20 illustrate the out-of-service area project(s) improvements included within this category. June 2019 I A-27 This page is intentionally blank. Vista CSMP Supplemental Program EIR Appendix A ~ c,n or VtSTA June 2019 I A-28 Appendix A2. Carlsbad Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Resources Guidelines .. This page is intentionally blank. Carlsbad Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Resources Guidelines Prepared for: The City of Carlsbad, California Prepared by: ECORP Consulting, Inc. with contributions from Cogstone Resource Management September 2017 (city of Carlsbad California ------·----~ ~-·, Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines CONTENTS 1.0 Purpose and Need for Guidelines ................................................................................................ 1 1.1 Organization ........................................................................................................................................................ 3 2.0 Definitions of Resources .............................................................................................................. 5 2.1 Types ...................................................................................................................................................................... 5 2.2 Cultural Association .......................................................................................................................................... 5 2.3 Time Period .......................................................................................................................................................... 6 2.4 Physical Characteristics ................................................................................................................................... 7 3.0 Regulatory Context ..................................................................................................................... 11 3.1 Local .................................................................................................................................................................... 11 3.1.1 City of Carlsbad General Plan ............................................................................................................. 11 3.1.2 City of Carlsbad Municipal Code ...................................................................................................... 13 3.1.3 Local Coastal Program .......................................................................................................................... 14 3.1.4 City of Carlsbad Council Policy No. 83 ........................................................................................... 15 3.2 State ..................................................................................................................................................................... 15 3.2.1 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) .............................................................................. 15 3.2.2 Senate Bill 18 ............................................................................................................................................ 18 3.2.3 California Coastal Act ............................................................................................................................ 18 3.2.4 Public Resources Code Section 5097.5 ........................................................................................... 18 3.2.5 California Public Resources Code 5097.9 ...................................................................................... 19 3.2.6 California Public Resources Code 5097.98 .................................................................................... 19 3.2.7 California Public Resources Code 5097.99 .................................................................................... 19 3.2.8 California Health and Safety Code 7050.5 .................................................................................... 19 3.2.9 California Code of Regulations (Title 14, Division 3, Chapter 1) ........................................... 20 3.3 Federal ................................................................................................................................................................ 20 3.3.1 National Historic Preservation Act ................................................................................................... 20 4.0 Context Statements .................................................................................................................... 23 4.1 Regional Archaeology and Ancient Native American History ...................................................... 23 4.2 Ethnography and Native American History .......................................................................................... 28 4.2.1 Luisef\o ........................................................................................................................................................ 28 4.2.2 Kumeyaay ................................................................................................................................................... 39 4.3 Euro-American History ................................................................................................................................. 40 4.4 Paleontological Resources .......................................................................................................................... 43 Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines 5.0 Roles and Responsibilities .......................................................................................................... 46 5.1 City of Carlsbad ............................................................................................................................................... 46 5.2 Private Applicants for Projects .................................................................................................................. 47 5.3 Consultants ....................................................................................................................................................... 47 5.3.1 Minimum Qualifications for Cultural Resources Professionals ............................................ .47 5.3.2 Minimum Qualifications for Paleontological Professionals ................................................... .49 5.4 California Office of Historic Preservation .............................................................................................. 49 5.5 California Native American Heritage Commission ............................................................................ 49 5.6 California Native American Tribes ........................................................................................................... 50 5.6.1 San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians ............................................................................................. 50 5.7 Federally-Recognized Tribes ...................................................................................................................... 50 5.8 Other Permitting or Approving Agencies ............................................................................................. 50 5.9 Interested Parties ............................................................................................................................................ 51 6.0 Sensitivity Models ....................................................................................................................... 52 6.1 Uses ..................................................................................................................................................................... 52 6.2 Architectural History Sensitivity Model .................................................................................................. 53 6.3 Archaeological Sensitivity Model ............................................................................................................. 55 6.4 Paleontological Sensitivity Model ............................................................................................................ 56 6.5 Management of the Models ...................................................................................................................... 60 7.0 General Methods and Standards of Analysis ........................................................................... 61 7.1 General Standards .......................................................................................................................................... 61 7.2 Thresholds of Review .................................................................................................................................... 61 7.3 Confidentiality ................................................................................................................................................. 62 8.0 Tribal Cultural Resources Procedures ....................................................................................... 64 8.1 Tribal Outreach and Coordination ........................................................................................................... 64 8.1.1 Notices of Exemption ............................................................................................................................ 64 8.1.2 Section 106 of the NHPA ..................................................................................................................... 68 8.1.3 AB 52 ............................................................................................................................................................ 68 8.1.4 SB18 ............................................................................................................................................................ 69 8.2 Identification of Tribal Cultural Resources ........................................................................................... 69 8.2.1 Impact Analyses and Mitigation Measures ................................................................................... 70 8.2.2 Preferred Treatment Options and Mitigation Measures ......................................................... 70 9.0 Cultural Resources Procedures .................................................................................................. 75 9.1 Sensitivity Model Review ............................................................................................................................. 75 Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad ii September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines 9.2 Records Searches and Literature Reviews ............................................................................................ 75 9.3 Field Surveys ..................................................................................................................................................... 76 9.4 Site Records and Survey Reports ............................................................................................................. 78 9.5 Evaluations of Significance ......................................................................................................................... 78 9.5.1 Properties Exempt from Evaluation of Eligibility ...................................................................... 78 9.5.2 General Methods .................................................................................................................................... 78 9.5.3 Archival Research .................................................................................................................................... 78 9.5.4 Architectural History and Built Environment... ............................................................................. 79 9.5.5 Historic Districts ...................................................................................................................................... 79 9.5.6 Archaeological Excavation ................................................................................................................... 79 9.5.7 Research Topics and Questions for Archaeological Sites ....................................................... 80 9.5.8 Evaluation Reports ................................................................................................................................. 85 9.6 Impact Analyses and Mitigation Measures .......................................................................................... 85 9.6.1 Thresholds ................................................................................................................................................. 85 9.6.2 Preferred Treatment Options and Mitigation Measures ......................................................... 87 9.7 Cu ration ............................................................................................................................................................. 97 10.0 Paleontological Resources Procedures ................................................................................... 98 10.1 Sensitivity Model Review ............................................................................................................................. 98 10.2 Records Searches and Literature Reviews ............................................................................................ 98 10.3 Field Surveys ..................................................................................................................................................... 98 10.4 Impact Analyses and Mitigation Measures .......................................................................................... 99 10.4.1 Negative Surveys .................................................................................................................................... 99 10.4.2 Positive Surveys ..................................................................................................................................... 100 10.4.3 Preferred Treatment Options and Mitigation Measures ....................................................... 100 10.5 Cu ration ........................................................................................................................................................... 100 11.0 Document Review and Consultation ..................................................................................... 101 11.1 Application Requirements ........................................................................................................................ 101 11.2 Completeness Review ................................................................................................................................. 101 11.3 Consultation ................................................................................................................................................... 102 11.4 Compliance Verification ............................................................................................................................. 103 12.0 References Cited ..................................................................................................................... 104 Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad iii September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1. Luisefio and Kumeyaay Bands in the Region of Carlsbad .................................................................. 30 Figure 2. Geology of the City of Carlsbad ..................................................................................................................... 45 Figure 3. Architectural History Sensitivity Model, showing high sensitivity in pink and moderate sensitivity in green, with the balance being considered low sensitivity ............................................................ 54 Figure 4. Paleontology Sensitivity Model ...................................................................................................................... 57 Figure 5. Conceptual capping of a site, in conjunction with a deed restriction (illustratio_n courtesy of Bonadelle Neighborhoods) ................................................................................................................................................ 91 Figure 6. Example of an interpretive panel. .................................................................................................................. 92 LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Summary of Paleontological Sensitivity by Map Unit ............................................................................. 58 LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Attachment A -Carlsbad City Council Policy No. 83 LIST OF APPENDICES Appendix 1 -Separate Implementation Manual Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad iv September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines LIST OF ACRONYMS AB ACHP APE ARMR ARPA BLM BP BSO CCR CEQA CFR CHRIS CONUS CRHR CRMP DPR EIR EIS EP FOE GIS GLO GPS HABS HAER HALS HPDF HPTP Assembly Bill Advisory Council on Historic Preservation Area of Potential Effects Archaeological Resource Management Report Archaeological Resources Protection Act Bureau of Land Management years Before the Present Building, Structure, and Object record Code of California Regulations California Environmental Quality Act Code of Federal Regulations California Historical Resources Information System Continental United States California Register of Historical Resources Cultural Resources Management Plan Department of Parks and Recreation Environmental Impact Report Environmental Impact Statement Evaluation Plan Finding of Effect Geographic Information System General Land Office Global Positioning System Historic American Building Survey Historic American Engineering Record Historic American Landscape Survey Historic Property Data File Historic Property Treatment Plan Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad V September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines IC Information Center MLD Most Likely Descendant NAD North American Datum NAHC Native American Heritage Commission NEPA National Environmental Policy Act NHPA National Historic Preservation Act NPS National Park Service NRHP National Register of Historic Places OHP Office of Historic Preservation PA Programmatic Agreement PI Principal Investigator PQS Professional Qualification Standards ROD Record of Decision SB Senate Bill SHPO State Historic Preservation Officer SLRBMI San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians SOI Secretary of the Interior SOQ Statement of Qualifications STP Shovel Test Pits or Shovel Test Probes TCP Traditional Cultural Property TCR Tribal Cultural Resource THPO Tribal Historic Preservation Officer USA Underground Service Alert USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service UTM Universal Transverse Mercator Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad vi September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines 1.0 Purpose and Need for Guidelines In 1990, the City of Carlsbad developed its first set of guidelines for the treatment of cultural resources that fall within the limits of the City. The original Cultural Resource Guidelines were prepared with funding from the National Park Service (NPS) via the California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) and established a standard of performance for cultural resources investigations to meet the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) that, by today's standards, were narrowly scoped to largely address archaeological sites. Since 1990, a number of changes have occurred in the regulatory context within which the City operates. These changes occurred at various levels of jurisdiction, including at the city, state, and national levels and in the thresholds and expectations for best professional practices in cultural resources management. Changes have also occurred in terms of the level of involvement by stakeholders in cultural resources, particularly Native American tribes, as well as historical societies and the general public. The changes include the following. • Carlsbad City Council Policy No. 83, adopted in 2016, calls for the City to "recognize [the City's] responsibility to protect with improved certainty the important historical and cultural values of current Tribal Cultural Resources within the City limits and to establish an improved framework for the City's consultations with Native American Tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the City of Carlsbad, including the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians." This policy calls for improved communication and consultation procedures with local Native American tribes. It will assist the City in implementing the requirements of Assembly Bill (AB) 52 and Senate Bill (SB) 18 through an update to the 1990 Guidelines, which is represented by the current document. • AB 52, passed by the California legislature in 2014, amended CEQA to require early consultation with California Native American tribes when preparing a CEQA document for a specific project. The City, as CEQA lead agency, must offer consultation with tribes that request notification of projects at the initiation of CEQA. The consultation, if initiated, is to determine whether or not Tribal Cultural Resources, as defined by AB 52, would be affected by the project. • SB 18, passed by the California legislature in 2005, mandates consultation with California Native American tribes when the City is considering the adoption or amendment of a General Plan or Specific Plan. SB 18 requires that CEQA lead agencies consult with local tribes regarding the provision of open space to protect resources important to Native American tribes. • The regulations implementing Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 were amended in 2000 and 2004. The amended regulations, found in the Federal Register at 36 CFR Part 800, specify how federal agencies are supposed to take into account the effects of their undertakings on historic properties. The Section 106 regulations apply to projects in the City when the project would receive federal funding, assistance, licenses, approvals, or permits Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 1 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines (such as a Section 404 Clean Water Act permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers [USACE] or funding by the Federal Highway Administration through Caltrans). • Decisions by the California Courts of Appeal and the California Supreme Court became case law that changed the interpretation of the CEQA Statute and Guidelines. The decision in the Madera Oversight Coalition vs. County of Madera and Tesoro Viejo, LLC (January 2012), said that evaluation of cultural resources to determine significance cannot be deferred until after the CEQA document is certified. This decision also said that preservation in place must be adopted to mitigate impacts to archeological sites, if feasible, unless the lead agency determines that another form of mitigation is available and provides "superior mitigation." In the League for Protection of Oakland's Architectural and Historical Resources vs. City of Oakland and Montgomery Ward & Co, Inc. (February 1997), it was found that documentation of a historically significant building prior to demolition may not reduce impacts to less than significant. If this is the case, a Statement of Overriding Considerations would be necessary in the Environmental Impact Report (EIR). • An update to the CEQA Guidelines that took effect January 1, 1999 removed Appendix Kand added Section 15064.5, Determining the Significance of Impacts to Archaeological and Historical Resources. This section more clearly defined a Historical Resource in the context of CEQA analysis, and established guidelines to determine whether a project may have a substantial adverse effect on the significance of a Historical Resource. The definition of a Historical Resource was added to the Guidelines in Section 15064.S(a) as a result of League for Protection of Oakland's Architectural and Historical Resources vs. City of Oakland and Montgomery Ward & Co, Inc., (1997), which, among other findings, determined that Historical Resources are not just those listed on a local register, but also resources that are eligible for listing in the CRHR or may otherwise be considered locally significant. Other subsections describe the types of actions that have substantial adverse effects, the relationship between historical resources and archaeological resources, and the protocol to follow if human remains are found. • An update to the CEQA Guidelines took effect September 27, 2016 to revise Appendix G to the CEQA Guidelines to separate the consideration of tribal cultural resources from cultural and paleontological resources, and to add sample checklist questions. • Best practices in cultural resources management now emphasize avoidance and preservation over destruction with documentation or data recovery. In addition, advances in digital technology have provided cultural resources managers with new tools for resource mapping, documentation, and data management. • There has been an increased awareness of the importance of early consultation with resource stakeholders as part of project planning, particularly with tribes. • There is an increasingly complex tribal consultation process that the City is either directly or indirectly affected by, and which varies from project to project. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 2 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines • City budgetary constraints, coupled with a recent post-recession increase in private-sector development, have led to the need for streamlined processing and compliance verification, and greater City staff efficiency. • Paleontological resources are now protected under state law and local regulations. These remnants of ancient life have scientific and educational value and are of great interest to many citizens of the City. These changes have necessitated not only an update to the City's Cultural Resources Guidelines, but the addition of new procedures to address the additional requirements that emerged since the Cultural Resources Guidelines were adopted in 1990. However, guidelines are only effective when they translate a complicated regulatory setting into an understandable set of procedures and when they offer clarification and standardization of implementation that the regulations themselves fail to provide. The City's Cultural Resources Guidelines must: • be user-friendly for City staff, by including process flow charts, compliance verification forms, and processing checklists that collectively standardize the implementation of the Guidelines and increase efficiency; • include resources for cultural resources and paleontological consultants that ensure that the work products provided for review by City staff are consistent in terms of level of detail and format, which will contribute to greater efficiency in City staff review and result in fewer denials or requests for further information; and • be clear, have established timeframes, and provide built-in accountability that removes the uncertainty from the compliance process so that the number of challenges to the need for following specific procedures is reduced. With the preceding in mind, the following updated and newly named Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Resources Guidelines were developed in consultation with the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians, cultural and paleontological resources professionals, City staff, and the public. These Guidelines were authored by cultural resources professionals from ECORP Consulting, Inc. who meet the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualifications Standards for prehistoric and historic archaeology. Input regarding the built environment was provided by ECORP and City staff who meet the same standards for historian, architectural historian, and historic preservation planner. Contributions regarding paleontological resources were provided by professionally qualified paleontologists from Cogstone Resource Management. 1.1 Organization These Guidelines are organized into twelve main sections. Section 1 presented the purpose and need for the Guidelines. Section 2 provides definitions of resources that are utilized throughout the Guidelines, and Section 3 provides an overview of the regulatory context. Section 4 includes detailed Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 3 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines cultural and paleontological context statements that can be used by the City and professional consultants in evaluating significance or interpreting site function. Section 5 outlines the roles and responsibilities of those responsible for participating in, implementing, or verifying compliance with these Guidelines. Section 6 presents high-level sensitivity models for archaeological, architectural history, and paleontological resources that are intended to aid the City in making informed decisions about land use. Section 7 provides general standards of analysis, and Sections 8, 9, and 10 provide the processes by which resources are considered under these Guidelines for tribal cultural resources, cultural resources, and paleontological resources, respectively. Section 11 discusses the process by which compliance is verified. References cited in these Guidelines are provided in Section 12. Attachment A provides a copy of Carlsbad City Council Policy No. 83, which led to the need to update these Guidelines. Appendix 1 is a separate Implementation Manual, which contains templates and forms needed to carry out the procedures specified in these Guidelines. Modifications to the Implementation Manual do not require an amendment to these Guidelines. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 4 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines 2.0 Definitions of Resources These Guidelines pertain to a variety of types of resources within the City. In the broadest sense, these resources can be classified as either those relating to past human activities or those relating to past non-human life-forms. 2.1 Types "Cultural resources" are broadly defined as anything made, modified, or moved by a human in the past. Cultural resources can also be described in terms of time period (prehistoric, ethnographic, and historic), culture (for example, Native American or Euroamerican), physical state (archaeological, built environment, landscape level, and sacred/religious), and significance, which is defined as meeting certain criteria and age thresholds specified in the regulations. In particular, a resource that is considered sacred, religious, spiritual or an object of cultural value to Native American tribes, regardless of time period, is a "Tribal Cultural Resource" that is given special and separate consideration under state and federal law, as well as these Guidelines. "Paleontological resources" are unrelated to humankind. Paleontology is defined as the study of ancient life; paleontological resources include direct remnants of ancient life, such as fossilized bones of vertebrate animals like whales and bison, fossilized invertebrate animals like snail shells and crabs, or fossilized plant parts like pine cones and leaves. In addition, paleontological resources include indirect remnants of ancient life such as fossilized tracks and burrows. Vertebrate fossils are less commonly found compared with invertebrate and plant fossils. Resources from the human environment (collectively, cultural resources) take many forms. The way in which they are described or classified can similarly vary, such as by time period, cultural affiliation, and physical characteristics. Most often, cultural resources are described using a combination of these characteristics. Commonly accepted definitions for each are provided below. 2.2 Cultural Association Native American cultural resources are those that are reasonably considered or confirmed (with or without tribal consultation) to be associated with Native American cultures that predated or coexisted with the arrival of Europeans to California. As it pertains to the City, these are generally composed of the Luisef\o and Kumeyaay, inclusive of their descendants, ancestors, and modern groups, such as the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians. A specific type of Native American place is one that is considered sacred, spiritual, or religious in nature. This can include Traditional Cultural Properties (TCPs), Traditional Cultural Landscapes (TCLs), and Tribal Cultural Resources (TCRs) that are identified as such by Native American tribes or communities. A TCP, which is a term that applies to federal undertakings and Section 106, "is eligible for inclusion in the National Register because of its association with cultural practices or beliefs of a living community Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 5 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines that (a) are rooted in that community's history, and (b) are important in maintaining the continuing cultural identity of the community" (Parker and King 1998). It is often referenced within the context of Native American culture, but is not exclusive to that culture. A TCR is a term that applies to CEQA and is defined in Section 21074(a) of the Public Resources Code as a site, feature, place, geographically defined cultural landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, as defined in Section 3. TCPs and TCRs may or may not exhibit noticeable signs of their presence unless called out by those who identify with them as being cultural resources and may include natural landforms, such as mountain peaks, rivers, or ridge tops. Although at the time of the preparation of these Guidelines a formal definition of TCL has not been developed by the NPS, the ACHP states: "Traditional cultural landscapes are considered by the NRHP to be a type of significance rather than a property type. Property types are limited to those specified in the NHPA and the NRHP regulations and include districts, buildings, structures, sites, and objects. Traditional cultural landscapes can and often do embrace one or more of these property types" (ACHP 2012:2). Euroamerican resources are those associated with people of European origin and descent, who first arrived in the San Diego area in the mid-to late 1700s. These include, but are not limited to, missionaries, fur trappers, gold miners, ranchers, and farmers who lived in the area when California was administered by Spain, Mexico, and the United States. 2.3 Time Period Prehistoric resources are places that contain the material remains of activities carried out by the native population of the area (Native Americans) prior to the arrival of Europeans in California. The term "prehistory" originated in academia to mean the time before there were written records, but it is widely understood that the term does not mean "before history;" Native American occupation is known to extend back 10,000 years, representing a Native American "history" that long predates the arrival of Europeans. However, because it is a nearly universal term used in cultural resources management to refer to ancient Native American sites, its usage is retained herein. It is a strong belief held by California Native Americans, including but not limited to the Luiserio, that their people have inhabited this region since time immemorial. Artifacts found in prehistoric sites include flaked stone tools such as projectile points, knives, scrapers, drills, and the resulting flakes from tool production (also known as debitage); ground stone tools such as manos, metates, mortars, and pestles for grinding seeds and nuts; bone tools, such as awls; ceramic vessels or fragments; and shell or stone beads. Subsistence byproducts (burned animal bone, charred seeds, nuts, or organic residue on ground stone tools) may also be present. Prehistoric features include hearths or rock rings, bedrock mortars and milling slicks, rock shelters, rock art, and burials. Ethnographic or protohistoric resources are typically considered to be associated with Native American culture, but they can be associated with other groups, like Hispanic, Asian, or other ethnic populations that migrated to California in historic times. Ethnographic resources often reflect a blending or co- occurrence of European and Native American items, such as the presence of glass beads, woven cloth, Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 6 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines and trade goods in Native American sites. With respect to Native American ethnographic sites, archaeologists tend to distinguish this time period as being marked by the arrival of Spaniards to the San Diego area, sometime between 1769 and 1776. Historic-period resources are places that contain the structures or material remains of activities carried out by people after the arrival of Europeans in the 1700s. Historic archaeological material usually consists of domestic refuse, disposed of either as roadside dumps or near structure foundations. Historic artifacts can include domestic refuse (food containers such as cans and bottles, ceramic and glass vessels for preparing and serving food and beverages, utensils, food waste, cosmetic and grooming items [perfume and cosmetics jars, combs brushes, mirrors], and clothing fasteners), building material (brick, concrete, concrete blocks, lumber, window glass, water and sewer pipe, nails, screws, bolts, and other metal fasteners), auto parts and oil cans, tools, and other miscellaneous items. Historic features include privies, pits, wells, and structure foundations. Archaeological investigations of historic-period sites are usually supplemented by historical research using written records. Historic structures include houses, garages, barns, commercial structures, industrial facilities, community buildings, dams, levees, and other structures and facilities with extant architecture that are usually more than 45 years old. Historic structures may also have associated archaeological deposits, such as abandoned wells, cellars, and privies, refuse deposits, and foundations of former outbuildings. Note that the use of "historic" instead of "historical" is deliberate in this context, as explained in Section 3. 2.4 Physical Characteristics Archaeological resources are composed of the remnants of past human activity, and include, but are not limited to, surface or subsurface artifact scatters, midden deposits, subsurface features, and human remains associated with any culture. According to National Register Bulletin 15, a "site" is the "location of a significant event, a prehistoric or historic occupation or activity, or a building or structure, whether standing, ruined, or vanished, where the location itself possesses historic, cultural, or archeological value regardless of the value of any existing structure. They include village sites, cemeteries, rock art, habitation sites, camp sites, and other archaeological features." A discussion of the National Register of Historic Places and related federal laws, upon which the National Register Bulletin relies and implements, is provided in Section 3. Archaeological sites are the locations of an event, a prehistoric or historic occupation or activity, or the former location of a building or structure, where the location itself possesses historic, cultural, or archaeological value regardless of the value of any existing structure or feature (OHP 1995). Archaeological sites can be defined by the presence of one or more features or artifacts. When based solely on artifact presence, archaeological sites are defined as such when there are at least three artifacts in a ten-square meter area. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 7 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines Archaeological isolates are individual artifacts that are reasonably believe to be out of primary context, such as artifacts that have been transported a distance from their original locations due to a variety of cultural or natural processes. In some cases, isolates indicate the presence of more extensive subsurface archaeological deposits. In other cases, particularly where the isolate is not in primary context, the presence of an isolate may indicate a more extensive prehistoric site in the vicinity, or simply reflects the general sensitivity of the area. Archaeological districts are further defined as "a significant concentration, linkage, or continuity of sites important in history or prehistory" by plan or by physical development (Keller and Keller, n.d.; OHP 1995). Examples of historic archaeological districts may consist of ranches, farms, mining landscapes, and historic town sites that contain a subsurface element. The same criteria are applied to prehistoric districts, which may consist of interconnected village sites, temporary camping sites, and a combination of archaeological sites, ethnographic landscapes, and/or traditional cultural properties. Features are considered "minor components of larger resources, like sites or districts. Features generally consist of small constructed works, discrete activity areas, landscaping, earthworks, non- portable natural objects modified by human use, and other similar cultural entities. They include, but are not limited to values such as: a garage or landscaping associated with a house; a gate valve associated with a ditch; an adit (entrance to an underground mine), tailings, or ruined mill that are part of a mining complex; or a trash pit, orchard, discrete activity area, bedrock milling station, rock art panel, or carved tree associated with a site" (OHP 1005:3). Historic archaeological features can include refuse dumps along roads or drainages with domestic refuse and/or building material; refuse dumps and deposits of domestic refuse and/or building material associated with a farmstead, ranch, residence, or commercial establishment; features and dumps/deposits associated with a historic-period farmstead, ranch, residence, or commercial establishment; or foundations or privies. Features associated with transportation include roads, highways, bridges, railroad grades and tracks, airfields, and runways that are at least SO years old. Linear features may have since been paved over or graded, but may retain their original alignments, thereby possessing some aspects of integrity. The built environment generally is considered to describe extant architecture and structures that are above ground and can still be utilized for the purpose it was originally intended, even if not effectively due to a loss of integrity. Sections N and VIII of National Register Bulletin 15 (How to Apply the National Register Criteria for Evaluation) further define a building as "a house, barn, church, hotel, or similar construction, is created principally to shelter any form of human activity. 'Building' may also be used to refer to a historically and functionally related unit, such as a courthouse and jail or a house and barn. If a building has lost any of its basic structural elements, it is usually considered a "ruin" and is categorized as a site." Bulletin 15 also defines the term 'structure' "to distinguish from buildings those functional constructions made usually for purposes other than creating human shelter and include dams and earthworks." The built environment may also include roads, agricultural irrigation systems, and similar features. These types of resources are studied by architectural historians, rather than archaeologists. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 8 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines Common types of resources within the built environment include buildings, structures, objects, and signs. A building, such as a house, barn, church, hotel, or similar construction, is created principally to shelter any form of human activity. Building may also be used to refer to a historically and functionally related unit, such as a courthouse and jail or a house and barn (OHP 1995). The term structure is used to distinguish from buildings those functional constructions made usually for purposes other than creating human shelter, such as roads, bridges, canals, fences, windmills, dams, etc.) (OHP 1995). The term object is used to distinguish from buildings and structures those constructions that are primarily artistic in nature or are relatively small in scale and simply constructed; although it may be, by nature or design, movable, an object is associated with a specific setting or environment (OHP 1995). This includes signs. Furthermore, in accordance with Title 22 of the City's Municipal Code, historic district means any area that contains several historic resources or landmarks that have special character or special historical value, or which represent one or more architectural periods or styles typical to the history of the City, that has been designated a historic district pursuant to Title 22 (see Section 3). Title 22 also defines historic resources as sites, places, areas, landscape, buildings, structures, signs, features, or other objects of scientific, aesthetic, educational, cultural, architectural, or historic significance to the citizens of the City and includes both historic landmarks and historic districts. This is notably different from the term "historical resource," which is defined in the California Public Resources Code as a cultural resource that warrants further consideration under CEQA. Historic site, as defined in Title 22, means any parcel or portion of real property that has special character or special historic, cultural, archeological, paleontological, architectural, community or aesthetic value. A cultural landscape is recognized for the relationship between cultural and natural features on a broad scale. These can be prehistoric or historic, and can be associated with specific cultures. Examples include large areas of historic mine tailings, prehistoric or ethnographic hunting and gathering locations, historic agricultural areas, and archaeological or historic districts. A rural historic landscape is defined as "a geographical area that historically has been used by people, or shaped or modified by human activity, occupancy, or intervention, and that possesses a significant concentration, linkage, or continuity of areas of land use, vegetation, buildings and structures, roads and waterways, and natural features" (McClelland et al. 1999). Cultural landscapes may include historic homesteads, ranching and grazing lands, or agricultural facilities and fields that have persisted for generations. An ethnographic landscape is defined as a cultural landscape, composed of natural and cultural features, which an associated population defines as a heritage resource. In either case, the individual elements that compose the cultural landscapes (or districts) are always recognized for being related in time and function. The National Park Service (NPS) initially identified ethnographic landscapes within Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 9 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines the grouping of four types of "historical landscapes" (historic site, historic vernacular, historic designed, and ethnographic). The NPS defined ethnographic landscapes as "a landscape containing a variety of natural and cultural resources that associated people define as heritage resources. Examples are contemporary settlements, sacred religious sites, and massive geological structures. Small plant communities, animals, subsistence and ceremonial grounds are often components" (NPS 2000). The NPS's Applied Ethnography program believed the initial definition of ethnographic landscapes to be too broad, and thus expanded the definition to include "a relatively contiguous area of interrelated places that contemporary cultural groups define as meaningful because it is inextricably and traditionally linked to their own local or regional histories, cultural identities, beliefs and behaviors. Present-day social factors such as people's class, ethnicity, and gender may result in the assignment of diverse meanings to a landscape and its component places" (Evans et al. 2001). A prehistoric landscape falls under the NPS's definition of a "cultural landscape" which includes several types of historic landscapes. The NPS defines a historic landscape as "a geographic area, including both natural and cultural resources, including the wildlife or domestic animals therein, that has been influenced by or reflects human activity or was the background for an event or person significant in human history" (Melnick 1984). Prehistoric landscapes are similar to ethnographic and historic landscapes, in that they may include the natural and cultural resources within a designated area. But unlike ethnographic landscapes, they do not contain landscape features associated with cultural practices or beliefs of a living community which have been passed down through generations. Prehistoric landscapes may consist of prehistoric travel routes, quarry sites, or groups of sites associated by archaeological deposits and/or features within a geographic region. A rural historic landscape is defined as "a geographical area that historically has been used by people, or shaped or modified by human activity, occupancy, or intervention, and that possesses a significant concentration, linkage, or continuity of areas of land use, vegetation, buildings and structures, roads and waterways, and natural features" (McClelland et al. 1999). Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 10 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines 3.0 Regulatory Context These Guidelines were developed to satisfy a variety of local, state, and federal requirements, to the greatest extent that they apply to any given project and for requirements over which the City has either jurisdiction or the ability to execute. Full compliance with federal law cannot be achieved solely by the City, and therefore, these procedures will result in project planning and environmental impact decisions that can be utilized by federal agencies to complete the compliance process. A summary of the scope of the regulatory context, including excerpts, is provided below. Not all projects under City jurisdiction will require compliance with all of these regulations. 3.1 Local 3.1.1 City of Carlsbad General Plan The City of Carlsbad General Plan (2015) affords consideration for the preservation of cultural resources. The City's Vision Statement Core Values for their General Plan note examples of the historical resources within the City including the Rancho Carrillo, the Marron Adobe, the Barrio neighborhood, the Magee House, and the Village. The General Plan includes guidelines to help revitalize the historic Barrio and Village neighborhoods. The General Plan also states the goal of enhancing education about the area's Native American history. Following are relevant goals and policies of the Arts, History, Culture, and Education Element of the City's General Plan: Goal 7-G-1: Recognize, protect, preserve, and enhance the city's diverse heritage. Policy 7-P.1 Prepare an updated inventory of historic resources in Carlsbad, with recommendations for specific properties and districts to be designated in national, state, and local registries, if determined appropriate and with agreement of the property owners. Policy 7-P.2 Encourage the use of regional, state and federal programs that promote cultural preservation to upgrade and redevelop properties with historic or cultural value. Consider becoming a participant in the Mills Act tax incentive program. Policy 7-P.5 Encourage the rehabilitation of qualified historic structures through application of the California Historical Building Code. Policy 7-P.6 Ensure compliance with the City of Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidelines to avoid or substantially reduce impacts to historic structures listed or eligible to be listed in the National Register of Historic Places or the California Register of Historical Resources. Policy 7-P.7 Implement the City of Carlsbad Cultural Resources Guidelines to avoid or substantially reduce impacts to archaeological and paleontological resources. Policy 7-P.8 During construction of specific development projects, require monitoring of grading, ground-disturbing, and other major earth-moving activities in previously undisturbed Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 11 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines 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. Policy 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. Policy 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. Policy 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. Goal 7-G.2: Make Carlsbad's history more visible and accessible to residents and visitors. Policy 7-P.3 Formalize a program of historical markers/plaques at resources in state and national registers or of local importance. Policy 7-P.4 Promote community education of historic resources, integration and celebration of such resources as part of community events: a. Enhance the community's recognition that objects of historic importance increase both fiscal and community value. b. Promote the use of historic resources for the education, pleasure and welfare of the people of the city. Cooperate with historic societies, schools, libraries, parks and community members to stimulate public interest in historic preservation. c. Maintain historical reference materials on file at the Carlsbad City Library. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 12 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines The General Plan includes designating Special Resource Areas that help reserve natural and cultural features within the City. Following is a relevant policy of the Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation Element of the City's General Plan: Policy 4-P.32: Where appropriate, designate as open space those areas that preserve historic, cultural, archeological, paleontological and educational resources. Promote expansion of recreational and educational use opportunities in areas of significant ecological value, such as lagoons, where discretionary use of the resource allows. Consider partnering with private foundations for the conservation of such lands and the development of educational programming. Combine historically significant sites with recreational learning opportunities, where possible. • Utilize community parks in support of historical and cultural programs and facilities when feasible and appropriate. Coordinate the efforts of the Historic Preservation Commission on the siting and care of historic ruins within parks. 3.1.2 City of Carlsbad Municipal Code The City of Carlsbad Municipal Code Title 22 Historic Preservation discusses historic and archaeological resources within the City. It includes definitions of local resource types, procedures for owners who want to voluntarily apply for historic site, landmark or district designations, and some regulatory provisions that may be available to owners of historic properties. The full text of Title 22 is available on the City's website. Compliance with Title 22 is voluntary as stated in the ordinance as of the date of these Guidelines. As such, Title 22 is not a regulatory code for the purposes of implementing CEQA. The other laws and regulations referenced and discussed in these Guidelines are instead utilized by the City for CEQA purposes, including Municipal Code Title 19, Environment. The City of Carlsbad Historic Preservation Commission implements Title 22 and the duties of the Commission specified in Municipal Code Chapter 2.42. The five-member Historic Preservation Commission acts in an advisory capacity to the City Council and Planning and Housing Commissions in all matters relating to the identification, protection, retention, and preservation of historic sites and areas in the City. Their responsibilities are to recommend the designation of historic landmarks or historic districts, to maintain a historic resources inventory, to provide advice and guidance on the restoration or modification of any historical area or site when requested by the property owner, and to conduct programs to educate local residents regarding historic places, structures, or events. The Historic Preservation Commission is included on the list of interested parties that receive notices for Mitigated Negative Declarations and Environmental Impact Reports prepared for development projects in accordance with CEQA. The notice provides the opportunity for the Commission to comment on CEQA documents for any development project that would affect a historic structure, Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 13 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines archaeological or paleontological site that is identified on an adopted city historic resources inventory or within a project's cultural resources study. 3.1.3 Local Coastal Program The City of Carlsbad's Local Coastal Program (LCP), which provides guidelines and land use policies for the City's Coastal Zone, outlines requirements for cultural resources within the Coastal Zone. The coastal zone is separated into several geographic areas or segments; the first two created in the early 1980s were called Mello I and Mello II, after state legislator Henry Mello, who sponsored the legislation that created the mechanism for the LCP. Select policies relevant to cultural resources are included below. Mello I Segment. Policy 4 -Environmental Impact Report: In the event of commercial and/or residential development pursuant of a coastal development permit, biological and cultural resources on the site shall be identified, and any adverse impacts associated with development mitigated, through a site specific environmental impact report (EIR). Proposed mitigation shall be incorporated in the project design. Mello II Segment: There are two applicable policies: Policy 8-2 Potentially Historic Structures: The City's historic structures which have the potential to meet criteria for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places appear to be economically well-used at present. The sites with historic significance of "local importance" also appear to be in active use. However, maintenance, repair and use of these properties may require special attention. The building code flexibility and tax benefits which may be available to such properties need further study. The City of Carlsbad in conjunction with individual property owners of historically significant structures should determine which local and federal programs are applicable and take advantage of them as appropriate. Policy 8-4 Archaeological and Paleontological Resources: The environmental impact review process will determine where development will adversely affect archaeological and paleontological resources. A site-specific review should also determine the most appropriate methods for mitigating these effects. Most importantly, the City of Carlsbad should require the implementation of these measures. West Batiguitos Lagoon/Sammis Properties Segment: A program of preservation and/or impact mitigation regarding archaeological sites located on the affected area shall be completed prior to any development. North Coast Corridor PWP Overlay Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Amendment (2014), Policy 3.7 Archaeological and Paleontological Resources, 3.7.1: Transportation, community and resource enhancement projects in the North Coast Corridor shall strive to protect and minimize impacts to archaeological and paleontological resources. Where North Coast Corridor projects may potentially adversely impact archaeological or paleontological resources, appropriate mitigation measures shall Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 14 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines be required and implemented consistent with the policies of the NCC PWP/TREP (as prepared by Caltrans/SANDAG, dated August 13, 2014). Any future amendment of the original PWP shall not decrease the level of protection of archaeological and paleontological resources guaranteed by the policies in the NCC PWP/TREP such that the project as a whole would no longer be, on balance, most protective of significant coastal resources. 3.1.4 City of Carlsbad Council Policy No. 83 Effective March 1, 2016, the City Council passed Policy No. 83, Tribal Consultation and Treatment and Protection of Tribal Cultural Resources. The purpose of the policy was to recognize the City's "responsibility to protect with improved certainty the important historical and cultural values of current Tribal Cultural Resources within the City limits and to establish an improved framework for the City's consultation with Native American Tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the City of Carlsbad, including the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians." This policy arose out of focused consultation with San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians and, to the extent allowed under the authority of the City, urges City and private projects under the jurisdiction of the City to be designed to avoid or substantially reduce impacts to Tribal Cultural Resources, as defined in CEQA (see below). The policy also requires the updating of the 1990 Guidelines. 3.2 State 3.2.1 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) The City is similarly bound to comply with applicable sections of CEQA (Pub. Res. Code §21000 et seq.) as it relates to tribal, cultural, and paleontological resources. The goal of CEQA is to develop and maintain a high-quality environment that serves to identify the significant environmental effects of the actions of a proposed project and to either avoid or mitigate those significant effects where feasible. CEQA pertains to all proposed discretionary projects that require state or local government agency approval, including the enactment of zoning ordinances, the issuance of conditional use permits, and the approval of development project maps. Ministerial actions, or those that fall under one of a number of exemptions, are not subject to CEQA. In accordance with CEQA, any project with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a cultural resource, either directly or indirectly, is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment. As a result, such a project would require avoidance or mitigation of impacts to those affected resources. Significant cultural resources must meet at least one of four criteria that define eligibility for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) (Pub. Res. Code §5024.1, Title 14 CCR, §4852). Resources listed on or eligible for inclusion in the CRHR are considered Historical Resources under CEQA. A Historical Resource is a resource that 1) is listed in or has been determined eligible for listing in the CRHR by the State Historical Resources Commission; 2) is included in a local register of historical Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 15 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines resources, as defined in Public Resources Code 5020.l(k); 3) has been identified as significant in an historical resources survey, as defined in Public Resources Code 5024.l(g); or 4) is determined to be historically significant by the CEQA lead agency [CCR Title 14, Section 15064.S(a)]. In making this determination, the CEQA lead agency usually applies the CRHR eligibility criteria. The eligibility criteria for the CRHR are as follows [CCR Title 14, Section 4852(b)]: 1. It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history, or the cultural heritage of California or the United States; 2. It is associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or national history. 3. It embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of a master or possesses high artistic values; or 4. It has yielded, or has the potential to yield, information important to the prehistory or history of the local area, California, or the nation. In addition, the resource must retain integrity. Integrity is evaluated with regard to the retention of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association [CCR Title 14, Section 4852(c)]. Impacts to a Historical Resource (as defined by CEQA) are significant if the resource is demolished or destroyed or if the characteristics that made the resource eligible are materially impaired [CCR Title 14, Section 15064.S(a)]. Prior to the amendments to the CEQA guidelines that established the significance criteria under the CRHR and defined Historical Resources, the CEQA statute only required that the lead agency consider whether or not the project will have a significant impact on unique archaeological sites. A unique archaeological resource is an archaeological artifact, object, or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated that, without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it meets any of the following criteria. 1. It contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions and that there is a demonstrable public interest in that information. 2. It has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest of its type or the best available example of its type. 3. It is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person (PRC Section 21083.2 [g]). CEQA Guidelines require that it should first be determined whether an archaeological site is an Historical Resource (is eligible for the CRHR) (14 CCR Section 15064[c][l]). If the site is a Historical Resource, then the guidelines for assessing impacts to, and mitigation for, archaeological sites that are Historical Resources should be followed and the financial limits on mitigation for unique archaeological sites do not apply (14 CCR Section 15064[c][2]). Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 16 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines As a practical matter a site that meets any of the three criteria for unique archaeological sites will almost always meet the definition of a Historical Resource under the CRHR eligibility criteria. Likewise, a site that fails to meet the definition of a unique archaeological site will similarly not meet the definition of a Historical Resource. Therefore, in almost all cases the provisions for unique archaeological sites will not apply if archaeological sites are first evaluated using CRHR criteria to determine if they are Historical Resources. The State CEQA Guidelines note that if a resource is neither a unique archaeological resource nor a Historical Resource, the effects of the project on that resource shall not be considered a significant effect on the environment (14 CCR Section 15064[c][4]). CEQA also requires that the lead agency consider impacts to Tribal Cultural Resources. A Tribal Cultural Resource that meets the statutory definition does not have to be further evaluated for significance. Section 21074(a) of the Public Resource Code defines Tribal Cultural Resources for the purpose of CEQA as: Sites, features, places, cultural landscapes (geographically defined in terms of the size and scope), sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that are either of the following: a. included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources; and/or b. included in a local register of historical resources as defined in subdivision (k) of Section 5020.1; and/or c. a resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Section 5024.1 for the purposes of this paragraph, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe. Recognizing that California Native American tribes are experts in their Tribal Cultural Resources and heritage, AB 52 amended CEQA to require lead agencies initiate consultation with tribes at the commencement of the CEQA process to identify Tribal Cultural Resources. Furthermore, because a substantial adverse change to a Tribal Cultural Resource is considered a significant impact on the environment under CEQA, consultation is required to develop appropriate avoidance, impact minimization, and mitigation measures. The process by which consultation with tribes occurs in CEQA was established with the passage of AB 52. Effective July 1, 2015, a lead agency must provide notice to any California Native American tribe that has requested notice of projects proposed by the lead agency; and for any tribe that responded to the notice within 30 days of receipt with a request for consultation, the lead agency must consult with the tribe. Topics that may be addressed during consultation include the presence or absence of Tribal Cultural Resources, the potential for the project to cause a substantial adverse change to Tribal Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 17 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines Cultural Resources, type of environmental document that should be prepared, and possible mitigation measures and project alternatives. The CEQA Guidelines, Appendix G, include paleontological resources among those resources that should be considered when evaluating the environmental impacts of a proposed project. Effects to unique paleontological resources typically occur through ground-disturbing activities. Significance of the discovery and importance of the resource may determine the level of consideration. Changes to the CEQA Statute resulting from the passage of AB 52 and revisions to the CEQA Guidelines to incorporate the requirements of AB 52 have clarified that cultural resources, tribal cultural resources, and paleontological resources being considered as separate types of resources. This is because all Tribal Cultural Resources are cultural resources by definition, but not all cultural resources are Tribal Cultural Resources. In addition, a Tribal Cultural Resource might also meet the legal definition of a historical resource under CEQA, warranting consideration as both types of resources. Paleontological resources are natural (related to geology and biology), and not cultural (related to humans), in nature. 3.2.2 Senate Bi/118 SB 18 was signed into law in September 2004 and became effective in March 2005. SB 18 (Burton, Chapter 905, Statutes of 2004) requires city and county governments to consult with California Native American tribes early in the planning process with the intent of protecting traditional tribal cultural places. The purpose of involving tribes at the early stage of planning efforts is to allow consideration of tribal cultural places in the context of broad local land use policy before project-level land use decisions are made by a local government. As such, SB 18 applies to the adoption or substantial amendment of general or specific plans. The process by which consultation must occur in these cases was published by the Governor's Office of Planning and Research through its Tribal Consultation Guidelines: Supplement to General Plan Guidelines (November 14, 2005). 3.2.3 California Coastal Act Section 30244 of the Act, "Archaeological or Paleontological Resources" states that: "Where development would adversely impact archaeological or paleontological resources as identified by the State Historic Preservation Officer, reasonable mitigation measures shall be required." If paleontological resources are present, efforts should be undertaken to monitor construction activities in potentially significant areas to reduce the adverse effects to paleontological resources and to salvage any significant fossils, or to avoid the site entirely. The City's certified Local Coastal Program, in conjunction with the California Coastal Commission, implements the California Coastal Act within the boundaries of Carlsbad. 3.2.4 Public Resources Code Section 5097.5 Section 5097.5 (a & b) of the California Public Resources Code Section states: Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 18 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines "No person shall knowingly and willfully excavate upon, or remove, destroy, injure or deface any historic or prehistoric ruins, burial grounds, archaeological or vertebrate paleontological site, including fossilized footprints, inscriptions made by human agency, or any other archaeological, paleontological or historical feature, situated on public lands, except with the express permission of the public agency having jurisdiction over such lands. Violation of this section is a misdemeanor. As used in this section, "public lands" means lands owned by, or under the jurisdiction of, the state, or any city, county, district, authority, or public corporation, or any agency thereof." 3.2.5 California Public Resources Code 5097.9 Public Resources Code 5097.9 establishes that no public agency or private party using or occupying public property or operating on public property, under a public license, permit, grant, lease, or contract made on or after July 1, 1977 shall interfere with the free expression or exercise of Native American religion. This code also prohibits damage to a Native American sanctified cemetery, place of worship, religious or ceremonial site, or sacred shrine located on public property, except on a clear and convincing showing that the public interest and necessity so require. 3.2.6 California Public Resources Code 5097.98 Public Resources Code 5097.98 specifies procedures to be followed in the event of the discovery of Native American human remains. This code specifies that the county Medical Examiner shall immediately notify the persons believed to be most likely descended from the deceased Native American. It provides that the most likely descendant has the right to inspect the site, with permission of the land owner, and provide recommendations for treatment of the remains and grave goods within 48 hours of being granted access to the site. The code also provides procedures in the event that the most likely descendant is unable to be identified or the identified descendants fail to make a recommendation. 3.2.7 California Public Resources Code 5097.99 Public Resources Code 5097.99 states that no person shall obtain or possess any Native American artifacts or human remains except as otherwise provided by law. The code further states that unlawful possession of these items is a felony, punishable by imprisonment. 3.2.8 California Health and Safety Code 7050.5 Health and Safety Code 7050.5 establishes the intentional disturbance, mutilation, or removal of interred human remains a misdemeanor. This code also requires that upon the discovery of human remains outside of a dedicated cemetery excavation or disturbance of land cease until a county Medical Examiner makes a report. The code also requires that the county Medical Examiner contact the NAHC within 24-hours if he or she determines the remains to be of Native American origin. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 19 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines 3.2.9 California Code of Regulations (Title 14, Division 3, Chapter 1) Section 4307 of the California Code of Regulations regarding Geological Features applicable to lands administered by the California Department of Parks and Recreation states: "No person shall destroy, disturb, mutilate, or remove earth, sand, grave, oil, minerals, rocks, paleontological features, or features of caves." Section 4309 of the California Code of Regulations regarding Special Permits applicable to lands administered by the California Department of Parks and Recreation states: "The Department may grant a permit to remove, treat, disturb, or destroy plants or animals or geological, historical, archaeological or paleontological materials; and any person who has been properly granted such a permit shall to that extend not be liable for prosecution for violating the forgoing." 3.3 Federal 3.3.1 National Historic Preservation Act Regulations implementing Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA) (36 CFR 800) provide procedures for federal agencies to identify, evaluate, assess effects, and provide treatment for adverse effects on historic properties for federal undertakings. A "historic property" is defined in 36 CFR Part 800.16(1)(1) as "any prehistoric or historic district, site, building, structure, or object included in, or eligible for inclusion in, the National Register of Historic Places maintained by the Secretary of the Interior. This term includes artifacts, records, and remains that are related to and located within such properties. The term includes properties of traditional religious and cultural importance to an Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization and that meet the National Register criteria" in 36 CFR Part 60. Historic Properties, as defined therein, are subject to these Guidelines. A federal undertaking is a project that receives federal funding or when a federal permit (such as a Section 404 permit from the USACE) is required. The Section 106 process is the responsibility of the federal agency that provides the funding or issues the permit. It is the federal agency official who determines if the project qualifies as an undertaking. However, the City must ensure that projects that qualify as federal undertakings that are initiated by the City or by applicants to the City go through the Section 106 process following the requirements of the responsible federal agency. The City or the applicant may hire a consultant to prepare the reports needed by the federal agency official for the Section 106 process. The steps in the Section 106 process generally parallel those carried out for CEQA and include identification of historic properties, evaluation of historical significance, assessment of effects, and resolving adverse effects. At various points in the Section 106 process the federal official must consult with the State Historic Preservation Officer (SHPO) and any Consulting Parties (such as Native American tribes and local governments, such as the City) identified by the federal official. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 20 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines A reasonable and good faith effort to identify potential historic properties in the Area of Potential Effect (APE) of the undertaking is required. Identification efforts may include background research, including a records search from the appropriate CHRIS Information Center and the NAHC, consultation with Native American groups, and field survey. If potential historic properties are identified, they must be evaluated to assess whether they are historic properties (have historic or prehistoric significance). Historic properties are those that are eligible for or are already listed in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP). The four NRHP eligibility criteria are as follows (36 CFR 60.4): "The quality of significance in American history, architecture, archaeology, and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects of state and local importance that possess aspects of integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, association, and a. is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history; b. is associated with the lives of a person or persons significance in our past; c. embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period or method of construction, or represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic value, or represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction; or d. has yielded or may be likely to yield information important in prehistory or history. In addition, the resource must be at least 50 years old, except in exceptional circumstances (36 CFR 60.4). Effects to NRHP-eligible resources (historic properties) are adverse if the project may alter, directly or indirectly, any of the characteristics of an historic property that qualify the property for inclusion in the National Register in a manner that would diminish the integrity of the property's location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, or association. In addition, the resource must possess sufficient integrity to adequately express the characteristics that make it eligible. Evaluation procedures include historical research to assess association with important historical events or persons, assessment of distinctive architectural or engineering characteristics, and archaeological investigation (may include test excavations) to assess information potential of archaeological sites. The federal agency official makes the determination of eligibility and the SHPO reviews the determination. The SHPO may concur or not concur with the determination. If properties are determined to be eligible (historic properties are identified), it must be determined if the historic property will be adversely affected by the undertaking. The criteria of adverse effect are applied. Adverse effects occur when an undertaking may directly or indirectly alter characteristics of a historic property that qualify it for inclusion in the NRHP (make it eligible for the NRHP). Examples of adverse effects include physical destruction or damage, alterations to a building or structure that are not consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards, relocation, and change of use or setting. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 21 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines Alteration or destruction of an archaeological site is an adverse effect. After applying the criteria of adverse effect, the agency official will make a finding that historic properties are or are not adversely affected. The SHPO will review and concur or not concur with the finding. When there are adverse effects to historic properties, a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) is negotiated between the federal agency and the SHPO, with input from the Consulting Parties. The City may be a signatory, invited signatory, or concurring party to the MOA. The MOA stipulates the treatment that will be applied to resolve the adverse effects. Treatment (mitigation measures) may include documentation of buildings and structures using HABS/HAER standards (including large format photography), rehabilitation using the Secretary of the Interior's Standards, or data recovery for archaeological sites. Other types of mitigation could include ethnographic studies, nominations to the National Register of Historic Places, oral history documentation, coalescing of collections of imagery, or other types of documentation. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 22 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines 4.0 Context Statements 4.1 Regional Archaeology and Ancient Native American History Most archaeologists contend that approximately 10,000 years ago at the beginning of the Holocene, warming temperatures and the extinction of the megafauna resulted in changing subsistence strategies with an emphasis on hunting smaller game and increasing reliance on plant gathering. The San Dieguito Complex was defined based on material found at the Harris site (CA-SDI-149) on the San Dieguito River near Lake Hodges in San Diego County (Warren 1968). San Dieguito artifacts include: large leaf-shaped points; leaf-shaped knives; large ovoid, domed, and rectangular end scrapers and side scrapers; engraving tools; and crescentics (Koerper, Langenwalter, and Schroth 1991). The San Dieguito Complex at the Harris site dates to 9,000 to 7,500 before present (B.P.) (Gallegos 1991: Figure 3.9). However, sites from this time period in coastal San Diego County have yielded artifacts and subsistence remains characteristic of the succeeding Encinitas Tradition, including manos, metates, core-cobble tools, and marine shell (Gallegos 1991; Koerper, Langenwalter, and Schroth 1991). The Encinitas Tradition (Warren 1968) and the Milling Stone Period (Wallace 1955) refer to a long period of time during which small mobile bands of people foraged for a wide variety of resources including hard seeds, berries, and roots/tubers (yucca and agave in inland areas), rabbits and other small animals, and shellfish and fish in coastal areas. The La Jolla Pattern of the Encinitas Tradition was found along the San Diego County coast beginning about 8,500 B.P. Phases within the La Jolla Pattern consist of La Jolla I (8,500 B.P. to 5,000 B.P.), La Jolla II (5,000 to 4,000 B.P.), and La Jolla III (4,000 B.P. to 1,300 B.P.) (Sutton and Gardner 2010). Most La Jolla Complex sites are located around the coastal lagoons, which began filling with sea water at the beginning of this period because of sea level rise as the ice caps melted at the end of the last ice age. Shellfish from these lagoons were an important part of the diet and most La Jolla sites are classified as shell middens. During La Jolla I both rocky shores shellfish, such as Mytilus sp. (mussels), and bay/estuary shellfish, such as Argopecten sp. (scallops), Chione sp. (cockles), and Ostrea lurida (oyster) are found in La Jollan sites. Later in time (after 3,000 B.P.) the rocky shores species are much reduced in quantity and almost disappear from the middens. This has been attributed to increased sediment deposition around the mouths of the lagoons along the northern and central San Diego coast, which covered the rocky habitats. Fewer sites were occupied in these areas during La Jolla III. However, the larger bays to the south (Mission Bay and San Diego Bay) never silted in and there are numerous La Jolla III sites in this area (Masters and Gallegos 1997). The Encinitas Tradition in inland San Diego County is known as the Pauma Pattern and was originally defined as the Pauma Complex (True 1958, 1980). The Pauma Pattern is divided into the Pauma I Phase (7,500-3,000 B.P.) and the Pauma II Phase (3,000-1,000 B.P.) (Sutton and Gardner 2010). Pauma sites have numerous manos and metates and lack the marine subsistence remains seen in La Jolla sites. Other Pauma Complex artifacts include core and cobble tools, scraper planes, and unifacial scrapers. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 23 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines In most Pauma Pattern sites, the mano-metate tool kit predominates, which suggests that collecting and processing hard seeds was emphasized. Pauma sites are located on older high elevation alluvial terraces in valleys and canyons. Some Pauma sites may be buried in shallow alluvium. The inland Pauma Complex and the coastal La Jolla Complex may be different seasonal manifestations of the same people with the La Jolla Pattern emphasizing marine resources (shellfish and fish) and the Pauma Pattern emphasizing hard seeds. There are more planing-scraping tools in the La Jolla Complex and more manos and metates in the Pauma Complex (Waugh 1986:55-56). Following the Pauma Complex, Waugh (1986:310) has defined a Transition Phase from about 2,000 B.P. to 1,000 B.P. in inland northern San Diego County. During this phase people lived in small groups which occupied seasonal camps on knolls and low hills along the San Luis Rey River and the Santa Margarita River and its major tributaries. These groups used the river as corridors for travel between the coastal mesas and interior valleys (Temecula Valley on the upper Santa Margarita River and San Jose Valley on the upper San Luis Rey River) where grass seeds and sage seeds were abundant. Seasonal residential bases were probably established in these areas. While traveling along the river corridors, camps were established in areas where chaparral was producing large amounts of seeds. The knoll locations along the rivers may have been selected in order to see game and members of other groups approaching. The camps had cached metates indicating the camps were-reused seasonally by the same groups. Artifacts found as a result of excavation at CA-RIV-3063, a Transition Phase site on a knoll overlooking the Santa Margarita River in Temecula Canyon, include 5 domed scrapers, 5 cobble tools, 3 cores, 2 biface fragments, 9 unifacially modified flakes, 18 manos, and 4 metates (slab and flat block). Obdisian from both the Coso and Obsidian Butte sources was present (Waugh 1986:233-241). Transition Phase artifacts include artifacts characteristic of the preceding Pauma Complex (core/cobble tools, hammerstones, cortex-based scrapers, domed scrapers), but they make up a smaller proportion of the total tool assemblage. Other artifacts found in Pauma Complex sites, such as scraper planes, hammer- grinders, and discoidals, are absent in the Transition Phase. Small unifacial flake tools and new forms for metates (slab and flat block) first appear during the Transition Phase (Waugh 1986:312). The period from 1,000 B.P. to 150 B.P. in northern San Diego County is divided into the San Luis Rey I Phase (1,000 to 500 B.P.) and the San Luis Rey II Phase (500 to 150 B.P.) (Sutton 2011). San Luis Rey I is characterized by Cottonwood Triangular arrow points, use of bedrock mortars, stone pendants, shell beads, quartz crystals, and bone tools. San Luis Rey II sees the addition of ceramics, including ceramic cremation urns, red pictographs on boulders in village sites, and steatite arrow straighteners. San Luis Rey II represents the archaeological manifestation of the antecedents of the historically known Luisefio. A new settlement system developed in the upper San Luis Rey River drainage area (east of Pala) at the beginning of the San Luis Rey I phase (1,000 -400 B.P.). The most important determinants of the new settlement system were access to water and access to acorns. Small permanent residential sites were located in a linear arrangement along the lower reaches of each of the tributaries on the north side of the San Luis Rey River (Waugh 1986:305). Acorns from coast live oak were available nearby as well as Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 24 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines plant foods from the riparian woodland and chaparral plant communities. Camps were also established on Agua Tibia Mountain / Palomar Mountain / Aguanga Mountain above 5,000 feet to collect and process acorns from black oaks and to hunt deer. These camps were occupied in the fall and were permanent in the sense that they were re-occupied every year (True and Waugh 1982). The watershed of each tributary along the north side of the river probably comprised the territory of a corporate kin group (Waugh 1986:314) or lineage. Settlements within the territory included the multiple residential sites along the drainage in the lowlands and the fall acorn camps in the uplands. An extended family within the lineage probably occupied each of the lowland residential sites (Waugh 1986:296), which together comprised the lineage settlement. The artifacts and features at the lowland residential sites indicate that a full range of activities took place at each site. These activities included hunting, tool manufacturing and maintenance, food processing, and social interaction (Waugh 1986:313). One of these residential sites (CA-SDI-731) is on lower Frey Creek above its confluence with the San Luis Rey River. The site is within the chaparral plant community and near coast live oaks. There are 23 bedrock mortars, 8 bedrock metates, and 20 bedrock slicks or milling surfaces. Ground stone tools include manos, metates, bowl mortars, and pestles. Fire- affected rock and ash features are present. There are both unifacial flaked stone tools, including domed scrapers, and bifacial flaked stone tools, including numerous Cottonwood Triangular arrow points which date to after 700 B.P. in this area (Waugh 1986:179, 262). All, except one, pieces of obsidian were from the Obsidian Butte source. Primary and secondary flakes among the debitage indicates that lithic reduction took place (Waugh 1986:303). A cache of burned Olivella shell beads was found adjoining an ash feature. There were 161 beads, 122 of which were Olivella cupped beads, which date to AD. 1150-1792 in the Santa Barbara Channel area. Faunal specimens consisted mostly of rabbit and deer. There are more deer bones and small rodent bones in the upper levels of the site. A few pieces of marine shell were found (Waugh 1986:179, 222, 266). The San Luis Rey I Complex indicates decreased residential mobility and increased intensification of land use, compared to the previous Transition Phase. Residential sites were located so as to control critical resources, especially water. All residential sites were in direct proximity to water. The transformation to settlement in stable permanent residential sites occurred within a relatively short span of time and coincided with the beginning of acorn use (Waugh 1986:313). Acorns required a much greater labor effort for processing (Basgall 1987), but were storable, allowing year-round settlement in permanent residential sites. This specialization and intensification of resource procurement is indicated by the bedrock mortars and pestles for acorn processing and the arrow points for deer hunting (Waugh 1986:314). At the beginning of San Luis Rey I, decreased mobility in order to control a water source resulted in multiple season residency, intensified use of restricted or smaller habitats or territories, and a specialized system of resource use (Waugh 1986:318-319). There was a consolidation of settlement at the beginning of San Luis Rey II (400 -130 B.P.) in the upper San Luis Rey River drainage area. The number of lowland residential sites decreased from 42 to 13. Each of the 13 residential sites consisted of a large village located at a reliable water source. Each of Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 25 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines the 13 villages had a territory that consisted of the watershed of one of the 13 major drainages that descend from Agua Tibia Mountain -Palomar Mountain -Aguanga Mountain (True and Waugh 1982; True 1990). Multiple lineages now lived together in one village, probably resulting in the parties comprised of multiple lineages described ethnographically for the Luiserio. Each territory had one or more permanent camps in the uplands for gathering black oak acorns and deer hunting in the fall. San Luis Rey II villages are recognized by their large size as well as the presence of ceramics and red pictograph panels on boulder outcrops. The pictographs were painted by girls during their puberty ceremonies and demonstrated clan {party) affiliation and ownership of their territory and its resources. The girls' puberty ceremonies symbolized established party and lineage rights to female labor and reproduction (Waugh 1986:316, 321). One of the 13 San Luis Rey II villages in the upper San Luis Rey River drainage area, known as Molpa (CA-SDI-308), was investigated by archaeologists during the 1950s (True, Meighan, and Crew 1974). It is located on two low knolls overlooking open grassland. There is a reliable spring below the site. The midden area at Molpa occupies 40,000 square yards (about 33,400 square meters). There are two pictograph panels and one cupule rock. There are 289 bedrock mortars and 109 bedrock milling surfaces on 10 outcrops. Seven subsurface features were found consisting of rock clusters and ash. Flaked stone tools included 327 Cottonwood Triangular arrow points, 10 Desert Side-Notched arrow points, and 6 leaf-shaped arrow points. There were also 49 knives, 12 drills, 5 domed scrapers, 1 keeled scraper, 5 flake scrapers, 59 retouched flakes, 7 hammerstones, 2 hammer-grinders, and 1 chopper. Ground stone tools include 88 manos, 24 metates, 8 pestles, and 9 portable mortars. Other artifacts consisted of 59 bone tools fragments, most probably representing awls and needles, 1 steatite arrow shaft straightener, 1 quartz crystal, 1 tourmaline crystal, 1 conically drilled bone fragment which may have been a pendant, 16 Olivella shell beads, 3 abalone ornaments, and 2 glass beads. Ceramics consisted of 2,728 sherds, 8 fired clay pipes and 4 fired clay figurines. Most of the ceramics came from the upper 18 inches of the site, which represents the San Luis Rey II component. There is less information about settlement along the lower San Luis Rey River west of Pala. However, a village site occupied during the San Luis Rey II phase, known as Tom-Kav (CA-SDI-682) was excavated during the 1950s and 1960s (True, Pankey, and Warren 1991). It is located near Bonsall on the San Luis Rey River where there is no adjacent upland area for collecting black oak acorns. There are 116 bedrock mortars, 51 bedrock metates, and 31 milling surfaces (slicks) on 7 groups of outcrops at Tom-Kav. There are small and large cupules on some of the outcrops and there is a pictograph panel on the ceiling of a rockshelter at the east end of the site. Flaked stone tools consist of 94 Cottonwood Triangular arrow points, large bifaces used as knives, drills, scrapers, and retouched flakes. Ground stone tools include 159 manos, 31 metates, 5 pestles, 5 portable mortars, and 29 smoothing stones. Bone artifacts consisted of 77 bone awls, 22 needles, and 57 worked bone fragments. Ceramics consisted of 1,720 Tizon Brown Ware sherds, 76 Colorado Buff Ware sherds, and 18 fired clay pipes. Animal bone was only classified as small and large mammal. A small amount of marine shell (Chione sp. and Argopecten sp.) was recovered. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 26 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines There were no upland acorn collecting camps associated with Tom-Kav, but there are several small processing stations with bedrock milling features and camps nearby. Their function is unknown and they would seem to be superfluous since all the resources collected from Tom-Kav's territory could have been brought back to the village for processing. It is possible these sites date to San Luis Rey I because most have no pottery (True, Pankey, and Warren 1991:47). There is a different proportion of bedrock mortars to bedrock milling surfaces at Tom-Kav compared to f'vlolpa. At Tom-Kav there are 116 mortars and 82 bedrock milling surfaces for a ratio of 1.4 to 1. At f'vlolpa there are 289 mortars and 109 bedrock milling surfaces for a ratio of 2.65 to 1. This indicates that acorn use was less intensive at Tom-Kav and that hard seeds made up a greater proportion of the plant foods (True, Pankey, and Warren 1991:47). Better documentation of a settlement system similar to that around Tom-Kav comes from an investigation of sites on Rancho Lilac on Keys Creek, a tributary which enters the San Luis Rey River from the south, west of Pala. The sites in the Rancho Lilac valley include a Late Prehistoric village, 5 temporary camps with bedrock milling features and subsurface deposits including tools, debitage and animal bone, 9 sites with bedrock milling features only, and 3 lithic scatters. CA-SDI-4909 has been identified as a Late Prehistoric village (Clevenger, Phillips, and Gallegos 1990). It has four loci with midden, each with associated bedrock milling features. The number and type of milling features at CA- SDI-4909 is not provided. Test excavations recovered triangular arrow points, bifaces, utilized and retouched flakes, worked bone, ground stone tools, ceramics, animal bone, marine shell, a shell pendant, and glass beads. The ceramics and glass beads indicate a San Luis Rey II occupation at CA- SDI-4909. The five temporary camps have bedrock milling features (59 mortars and 105 basins/slicks), flaked and ground stone tools, and animal bone. CA-SDI-4909 appears to be a San Luis Rey II village, based on the presence of ceramics. The investigators state that all the temporary camps are associated with the village and that all the sites in the valley comprise a settlement system, implying that were all occupied at the same time by one group. However, the temporary camps lack ceramics and, as with sites around Tom-Kav, there is no need for camps so close to the village. As with the Tom-Kav area, it is more likely that the camps date to the San Luis Rey I Phase. The temporal and functional relationships of the sites cannot be determined because radiocarbon dates are not available. The ratio of mortars to milling surfaces (basins to slicks) is 0.56 mortars to 1 milling surface, indicating that in the Keys Creek area acorns were even less important than in the Tom- Kav area. In the Keys Creek area, hard seeds from the chaparral community which surrounds the sites were the most important plant resource. Their use could have been intensified through managed burning of the chaparral to allow grasses to grow and produce new sprouts from the chaparral plants. This pattern of settlements associated with hard seed processing is probably more characteristic of the lower San Luis Rey River area and the area around Carlsbad. In these areas there was abundant coastal sage scrub and chaparral with numerous plants that produced hard seeds, while acorns were available only from coast live oak trees which had a limited distribution, mostly in canyons. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 27 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines 4.2 Ethnography and Native American History The City of Carlsbad is located in a culturally-rich region, which has long since been home to, or within traditional use areas of, Native American cultures. The cultural history of Carlsbad is complex, and a representative summary of two main cultures, namely, the Luiseno and the Kumeyaay, is provided herein. Figure 1 illustrates the organization of both cultures. The reader is encouraged to seek additional information through references that are cited throughout. 4.2.1 luisefio The Luiseno were one of the Takic-speaking groups in southern California prior to the arrival of Euro- Americans. Luiseno occupied most of the area drained by the San Luis Rey and Santa Margarita Rivers. The Luiseno lived in sedentary and autonomous village groups, each with specific subsistence territories encompassing hunting, collecting, and fishing areas. Villages were typically located in valley bottoms, along streams, or along coastal strands near mountain ranges where water was available and village defense was possible. Inland populations had access to fishing and gathering sites on the coast, which they used during the winter months (Bean and Shipek 1978). Luiseno subsistence was based on the gathering of acorns, seeds, greens, bulbs, roots, berries, and other vegetal foods. This was supplemented by hunting mammals such as deer, antelope, rabbit, woodrat, ground squirrels, and mice, as well as birds including quail, doves, and ducks. Bands along the coast also exploited marine resources, such as sea mammals, fish, crustaceans, and mollusks. Inland, trout and other fish were taken from mountain streams (Bean and Shipek 1978). Hunting was done both individually and by organized groups. Tool technology for food acquisition, storage, and preparation reflects the size and quantity of items procured. Small game was hunted with the use of curved throwing sticks, nets, slings, or traps. Bows and arrows were used for hunting larger game. Dugout canoes, basketry fish traps, and shell hooks were used for near-shore ocean fishing. Coiled and twined baskets were made for food gathering, preparation, storing, and serving. Other items used for food processing included large shallow trays for winnowing chaff from grain, ceramic and basketry storage containers, manos and metates for grinding seeds, and ceramic jars for cooking (Bean and Shipek 1978). Luiseno social organization was based on patrilineal and patrilocal lineages. Exogamy rules required that a man could not marry a woman related to them within five generations. Women moved to their husband's village, but kept their identity as a member of their natal lineage (Cultural Systems Research 2005:15). Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 28 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Corlsbod Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines 29 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines LUISENO BANDS San Luis Rey Pala Pauma Valley Pauma &. Yu1rna Rincon KUMEYAAY BANDS San Pasqual Mesa Grande Barona Viejas Ewilaapaayp Sycuan Figure 1. Luiserio and Kumeyaay Bands in the Region of Carlsbad. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 30 La Jolla Pechanga Campo Jamul La Fl>sta Manzanita September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines The Luiserio corporate group was a "party" composed of one major lineage with a ceremonial leader (chief), a ceremonial bundle, and a ceremonial house or enclosure. Members of other lineages within the party could live in the same village as the major lineage or within other villages within the party territory. The ceremonial chief was also the hereditary chief of the party who organized religious, economic, and military activities (Goldberg 1:47). An advisory council of ritual specialists and shamans was consulted for their specialized knowledge. Resources within the party territory were owned by the party. The party territory was marked by boundary markers and was defended against trespassers (Waugh 1986:74). The most important ceremonies were boy and girl initiation ceremonies and mourning ceremonies for all who had died during the year. The corporate identity of the Luiserio party was reaffirmed through these ceremonies. Ceremonies were usually held during fall and winter when stored foods were available for exchange with other groups. During the girls' initiation ceremony, the girls made geometric red paintings on boulders with their hands. Luiserio girls painted the same geometric rectilinear red designs on rocks and their faces for four successive months. Thus, there are red pictographs associated with every Luiserio village site usually on a boulder or outcrop in or near the village (Cultural Systems Research 2005:55-56). Non-geometric designs were made by shamans in isolated rockshelters and on sheltered outcrops away from the village (Shepard 1996). Ceremonies were held in and around an unroofed ceremonial enclosure surrounded by a brush fence. The enclosure could be round, elliptical, or rectangular. One example measured 38 by 58 feet. There was a ramada (a structure with a thatched roof supported by willow poles) in the center of the enclosure near fire pits. Spectators watched the dances from outside the fence. The ceremonial enclosure was located near the chief's house (Cultural Systems Research 2005:11-12). Houses were circular with conical roofs and were made of a framework of logs covered by tules, sedge, or bark and a layer of earth. The floors of the houses were about two feet below the ground surface. Houses had a central fireplace, but most cooking was done outside (Cultural Systems Research 2005:9). Round earth-covered semi-subterranean sweathouses with an interior fire pit were primarily used by men and were located next to a stream or pond. Ramadas, flat-roofed open structures, provided shade for work areas (Cultural Systems Research 2005:12-13). Women's work areas often consisted of a circular windbreak made of arrow weed or tule. They had a hard-packed earth floor that was swept to remove debris. Earth ovens consisted of a pit with a ring of rocks. Granaries for storing acorns, seeds, and nuts were made of woven arrow weed or willow, sealed with mud. They were built on platforms, on top of houses, or on boulders to keep burrowing animals out. Caves and rockshelters in or near villages were used for activity areas, as caches, and for ceremonies. Rockshelters away from the village could be used as temporary camps. Other temporary camps had lean-tos made of willows with an adjacent fire pit (Cultural Systems Research 2005:12-14). When the Spanish arrived in southern California in 1769, it is estimated that there were 50 Luiserio villages with a population of about 200 each, suggesting a total population of about 10,000 (White 1963:104). Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 31 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines The first contact with Euro-Americans by Native Americans in southern California came as a result of the Spanish Portola Expedition in 1769. Missions were established by Franciscan friars to convert, educate, and control the native population. Mission San Diego was established to convert the Native Americans that lived in the area, known as the Kumeyaay or Diegueno. Mission San Juan Capistrano was established in 1776 on San Juan Creek (in what is now southern Orange County) to convert the Agjachemem or Juaneno. Coastal Luiseno people were also taken to Mission San Juan Capistrano. Mission San Luis Rey was established in 1798 on the lower San Luis Rey River (in what is now Oceanside) to convert the Luiseno (Castillo 1978:100). Some missions later established outposts in inland areas. An asistencia (mission outpost) of Mission San Luis Rey, known as San Antonio de Pala, was built in Luiseno territory along the upper San Luis Rey River near Mount Palomar in 1810 (Pourade 1961). Some coastal Luiseno people were converted and baptized by Franciscan friars and taken to the San Juan Capistrano Mission after it opened in 1776. However, the friars at San Luis Rey Mission (established 1798), allowed many native people to remain in their villages, especially along the upper San Luis Rey River, with a continuation of traditional economic organization and leadership (Bean and Shipek 1978:558). The friars travelled to the villages to say mass and teach farming skills and European crafts (Bean and Shipek 1978:558). Hundreds of Luiseno who lived near San Luis Rey Mission were converted and brought to live at the mission. Other Luiseno converts worked on ranches established by the mission friars. The ranches were within 10 leagues of the mission and included ranches at Santa Margarita, Las Flores, San Mateo, Pala (around the asistencia), and Temecula. The friars appointed Luiseno alcaldes or overseers to manage the labor of the Luiseno on the ranches where the Luiseno grew wheat, barley, and corn and looked after large herds of cattle. Each ranch had houses, storehouses, and a chapel. The priests from the mission came to say Mass in the chapels on the ranches. The Luiseno on the ranches were able to maintain more of their culture and religious traditions than those at the mission. Other Luiseno remained in their villages on the upper San Luis Rey River and the headmen of these villages retained their authority. People who left the mission usually returned to these villages (Phillips 2014). The Spanish saw the native people as lower class, conquered people who had obligations which included obedience, allegiance to the crown, and fidelity to God. The Luiseno saw these as foreign obligations that were forced on them. However, the friars saw not fulfilling these obligations as a crime punishable by forcible return to the mission, public whipping, or incarceration. The friars thought the Luiseno had a child-like culture and therefore the friars should serve in loco parentis and have rights of judgment and punishment (Carrico 2008). After Mexico became independent of Spain in 1821, the Mexican government said that the Indians were citizens of Mexico and released some of them from the control of the missions. In 1834, Mexico secularized the missions. This meant that the friars no longer had political or legal jurisdiction over the converts. While some Luiseno returned to the inland villages, others remained at the mission and on the mission ranches. The Mexican governor of Alta California appointed Pio Pico as administrator of Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 32 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines Mission San Luis Rey. Pico continued the system the friars had established for running a large agricultural enterprise using the labor of the Luiseno, but without the religious instruction that the friars had provided. Pico was assisted by three Mexicans who served as ranch managers. The Luiseno carried out agricultural labor, including plowing, seeding, and harvesting. Craftsmen included shoemakers, blacksmiths, carpenters, soap makers, and weavers. In 1840 the mission and its ranches had 25,000 sheep and 3,000 cattle. Pico served as mission administrator from 1835 to 1840 (Phillips 2014). Under the secularization law Indian pueblos were supposed to be created. The only Indian pueblo in Luiseno territory was Las Flores on the coast north of the Santa Margarita River which was established on one of the former mission ranches. In 1836 there were 196 Luiseno at Las Flores and some had individual plots of farm land. Farm animals were given to the people of Las Flores by the Mexican government in 1839 (Phillips 2014). The mission administrators exploited native labor to enrich themselves. The Luiseno were not paid and were treated like serfs who were given only food. At the mission, some lived in the mission buildings. Under the Mexican system the Luiseno were free to leave the mission and many returned to the inland villages. Others went to Los Angeles where they worked as part time laborers or worked on ranches that had been given as land grants by the Mexican governor to Mexican citizens. One of the land grants in Luiseno territory included Rancho Santa Margarita y Las Flores which included the former mission ranch of Santa Margarita and the pueblo of Las Flores which was also on a former mission ranch. Rancho Santa Margarita was granted to Pio and Andres Pico in 1841 (Avina 1976), one year after Pio Pico resigned as administrator of Mission San Luis Rey. In 1844 Las Flores was added to the land grant (Avina 1976). Pio Pico put a large cattle herd on his land grant, possibly taken from the mission herds. He also had a resident labor force from the pueblo of Las Flores, which was now on his land grant (Phillips 2014). Other Mexican land grants in Luiseno territory included Temecula, Little Temecula, Pauba, Monserate, Guajome, Pauma, and Cuca. Temecula and Little Temecula were located on one of the former mission ranches. The Little Temecula land grant was given to Pablo Apis, a Luiseno who had been an alcalde at Mission San Luis Rey. Apis became the headman or captain of a village community of Luiseno on the little Temecula land grant (Phillips 2014). During the Mexican-American War in 1846, Manuelito Cota, a mestizo who lived near Pala, led a group of Indians who killed 11 Mexicans on the Rancho Pauma land grant. In retaliation, 38 Luisenos and Cupenos were killed at Aguanga. The Cupenos were another Takic-speaking group who lived in San Jose Valley east of the upper end of San Luis Rey River (Phillips 2014). After Mexico lost the Mexican-American War, the U.S. government took control of California. California was governed by the U.S. Army from 1847 to 1849 and became a state in 1850. The U.S. government considered the Luiseno to be Mission Indians who were not U.S. citizens, but were residents of San Diego County. As residents of San Diego County, they were required to pay taxes, which caused much Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 33 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines resentment. The captains of the village communities of Temecula, Pala, Potrero, La Jolla, and Pauma had to sell some of their cattle in San Diego in order to pay the taxes (Phillips 2014). George Barbour was appointed by Congress as Indian Commissioner in 1851 and was told to negotiate treaties with the southern California Indians. Many Luisef\o communities sent representatives to meet with Barbour at Rancho del Chino east of Los Angeles. Barbour did not attend the meeting and returned to Washington, D.C. without accomplishing anything (Phillips 2014). During the Gold Rush, hundreds of gold seekers used the southern route into California, crossing the Colorado River at Yuma where they came into conflict with the Quechan, a Yuman-speaking group. Two white men, Lincoln and Glanton, established a ferry at Yuma and the Quechan established a competing ferry. During a meeting between the two ferry-operating groups, Glanton clubbed the Quechan chief. In retaliation, the Quechan later killed Glanton and Lincoln. The Morehead Expedition was sent by the California state militia to punish the Quechan, but was forced to retreat by the Quechan. However, later in 1850, Camp Yuma, whose name was later changed to Camp Independence, was established. By 1851 there were only 11 men in the camp. The Quechan attacked a group of sheepherders who were crossing the river and stole some of their sheep. They then surrounded the military camp. Captain Davidson of the militia from San Diego went to Camp Independence and rescued the men there; they abandoned Camp Independence and returned to San Diego. The Quechan destroyed Camp Independence and the ferry in late 1851 (Phillips 2014). Perhaps emboldened by the success of the Quechan, Antonio Garra, a Cupef\o leader, organized a revolt against the Americans. The Mexican land grant known as Valle de San Jose came into the possession of an American named John Warner and the ranch became known as Warner's Ranch. Most of the Cupef\o villages were on Warner's Ranch, including the village of Kupa. Garra's son and others killed four Americans in Kupa. Another group attacked Warner's house. Although Warner escaped, when he returned he found that all his possessions in his house had been stolen and all his cattle were gone (Phillips 2014). The Luiserio leaders supported the Americans and refused to join the revolt of the Cuperios. However, a volunteer force of the California militia was organized in San Diego to put down the "Indian revolt" and martial law was declared in San Diego County on November 26, 1851. Antonio Garra, Garra's son, and four other Indians thought to have killed the Americans at Kupa were captured by forces from the California militia and the U.S. Army, were tried by military tribunals, and executed in December 1851 and January 1852. Kupa and other Cupef\o villages were burned. Captain Heintzelman of the U.S. Army returned to Yuma where the Quechan were robbing travelers and "subdued" the Quechan by the end of 1852 (Phillips 2014). The revolt by Antonio Garra and some of the Cupef\o people was a result of the requirement by the County officials that the Indians must pay taxes and the unfulfilled promise of treaty negotiations on the part of the federal government. Meanwhile, the Americans in San Diego believed that all of the Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 34 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines southern California Indians were united against them and that they would be attacked by thousands of warriors (Phillips 2014). Indian Commissioner Wozencraft, a representative of the federal government, negotiated a treaty with the Luiseno captains at Temecula on January 5, 1852. The purpose of the treaty, from the government's point of view, was to stop all acts of hostility against U.S. citizens and other Indians. The Indians had to accept the jurisdiction, authority, and protection of the U.S. Government and to be governed by the U.S. Indian Bureau. In return, the Luiseno, Cahuilla, and Serrano would be given a large vaguely defined reservation that extended from the San Gorgonio and San Jacinto Mountains on the north to a line running west from the San Jose Valley to Pauma on the south. From Pauma the western boundary would run north through Temecula. The eastern boundary was the desert. The Indians who signed the treaty were to be given flour, clothing, cloth, plows and other farm tools, along with horses and oxen. A similar treaty was negotiated with the Kumeyaay on January 6, 1852. The Kumeyaay were to be given a reservation that extended south from the Luiseno reservation through the eastern mountains to the Mexican border (Phillips 2014). The California Legislature opposed ratification of the treaties by the U.S. Senate and the Senate rejected them. Instead, Congress appointed Edward S. Beale as Indian Agent for California. Beale gave Benjamin D. Wilson of Los Angeles a contract to prepare a report on Indian policy for southern California. Wilson recommended setting aside smaller reserves (reservations) where the Indians were currently living, at places including San Gorgonio, San Jacinto, Temecula, Agua Caliente (Kupa), and Tejon. He noted that some of these places had existing vineyards and orchards from mission times. There should be one town in each reserve and the government should provide cattle, clothing, and tools to promote farming. There should be no hereditary chiefs. The Indian agent assigned to the reserve would appoint leaders based on good behavior who would enforce compulsory labor and rationing of food from commonly held stores of the produce of the small self-supporting agricultural community. Congress authorized five reserves, each with a military garrison, in California. One of these was Tejon (north of Los Angeles), established by Beale in 1853. The others were in northern California. Once again, the federal government failed to provide any land for the southern California Indians (Phillips 2014). Cave Couts was appointed Indian subagent for the Luiseno in 1853 and John Warner was appointed subagent for the Cupeno and Kumeyaay. Couts came from a slave-holding family in Tennessee and came to California as an officer in the U.S. Army during the Mexican-American War. He served on the military tribunal in San Diego that sentenced Antonio Garra to be executed. Couts married the daughter of a wealthy Mexican rancho owner in 1851 and received the Rancho Guajome land grant, near Mission San Luis Rey, as a wedding present (San Diego History Center 2016). Couts' appointment as Indian subagent was based on the 1850 Act for the Government and Protection of Indians. Using his position as Indian subagent to enforce provisions of the Act, he instituted a feudal labor system that bound Luiseno to ranch owners who exploited their labor. One of the provisions of the Act allowed employers to take custody of Indian children until they reached majority age, providing them with free Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 35 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines child labor. Couts procured Luiserio labor for the development of his Rancho Guajome and for neighboring ranches. When Indian laborers didn't work hard enough, Couts flogged them, which sometimes resulted in their deaths. Couts was indicted for the flogging death of a Luiserio captain named Urbano in 1855 (Hanks 2012). Couts appointed Manuelito Cota, the mestizo who had killed the Mexicans at Rancho Pauma during the Mexican-American War, to be a paramount chief over the captains of the Luiserio villages on the upper San Luis Rey River. Cota had a ranch east of Pala. Because Cota was not part of any Luiserio lineage, the Luiserio captains did not want to accept his authority. Cota actually served as an Indian labor recruiter and contractor for his own and neighboring ranches (Hanks 2012). Couts wrote in 1856 that the Luiserio were industrious agriculturalists, but that the Kumeyaay did not farm. According to Couts, they subsisted on acorns and stolen cattle (Phillips 2014). When Cota retired in 1860 the Luiserio captains chose Francisco Majal to succeed him. Couts was opposed to Majal because Majal was unwilling to recognize Couts' authority over him. Couts denounced Majal as a drunkard and thief and was successful in getting the Office of Indian Affairs to re-appoint Manuelito Cota in 1865 (Hanks 2012). In 1867 Indian Agent Stanley met with 20 Luiserio captains at Temecula. He gave them supplies and tools and asked them to establish and maintain farms with fruit trees and grape vines. He noted that the Indians were losing their land to white men who also sold them liquor in exchange for their labor and for access to their women. In 1868 Stanley recommended establishing a reservation at Pala. In 1869 Cota recommended San Pasqual as a reservation. In 1870 President Grant, by executive order, set aside land at Pala and San Pasqual for exclusive Indian use (Phillips 2014). The Luiserio captains, who were not happy with Cota because he was trying to get them to move onto reservations, elected Manuel Olegario (also known as Olegario Calac) as paramount chief over 12 villages in 1870. Olegario was a member of an important Luiserio lineage, unlike Cota. However, Olegario was not recognized by the federal government because he had not been appointed by an Indian agent. Olegario and the Luiserio captains said they would not go to the reservations. The Luiserio feared that on the reservations they would become dangerously dependent on the federal government and would lose control over their affairs. Because the Luiserio refused to move onto the ill-defined reservations, President Grant in February 1871 rescinded his executive order creating the reservations (Phillips 2014). Rescinding the order reinforced the Luiserio's belief that on the reservations they would be landless indigents with no claims to the land they currently occupied (Hanks 2012). Violence erupted between the Cota faction and Olegario's followers at Pala and Pauma in the summer of 1871. Cota's sister, Margarita, was taken by Olegario's supporters and hung by her wrists (Hanks 2012). Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 36 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines Olegario and Manuel Largo of the Mountain Cahuilla went to San Bernardino in August 1871 and convinced Justice Wagner to issue an arrest warrant for Cota. News that the leaders of the Luisef\o and the Cahuilla had joined forces and were trying to overthrow the government-appointed Indian leaders led to fears of another Indian uprising, such as the one led by Antonio Garra in 1851 (Hanks 2012). During a meeting with Indian Superintendent Whiting at Temecula in 1871, the Luisef\o captains complained about Cota who they said had abandoned them, did not defend and protect them, and neglected their welfare. Whiting recognized the forced resignation of Cota. At this meeting Olegario said that he was the leader elected and chosen by the Luisef\o and that the reservations were promoted by the ranch owners who wanted the land the Indians currently occupied. Whiting said that neither Cota nor Olegario could be chief and appointed Jose Antonio Sal, Cota's relative, as general chief who should appoint captains and alcaldes. Like Cota, Sal supported reservations. However, most Luisef\o continued to support Olegario (Hanks 2012, Phillips 2014). In 1873 Olegario complained that whites were taking Indian lands and sent a petition to the General Land Office in Los Angeles (Phillips 2014). In 1875, Indian agent Charles Wetmore proposed establishing trust lands for Indians which they could not sell or buy. He also recommended that the proposed trust lands be surveyed to establish their boundaries. Wetmore said that there should be a town on the trust lands where there would be a Catholic church with a priest to "help" the Indians. Olegario opposed the land surveys, saying that surveying would limit Indian lands to small patches and that whites would take the rest. Surveying, which had begun at Pauma, was stopped (Phillips 2014). Olegario began to change his mind about reservations after all of the Luisef\o people were evicted from Rancho Temecula by the San Diego County Sheriff in 1875 (Phillips 2014). The Luisef\o people from Temecula were forced into a waterless canyon which later became the Pechanga Reservation (Hanks 2012). Encroachment on traditional Luisef\o lands was also occurring around other Luisef\o villages. Olegario went to Washington D.C. in November of 1875 and met with Secretary of the Interior Chandler and President Grant. As a result of this face-to-face appeal, on December 26, 1875 President Grant created nine small reservations in San Diego County by executive order. The Pala Reservation, Potrero Reservation (later became the La Jolla Reservation), and the Rincon Reservation were in Luisef\o territory. The Agua Caliente Reservation was created at Kupa for the Cupeno. The other reservations were in Kumeyaay territory (Hanks 2012, Phillips 2014). In June 1877 Antonio Varela, who was leasing land at Rancho Cuca near the Potrero reservation, began grazing his cattle on land outside the rancho, threatening traditional Luisef\o food sources. Olegario and his warriors blocked the access of Varela to the ranch in an effort to keep his cattle off of traditional Luisef\o lands. Several Luisef\o were arrested and brought before Justice of the Peace Cave Couts, who uncharacteristically decided he had no jurisdiction and freed the prisoners (Hanks 2012). Olegario sought the removal of the owner of Rancho Cuca, Margaret Trujillo, and return of the rancho land to the Luisef\o. Deputy Sherriff Ed Bushyhead was sent to Cuca to arrest Olegario. Olegario and Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 37 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines his followers refused to recognize the authority of the arrest warrant and a standoff ensued. Bushyhead returned to San Diego without his prisoner. Olegario went to court and argued that Cuca was traditional Luisefio land, owned and worked by his people "since time began." However, the judge made no ruling in the case (Hanks 2012). Olegario fought for the sovereign rights of the Luisefio people using the white's own legal system. "Olegario Calac redefined the nature of resistance in southern California by his use of the courts as well as confrontation" (Hanks 2012:47). He led the Luisefio in their fight for self-determination and resistance of white domination. "Olegario kept his people together, maintained the tribal integrity of their reservations, and represented the whole of the Luisefio nation with dignity and wisdom" (Hanks 2012:47). Olegario died July 31, 1877. Many Luisefio believed Olegario had been poisoned, but a Medical Examiner's inquest by Justice Cave Couts found no foul play (Hanks 2012). The reservation created by President Grant at Agua Caliente for the Cupefio was rescinded by President Hayes in 1880 at the request of former Governor Downey who was then the owner of Warner's Ranch and wanted all Indians removed from his property. In 1903, all Cupefio were removed to Pala (Phillips 2014). In 1882, Indian Commissioner Hiram Price authorized Helen Hunt Jackson to investigate the conditions of the southern California Indians. Accompanied by Abbot Kinney, she visited the Cahuilla, Luisefio, and Kumeyaay settlements. In her report she recommended resurveying the reservation boundaries and issuing federal patents for them, removing white settlers, establishing schools, distributing farm equipment, and hiring a law firm to represent the Indians. As a result of her visit to Soboba, the Soboba reservation was established in 1883 (Phillips 2014). She wrote the novel Ramona (published 1884) based on her investigations. The Act for the Relief of Mission Indians established trust-patent reservations in 1891 (Bean and Shipek 1978:558-559). The Act created the Pechanga Reservation near Temecula, the Pauma and Yuima Reservation, and the San Pasqual Reservation (not established until 1910) (CIAP 2004). The Act also established the Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) to "manage" the Native Americans and help them "assimilate" into American society (Bean and Shipek 1978:558-559). The BIA established native governments on the reservations (subject to the approval of the BIA) and started boarding schools for native children so that they would "adapt" to American culture. The Perris Indian School opened as a manual training boarding school for Indians in 1892, but lack of water resulted in a move to the Sherman Indian Institute in Riverside in 1901. The purpose of the boarding schools was to remove Indian children from their native environment in order to ensure "the transculturation of American Indians" which included "imposed assimilation" to American culture "and the subsequent loss of a distinct Indian culture," according to Albert Smiley, an Indian commissioner for southern California (Hanks 2012:87). Many Luisefio children were taken to the Perris Indian School and, later to the Sherman Indian Institute. Conditions were poor at the Perris Indian School, resulting in poor health of the children. This caused Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 38 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines great distress among the parents at Temecula who also thought their children were not being fed properly. This may have contributed to the murder of Mrs. Platt, the teacher at the day school at the Pechanga Reservation in 1894. The schoolhouse was burned with Mrs. Platt in it, resulting in her death. Some of the Luiseno parents had asked her for money so they could go to investigate conditions at the Perris Indian School and see their children, but Mrs. Platt refused. At Sherman Institute, children were beaten when caught speaking their native language and many had to steal food from the kitchen to get enough to eat. Many escaped and went home, only to be sent back to the school (Hanks 2012). Constance G. Dubois visited the southern California reservations and villages in 1900. She found that the Indians lived a miserable existence in terrible poverty. They had some legal rights on the reservations, but on private land were vulnerable to the white civil justice system (Phillips 2014). Native Americans were finally granted U.S. citizenship when Congress passed the Indian Citizenship Act in 1924. It was thought that granting citizenship would help assimilate Native Americans into mainstream society. However, this did little to change the authority of the BIA and its agents on the reservations. Indian agent police brutally enforced Prohibition on the reservations during the 1920s (Hanks 2012). The Mission Indian Federation was organized in 1920 to counter the control of the BIA and its agents. The Federation was made up of representatives from all the reservations in southern California, but was led by Jonathan Tibbet of Riverside who could serve as an intermediary with white society. The Federation put its own police on the reservations in order to solve problems before the BIA agents could intervene. The Federation was also a lobbying organization and assisted in convincing Congress to pass the Indian Citizenship Act and other federal legislation affecting Native Americans (Hanks 2012). 4.2.2 Kumeyaay The Kumeyaay (also known as Tipai and Ipai) were Yu man speakers (part of the Hokan language family) who occupied San Diego County. The Kumeyaay have been ancestrally located in the southern part of the City of Carlsbad, southeast into Imperial County and south of the United States into Baja California. From west to east, the Kumeyaay occupied the coast, coastal hills, mountains, and desert. The primary source of Kumeyaay subsistence was vegetal food. Seasonal travel followed the ripening of plants from the lowlands to higher elevations of the mountain slopes. Acorns, grass and sage seeds, cactus fruits, wild plums, pinyon nuts, and agave stalks were the principal plant foods. Deer, rabbits, small rodents, and birds provided meat. Residential bases were selected for seasonal use and were occupied by exogamous, patrilineal clans or bands. Three or four clans might winter together and then disperse during the spring and summer (Luomala 1978). The Kumeyaay were loosely organized into exogamous patrilineal groups termed sibs, clans, gens, and tribelets by ethnographers. The Kumeyaay term was cimul. The cimul used certain areas for hunting and gathering, but apparently did not control a bounded and defended territory, as did the Luiseno. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 39 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines In addition, members of several different cimul usually lived in the same residential base, unlike the Luisefio where a single lineage, party, or clan controlled a village and its territory. Kumeyaay lived in residential bases during the winter and subsisted on stored resources. No permanent houses were built. Brush shelters were temporary and were not re-used the next year. Ceremonies, including rites of passage and ceremonies to insure an abundance of food, were held in the winter residential bases. The cimul leader directed the ceremonies and settled disputes (Christenson 1990:58, 62). One of the most important ceremonies was the mourning ceremony. Upon death, the Kumeyaay cremated the body of the deceased. Ashes were placed in a ceramic urn and buried or hidden in a cluster of rocks. The family customarily held a mourning ceremony one year after the death of a family member. (Luomala 1978). The Kumeyaay were geographically and linguistically divided into western and eastern Kumeyaay. The western and eastern Kumeyaay spoke two different dialects (Christenson 1990:64). The western Kumeyaay lived along the coast and in the valleys along the drainages west of the mountains. The eastern Kumeyaay lived in the canyons and desert east of the mountains. The western Kumeyaay spent the winter in residential bases in the lowland valleys and then broke into smaller cimul groups that moved gradually eastward toward the mountains, following ripening plants and occupying temporary residential sites along the way. Thus, each group occupied several different residential bases during the course of a year (Christenson 1990:292-293). The eastern Kumeyaay spent the winter in villages on the desert margin where water was available from springs at canyon mouths. They moved up the canyons toward the mountains during spring and summer. The eastern and western Kumeyaay met in the mountains in the fall where they gathered black oak acorns, traded, and held ceremonies (Christenson 1990:63). It is estimated that the precontact Kumeyaay population was about 9,000 (Luomala 1978). Beginning in 1775, the semi-nomadic life of the Kumeyaay began to change as a result of contact with European- Americans, particularly from the influence of the Spanish missions. Through successive Spanish, Mexican, and Anglo-American control, the Kumeyaay were forced to adopt a sedentary lifestyle and accept Christianity (Luomala 1978). 4.3 Euro-American History Euro-American colonization of California began with the Spanish Portola land expedition. The expedition, led by Captain Gaspar de Portola of the Spanish army and Father Junipero Serra, a Franciscan missionary, explored the California coast from San Diego to the Monterrey Bay area in 1769. As a result of this expedition, Spanish missions to convert the native population, presidios (forts), and towns were established. The Franciscan missionary friars established 21 missions in Alta California (the area north of Baja California) beginning with Mission San Diego in 1769 and ending with the mission in Sonoma established in 1823. The purpose of the missions and presidios was to establish Spanish economic, military, political, and religious control over the Alta California territory. As previously mentioned, missions were established at San Diego in 1769, at San Juan Capistrano in 1776 and San Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 40 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines Luis Rey Mission was established in 1798 on the lower San Luis Rey River (in what is now Oceanside) (Castillo 1978:100). Some missions later established outposts in inland areas. The missions sustained themselves through cattle ranching and traded hides and tallow for supplies brought by ship. Large cattle ranches were established by Mission San Luis Rey at Temecula and San Jacinto (Gunther 1984). The Spanish also constructed presidios, or forts, at San Diego and Santa Barbara, and a pueblo, or town, was established at Los Angeles. The Spanish period in California began in 1769 with the Portola expedition and ended in 1821 with Mexican independence. After Mexico became independent from Spain in 1821, what is now California became the Mexican province of Alta California. The Mexican government closed the missions in the 1830s and former mission lands were granted to retired soldiers and other Mexican citizens for use as cattle ranches. Much of the land along the coast and in the interior valleys became part of Mexican land grants or "ranchos" (Robinson 1948). During the Mexican period there were small towns at San Diego (near the presidia), San Juan Capistrano (around the mission), and Los Angeles. The rancho owners lived in one of the towns or in an adobe house on the rancho. The Mexican Period includes the years 1821 to 1848. Most of what is now Carlsbad was the Mexican land grant known as Rancho Agua Hedionda, granted to Juan Marfa Marron by the Mexican governor of Alta California in 1842 (Avina 1976:92). When originally granted, the rancho covered three square leagues. When surveyed by the U.S. Surveyor General's Office, the area of the grant was 13,311 acres. Marron had been a ship captain and arrived in San Diego in the 1820s. He married the daughter of the Alcalde of San Diego and was a regidor (city councilman) in San Diego. Marron raised cattle and horses on his rancho. He supported the Americans during the Mexican War which caused trouble with his neighbors when they used his support for the Americans as a pretext to remove all the livestock from his rancho in 1846 (Anderson 2007). The American period began when the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, which ended the Mexican War, was signed between Mexico and the United States in 1848. As a result of the treaty, Alta California became part of the United States as the territory of California. Rapid population increase occasioned by the Gold Rush of 1849 allowed California to become a state in 1850. Most Mexican land grants were confirmed to the grantees by U.S. courts, but usually with more restricted boundaries which were surveyed by the U.S. Surveyor General's office. Land that was not part of a land grant was owned by the U.S. Government until it was acquired by individuals through purchase or homesteading. Floods and drought in the 1860s greatly reduced the cattle herds on the ranchos, making it difficult to pay the new American land taxes on the thousands of acres that comprised many of the ranchos. Many Mexican-American cattle ranchers borrowed money at usurious rates from newly arrived Anglo- Americans. The resulting foreclosures and land sales transferred most of the land grants into the hands of Anglo-Americans (Cleland 1941:137-138). Don Juan Maria Marron died in 1853 at the age of 45, leaving most of Rancho Agua Hedionda to his widow and four children. His brother, Silvestre Marron, received 360 acres. In 1860 the heirs took a Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 41 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines loan of $6,000 from Francis Hinton with the rancho as collateral. Drought, which greatly reduced the Marron's cattle herd, left the Marron family unable to repay the debt and Hinton foreclosed in 1865. Hinton was born in New York and came to California as part of the Boundary Commission Guard during the Mexican War. He previously was a merchant in Yuma (Allen and Harmon n.d.). Hinton never married and lived at the rancho until his death in 1870. Robert Kelly, who had come to San Diego from Yuma with Hinton as a member of the Boundary Commission Guard, became a partner in tbe Jamacha Rancho near San Diego where he raised cattle. In 1860 Kelly became ranch foreman on Hinton's Rancho Jamul and later became a partner with Hinton in Rancho Agua Hedionda. Hinton had no children and, upon Hinton's death in 1870, Hinton's half interest in Rancho Agua Hedionda was bequeathed to Robert Kelly who now fully owned the Rancho (Allen and Harmon n.d.). When Robert Kelly died without heirs in 1890 the rancho passed to the nine children of his brother, Matthew Kelly, who had died in 1885. Matthew Kelly had come to California as part of the Gold Rush and then moved to the San Diego area to join his brother, Robert. The Kelly children divided the rancho equally among them and the new parcels were surveyed in 1895 (Allen and Harmon n.d.). Matthew Kelly lived outside the rancho Oust east of the southeastern rancho boundary) on land (in Section 19 of T3 W, R 12 S) that he purchased from the federal government in 1881 and 1884 (BLM 2016). Kelly's land was known as Rancho de los Kiotes. His heirs sold Rancho de los Kiotes to a San Francisco syndicate in 1922. They sold the land (840 acres) to actor Leo Carrillo in 1938. Carrillo remodeled the adobe house Kelly had built and lived there until his death in 1961 when the ranch passed to his adopted daughter, Mrs. Marie Antoinette Carrillo Delpy (Anderson 2007a). Leo Carrillo Ranch, located in Carlsbad, is now California Historical Landmark No. 1020 and is listed on the NRHP. The original town of Carlsbad was located outside of Rancho Agua Hedionda on federal land along the coast south of Buena Vista Lagoon. The town began as a station (Frazier's Station) on the new California Southern Railroad which completed its line from National City (south of San Diego) to Colton in 1882. The railroad was later completed through San Bernardino to Barstow, where it connected with the transcontinental AT&SF (Santa Fe) Railroad in 1885. The railroad became part of the AT&SF Railway in 1906 (Robertson 1998). John A Frazier, a former ship captain, arrived in the area in 1883 and dug a well near the railroad to provide water for the steam locomotives when they stopped at what became known as Frazier's Station beginning in 1884. Frazier dug another well that produced mineral water. Frazier had the mineral water analyzed and the mineral content was found to be similar to the water of one of Europe's most popular health spas, Karlsbad, in Bohemia (now known as Karlovy Vary, Czech Republic) (Anderson 2007b, Gudde 1969:54). Frazier bought land from the federal government around Frazier's Station and along the coast (in Section 1 of TS W, R 12 S) in 1886 and purchased additional land in 1892 (BLM 2016). Frazier and several businessmen from the eastern U.S. formed the Carlsbad Land and Mineral Water Company Frazier provided the land and the other partners in the company provided the capital. Frazier's Station was renamed Carlsbad when the company divided some of the land into town lots and filed a town plat with the County. The company began bottling the mineral water and sold it Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 42 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines nationwide as (The American) Carlsbad Mineral Water. The Company built a large hotel and spa (the Carlsbad Hotel) near the mineral water well for those who wanted to take the waters in person (by drinking and bathing) (Carlsbad Spa 2016). Frazier sold lots around the hotel and those who bought the lots built businesses and residences that formed the beginning of the town of Carlsbad. In 1890 there were a telegraph office, Wells Fargo Express, a school, a Methodist and a Congregational church, a hotel, and another hotel under construction. The Carlsbad Hotel was destroyed by fire in 1896 (Allen and Harmon n.d.). Several of the partners in the Carlsbad Land and Mineral Water Company, including Samuel C. Smith and Gerhard Schutte, moved to Carlsbad. Gerhard Schutte's home, built in the Queen Anne style, became one of the two Twin Inns. The Twin Inns was greatly expanded and redecorated with exotic foreign themes and later became a fried chicken restaurant. The Shipley family purchased the Smith home, as well as large tracts of land around Carlsbad (Allen and Harmon n.d.). There was little further development in Carlsbad until 1914 when the South Coast Land Company bought up all the remaining lands of the Carlsbad Land and Mineral Water Company, as well as other adjoining properties. The new company drilled wells to provide water for farming. New settlers arrived and bought farm land, growing winter vegetables, grains, and poultry. During the 1920s Carlsbad became a major avocado production area. The Carlsbad Avocado Growers Club was formed in early 1923 with John Newberry as president. The peak years for avocado production were 1947 and 1948. Commercial flower and bulb production also began in the 1920s. In 1949, it was estimated that 90 per cent of the nation's freesia bulbs came from Carlsbad's annual production of nearly three million bulbs (Allen and Harmon n.d.). After a vote about whether to join Oceanside or incorporate, Carlsbad incorporated as a city in 1951 (Allen and Harmon n.d.). In 1930, the Eastman Hotel Company acquired the mineral water well and built the California-Carlsbad Mineral Springs Hotel. The hotel had 130 rooms with a spa and clinic for taking mineral water baths. The hotel was purchased by the Lutheran Services of San Diego in 1956 and became a retirement home (Allen and Harmon n.d.). By the early 1950s, the mineral water well had been buried and forgotten. B. M. Christiansen rediscovered and reopened the well and made a Bohemian-themed well house to protect and commemorate the well (Allen and Harmon n.d.). In 1995, the mineral well was reopened as the Carlsbad Mineral Water Artesian Well by Ludvik and Veronica Grigoras from Karlovy Vary, Czech Republic. A new spa opened as the Carlsbad Mineral Water Spa and the water was sold as Carlsbad Alkaline Water (Carlsbad Spa 2016). 4.4 Paleontological Resources The sediments of the City of Carlsbad contain a geological sequence of marine and non-marine sedimentary rocks that record portions of 140 million years of the earth's history (Figure 2). The primary geologic formations present are marine and non-marine Pleistocene and Holocene sediments, the Santiago Formation, Point Loma Formation, Lusardi Formation, and the Delmar Formation. Other geologic units present in the area consist of the Torrey Sandstone, alluvial flood-plain deposits, paralic Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 43 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines deposits which consist of both marine and continental sediments, marine beach deposits, paralic estuarine deposits, Tonalite, Dacite stock, Leucogranodiorite of Lake Hodges, and some metasedimentary and metavolcanic rocks. The area contains abundant alluvial and flood-plain deposits from the early Pleistocene and Holocene (about 2 million years ago [Mya] to present). The City of Carlsbad also contains many paralic deposits from the Pleistocene (approximately 2 Mya to 10,000 years ago). These paralic deposits are deposits that contain intertwined marine or continental sediments. Based on grain size and depositional history, most of these units have low to moderate fossil potential and should be surveyed to determine fossil potential in individual locations. The Santiago Formation (49-45 Mya) and the Delmar Formation (49-47 Mya) are part of the La Jolla Group and are primarily middle Eocene (49-38 Mya) sandstones and siltstones. The Santiago Formation contains lenses of fossiliferous claystone and siltstone. The accompanying Delmar Formation is a sandy claystone interbedded with sandstone. This formation is not well known for producing fossils, but has the potential to yield specimens. Before the Eocene, this area was a shallow sea (approximately 74 Mya). This sea deposited the sands and silts which comprise the major formations from this time. The Point Loma Formation (76-72 Mya) is a sandstone and siltstone unit with significant fossil potential. This Upper Cretaceous unit is known to contain abundant calcareous nannoplankton. The Lusardi Formation (90-75 Mya), also Upper Cretaceous in age, is primarily a cobble and boulder conglomerate which is unlikely to produce any fossil material, but does contain lenses of medium grained sandstone which have the potential to yield fossil material. There are also zones of metasedimentary and metavolcanic deposits which have low to marginal potential to produce any significant fossil discoveries. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 44 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines Qmb Qop City of Carlsbad Geology LJ Crty Lom1ts •,11 0 0 I I M1k~ I I I I I I I I ~ K1kmlc1crs A. I 62,500 I inch I m1k Geology data modined from Kennedy and Tan. 2007 c=J Oa: alluvial flood-~aln deposits (late Holocene) D Qmb· marine beach deposits (lale Holocene) c=J Ope Parahc estuanne deposits (late Holocene) ,I, 1, 11• 1,ll l 21 .CJ ~~~,=~:t11uvial flood-plain deposits (Holocene and late D Qls: landslide deposits (Holocene and P1e1stocene) \ c=J ~~st:e~~~vlal flood-plain deposits. undivided (late to middle \ \ \ :==I) Oop6-7 (old paralic depoStls, units 6-7 (lale to middle Pleistocene) Qoa6: old alluvial rloocl-plam deposits. unit 6 {late to middle Pleis1ocene) Qoe5. old alluvial flood-plain deposits, untt 5 (late to middle Pleistocene} LJ Qop7-8· oki para!IC deposits. un~s 7-8 (late to mkldle Pleistocene) ~ Oop6: old para lie deposits. untt 6 (late to middle Pleistocene) W Qop2-4 0kt parahc deposits. units 2..4 {late to middle P,e1stocene) Ovoa very o4d alluvial flood.plain deposits, undivided (middle to early Pleistocene) ::=J ~'f:~~ef paralte deposits, undivided (middle 10 earty Map by Andie Simmons. Cogstone Resource M•~ment tnc .• Oranoe. CaMOf,.a 2016 Figure 2. Geology of the City of Carlsbad. Tribal, Cul tural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 45 C) ~~~~~:7 old para11c ctepas1ts, unrt 13 (middle to early □ ~::i~~~:r Old parahc depcSIIS, unit 12 (middle to earty D Ovop10-11 very old paraltedeposf1s. units 10-11 (middle to earty Pleistocene) □ ~::.~:;: old para1tc deposits, UM 10 (middle to ear1y Tda Oac1te stock (MK>Cene) -Td Delmar Formation (middle Eocene) D rsa Santiago Formahon (middle Eocene) Ill Tt Torrey Sandstone (mlddle Eocene) C] t(p Point Loma Formation (Upper Cretaceous) LJ Kl. Lusardi Formation (Upper Cretaceous) -Kt' Tonahte, undivided (mid-Cretaceous) -Klh Leucogranoc:hof'1te of Lake Hodges (mid-Cretaceous) -~::Z~~~imentary and rnetavolcanlc rocks, undivided CJ \Nater BOdy Copynght 02010:E.~1 Oelonne NA: EO Sour~s USGS ESRI TANA ANO Soutces Esn, 0.Lorme USGS NPS September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines 5.0 Roles and Responsibilities Implementation of these Guidelines requires effort from, and collaboration with, a number of City staff; professionally qualified City and consultant staff; and tribes, agencies and interested parties. Those that are expected to either materially participate in their implementation, or those that will contribute important information to the process, are presented below. 5.1 City of Carlsbad The City of Carlsbad will serve either as a CEQA lead or responsible agency for discretionary approval of private-sector projects, or as lead agency and a project proponent for City projects. The City also administers the issuance of ministerial approva ls, plan checks, and non-discretionary actions related to projects under its jurisdiction, which are not subject to compliance with CEQA. The City Building Division monitors and enforces the building and safety standards contained in the state Building Codes and in various municipal codes and policies. This includes oversight of ministerial actions, which are not subject to these Guidelines. There are three primary divisions or departments that may be expected to implement these Guidelines, in whole or in part, as follows. • The City Planning 9ivision and Land Development Engineering are responsible for ensuring compliance of all development proposals with the City's zoning, subdivision, and environmental ordinances, as well as various codes, standards, and policies. • The Public Works Department is responsible for administering and planning City projects that affect public streets, the water and sewer system, and other important infrastructure in the City. • The Parks and Recreation Department operates 40 parks and nearly 68 miles of trails, as of May 2017, throughout the City, and plans and administers City projects in these areas. This includes areas of public open space that contain, or may contain, tribal, cultural, or paleontological resources. The Planning Division, Public Works, and Parks and Recreation Departments are the departments most likely to be responsible for CEQA compliance. In addition, the Historic Preservation Commission will receive Notices of Preparation for Environmental Impact Reports and notices of public review periods for other CEQA documents prepared for development projects under consideration by the Planning Department. Such notices allow the Historic Preservation Commission to comment during the public review period on environmental documents for projects that involve historic structures, and archaeological or paleontological sites, as shown on the hi storic resources inventory or as identified in an environmental study. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 46 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines 5.2 Private Applicants for Projects Developers and citizens who propose development projects within the City, which are typically funded wholly with private money on privately-owned property, are considered private-sector applicants. These applicants are subject to compliance with all applicable laws, codes, regulations, and permits, both discretionary and ministerial. Although the City is ultimately responsible for approval or denial of a proposed project, the applicants and City may engage third-party consultants to implement portions of these Guidelines and carry out technical analyses used to support decision-making of discretionary projects. 5.3 Consultants To ensure that consultants implementing these Guidelines are professionally qualified and produce technical documentation that can be used to support CEQA and discretionary approval of projects, minimum qualifications standards are required. These standards apply to both City-contracted consultants and those retained directly by private-sector project applicants. 5.3.1 Minimum Qualifications for Cultural Resources Professionals The Principal Investigator (Pl) is the professional that is primarily responsible for the design, preparation, execution, and results of a cultural resources study, and is the individual responsible for ensuring that the study is conducted in accordance with the terms of these Guidelines and all applicable laws and regulations. Pis implementing these guidelines shall meet the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards (PQS) that pertain to the particular area of study. The PQS standards are published in 36 CFR Part 61 and Volume 62, No 119 of the Federal Register (June 20, 1997) and state: The qualifications define minimum education and experience required to perform identification, evaluation, registration, and treatment activities. In some cases, additional areas or levels of expertise may be needed, depending on the complexity of the task and the nature of the historic properties involved. In the following definitions, a year of full-time professional experience need not consist of a continuous year of full-time work but may be made up of discontinuous periods of full-time or part-time work adding up to the equivalent of a year of full-time experience. The NPS (NPS n.d.) published more detailed and comprehensive professional qualifications standards that apply to these Guidelines. Qualification standards are provided for Pis in the following disciplines and can be found in their entirety at https://www.nps.gov/history/local-law/gis/html/quals.html. All of the following disciplines also require a demonstrated ability to carry out applicable research or work, and education and experience must be in the relevant field: • Prehistoric Archaeologist: graduate degree plus 2.5 years of experience Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 47 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines • Historical Archaeologist: graduate degree plus 2.5 years of experience • Architectural Historian: graduate degree plus 2 years of experience or an undergraduate degree plus 4 years of experience • Conservator: graduate degree plus 3 years of experience or an undergraduate degree plus 3 years of experience and another 3 years of full-time apprenticeship • Cultural Anthropologist: graduate degree plus 2 years of experience or an undergraduate degree plus 4 years of experience • Curator: graduate degree plus 2 years of experience or an undergraduate degree plus 4 years of experience • Historic Engineer: licensed civil engineer plus 2 years of experience or a Masters of Civil Engineering plus 2 years of experience or a Bachelors of Civil Engineering plus 2 years of experience • Folklorist: graduate degree plus 2 years of experience or an undergraduate degree plus 4 years of experience • Historical Architect: licensed architect plus 2 years of experience, or a Masters of Architecture degree plus 2 years' experience or a Bachelors of Architecture with 2 years of experience • Historical Landscape Architect: licensed landscape architect plus 2 years of experience, or a Masters of Architecture degree plus 2 years of experience or a Bachelors of Architecture with 3 years of experience • Historic Preservation Planner: licensed land use planner plus 2 years of experience or a graduate degree in planning plus 2 years of experience, or an undergraduate degree plus 4 years of experience • Historic Preservationist: graduate degree plus 2 years of experience or an undergraduate degree plus 4 years of experience • Historian: graduate degree plus 2 years of experience or an undergraduate degree plus 4 years of experience The Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards allow for lead agencies to use some discretion in the combination of education and experience criteria required for each specialty. Consultants who may not definitively meet the criteria presented above must obtain approval from the City, in consultation with applicable agencies, prior to acceptance of work products intended to be utilized under these Guidelines, and may be subject to a mandatory peer review of the resulting documentation. Technical staff working under the direct supervision of the qualified PI need not meet the above criteria. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 48 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines 5.3.2 Minimum Qualifications for Paleontological Professionals The qualifications listed below were derived from professional societies, federal, state, and local agencies. The roles are summarized from the same sources. A Principal Paleontologist is an individual with a graduate degree in paleontology, geology, or related field, with at least one year of prior experience as a principal investigator. Generally, such persons will have a total of five or more years of paleontology experience; however, an advanced degree is less important than demonstrated competence. Competence in paleontology can be demonstrated by a thesis or dissertation on paleontological topics, at least three peer-reviewed publications on paleontological topics, or at least 10 paleontological resources consulting reports. The Principal Paleontologist is responsible for ensuring that all subordinate personnel are appropriately qualified and trained. In addition, the Principal Paleontologist is responsible for the evaluation of fossils to determine if they meet legal significance standards, production of a final report with a complete catalog, and for ensuring the curation of significant specimens. Specimens not meeting significance standards may be donated for educational use in the City. Other members of a paleontological field team may include Field Directors, Supervisors, and Technicians/Monitors. Laboratory work and use of specialists may be required to remove rock from fossils, obtain radiocarbon dates and perform other needed tasks. An undergraduate degree in paleontology, geology, or related field is preferable, but is less important than documented experience performing paleontological mitigation. These personnel must work under the supervision of a Principal Paleontologist. 5.4 California Office of Historic Preservation The California OHP is a state agency led by the SHPO that, through delegation of authority by Congress, acts on behalf of the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation in the implementation of the regulations in 36 CFR Part 800 that implement Section 106 of the NHPA. The OHP is also responsible for maintaining the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS), and for administering the CRHR, NRHP, CHL, and various grants and programs related to historic preservation in California. Although OHP does not participate in the CEQA process for individual private-sector projects, it may enter into consultation as part of Section 106 compliance or when state-owned historical resources may be affected by a project. 5.5 California Native American Heritage Commission The California NAHC is composed of a nine-member governor-appointed advisory body responsible for the identification and cataloging of places of special religious or social significance to Native Americans, including sacred sites and known Native American graves and cemeteries. The NAHC may serve as a trustee agency under CEQA, and is responsible for identifying a Most Likely Descendant for Native American human remains that are unearthed in California. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 49 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines 5.6 California Native American Tribes California Native American tribes are defined in Section 21073 of the California Public Resources Code and Chapter 905 of the Statutes of 2004. Those that notified the City in writing of their request to receive notice of all projects subject to CEQA are subject to the procedures enacted by AB 52. These tribes need not be physically located in or near Carlsbad, but must be traditionally and culturally affiliated with the land currently under the jurisdiction of the City. In addition, California Native American Tribes, including but not limited to those that do not request that the City notice them under AB 52, may be consulted under SB 18, as determined by the NAHC. The SB 18 lists typically provided by the NAHC in response to City requests include the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians, but also include other tribes. The City is required to offer consultation under SB 18 to all of the tribes named by the NAHC on its SB 18 list. 5.6.1 San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians The San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians (SLRBMI) and the City enjoy a special planning partnership for all discretionary actions carried out or contemplated by the City. This relationship, which was further fortified by the passage of Council Policy No. 83 in 2016, allows for a higher level of involvement in project planning than is typically afforded to tribes, which is reflected in portions of these Guidelines. The SLRBMI is also a participant in the City's CEQA compliance under AB 52. Although the tribe is not federally-recognized, SLRBMI is a California Native American tribe and is considered by federal agencies as a consulting party in Section 106 consultation. 5. 7 Federally-Recognized Tribes Federally recognized tribes are those defined in 25 CFR Part 83 and identified as such by the Bureau of Indian Affairs. These tribes are recognized by the federal government as having special sovereignty, immunities, and privileges by virtue of their government-to-government relationship with the United States. Federally-recognized tribes are eligible for funding and services from the BIA and are afforded special consultation rights under Section 106 of the NHPA. Federally-recognized tribes may include, but are not limited to, California Native American tribes as described in Section 5.6. 5.8 Other Permitting or Approving Agencies There are several federal agencies that may issue federal approvals, permits, licenses, or funding for projects in the City, which will trigger compliance with Section 106 NHPA and potential consultation with interested parties including but not limited to California Native American tribes, historical societies, and preservation organizations, etc.: • U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE): issuance of a permit for temporary and permanent discharge of fill into Waters of the United States, in accordance with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad so September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines • U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS): issuance of a biological opinion or incidental take permit for federally-listed biological species • Federal Highways Administration (FHA), and its designee, California Department of Transportation (Caltrans): issuance of Federal pass-through funds, which will require separate compliance with the Caltrans Section 106 PA, or issuance of encroachment permits, which will require separate review by Caltrans • Other federal agencies that may provide funding to City or private projects such as the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's Community Development Block Grant program 5.9 Interested Parties Other parties may express interest or provide input in planning and project approval decisions that are based, in part, on the implementation of these Guidelines. These include the City's Historic Preservation Commission, external historical societies and organizations, the City's Cultural Arts Office, professional societies, academia, and the general public. Although these entities do not have responsibility for implementing these Guidelines, any input will be taken into consideration as appropriate. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 51 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines 6.0 Sensitivity Models 6.1 Uses Cultural resources come in a variety of forms, and range from historic, existing architecture to deeply buried archaeological and tribal cultural resources. The very nature of the latter makes identification and avoidance difficult, as some archaeological and tribal cultural resource sites sometimes do not manifest on the surface, such that they would be detectable by typical surface or near-surface methods alone. The ability to predict the presence of cultural resources is not always possible; however, the use of modeling to produce sensitivity and compliance status maps can be very helpful in long-range planning efforts. There are a number of benefits and uses for a sensitivity model for the City including: • serving as a screening tool for planners and developers to determine if cultural resources surveys and evaluations have already been completed for a project area, thereby reducing the effort necessary to inventory for cultural resources; • serving as a planning tool to identify to developers particularly sensitive areas that have a high potential for cultural resources, which may result in larger areas set aside for avoidance and preservation of cultural resources; • identifying areas that may require additional or more specialized studies, such as geo- archaeological investigations; • identifying areas that may require focused consultation with Native American tribes; • identifying areas that may require consultation with specific special interest groups, like, historical societies, or other ethnic groups; • serving as a model for predicting the types of cultural resources that may be expected in a project area; • allowing for the development of research themes and questions, guidelines for treatment, and an overall compliance framework that can be applied in a consistent manner over time; and • being housed in a Geographic Information System (GIS) database and continually updated and refined, as information generated through implementation of the City's Guidelines is fed back into the model. However, as discussed further in Section 7.3, confidential information in the possession of the City cannot be disclosed to the public. Only City staff, professionally qualified consultants meeting the qualifications in Section 5, and California Native American tribes (when appropriate) may have access to information about specific site locations and descriptions. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 52 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines More important than the purpose of this sensitivity model is acknowledgement of what this model is not-it does not provide a predictive map of where resources are located, does not represent an inventory of resources, and must not be used as a substitute for appropriate level of study under applicable state and federal law. The initial sensitivity model for the City was developed through a broad and high-level records search and literature review, a review of geological maps and soils data, aerial photograph review, and from professional expertise in cultural resources management efforts throughout the City. General maps were created based on the model, which show general areas sensitive for archaeology, built environment resources (Figure 2), and paleontology (Figure 3). In the future, tribes may elect to submit information about areas of special concern, which may be included in the sensitivity model with their authorization. In accordance with Section 7.3 of these Guidelines, archaeological information is restricted from public distribution or access under a variety of laws and regulations. Therefore, the sensitivity model for archaeological resources has been redacted from these Guidelines and will be kept in a secure location at the City. Only City planning staff and those qualified professionals meeting the applicable Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualifications will be permitted to view the information. However, the CHRIS information centers are the primary source of archaeological information available to qualified professionals. 6.2 Architectural History Sensitivity Model The three types of areas depicted on Figure 3 are High Sensitivity, Moderate Sensitivity, and Low Sensitivity for resources in the built environment. High Sensitivity: areas shown in red in Figure 3 represent those areas that have known historic districts and features. These include Historic Village and Barrio Neighborhoods; McClellan Palomar Airport; and neighborhoods built before 1968 (as determined by reviewing historic aerial photographs and historic USGS quadrangle maps). Moderate Sensitivity: areas shown in green in Figure 3 represent those areas that can be classified neither as high nor low, because they have not been surveyed for cu ltural resources or do not otherwise fall into either the high or low categories. These include developments that were built between 1968 and 1983 (as determined by reviewing historic aerial photographs and historic USGS quadrangle maps). Low Sensitivity: areas shown without highlight in Figure 3 represent areas that are reflected in the files at CHRIS for having been previously surveyed, and/or have lower frequencies of previously recorded sites, or have recently been fully developed (as determined from historic through modern aerials), or have no visible indication of cultural resources on aerial photographs, or are set back from major water courses, such that the potential for cultural resources is relatively low. This includes heavily developed areas and areas built after 1983. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 53 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines I ..... __ -. -··· ..... .. . . .. ! I! 11---------1 :; n ! : :iJH ~ Figure 3. Architectural History Sensitivity Model, showing high sensitivity in pink and moderate sensitivity in green, with the balance being considered low sensitivity. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 54 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines The categories presented above are considered preliminary only, and are expected to shift over time; thus, they should be considered only for screening and are not definitive. For example, where a property is currently situated in an area of high sensitivity, and such property is subject to the Guidelines for identification, evaluation, and treatment of cultural resources, it will eventually be surveyed. If the survey concludes, with agency concurrence, that there are no cultura l resources located within its boundaries, then the model would be updated by the City to reflect a lower sensitivity, regardless if the development were to proceed; the color would change from red to green or no color. If development of that property is delayed, the classification of low sensitivity would alert the City to require, perhaps, a field visit to confirm ground conditions, but not necessarily a full re-survey. Also, with the passage of time, built environment resources age and new context statements emerge, so these resources may achieve higher sensitivity levels. Over time, over the course of the implementation of the Guidelines, the sensitivity model would more accurately reflect the actual inventory of cu ltural resources. As such, this model will not be available in its entirety to the public, but will be utilized by qualified City staff. However, at any time, a potential applicant for a project within the City can request information about whether the project is located in a high, moderate, or low sensitivity area. Knowledge of the relative sensitivity of the project location may help make a determination about whether development, adaptive re-use or strict preservation is the appropriate land use. 6.3 Archaeological Sensitivity Model Similar to the architectural history model presented above, the three types of areas depicted in the sensitivity model are High Sensitivity, Moderate Sensitivity, and Low Sensitivity. These sensitivity levels were initially developed not by actual site locations, but by the presence or absence of development, or by existing landform. High Sensitivity: these represent those areas that are situated in landforms that typically contain archaeological sites, or for which signatures of cultural resources are visible from aerial photography, or for which there is a higher concentration of previously recorded cultural resources. Moderate Sensitivity: these represent those areas that can be classified neither as high nor low, because they have not been surveyed for cultural resources or do not otherwise fall into either the high or low categories. Low Sensitivity: these areas represent areas that are either reflected in the files at CHRIS for having been previously surveyed, and/or have lower frequencies of previously recorded sites, or have recently been fully developed (as determined from historic through modern aerials), or have no visible indication of cultural resources on aerial photographs, or are set back from major water courses, such that the potential for cultural resources is relatively low. This includes heavily developed areas and areas built after 1983. This model will not be avai lable to the public, but will be utilized by City staff. However, at any time, a potential applicant for a project within the City can request information about whether the project is Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Corlsbod 55 September 2017 Tribal. Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines located in a high, moderate, or low sensitivity area. While the City cannot release confidential information to the requesting party, knowledge of the relative sensitivity of the project location may help make a determination about whether development or conservation is the appropriate land use. The sensitivity model is also useful in suggesting the types of cultural resources that may be encountered, which, in turn, can be used to pre-define research themes and topics. It can also be used to develop standard treatment methods when avoidance or mitigation of significant cultural resources is necessary. 6.4 Paleontological Sensitivity Model The sensitivity of each rock unit in the City was determined by considering the known yield of fossils in each geologic formation. A rank of high, moderate, or low sensitivity for paleontological resources was based on this information. Figure 4 shows the model in its cu rrent form. Table 1 provides a summary. High: High sensitivity was assigned to geologic formations known to contain paleontological localities with fossils meeting significance criteria as defined above. These formations have the highest potential to produce unique invertebrate fossil assemblages or unique vertebrate fossil remains. The High potential units in the City of Carlsbad are the Point Loma Formation, Santiago Formation and some of the old paralic deposits which are equivalent to the Bay Point Formation (130,000-80,000 years old). Moderate: Moderate sensitivity was assigned to geologic formations known to contain paleontological localities or to represent depositional environments that should preserve fossils, but not in every location. This is described as patchiness. These geologic formations are judged to have a strong, but often unproven, potential for producing unique fossil remains (Demere and Walsh 1993). The Moderate sensitivity units in the City of Carlsbad include the Lusardi Formation, Delmar Formation, a few of the paralic deposits from the late to middle Pleistocene, the late Holocene marine beach deposits, and the late Holocene paralic estuarine deposits. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 56 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad Geology Cj City Limits D Geologic Units Paleontological Sensitivity -Low Moderate _H,gh Water Body O.S I M1l~ ~ K1lomctcn A, 1 til,500 I 11\Ch I mile Map by Andre s.mmons Cogstone Resoorce M•naoemem Inc Orang&, Ctlliotnla. 2016 Figure 4. Paleontology Sensitivity Model. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Corlsbod 57 \ \ \ t;t:,;},. ~ol.vl.a Jt~.1111\ :c,pynght :i20l2i?lh1 Delorme NAllrEo Sources USGS ESRI TANA, ANO SourcH E"'1 dtt.&fne USGS NPS, September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines Table 1. Summary of Paleontological Sensitivity by Map Unit Map Unit Description Qa alluvial flood-plain deposits Qmb marine beach deposits Qpe paralic estuarine deposits Qya young alluvial flood-plain deposits Qls landslide deposits Qoa old alluvial flood-plain deposits, undivided Qoa6 old alluvial flood-plain deposits, unit 6 Qoa5 old alluvial flood-plain deposits, unit 5 Qop7-8 old paralic deposits, units 7-8 Qop6-7 old paralic deposits, units 6-7 Qop6 old paralic deposits, unit 7 Qop2-4 old paralic deposits, units 2-4 Qvoa very old alluvial flood-plain deposits, undivided Qvop very old paralic deposits, undivided Qvop13 very old paralic deposits, unit 13 Qvop12 very old paralic deposits, unit 12 Qvop10-11 very old paralic deposits, units 10-11 Qvop10 very old paralic deposits, unit 10 Tda Dacite Stock Td Delmar Formation Tsa Santiago Formation Tl Torrey Sandstone Kp Point Loma Formation Kl Lusardi Formation Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Corlsbod Age late Holocene late Holocene late Holocene Holocene and late Pleistocene Holocene and Pleistocene late to middle Pleistocene late to middle Pleistocene late to middle Pleistocene late to middle Pleistocene late to middle Pleistocene late to middle Pleistocene late to middle Pleistocene middle to early Pleistocene middle to early Pleistocene middle to early Pleistocene middle to early Pleistocene middle to early Pleistocene middle to early Pleistocene Miocene middle Eocene middle Eocene middle Eocene Upper Cretaceous Upper Cretaceous 58 High Moderate Low X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X X September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines Table 1. Summary of Paleontological Sensitivity by Map Unit Map Unit Description Age High Moderate Low Kt Tonalite, undivided mid-Cretaceous X Klh Leucogranodiorite of Lake Hodges mid-Cretaceous X Mzu Metasedimentary and metavolcanic Mesozoic X rocks, undivided Low: Low sensitivity was assigned to geologic formations that, based on their relatively young age and/or high-energy depositional history, are judged unlikely to produce unique fossil remains. Low resource potential formations rarely produce fossil remains of scientific significance and are considered to have low sensitivity. However, when fossils are found in these formations, they are often very significant additions to the geologic understanding of the area. Low resource potential and low sensitivity is also assigned to geologic formations that are composed either of volcanoclastic (derived from volcanic sources) or metasedimentary rocks, but that nevertheless have a limited probability for producing fossils from certain formations at localized outcrops. Volcanoclastic rpck can contain organisms that were fossilized by being covered by ash, dust, mud, or other debris from volcanoes. Sedimentary rocks that have been metamorphosed by head and/or pressure caused by volcanoes or plutons are called metasedimentary. If the sedimentary rocks had paleontological resources within them, those resources may have survived the metamorphism and still be identifiable with the metasedimentary rock, but since the probability of this occurring is so limited, these formations are considered to have a low sensitivity. Low resource potential and low sensitivity also applies to geologic formations that are composed entirely of volcanic or plutonic igneous rock, such as basalt or granite, and therefore do not have any potential for producing fossil remains. These formations have very low paleontological resource potential; i.e. they are not sensitive. Those formations within the City of Carlsbad with Low potential include the Pleistocene and Holocene alluvial and flood-plain deposits, most of the paralic deposits, and the Torrey Sandstone (middle Eocene). It would be unlikely to find paleontological resources in the metasedimentary and metavolcanic rocks, as the heat and pressure these rocks experienced would likely have destroyed any fossil material. The volcanic units in the area, including the Dacite stock (Miocene; 23-5 Mya), and the Cretaceous (146-65 Mya) Tona lite and Leucogranodiorite of Lake Hodges, are also in the Low potential sensitivity and are highly unlikely to yield any paleontological resources. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 59 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines 6.5 Management of the Models The City Planning Division will periodically obtain updates to the models presented in these Guidelines. Formal updates will be carried out by qualified professionals or with collaboration with the CHRIS, or both; however, in the interim, the City will keep confidential records of the results of cultural resources studies that affect the level of sensitivity on a parcel-by-parcel basis. Periodic official updates to the sensitivity models shall not require a revision to these Guidelines; however, any subsequent revisions may be accompanied by an update to the models. In addition, the Planning Division shall notify the secretary to the Historic Preservation Commission upon the updating of non-confidential sensitivity models. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 60 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines 7.0 General Methods and Standards of Analysis 7.1 General Standards There are numerous standards and guidelines that currently apply to cultural resources management. While modifications to these standards are expected to occur over the lifetime of the Guidelines and its individual projects, the fundamental standards for professional cultural resources management will always apply. These fundamental standards and guidelines include: • CEQA and applicable sections of the CEQA Guidelines and Public Resources Code; • Archaeological Resource Management Reports: Recommended Contents and Format (February 1990), published by the California OHP; • Instructions for Recording Historical Resources (March 1995), published by the OHP; • Section 106 of the NHPA and its implementing regulations at 36 CFR Part 800; • Standards for cu ration of archaeological collections in 36 CFR Part 79; • Ethical and professional standards of the Society for California Archaeology, the Society for American Archaeology, and the Register of Professional Archaeologists (RPA); and • Secretary of Interior's Standards and Guidelines for the identification, evaluation, and treatment of archaeological and historical resources as appropriate. The following sections present the specifications for project work that meet the standards and guidelines above. These specifications are also based on standard practice by the NPS for similar projects. Deviation from any standards, guidelines, or work plan specifications must be approved by the City, in consultation with applicable federal agencies, in advance of implementation. 7.2 Thresholds of Review There are two broad types of actions that the City is responsible for: discretionary projects and ministerial actions. Discretionary projects are those that require that the City exercise judgement or deliberation when determining whether or not to approve a project. Because discretionary projects can result in no approval (denial), they are subject to compliance with CEQA and, by extension, these Guidelines. Ministerial actions are agency decisions involving little or no judgment by City staff as to the wisdom or manner of carrying out the project. These actions include plan checks, over-the-counter building permit issuance, dog or business licenses, and oth_er similar actions for which an agency official has no ability to deny or reject the action, as long as the subject of the action meets the pre-approved Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 61 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines parameters and the required terms and conditions are met. Ministerial actions are not subject to CEQA or to these Guidelines. Therefore, the following procedures for the identification, evaluation, determination of effect, and mitigation of significant impacts to tribal, cultural, and paleontological resources apply only to discretionary projects (in which the City has the ability to deny a project through the exercise of judgment as to the wisdom or manner of carrying out the project), or to applicable City projects not exempt under CEQA. 7 .3 Confidentiality Maintaining confidentiality of the location and nature of archaeological sites and TC Rs is of the utmost importance to the City. Similarly, federal and state law recognize this need. As it pertains specifically to CEQA and these Guidelines, the City shall make best efforts to meet the following objectives in the California Public Resources Code, which are provided herein: "Any information, including, but not limited to, the location, description, and use of the tribal cultural resources, that is submitted by a California Native American tribe during the environmental review process shall not be included in the environmental document or otherwise disclosed by the lead agency or any other public agency to the public, consistent with subdivision (r) of Section 6254 of, and Section 6254.10 of, the Government Code, and subdivision (d) of Section 15120 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations, without the prior consent of the tribe that provided the information. If the lead agency publishes any information submitted by a California Native American tribe during the consultation or environmental review process, that information shall be published in a confidential appendix to the environmental document unless the tribe that provided the information consents, in writing, to the disclosure of some or all of the information to the public. This subdivision does not prohibit the confidential exchange of the submitted information between public agencies that have lawful jurisdiction over the preparation of the environmental document" (Section 21082.3[c][l]). "This subdivision does not prohibit the confidential exchange of information regarding tribal cultural resources submitted by a California Native American tribe during the consultation or environmental review process among the lead agency, the California Native American tribe, the project applicant, or the project applicant's agent. Except as provided in subparagraph (B) or unless the California Native American tribe providing the information consents, in writing, to public disclosure, the project applicant or the project applicant's legal advisers, using a reasonable degree of care, shall maintain the confidentiality of the information exchanged for the purposes of preventing looting, vandalism, or damage to a tribal cultural resources and shall not disclose to a third party confidential information regarding tribal cultural resources" (Section 21082.3[c][2][A]). "This paragraph does not apply to data or information that are or become publicly available, are already in the lawful possession of the project applicant before the provision of the information by the California Native American tribe, are independently developed by the project applicant or the project applicant's agents, or are lawfully obtained by the project applicant from a third party that is not the lead agency, a California Native American tribe, or another public agency" (Section 21082.3[c][2][B]). Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 62 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines "This subdivision does not affect or alter the application of subdivision (r) of Section 6254 of the Government Code, Section 6254.10 of the Government Code, or subdivision (d) of Section 15120 of Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations" (Section 21082.3[c][3]). "This subdivision does not prevent a lead agency or other public agency from describing the information in general terms in the environmental document so as to inform the public of the basis of the lead agency's or other public agency's decision without breaching the confidentiality required by this subdivision" (Section 21082.3[c][4]). "Consistent with subdivision (c), the lead agency shall publish confidential information obtained from a California Native American tribe during the consultation process in a confidential appendix to the environmental document and shall include a general description of the information, as provided in paragraph (4) of subdivision (c) in the environmental document for public review during the public comment period provided pursuant to this division" (Section 21082.3[f]". In addition, information obtained or derived from information provided by the California Historical Resources Information System maintained by the California Office of Historic Preservation cannot be disclosed to the public. The California Public Records Act exempts from public disclosure the "records of Native American graves, cemeteries, and sacred places and records of Native American places, features, and objects described in Section 5097.9 and 5097.993 of the Public Resources Code maintained by, or in the possession of, the Native American Heritage Commission, another state agency, or a local agency" (GC § 6254(r)); and "records that relate to archaeological site information and reports maintained by, or in the possession of, the Department of Parks and Recreation, the State Historical Resources Commission, the State Lands Commission, another state agency, or a local agency, including the records that the agency obtains through a consultation process between a California Native American tribe and a state or local agency" (GC § 6254.10). Although no federal lands currently exist within the City boundaries, dissemination of archaeological site information is also prohibited by Exemption 3 of the federal Freedom of Information Act (5 USC 5), because the disclosure of cultural resources location information is prohibited by the Archaeological Resources Protection Act of 1979 (16 USC 470hh) and Section 304 of the NHPA. Therefore, it is also exempted from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act. Therefore, in light of these requirements for confidentiality, the City shall not make publicly available the locations of cultural and paleontological resources, and dissemination of such information will be tightly guarded on a "need to know" basis only. Such circumstances are generally limited to City staff, landowners of property that contain resources, and consultants and engineers who are responsible for designing proposed projects in accordance with these Guidelines. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 63 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines 8.0 Tribal Cultural Resources Procedures Tribal cultural resources (TCR) are identified by California Native American Tribes through a consultation process in CEQA prescribed by AB 52. In recognition of the special relationship between the City and SLRBMI, this process, at minimum, requires consultation by the City with SLRBMI; however, in compliance with AB 52, this does not preclude additional California Native American Tribes from participation. No delegation of consultation authority from the City to Applicants or consultants is provided by these Guidelines, although these parties may be asked to provide technical and administrative support. 8.1 Tribal Outreach and Coordination There are three regulatory mechanisms by which government-to-government consultation between tribes and agencies may occur: Section 106 NHPA, AB 52, and SB 18. Not all three will apply for any given project; however, the following procedures will be conducted when applicable, and documentation of compliance with these procedures shall be kept separate. The City of Carlsbad made a commitment to SLRBMI when it adopted City Council Policy No. 83. To follow through on that commitment, these Guidelines contain specific additional tribal consultation procedures that will apply to SLRBMI, in addition to their participation under the three regulatory mechanisms, when applicable. The procedures under Notices of Exemption are not required by any of the regulatory mechanisms listed previously, and are above and beyond what is normally required. Because these procedures are outside of the strictly regulatory process, they are listed first. 8.1.1 Notices of Exemption Section 15061 of the CEQA Guidelines requires that the City first consider whether or not the project is subject to CEQA, if not exempted by statute or by category. Statutory exemptions are provided in Article 18 of the CEQA statute, from Section 15260 to 15285 and include, but are not limited to: • projects ongoing since 1970; • feasibility and planning studies; • discharge requirements; • adoption of coastal plans and programs; • general plan time extensions; • financial assistance to low or moderate income housing; • ministerial projects; • emergency projects; Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 64 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines • family day care homes; • specified mass transit projects; • transportation improvement and congestion management programs; • application of coatings; • air quality permits; and • specifically named projects either in the CEQA guidelines (Section 15282) and CEQA statute (Section 21080 et seq.). Statutory exemptions under CEQA are not subject to these Guidelines. In addition, Section 21084 of the Public Resources Code required the development of a list of classes of projects that have been determined not to have a significant effect on the environment and are therefore exempt from CEQA, as long as there is no exception to the exemption as specified in Section 15300.2 of the CEQA Guidelines. These categorically exempted projects currently include, but are not limited to the following projects in Sections 15301 through 15333: • operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion of use; • replacement or reconstruction of existing structures and facilities; • new construction or conversion of small structures; • minor alterations to land; • minor alterations in land use limitations; • information collection; inspections; • loans; • accessory structures; • surplus government property sales; • minor additions to schools; • minor land divisions; • acquisition or transfers of lands for conservation or preservation of parks, wilderness, historical resource, or wildlife conservation; • transfer of ownership of land in order to create parks; • open space contracts or easements; Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 65 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines • annexation of existing facilities; • educational or training programs; • normal operations of facilities for public gatherings; • leasing facilities; • small hydroelectric or cogeneration projects at existing facilities; • some types of hazardous materials responses; • in-fill development; and • small areas of habitat restoration. In accordance with Section 15300.2(f) of the CEQA Guidelines, categorical exemptions cannot be used for a project that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource or under unusual circumstances. Because some TCRs may also meet the regulatory definition of historical resources under CEQA, consideration of the project's effects on TCRs must be taken into consideration before determining that a Notice of Exemption (NOE) is the appropriate CEQA document, and such consideration will include input from the California Native American tribes. This additional consideration (the process of which is provided below) is above and beyond what is required under AB 52 in order to meet the spirit and intent of City Council Policy No. 83. 8.1.1.1 Procedure for Pre-NOE Consultation with SLRBMI The City will first screen every discretionary project to determine whether or not it is categorically exempt from CEQA and these Guidelines and does not invoke the exception to the exemption rule. The following types of projects are expected to be categorically exempt and have no reasonable potential to impact either historical resources or TCRs, and therefore, shall not be subject to the tribal notifications below: • statutory exemptions, including ministerial projects; • subdivisions without construction; • wireless communication projects without ground-disturbing activity; • changes of use of existing structures and facilities without ground-disturbing activity; • sign permits; • Consistency Determinations; • time extensions; • repair, minor alteration, repaving or replacement of existing infrastructure within previously excavated alignments, trenches or facilities; and Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 66 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines • other similar projects or permits, without ground disturbing activities or occurring within previously excavated graded areas, alignments, or trenches, as determined by the City Planner. Some projects that are found to be eligible for Categorical Exemptions may still warrant consultation with the SLRBMI in order to determine whether or not a NOE is the appropriate CEQA document. In the event that the City screens a project activity, taking into consideration applicable sensitivity models, and determines that it otherwise qualifies for a Categorical Exemption under CEQA, then no later than 14 calendar days after deeming the application complete, City shall provide written notice by email to the SLRBMI of the intent to determine that a NOE will be prepared under CEQA. No response is necessary from SLRBMI if the tribe has no concerns. If the tribe has concerns, the tribe shall provide confidential comments to the city within 10 business days of receiving the notice of intent. Upon receipt of comments from SLRBMI, within 5 calendar days the City shall acknowledge by email or letter its receipt of the comments. The City shall review and evaluate the comments as follows: • to determine if the comments provide specific evidence about the presence of potential tribal cultural resources within the project area; • to determine if the comments provide specific information that the project may result in potentially significant impacts to tribal cultural resources that may affect the City's ability to utilize a Categorical Exemption; • if the comments are provided in verbal form only, to make a reasonable and good faith effort to interpret the commen'ts in a way that is respectful of the tribe's concerns; • to determine if additional consultation is warranted and would lead to important information prior to the project, as opposed to being conducted as part of implementation of standard unanticipated discovery measures; and • to determine if the information presented meets the definitions and thresholds established by AB 52. The above shall factor into the City's determination of the appropriate CEQA document for the project, as reflected in the CEQA determination letter prepared by the City for the project in accordance with the timelines prescribed by the Permit Streamlining Act. The City shall copy SLRBMI on CEQA determination letters. If comments are received after the prescribed comment period, then the City shall evaluate those comments, but is not obligated to halt the project review and approval process in the meantime. Evaluation and notification of determinations following the receipt of late-arriving comments shall follow the same procedure above. The City may coordinate with SLRBMI and the applicant regarding potential project conditions that may still be desirable for projects that do not meet AB 52 thresholds and warrant a NOE. However, in Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 67 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines the event that the above procedure indicates that a potentially significant TCR is present as defined by CEQA and may be adversely impacted, then the City shall not prepare a NOE, but shall undertake an Initial Study. 8.1.2 Section 106 of the NHPA As a non-federal lead agency, the City is not directly responsible for compliance with Section 106 of the NHPA. However, some projects for which the City is the proponent will require federal permits, approval, or funding assistance. The legal responsibility to consult under Section 106 falls to the federal agency and therefore, the lead federal agency may direct the consultant otherwise; these Guidelines are not intended to supersede federal law or agency directives. To ensure that cultural resources investigations are compatible with the federal requirements under Section 106 and its implementing guidelines, the qualified professional consultant may implement the following procedures, subject to approval by the federal lead agency. For projects subject to Section 106 of the NHPA, the City, or its designee which is likely to be the qualified professional consultant, shall first contact the NAHC to request a search of the Sacred Lands File and list of contacts. Upon receipt of the results, the City or its designee shall send by mail or email a project notification letter to each contact named by the NAHC. The notification letter shall, at minimum, include a boundary map of the project area and a brief description of the project, and the name and contact information to whom comments should be addressed. No sooner than one week following the delivery of the project notification letters, the City or its designee shall attempt, up to two times, to reach each contact by phone or email to verify receipt of the project notification letter and solicit comments. All non-written correspondence shall be documented in a log or appropriate record of conversation, which includes both successful and non-successful attempts to contact each individual. Copies of the written correspondence and logs shall be forwarded by the City or designee to the applicable federal agencies with the applicable technical report in order for the federal agency to follow up and continue with government-to-government consultation. 8.1.3 AB52 Each CEQA lead agency maintains its own file of general request letters from California Native American tribes under AB 52. The City shall first review project applications and within 14 days of determining that the application is deemed complete and it is ready to undertake CEQA review, it shall notify in writing those tribes that specifically requested notification under CEQA. The tribes notified may be different than the tribes being consulted under SB 18 or Section 106, although some overlap may occur. For tribes that respond within 30 days with a request to consult, the City shall initiate consultation within 30 days of receiving the written request to consult. Consultation concludes when either the parties come to agreement on impacts to, and mitigation measures for, TCRs, or, when the City determines, after acting in good faith and in a reasonable manner, that mutual agreement cannot Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 68 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines be reached. The procedures outlined in AB 52 shall be conducted as specified in the California Public Resources Code Sections 21074, 21080.3 et seq., 21082.3, 21083.09, and 21084.3. 8.1.4 SB 18 If a project will require a general plan or specific plan adoption or amendment, the City must comply with SB 18, which requires local agencies, including cities and counties, to contact and consult with California Native American tribes prior to amending or adopting a general plan or specific plan, or designating land as open space containing Native American cultural resources. The consultation that is conducted under SB 18 is different than that which is normally conducted in conjunction with cultural resources studies under AB 52 or Section 106 of the NHPA. In addition, consultation under SB 18 must be government-to-government, between the Native American community and the local agency and in accordance with the Governor's Office of Planning and Research's Tribal Consultation Guidelines (2005). First, the City or its designee will obtain the list of applicable Native American tribes and organizations to contact for SB 18 consultation for the project from the NAHC. Each listed tribe will be contacted by letter to provide them with information about the project and ask if they wish to consult with the City. Follow-up phone calls will be made to each group and the results of all correspondence will be documented in a summary report. Native American consultation meetings will be conducted by City staff. 8.2 Identification of Tribal Cultural Resources The determination of whether or not a TCR is present in or near a project site falls to the City, in consultation with the California Native American tribes through the AB 52 consultation process. A TCR, defined in Section 21074 as sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a Native American tribe that are: • Included or determined to be eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources; • Included in a local register of historical resources as defined in subdivision k of Section 5010.1; and/or • Determined by the City to be significant, as supported by substantial evidence, including a cultural landscape with a geographically defined boundary. Therefore, when determining that a resource meets the definition of a TCR, the City must, through tribal consultation, specify which of the seven aspects of integrity are present during pre-project (current) conditions. National Register Bulletin 38 provides some guidance on establishing integrity of Traditional Cultural Properties, which is the equivalent of TCRs under the Section 106 process. City staff Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Corlsbod 69 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines may also rely upon professional cultural resources consultants to assist in determining or verifying integrity. 8.2.1 Impact Analyses and Mitigation Measures AB 52 established that a substantial adverse change to a TCR has a significant effect on the environment. In making this determination, the City must determine if the Project will cause a substantial adverse change to the TCR. However, because the nature of TCRs can vary, and because they represent a new type of resource in the CEQA process since the adoption of the original Guidelines, and because some TCRs (particularly religious and sacred resources) may be difficult to quantify, determining whether or not a project will significantly impact a TCR may be difficult. Determining impacts to TCRs may initially follow the process typically used to assess impacts to Historical Resources, which relates to integrity. Determination of impacts to TCRs must take into account the significance ascribed to them by the California Native American tribe and may not always parallel impact assessments for Historical Resources. Integrity of a resource is evaluated with regard to the retention of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association [CCR Title 14, Section 4852(c)]. Impacts may be significant if the resource is demolished or destroyed or if the characteristics that made the resource eligible are materially impaired [CCR Title 14, Section 15064.S(a)]. Accordingly, impacts to a TCR would likely be significant if the project negatively affects the qualities of integrity that made it significant in the first place, as determined through consultation with the California Native American tribe. Once the significance of that TCR has been established and further defined by one or more of those aspects of integrity, the City must next determine whether or not the project will adversely affect (significantly impact) those applicable aspects of integrity. In making this determination, the City should address the aspects of integrity that are important to the TCR's significance, which were identified by the tribal experts. 8.2.2 Preferred Treatment Options and Mitigation Measures In the event that the City applies these thresholds and determines that there will be a significant impact on a TCR, the following are preferred treatment options and mitigation measures. Some or all of these options or measures may be required of projects, depending on the particular TCR and/or nature of the impact. 8.2.2.1 Avoidance and Preservation Avoidance and preservation of TCRs can only be accomplished when a legal mechanism prevents future development and there are appropriate measures in place for long-term maintenance. For TCRs, this may require either the recording of a deed restriction or the dedication of a conservation easement over the resource, recorded with the County, to restrict development in perpetuity. Management of the protected resource in perpetuity will be the responsibility of either a qualified third-party easement Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 70 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines manager or the affiliated California Native American tribe. Long-term funding will be required to be demonstrated by the project proponent in either case. The management shall include, but is not limited to, the following measures, as deemed appropriate: • fence and gate repair; • sign replacement; • regular monitoring and associated reporting by a professional archaeologist for damage; • erosion control; • trash removal; • vegetation and weed control with no or minimal ground intrusiveness; • security patrols; • vandalism abatement; and • removal of trespassers. No signs indicating the presence of TCRs shall be permitted. In addition, the deed restriction or conservation easement will be subject to negotiated conditions that restrict certain uses of the property, depending on the nature of the resource. This will be determined in consultation with the California Native American tribe. The Applicant shall provide a copy of the recorded deed or conservation easement that includes the preserved resource as proof of the restriction of future activities that could affect the integrity of the site. Proof of compliance will typically be submitted to the City prior to ground-disturbing activities. 8.2.2.2 Dignified and Respectful Treatment It is important that TCRs be treated with dignity and respect. The City may require as mitigation the implementation of a Contractor Sensitivity Training Session to allow a tribal representative to instill a sense of appropriate respect for TCRs in its construction contractors, and to educate workers about the proper level of respect. 8.2.2.3 Repatriation The City recommends that the landowner or project proponent (if not the City) enter into an agreement with the applicable California Native American tribe on an appropriate reburial location on the property for any cultural materials or human remains that may be unearthed during ground disturbing activities during the project. The location shall be one that will not be subjected to ground disturbing activities in the future. This location will be documented as a reinternment location by the Native American tribe, and the tribe may file it as such with the NAHC, County, City, and the CHRIS. The site of any reburial of Native American human remains shall be kept confidential and not be disclosed pursuant to the Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 71 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines California Public Records Act, California Government Code §§ 6254.10, 6254(r). The Medical Examiner shall also withhold public disclosure of information related to such reburials pursuant to the specific exemption set forth in California Government Code § 6254.S(e). 8.2.2.4 Tribal Monitoring The presence of a Native American monitor will be necessary during ground-disturbing activities that have the potential to affect TCRs. Monitoring may be required for an entire site or portions of a site, depending on discussions and consultation with the tribes and other information based on where native soils occur, a site's geomorphology, geotechnical reports, prior grading plans for disturbed soils, or other reasons. In cases where the TCR is also considered a historical resource under CEQA (i.e., it is also significant for archaeological characteristics), then archaeological monitoring may also be required. In other cases, where the TCR is not significant archaeologically, only a tribal monitor may be required. When monitoring is required to address potential impacts to TCRs, then 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 Luisef\o tribe. This agreement will contain provisions to address the proper treatment of any tribal cultural resources and/or Luisef\o Native American human remains inadvertently discovered during the course of the project. The agreement will outline the roles and powers of the Luisef\o 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 Luisef\o 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 Luisef\o Native American cultural importance shall be returned to the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians, and/or the Most Likely Descendant, if applicable, and not be curated, unless ordered to do so by a federal agency or a court of competent jurisdiction. 3. The Luisef\o 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. Luisef\o Native American monitors and archaeological monitors shall have joint authority to temporarily divert and/or halt construction activities. If tribal cultural resources are discovered Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 72 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines during construction, all earth-moving activity within and around the immediate discovery area must be diverted until the Luisef\o 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 Luisef\o 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 Luisef\o 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 Luisef\o 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 Luisef\o Native American monitor that such fill material does not contain tribal cultural resources. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 73 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines 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 Luiseno 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. The above measures are intended as guidance for the development of an agreement, which may or may not be accompanied by a mitigation measure in a CEQA document. Each project will be evaluated for the presence or potential presence of TCRs individually, and when an agreement is deemed appropriate, measures will be tailored to that specific project. 8.2.2.5 Data Recovery and Curation TCRs can also be archaeological sites that are eligible under NRHP Criterion D / CRHR Criterion 4 because they possess information that is important in history or prehistory. In such a case, data recovery excavations are one method of mitigating for adverse effect. Data recovery or curation, or both, may not be appropriate for TCPs or TCRs and thus would be a last resort. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 74 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines 9.0 Cultural Resources Procedures 9.1 Sensitivity Model Review In reviewing the cultural resources sensitivity maps, the City shall first determine the sensitivity of the project for archaeological and architectural historical resources. In the event that the project is wholly located within an area of low sensitivity for either or both, the City shall require the applicant to retain a professionally qualified consultant to first request a records search from the South Coastal Information Center (SCIC) at San Diego State University. The SCIC is a clearinghouse (part of the CHRIS) that contains previous cultural resources reports, site records, historic maps, text, and lists of historically important sites, buildings, districts, and other locations. The SCIC results may indicate that the project area has never been surveyed by a qualified professional. In those cases, the City shall cause the implementation of a survey using professionally qualified consultants. If the review of the sensitivity models reflect either moderate or high sensitivity, the City shall require a professionally qualified consultant to be retained to carry out a records search and literature review with SCIC, and any additional survey or evaluation that may be required based on the qualified consultant's professional judgement. 9.2 Records Searches and Literature Reviews All archival research conducted as part of identification efforts for a particular project area within the boundaries of the City shall begin with a record search and literature review at the SCIC. All records searches must be no more than one year old at the time of submission to the City. The records search must include the project under consideration. The consultant, meeting the applicable Professional Qualifications Standards published by the Secretary of the Interior, shall utilize best judgment for the review of a radius around the project area. In addition to the site records and reports on file at the SCIC, the Office of Historic Preservation's Historic Property Data File for San Diego County (HPDF), on file at the SCIC, should be consulted to obtain an inventory of evaluated resources from the historic period. The California Historical Resource Status Codes (OHP 2004, plus updates) for each inventoried resource in the HPDF in the records search radius should be consulted to determine if the resource has been determined eligible for, or listed in, the NRHP or the CRHR. In addition to information from the records search at the SCIC, the following sources should be consulted, if available and appropriate: • California Inventory of Historic Resources • The National Register Information System Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 75 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines • California Historical Landmarks • Historic Spots in California (Kyle 2002) • Historic GLO land patent records and plat maps available from the BLM's General Land Office Records • The City of Carlsbad historic resources inventory (see Policy 7-P.1 of Goal 7-G-l of the General Plan) or other relevant documents including but not limited to other city document inventories and building permits, etc. • Caltrans Bridge Local and State Inventories • Handbook of North American Indians for lists and maps of nearby Native American villages • Local historical societies • Historical aerial photographs and historical maps to provide information on the past land uses of the property and locations of historical buildings • County Assessor records All archival research efforts, regardless of outcome and particularly if such research failed to yield information on cultural resources, should be documented in the technical report, including the name of repository and any personnel assisting in the research, the date that the research was conducted, the individual conducting the research, and what sources were consulted or reviewed. The reporting of records search results within technical reports must include the title and author of each report, its SCIC report number, author, and date. In addition, technical reports must include an accounting of all previously-recorded resources within the records search radius, and whether or not each is located within the project area. Given privacy concerns surrounding the distribution of records search information for property that is not included in the project, the results of the records search for the radius around the project area shall not be transmitted to the City or any third party. As part of the identification efforts, the NAHC should be contacted to carry out a search of the Sacred Lands File. The NAHC holds files containing information about sacred lands and other cultural resources of importance to Native Americans. The NAHC will also provide lists of Native American contacts that may be able to provide information about Native American cultural resources in and near the project area, should the AB 52 process not result in tribal comment on TCRs. The list should be forwarded to any federal agencies that will carry out Section 106 consultation. 9.3 Field Surveys All surveys, either archaeological or for historic structures, must be conducted using the Secretary of the Interior's standards for the identification of Historic Properties, including any future updates, and in accordance with these Guidelines. For archaeological surveys, fieldwork must be systematic and Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 76 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines pedestrian, using parallel transects no more than 15 meters apart, unless wider transect widths are justified by the PL Vehicular, All Terrain Vehicle, or horseback surveys are not permitted for survey or identification; however, consultants who are only using such means to transport themselves to a site location for a site-specific investigation may utilize any method of transportation that is acceptable to the landowner. For surveys of the built environment, typically a pedestrian survey will be conducted, but can include combination of a vehicular survey if appropriate at the discretion of the qualified professional consultant. Field surveys are generally considered valid for five years, and a new or an updated survey will be required for surveys older than five years. However, should a case be made to the City that demonstrates that the ground conditions have not changed since a previous, older survey, and that the methods used in older surveys are consistent with these guidelines, then an updated survey may not be required. In accordance with Council Policy No. 83, it is the City's policy that California Native American Tribes be invited to participate in all archaeological pedestrian field surveys. Moreover, it is the City's policy that any archaeological fieldwork that disturbs the ground shall be carried out in coordination with a Luiseno Native American monitor, under the following parameters. Cultural resources surveys that are intended to inventory built environment resources only (not archaeology) are exempt from this requirement. • If the City is the project proponent, then the City's archaeological consultant shall provide written proof, upon contract or task order award, that a Luiseno Native American monitor has been invited to participate in the archaeological pedestrian field survey, and retained in the event that ground-disturbing archaeological fieldwork is required. • If the City is not the project proponent but is only serving as the lead agency under CEQA, and the proponent or property owner retains the services of an archaeologist to survey his or her property and no documentation of outreach or participation by a Luiseno Native American monitor can be provided, then the archaeological inventory shall be deemed incomplete until outreach to the tribe, and a tribal survey if requested by the tribe, is carried out. If the proponent or property owner's archaeologist conducts archaeological fieldwork that disturbs the ground and no documentation of participation by a Luiseno Native American monitor can be provided (subject to the exception below), then the archaeological inventory shall be deemed incomplete until a tribal survey is carried out. • In the event that a Luiseno Native American monitor elects to not participate in the archaeological field survey or does not report at the agreed upon time and location, then the survey may proceed without the monitor present and the resulting technical study shall be deemed complete with the incorporation of documentation demonstrating reasonable and good faith effort to include a Luiseno Native American monitor. In such a case, the tribe shall be provided a copy of the archaeological inventory report for review and comment prior to submittal to the City. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 77 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines Site recording shall include any physical evidence of human activities over 45 years old. Any cultural resource that contains at least three artifacts in a 10-square-meter area or consists of one or more features should be considered a site. Any indications of cultural presence in the project area that fail to meet the definition of a site should be recorded as isolates or noted on a location map. Any building that is at least 45 years of age or older warrants at least initial consideration under these Guidelines. The PI shall exercise professional judgment when drawing site boundaries and in recording resources, which must be justified in the technical report. 9.4 Site Records and Survey Reports Site recording, or updates to previously recorded sites, shall be documented by the qualified professional using the most current revision of the California OH P's DPR 523 series Historical Resources Inventory forms following the Instructions for Recording Historical Resources (OHP 1995). Photography and submeter GPS precision for mapping of site boundaries is strongly encouraged. All completed DPR 523 forms should be sent by the qualified professional to the SCIC as soon as possible, so that primary numbers and trinomials (if appropriate) can be assigned, which will then be included in the technical reports in place of the temporary numbers assigned in the field. Survey or inventory reports for all required archaeological surveys of a project area shall be prepared in a manner consistent with the California OHP's Archaeological Resource Management Reports: Recommended Contents and Format, the "Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Identification" (48 FR 44720-23; NPS 1998), and the NPS's publication, "The Archeological Survey: Methods and Uses" (1978: GPO stock #024-016-00091). 9.5 Evaluations of Significance 9.5.1 Properties Exempt from Evaluation of Eligibility Buildings, structures, and facilities less than 45 years old at the time of study are exempt from evaluation as modern resources, unless determined to be of exceptional significance and meet Criterion Consideration (g) of the NRHP (A property achieving significance within the past 50 years and is thereby subject to the guidance in National Register Bulletin 22 (Sherfy and Luce 1979, rev. 1998). Historic archaeological sites that consist of refuse dumps containing only surface items that are less than 45 years old are also exempt from evaluation. 9.5.2 General Methods All evaluations of eligibility shall be conducted relative to all four of the CRHR and NRHP eligibility criteria, regardless of the type of resource. 9.5.3 Archival Research For historic-era archaeological sites or resources in the built environment, this may require additional property-specific archival research, beyond that which is conducted generally during an inventory or Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 78 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines survey. The research may use sources including county records, historical aerials, historical USGS topographic maps, General Land Office (GLO) Plat maps and patent records, and assessor property records in an attempt to gather historical property and building information relevant to the construction and use of the building. Archival research may also be conducted to gather more detailed property history and information regarding use of the building, architectural designs and styles, and other history, as necessary. 9.5.4 Architectural History and Built Environment Evaluation of eligibility of the built environment is often initiated during the inventory stage, but cannot be completed until evaluated within its historic context. Developing a historical context generally begins with compiling information from sources on relevant historical themes. National Register Bulletin 15 defines a theme as "a means of organizing properties into coherent patterns based on elements such as environment, social/ethnic groups, transportation networks, technology, or political developments that have influenced the development of an area during one or more periods of prehistory or history. A theme is considered significant if it can be demonstrated, through scholarly research, to be important in American history." Historical research, scaled appropriately for the size and nature of the undertaking, should be conducted to identify and develop the appropriate themes to determine whether those themes are significant and to establish the context within which to assess significance of the built environment or for archaeological resources. If a significant historic context is identified by the qualified professional, then evaluation requires an identification of the essential physical features -commonly referred to as "character-defining features" -that must be present to represent the property's significance. Following procedures outlined by OHP and NPS, the qualified professional must determine if the character-defining features are visible enough to convey their significance, often through a comparison of archival materials or similar properties elsewhere; determine which aspects of integrity are particularly important to the property and if they are present; and, if present, with what period of significance the resource is associated. 9.5.5 Historic Districts As described in Section 2.0, a district is "a significant concentration, linkage, or continuity of sites important in history or prehistory" by plan or by physical development (Keller and Keller, n.d.; OHP 1995). When determining whether or not a district is present, consideration must be paid to whether or not individual buildings or sites contribute to the significance of the district as a whole. Contributing elements are those that possess some aspect that the significance or historic theme, such as a common architectural style. Non-contributing elements may be associated with the period of significance of the district, but may be minor or heavily remodeled such that they fail to convey the significance of the district as a whole. Elements may or may not also be individually significant. 9.5.6 Archaeological Excavation In all cases where evaluation of eligibility of cultural resources cannot be ascertained from survey-level data alone, and archaeological testing is necessary, the Pl, in consultation with the Luiserio Native Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 79 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines American monitor, shall prepare and implement a testing program to guide evaluation of cultural resources using research themes and questions, as presented below. The testing program should be consistent with the "Secretary of the Interior's Standards and Guidelines for Evaluation" (48 FR 44723- 26; NPS 1998). Prior to the initiation of subsurface excavation, the PI shall review utility maps, when appropriate, to determine what areas lack subsurface integrity due to utility trenches or past earth-moving activities. The PI shall utilize Underground Service Alert (USA) North services (http://www.usanorth.org/; 1-800- 227-2600) to assist in the identification of subsurface utility lines, in accordance with state law. Any archaeological testing shall be limited to disturbing no more than 5 percent of the surface area of the resource or four cubic meters, whichever is less. No complete (100 percent) surface collections are allowed under these Guidelines for evaluations of eligibility in order to avoid a significant effect during testing. Suggested subsurface testing methods include shovel test pits (STPs) or auguring placed systematically across the site and one by one meter excavation units. Testing must proceed downward until either culturally-sterile soil is encountered, or, if possible, the maximum depth of project disturbance is reached, so that the full extent of impacts is understood early. If the full extent cannot be tested for any reason, then monitoring may be required during ground-disturbance. Even after testing, if new deposits are found, previously unknown during testing, then unanticipated discovery measures would apply. The following documentation should be prepared during all excavation work: (1) general site photographs taken before, during, and at the completion of excavation work; (2) photographs of at least one wall of every excavation unit and all features; (3) excavation records and field notes for each unit, level, and feature; (4) individual feature records; (5) scale profile drawings of unit walls with associated Munsell soil color readings; and (6) photograph record forms, field catalog forms, and sample artifact catalog forms (may be combined with field catalog forms). 9.5.7 Research Topics and Questions for Archaeological Sites The significance of a historic property can be assessed only when it is evaluated within its historic context. Developing a historical context generally begins with compiling information from sources on relevant historical themes. National Register Bulletin 15 defines a theme as "a means of organizing properties into coherent patterns based on elements such as environment, social/ethnic groups, transportation networks, technology, or political developments that have influenced the development of an area during one or more periods of prehistory or history. A theme is considered significant if it can be demonstrated, through scholarly research, to be important in American history." Historical research, scaled appropriately for the size and nature of the undertaking, should be conducted to identify and develop the appropriate themes to determine whether those themes are significant and to establish the context within which to assess significance of the built environment or for archaeological resources. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carls bod 80 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines The California OHP requires the use of a research design that "should present important research questions recognized for the region and relevant to the study, based on previous research" (OHP 1989:9). Research questions serve to guide research methods and to assess the potential for the recovery of scientifically valid data, ethnographic background, or oral history that are likely to satisfy any of the four CRHR and NRHP criteria. Sources of data sought in the evaluations of eligibility shall be selected by the PI, using professional judgment, as appropriate for the nature and type of the resource being evaluated and may vary according to criterion and resource. Sources may include, but are not limited to: archaeological data; architectural style; records, maps, and historical accounts in the archival record; oral history information; ethnographic and prehistoric contexts, and comments from California Native American Tribes. Comments from tribes can only be included in the consultation and administrative record if express permission has been granted by the commenting tribe. For documentation of compliance with AB 52 or SB 18, the City may contain a confidential (non-public) administrative record of tribal comments, when such comments have been identified by the tribe as being restricted from public distribution. Following are examples of research themes and questions; however, the PI will utilize professional judgement in developing the research design that is appropriate for the resource being evaluated. Research themes and questions may be suggested by consulting tribes and shall be taken into consideration during the testing. In the event that testing is not supported, then evaluations of eligibility shall utilize all other available data and may result in an assumption of eligibility for the purpose of the project only. Prehistoric Sites Research topics for the prehistoric sites in the project area include activities and site function, internal site organization, subsistence patterns, and chronology and temporal patterning. Activities and Site Function. Collecting site function and activities data is an important research theme in regard to explaining the past. Cultural material and feature data could explain the relationship between humans and their environment. Research questions could include: • ls there a full range of activities represented, such as would be characteristic of a habitation site, or is there only a limited set of activities characteristic of a location? For example, are activities limited to resource procurement, or do they represent more permanent occupation? • Is there evidence of flaked stone tool use? • Is there evidence of flaked stone tool manufacturing? • ls there evidence of food processing? • ls there evidence of food preparation and cooking? • Is there evidence of overnight stays? • Is there evidence for flaked stone tool production and what techniques were used? Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 81 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines • Is there evidence for ceremonial activity? • Do the site activities suggest a contribution to broad settlement patterns or mobility patterns? Data requirements to address these questions include tools classified functionally and debitage classified technologically. If subsurface features (hearths, ovens) are present, the type and number of features will also help address these questions. Internal Site Organization. Habitation sites are often composed of features that can be ascribed to living, food processing, refuse, religion or ceremonial functions, and many other aspects of prehistoric society. Identification of such features, and analysis of the internal site organization, can give insight into the social organization. Pertinent research questions could include: • Are there distinct manufacturing, processing, food preparation, or ceremonial areas within the site? • Were male and female activities conducted in different areas of a site? • If bedrock milling features are present, are distinct activity areas associated with each outcrop containing bedrock milling features, or was a single activity area used by everyone using any of the bedrock milling features at the site? • Does the arrangement of the features within the site suggest a broader prehistoric community design or sense of planning? Data requirements include maps of the spatial distribution of tools, debitage, subsistence remains, and features. If the site is small and there are few categories that do not vary spatially, this domain cannot be addressed. Subsistence Patterns. How prehistoric populations acquired food and water is a fundamental question studied by archaeology. While reflections of subsistence patterns are found in various features within habitation sites, such as hearths and midden deposits, reconstruction of subsistence systems often require information from multiple sites. These kinds of patterns may be indicative of eligibility under NRHP Criterion A or CRHR Criterion 1. Research questions could include: • Where were the food procurement locations utilized by the occupants of the site? • What resources were brought to the sites, and were they processed, prepared, or consumed at the site? • Is there evidence for specialization or intensification of resource use? • Are subsistence strategies narrowly focused on a few resources, or are they broad-based? • Do subsistence strategies change through time? • Can changes in the natural or cultural environment account for change? Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 82 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines • Do the site activities suggest a contribution to broad subsistence patterns or mobility patterns? Specialization would be indicated by large numbers of the remains of a few species. Intensification would be indicated by reliance on resources that require greater amounts of labor to procure or process. Data categories necessary to address these questions include fauna! remains, protein and blood residue analysis, artifact use-wear analysis, and landscape-site associations. Chronology and Temporal Patterning. In order for archaeologists to study cultural similarities and differences in cultures of the past, they must first put sites in temporal order. Patterns may be indicative of eligibility under NRHP Criterion A or CRHR Criterion 1. Research questions could include: • Can the site be assigned to a particular period, complex, or phase? • Were the sites used at the same time as other nearby sites or sequentially? • Were the sites used continuously for a short or long period of time? • Were there periods of time when the sites were not used (continuous occupation or periodic abandonment)? • What portions of local chronological sequences are represented by cultural resources in the project area? • What are the chronological ranges for particular projectile point types? • Can we identify chronological patterns in lithic raw material procurement practices or flaking technologies? If so, can these be used to date sites lacking other diagnostic artifacts? • Do significant correlations exist between the timing of climatic shifts and technological innovations? • Do the sites suggest a contribution to broad cultural change? Chronological dating of sites often relies on the presence of subsurface material rather than surface material alone. Substantial subsurface material combined with a necessary degree of site integrity and preservation may aid in the dating of the archaeological site. Sites most likely to contribute to this theme include habitation sites that may contain thermal features, refuse deposits, and stratified middens. These sites may contain stone artifacts, such as projectile points, with temporally indicative stylistic characteristics. Also, charcoal, animal bone, and shell may be dated by radiocarbon assay. Some indication of the time range (relative dating) for obsidian artifacts may be obtained from measurement of obsidian hydration rinds. Trade and Exchange. Archaeological information about trade and exchange comes mostly from exotic lithic and shell materials. These are materials with no known local source that must have been obtained from elsewhere through trade or exchange. Research questions could include: Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 83 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines • What inferences about mode of exchange can be made between the site area and the source area(s)? • Do exotic artifacts present at the site reflect inter-tribal relationships or broad patterns of mobility or settlement? Historic Archaeological Sites Material from rural archaeological sites from the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries can provide information about the developing domestic economy of farmsteads and ranches, changes in socio- economic status, and changes in the spatial organization of activities within the farmstead. Early settlers may have been relatively self-sufficient, producing most food for their own consumption on the farm. Over time they may have increasingly participated in the developing market economy, exchanging their agricultural products for manufactured goods obtained from towns. Some farmers/ranchers may have specialized in a single crop or product and ceased to produce food for domestic consumption, obtaining all food from stores in the nearest town. The socio-economic status of rural residents may also have changed, based on increased access to markets for their agricultural products and changing commodity prices. By about 1920, most rural residents fully participated in the national economic system and agriculture had become mechanized. For the period after about 1920, there is little information that historical archaeology can provide about rural ranching and farming that is not already known from historical sources. Research topics could include: • Self-sufficiency versus participation in a market economy. Were food and household items produced on the farm or obtained from local, regional, or national sources? Did the degree of self-sufficiency decrease over time? • Socio-economic status. What was the socio-economic status of rural residents, as reflected in material possessions? Did socio-economic status change over time? • Organization of activities. What was the spatial organization of activities within the farmstead and did this change over time in conjunction with increased production for the market? More specific research questions should be developed based on the historic context for the resource being evaluated. Data categories necessary to address the research topics and questions include artifacts from before 1920 classified functionally. Technological attributes will provide a date range. Features, such as foundations, wells, privies, pits, walls, and fences will provide information on the organization of activities. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 84 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines 9.5.8 Evaluation Reports Evaluation reports for archaeological sites will provide a prehistoric or historic context for the resource(s) evaluated, the methods employed, the results of archival research, the results of subsurface testing, and an evaluation of the resource using all four NRHP and CRHR eligibility criteria. Note that tribal consultation by the agency may be required in order to complete the evaluations, and so any partial evaluations advanced by consultants during pre-project planning studies must clearly identify any resources that require consultation to complete. 9.6 Impact Analyses ·and Mitigation Measures 9.6.1 Thresholds In the event that any cultural resources are found to be eligible for either the CRHR or NRHP or both (hereafter, "eligible cultural resources"), then an impact assessment must be conducted, as described below. Assessment of impacts to non-eligible cultural resources, as required by CEQA (unique archaeological resources) and NEPA will be addressed separately by the project's CEQA and NEPA documentation. As discussed in Section 3, the determination of whether or not a historical resource under CEQA will be significantly affected by a project parallels the comparable process under federal law. A significant impact under CEQA, or an adverse effect under Section 106, occurs when a project may alter, directly or indirectly, any of the characteristics of a resource that negatively affect its significance. These include reasonably foreseeable effects caused by the project, or those that may occur later in time or those that may be cumulative. Examples of adverse effects include, but are not limited to: physical destruction or damage to all or part of the property; alteration, restoration, rehabilitation, repair, maintenance, stabilization, or remediation; removal of the property from its historic location; change of the character or physical features; introduction of visual, atmospheric, or audible elements; neglect; or transfer, lease, or sale out of federal ownership (36 CFR 800.S[a][2] et seq.). It is important to be specific as to the effect that will occur to the resource. This will assist in the determination of impact significance and, if warranted, the measures that are appropriate to mitigate the impact. Adverse effects on historic properties include, but are not limited to: (i) Physical destruction of or damage to all or part of the property; (ii) Alteration of a property, including restoration, rehabilitation, repair, maintenance, stabilization, hazardous material remediation, and provision of handicapped access, that is not consistent with the SOi's standards for the treatment of historic properties (36 CFR part 68) and applicable guidelines; (iii) Removal of the property from its historic location; Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 85 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines (iv) Change of the character of the property's use or of physical features within the property's setting that contribute to its historic significance; (v) Introduction of visual, atmospheric or audible elements that diminish the integrity of the property's significant historic features; (vi) Neglect of a property which causes its deterioration, except where such neglect and deterioration are recognized qualities of a property of religious and cultural significance to an Indian tribe or Native Hawaiian organization; and (vii) Transfer, lease, or sale of property out of Federal ownership or control without adequate and legally enforceable restrictions or conditions to ensure long-term preservation of the property's historic significance. In addition, impacts to a Historical Resource (as defined by CEQA) are significant if the resource is demolished or destroyed or if the characteristics that made the resource eligible are materially impaired [CCR Title 14, Section 15064.S(a)]. Therefore, the PI, in consultation with the City, project applicant, and, if applicable, SLRBMI or California Native American Tribes, shall determine whether or not the project will have a significant impact on a cultural resource. This determination may be combined with an evaluation of eligibility report if sufficient information exists for the PI to make a determination of effect. For the purpose of these Guidelines, there are three categories of measures: Standard Conditions (for complete avoidance and preservation); Standard Treatment Measures (agreed-upon mitigation that will minimize or mitigate adverse effect without further review); and Non-Standard Treatment Measures (for other mitigation measures that are atypical, require phased implementation, or are otherwise not accounted for herein). The findings are summarized below and the following section provides details of each condition. • If there are eligible cultural resources within the project area that will not be affected by the project because the criteria for adverse effect are not met, then the report shall specify a finding of "No Adverse Effect to Historic Properties" for Section 106 and/or "No Significant Impact to Historical Resources" under CEQA. The CEQA document findings would be "Less Than Significant Impact to Historical Resources." • If there are eligible cultural resources within the project area that will not be affected by the project because of the incorporation of Standard Conditions presented in the following section, then the report shall specify a finding of "No Adverse Effect to Historic Properties, with Standard Conditions" and/or "No Significant Impact to Historical Resources, with Standard Conditions." This finding applies only to complete avoidance and preservation of eligible resources. The standard conditions must be included in the CEQA document as mitigation measures or conditions of approval. The CEQA document findings would be "Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated." Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Corlsbod 86 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines • If there are eligible cultural resources within the project area that will be adversely affected by the project and the Applicant has determined that one or more of the Standard Treatment Measures provided in the following section will minimize or mitigate adverse effect, then the report shall specify a finding of "Adverse Effect to Historic Properties, with Standard Treatment Measures" and/or "Significant Impact to Historical Resources, with Standard Treatment Measures." The standard treatment measures must be included in the CEQA document as mitigation measures or conditions of approval. The CEQA document findings would also be "Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated." • If there are eligible cultural resources within the project area that will be adversely affected by the project, and the Applicant has determined that non-standard treatment measures are required to minimize or mitigate adverse effect, then the report shall specify a finding of "Adverse Effect to Historic Properties, with Non-Standard Treatment Measures" and/or "Significant Impact to Historical Resources, with Non-Standard Treatment Measures." A treatment plan must be prepared to specify the non-standard mitigation, phased mitigation, or other circumstances not accounted for in the standard treatment measures. The CEQA document findings would also be "Less Than Significant Impact with Mitigation Measures Incorporated." 9.6.2 Preferred Treatment Options and Mitigation Measures 9.6.2.1 Standard Treatment Measures Avoidance is the preferred treatment method for all eligible cultural resources, including archaeological sites, TCPs, TCRs, historic structures, and ethnographic landscapes. The project proponent for a specific project area must consider redesigning the development project to avoid adverse effects to resources. This could include converting a lot that had been planned for residential development to open space designation or redesigning a road to curve around a Historic Property. However, not all eligible cultural resources can be avoided; if such redesign is not feasible, then the Applicant may be asked to justify why that is the case prior to project approval or permit issuance, and this may require additional consultation with interested parties and California Native American Tribes. Standard Treatment 1: Conservation Easement Avoidance and preservation of eligible cultural resources can only be accomplished when a legal mechanism prevents future development and there are appropriate measures in place for long-term maintenance. For archaeological resources on privately owned property, this will require the dedication of a conservation easement over the site, recorded with the County, to restrict development in perpetuity. The easement may be held either by the City, the County, a non-profit corporation, or a California Native American tribe, as long as the land owner and the easement holder are not the same. For archaeological resources on City-owned property, this will require the placement of a deed restriction and incorporation into the appropriate City department's operations and management plan (O&M Plan). For archaeological resources within public rights-of-way or under roadways, where a legal Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 87 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines encumbrance is not possible, then the City Planning Division shall note the confidential location both on the archaeological sensitivity model and in a confidential section of the project's file, and all future projects in that location shall be subject to additional tribal consultation prior to ground disturbance. Management of the preserved site will be the responsibility of a qualified third-party preserve manager (which also may be the City, the County, a non-profit corporation, or a California Native American tribe) and in accordance with the applicable O&M Plan with sufficient long-term funding. Management shall include but is not limited to the following measures, as deemed appropriate: fence and gate repair; sign replacement; regular monitoring and associated reporting by a professional archaeologist for damage; erosion control; trash removal; vegetation and weed control; security patrols; vandalism abatement; and removal of trespassers. No signs indicating the presence of tribal cultural resources shall be permitted. In addition, the following activities are prohibited within the boundaries of preserved sites, unless otherwise agreed to by SLRBMI, even if such activities are permissible in other areas of larger biological or open space preserves, within which the site may be located): • Unseasonable watering; use of fertilizers, pesticides, biocides, herbicides or other agricultural chemicals • Use of off-road vehicles and use of other motorized vehicles except on existing roadways • Agricultural cultivation activity of any kind • Recreational activities, including, but not limited to, camping, with the exception of the use of a pedestrian trail adjacent to the site boundaries • Construction, reconstruction, erecting or placement of any building, billboard or sign (except for that which is designed to keep the public out), or any other structure or improvement • Depositing or accumulation of soil, trash, ashes, refuse, waste, bio-solids or any other materials • Lighting fires, incendiary devices, or flammable substances • Planting, introduction or dispersal of nonnative or exotic plant or animal species (animal grazing is permitted for fire control) • Filling, dumping, excavating, draining, dredging, mining, drilling, removing or exploring for or extracting artifacts, minerals, loam, soil, sand, gravel, rock or other material on or below the surface of the sites, or granting or authorizing surface entry for any of these purposes • Altering the surface or general topography of the sites, including but not limited to any alterations to habitat, building roads or trails, over paving or otherwise covering the sites with concrete, asphalt or any other impervious material, except for capping as described below or another form of capping with no objection from SLRBMI • Removing, destroying, or cutting of trees, shrubs, or other vegetation, except as required by law for fire control and prevention or treatment of disease Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 88 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines • Mechanical or chemical weed abatement activities (hand and grazing methods are acceptable) • Manipulating, impounding or altering any natural water course, body of water or water circulation on the sites, and any activities or uses detrimental to water quality, including but not limited to degradation or pollution of any surface or sub-surface waters • Engaging in any use or activity that may violate, or may fail to comply with, relevant federal, state, or local laws, regulations, permit conditions, or applicable policies Conservation Easements may also be used to preserve resources of the built environment, and the terms and limitations of such easements will need to reflect the type of resources being preserved. The Applicant shall provide a copy of the recorded Conservation Easement as proof of the restriction of future activities that could affect the integrity of the site. Proof of compliance must be submitted to the City Planner, or city project manager for a city project, in accordance with the schedule that was agreed upon through consultation. If avoidance and preservation of eligible cultural resources is not possible, then implementing one of the following Standard Treatment Measures may minimize or mitigate adverse effects. If a project will implement one or more of these measures without modification (except where allowed, below), and the agencies determine that no other mitigation is necessary, then the standard treatment measures will become mitigation measures or conditions of approval without the need for developing a separate treatment plan. In this case, the determination of effect must be explicit about the site-specific requirements for each treatment measure, include a schedule for implementation relative to pre-construction, construction, and post-construction phases, and provide the means by which proof of compliance will be provided. If the City concludes that enough modifications to the measures have occurred that change the following pre-approved measures in a manner than could alter the purposes for which they are intended, then a separate treatment plan may be required to negotiate Non-Standard Treatment Measures. Standard Treatment 2: Capping In certain cases, the use of capping with natural materials will be desirable as a supplement to a conservation easement. This could include sites that are located in highly visible areas where public access could otherwise present a risk to the preservation of the site, where existing topography or future grade differentials could cause erosion and stabilization issues, or where there is not sufficient horizontal separation from project activities, but that vertical separation could be achievable. In these scenarios, the use of capping with soil, vegetation, and/or geotextile fabric may be preferred over complete exposure of the site. Figure 5 illustrates this in concept. Exceptions to these guidelines can be negotiated in consultation with all parties. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 89 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines Where capping is considered an appropriate treatment measure, the following guidelines will be employed: • The thickness of the soil cap must take into consideration the size and shape of the site, particularly the elevation of above-surface features like bedrock outcrops. • The methods used to cap the resource must be designed to avoid damage to the resource during the process of installing the cap (such as prohibition of heavy equipment during installation). • Caps may be covered with vegetation (without invasive root systems) to discourage erosion and unauthorized digging. • No buildings or structures shall be placed on top of the cap. • Non-motorized pedestrian paths may be placed over the cap, but only when constructed of natural materials such as bark or pea gravel (i.e., no pavement, brick, imported stone) and only when the entire site is capped by at least 18 inches of soil. • No signage to indicate the location of a site beneath the cap shall be installed. • Design and final implementation of the capping plan will be developed and monitored by a qualified professional archaeologist and Native American monitor, when appropriate. • The area subject to capping must be legally restricted from future development, in perpetuity (with a conservation easement or documented in accordance with Standard Treatment #l above if located within public rights-of-way); however, long-term management can be scaled accordingly. • As appropriate, the capping should include a combination of layers of culturally-sterile and chemically-compatible soil of different colors and/or the layering of cyclone, chain link, or orange barrier fencing to discourage digging. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 90 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines ---;.,---... --..,._ .. --......... --.-_ ~ ...__._,._.,.,..,...,,..-~.....--:---..:.-.:, .,,.,..,_., .............. cu..-- Figure 5. Conceptual capping of a site, in conjunction with a deed restriction (illustration courtesy of Bonadelle Neighborhoods). Standard Treatment 3: Doto Recovery Excavation Archaeological sites that are eligible under NRHP Criterion D / CRHR Criterion 4, at minimum, are significant because they possess information that is important in history or prehistory. In such a case, data recovery excavations are one method of mitigating for adverse effect. Data recovery may not be appropriate for TCPs or TCRs and shall not be employed over the objection of the tribe or cultural group that associates with the resource. Should data recovery of a Native American site be pursued, then the SLRBMI shall be afforded an opportunity to comment on the data recovery plan in advance of implementation. Should data recovery be an appropriate mitigation, the finding of effect shall specify the specific sites, number and size of units, and volume of excavation and is subject to City approval. Data recovery of prehistoric sites cannot be utilized as a Standard Treatment Measure over the objection of California Native American Tribes. The data recovery will be documented in a confidential technical report that provides a discussion of the research topics that guided data recovery, discusses the field and laboratory methods employed, describes the recovered artifacts, updates the feature sketch map, and discusses how the recovered material contributed to addressing the research topics. A catalog of the recovered artifacts will be provided in a report appendix. A sa mple of artifacts recovered from each site, not to exceed 10 percent (by artifact count, unless the Principal Investigator recommends another basis for this calculation) of the collection, may be permanently curated at an approved curation facility (see below). The sampling should not be restricted to diagnostics only, but shall represent the full spectrum of cultural materials observed at Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Corlsbod 91 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines the site. The remaining 90 percent of collected artifacts shall be offered to a local historical society for incorporation into publicly accessible or educational collections. Unclaimed collections will remain in the possession of the applicant and used as appropriate for public display within the facilities in the development. Standard Treatment 4: Project-Specific Public Interpretation and Education Any eligible cultural resource may be interpreted for the benefit of the general public through the development and installation of one or more interpretive panels in parks, along trails, or at scenic overlooks. The consultation conducted with SLRBMI would determine whether or not this measure is appropriate for Native American cultural resources. The number, location, and content of the panels shall not disclose the locations of confidential archaeological sites. Panels will measure approximately two feet by three feet and will be displayed along newly constructed trails within the permit area. Panels may be upright (as shown in Figure 6) or may be lower and angled . Panels will be printed, manufactured, and installed by appropriate and experienced professionals. Immediately following installation, photographs and GPS coordinates of the installed signs will be provided to the City as proof of compliance with this requirement. Should the subject of the panels or signs be Native American culture, then the SLRBMI shall be afforded an opportunity to review and comment on the draft panels, prior to manufacturing. Figure 6. Example of an interpretive panel. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Corlsbod 92 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines 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 • 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. Standard Treatment 6: HABS/HAER/HALS-Like Documentation The Historic American Building Survey (HABS), Historic American Engineering Record (HAER), and Historic American Landscape Survey (HALS) programs are administered by the NPS, in consultation with the federal agency and SHPO. These programs provide documentation for eligible buildings and structures. For the purpose of these Guidelines, federal agencies, NPS, and SHPO are not involved; however, documentation comparable with this program may be utilized. It should be noted that this documentation does not mitigate certain impacts to CEQA-defined Historical Resources to a less-than- significant level. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 93 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines Standard Treatment 7: CC&Rs The collecting, digging, disturbance, or removal of any artifact or other prehistoric or historic object located in an open space area, conservation easement, a lot subject to a deed restriction, or to any archaeological site or Historic Property that may become unearthed in the future, is prohibited. Notification of such restrictions shall be included in a restrictive type of covenant recorded on each parcel. Homeowners shall not be provided the locations of known cultural resources and archaeological sites, as these are confidential and restricted from public dissemination under state and federal law. A copy of the recorded covenant shall be provided to the City as proof of compliance. Standard Treatment 8: Tribal Access Agreements Upon transfer to the holder of any portion of a conservation easement that is intended to preserve confidential Native American or tribal resources, and upon request from a federally recognized and/or California Native American tribe to gain access to the tribal resource for visitation, the City shall develop a right-of-access authorization for requesting tribes, in cooperation with the landowner. The authorization shall specify the terms under which tribal access can be legally achieved and shall define the acceptable and prohibited uses thereof, and appropriate liability waivers. Use of this Standard Treatment Measure cannot occur over the objection of the private landowner, if applicable. Standard Treatment 9: Contractor Awareness Training There always remains a possibility that unanticipated discoveries may occur during project construction. For this reason, an archaeological sensitivity training program (Contractor Awareness Training) will be developed and delivered by a qualified professional archaeologist during a pre- construction meeting for construction supervisors prior to beginning any ground-disturbing work in the project. The sensitivity training program will provide information about notification procedures when potential archaeological material is discovered, procedures for coordination between construction personnel and monitoring personnel, and information about other treatment or issues that may arise if cultural resources (including human remains) are discovered during project construction. This protocol shall be communicated to all new construction personnel during orientation, prior to the employee beginning ground-disturbing work on the project, and on a poster that is placed in a visible location inside the construction job trailer. Standard Treatment 10: Controlled Grading Procedures A program of controlled grading may be implemented during the excavation of soil that is identified as part of a prehistoric cultural deposit at a particular location. Controlled grading is a method employed to peel away layers of soil to reveal cultural materials in a manner that significantly enhances the opportunity to identify and understand the relationship of artifacts and features within a prehistoric site. Controlled grading will not be required for soil that is identified as non-cultural formational soil or fill dirt imported to the site. The determination of the transition from cultural soil to formational soil will be made jointly by the project archaeological consultant, the Native American representative, and the project geologist, if applicable. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 94 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines Controlled grading will involve use of a small piece of equipment or a road grader to peel away native soil using shallow cuts made in approximately five-inch-deep layers. The grading equipment will push the shallow cuts of soil to the outside of the cultural deposit area. This deposited soil may be sampled and screened to ensure adequate detection of any cultural materials that may be present. The project archaeologist and Native American representative will direct the controlled grading process, including the pace of the grading and the depth of layers to be removed. The potential exists that discoveries may temporarily suspend the controlled grading process if significant discoveries are made that require focused archaeological excavations. As successive layers of the prehistoric site are exposed, any cultural features or artifact concentrations that are exposed and identified will be excavated as part of the data recovery program. In the event that a human burial or human remains are exposed, the protocol stated in the data recovery program will be implemented. The archaeological monitor and Native American monitor will follow closely behind the grading equipment and mark any cultural material with pin flags. Each artifact will be recorded to provide horizontal and vertical locational data. If no cultural deposits are encountered, the road grader will continue to make passes until one of two conditions are met (whichever occurs first): • Grading will continue to a depth of 30 centimeters below the depth of any recorded artifacts, suggesting an end to the potential for cultural deposits, or Non-cultural formational soils are encountered that predate any human occupation of this location. Once the cultural deposit has been completely removed, the controlled grading process will be terminated and mass grading may proceed. Standard Treatment 11: Post-Review Discoveries There always remains the potential for ground-disturbing activities to expose previously unrecorded cultural resources, even for phases that do not have known resources present. If subsurface deposits believed to be cultural or human in origin are discovered during construction, then all work must halt within a 100-foot radius of the discovery and the following procedures apply. A qualified professional archaeologist, meeting the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards for prehistoric and historic archaeologist, shall be retained to evaluate the significance of the find, and shall have the authority to modify the no-work radius as appropriate, using professional judgment and in consultation with the Luisefio Native American monitor. The following notifications shall apply, depending on the nature of the find: • If the professional archaeologist, in consultation with the Luisefio Native American monitor, determines that the find does not represent a cultural resource, then work may resume immediately and no agency notifications are required. • If the professional archaeologist, in consultation with the Luisefio Native American monitor, determines that the find does represent a cultural resource from any time period or cultural Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 95 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines affiliation, then he or she shall immediately notify the City and applicable landowner. The City shall consult with the other permitting agencies, if applicable, and the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians on a finding of eligibility and implement appropriate treatment measures, if the find is determined to be eligible for inclusion in the NRHP or CRHR. Work cannot resume within the no-work radius until the City, through consultation as appropriate, determines that the site either: 1) is not eligible for the NRHP or CRHR; or 2) that the treatment measures have been completed to their satisfaction. • If the find includes human remains, or remains that are potentially human, then he or she shall ensure reasonable protection measures are taken to protect the discovery from disturbance (AB 2641). The archaeologist shall notify the San Diego County Medical Examiner (per Section 7050.5 of the Health and Safety Code). The provisions of Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code, Section 5097.98 of the California Public Resources Code, and Assembly Bill 2641 will be implemented. If the Medical Examiner determines the remains are Native American and not the result of a crime scene, then the Medical Examiner will notify the Native American Heritage Commission, which then will designate a Native American Most Likely Descendant (MLD) for the project (Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code). The designated MLD will have 48 hours from the time access to the property is granted to make recommendations concerning treatment of the remains. 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. If the landowner does not agree with the recommendations of the M LD, then the NAHC can mediate (Section 5097.94 of the Public Resources Code). If no agreement is reached, the landowner must rebury the remains where they will not be further disturbed (Section 5097.98 of the Public Resources Code). This will also include either recording the site with the NAHC or the appropriate Information Center; using an open space zoning designation or conservation easement as appropriate; and/or recording a reinterment document with the County in which the property is located (AB 2641). Work cannot resume within the no-work radius until the lead agencies, through consultation as appropriate, determine that the treatment measures have been completed to their satisfaction. Non-Standard Treatment Measures Based on the number and type of resources within a project, or based on the construction timing of the project, there may be a need to develop and negotiate certain types of mitigation that are not provided for above. These may be alternate ways of resolving adverse effect (e.g., Section 6.3.1, below), or may require the phased implementation of mitigation measures for long-term buildout. Compensatory mitigation (such as the analysis and proper curation of pre-existing artifact collections) is one such measure; however, in recognizing that no two cultural resources are the same, care must be taken to ensure that such a mitigation, if entertained, actually mitigates the impacts caused by a project. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 96 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines In such circumstances where a non-standard treatment measure is considered, the Applicant shall propose mitigation measures in a treatment plan that is submitted to the City for review and consultation with the other applicable agencies and tribes. 9. 7 Cu ration Should permanent curation be necessary (such as for curation of historic-era archaeological artifacts), archaeological specimens, including their associated documentation (i.e., field notes, photographs, maps, and all environmental materials such as pollen, soils, sediments, bone, and shell) shall be curated using the standards set out in 36 CFR Part 79 to the greatest extent that facilities in southern California meet such standards. The San Diego Archaeological Center is the preferred location for curated collections of historic (non-Native American) artifacts and prehistoric artifacts that are not claimed by a culturally and traditionally affiliated California Native American tribe. Other curation facilities may become available in the future. Approval for the use of alternate facilities is at the discretion of the City, in consultation with the applicable federal agencies and SHPO. Native American human remains, grave goods, items of cultural patrimony, and sacred objects encountered during the undertaking that are located on state or private land shall be treated in accordance with the requirements of Section 7050.5 of the California State Health and Safety Code and Section 5097.98 of the California Public Resources Code, which collectively penalize the intentional disturbance or removal of human remains and require that activity stop in the event of a discovery of human remains so that the Medical Examiner and, if applicable, NAHC, can determine the identity and/or historical significance of the find. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 97 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines 10.0 Paleontological Resources Procedures 10.1 Sensitivity Model Review In reviewing the paleontology sensitivity map, the City shall first determine whether or not the project is located in a medium or high sensitivity area, which will require a paleontological survey. Projects located entirely within low sensitivity areas require no further study for paleontology; however, the result of the sensitivity model check shall be reported in the CEQA document and, at minimum, a standard mitigation measure for unanticipated discovery shall apply to all non-exempt projects (described further below). 10.2 Records Searches and Literature Reviews The San Diego Natural History Museum (SDNHM) is the sole institution holding fossils for San Diego County, and therefore, represents the best source for information about fossil-bearing sediments and rock. For projects that require a paleontological survey, the City or qualified consultant shall first request a paleontological assessment from the SDNHM for the project area plus a one-mile radius. Other sources that may be reviewed include online paleontology databases, the published literature, and project or nearby geotechnical boring reports to obtain information on subsurface rock unit depths. 10.3 Field Surveys If the underlying geologic formation is exposed on the site, a field survey may be warranted. All paleontological field surveys for the project area must be completed by or under the direction of the Principal Paleontologist, who is responsible for ensuring that the surveyor is knowledgeable about local geology and paleontology. All paleontological resources encountered during the survey shall be documented on standard locality forms, and documented with photography and GPS coordinates. The surveyor shall describe the sediments of the project in detail and evaluate the potential for specific sediments to be conducive to the preservation of fossils. Only qualified, trained paleontologists with specific expertise in the type of fossils being evaluated can determine the scientific significance of paleontological resources. Fossils are considered to be significant if one or more of the following criteria apply: 1. The fossils provide information on the evolutionary relationships and developmental trends among organisms, living or extinct; Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 98 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines 2. The fossils provide data useful in determining the age(s) of the rock unit or sedimentary stratum, including data important in determining the depositional history of the region and the timing of geologic events therein; 3. The fossils provide data regarding the development of biological communities or interaction between paleobotanical and paleozoological biotas; 4. The fossils demonstrate unusual or spectacular circumstances in the history of life; 5. The fossils are in short supply and/or in danger of being depleted or destroyed by the elements, vandalism, or commercial exploitation, and are not found in other geographic locations; and/or, 6. All identifiable vertebrate fossils are considered significant due to the rarity of their preservation. As so defined, significant paleontological resources are determined to be fossils or assemblages of fossils that are unique, unusual, rare, uncommon, or diagnostically important. Significant fossils can include remains of large to very small aquatic and terrestrial vertebrates or remains of plants and animals previously not represented in certain portions of the stratigraphy. Assemblages of fossils that might aid stratigraphic correlation, particularly those offering data for the interpretation of tectonic events, geomorphologic evolution, and paleoclimatology, are also critically important (Scott and Springer, 2003; Scott et al., 2004). 10.4 Impact Analyses and Mitigation Measures Under current law, an analysis of the record search and survey results, if survey is required, must be used in a determination of whether or not "unique" (or "significant") paleontological resources will be impacted by the project, and whether or not that impact is significant. This conclusion must be based on actual information indicating a high probability of potential to damage or destroy significant fossils and documented in a Paleontological Assessment Report, used to support a CEQA document. 10.4.1 Negative Surveys If the survey resulted in a negative finding for paleontological resources, then the paleontology sensitivity model should be updated to reflect low sensitivity for that project area. The Principal Paleontologist shall determine whether or not, based on professional judgement, the designation of low sensitivity can be extended outside of the project area. In addition, the CEQA document shall require the adoption of a standard unanticipated discovery measure that instructs construction personnel to immediately halt ground-disturbing activity at the location of a suspected paleontological exposure plus a SO-foot radius around the find. Work shall be halted within the no-work radius until the City can consult with a qualified paleontologist on the identification and evaluation of the find. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 99 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines At the discretion of the Principal Paleontologist, an additional mitigation measure requiring contractor awareness training may be warranted. However, unlike the unanticipated discovery measure, this is not a default mitigation measure for all projects that result in a negative survey for paleontological resources. 10.4.2 Positive Surveys If the survey and/or Paleontological Assessment Report resulted in a positive finding for paleontological resources or a high probability for fossil-bearing sediments below the surface, then a Principal Paleontologist shall be retained to prepare a Paleontological Mitigation and Monitoring Plan to address the following information, as applicable and appropriate: • the level of monitoring (spot checks, part time or full time), protocols and authorization for work stoppages, and safety procedures • the need for Contractor Awareness Training for all earthmoving personnel for any projects where a monitor will not be present full time • a research design listing the research questions and the data requirements for those questions • the level and type of assistance from the contractor needed by the paleontologist to take bulk samples and place them into a safe area for processing • the methods for fossil collection, fossil preparation, fossil identification, stratigraphic profiles, and curation • the types of progress reports that will be provided to the project proponent and City (weekly or monthly) • the schedule for reporting • a recommendation for the updating of the paleontology sensitivity model, which takes into consideration the presence or absence of paleontological resources, the amount of ground disturbance, and the potential for future discoveries • the identity of the financially-responsible party 10.4.3 Preferred Treatment Options and Mitigation Measures Vertebrate fossils are rare in contrast with invertebrate and plant fossils. Due to this factor, all vertebrate fossils are generally recovered while samples of invertebrates and plants are taken. Documentation and curation is the preferred treatment method for paleontological resources. 10.5 Curation In accordance with the Paleontological Mitigation and Monitoring Plan, specimens of significant fossils, all paleontological data, and a copy of the final report shall be curated at the SDNHM. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 100 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines 11.0 Document Review and Consultation As discussed earlier, the City is ultimately responsible for the compliance with these Guidelines. As such, the City planning staff will be responsible for receiving applications, reviewing documentation generated under these Guidelines, carrying out non-federal Native American consultation, preparing CEQA documentation, and, ultimately, making a project decision. Appendix 1 to these Guidelines provides the Implementation Manual with template forms and letters. 11.1 Application Requirements Applicants or consultants implementing these Guidelines are required to submit two bound copies and one PDF on a CD of every cultural resources and paleontological resources technical document prepared for the project. One hard copy is intended for City use. One hard copy of technical documents that address archaeological resources will be transmitted to SLRBMI for review. Depending on the number of consulting tribes and parties, if electronic copies are not acceptable, additional hard copies of the reports may be requested by the City. All hard and electronic copies of technical documentation containing confidential information that is restricted from public distribution must be bound separately in a confidential appendix, and clearly marked on the cover of the document. 11.2 Completeness Review A completeness review of the cultural and paleontological technical documentation will be conducted by the planning staff using a Cultural Resources Compliance Review Checklist (Appendix 1). Upon receipt of the documentation, the City shall first acknowledge in writing the date on which the materials were received. This begins a 30-day review period for the City staff to review the submitted materials and identify any additional technical information that is necessary. The checklist prompts the City to verify specific information. This includes: • Does the project boundary provided by the applicant take into account all areas of ground disturbance, conservation, construction staging, infrastructure, and off-site mitigation? • Is the records search and literature review less than one year old? • Has a search of the Sacred Lands File with the NAHC been conducted within the past year? • Has the project area and any off-site improvement areas been surveyed for cultural resources in accordance with the methods in these Guidelines? • Is there documentation that Native American tribes were invited to participate and/or participated in the archaeological field survey and any archaeological testing? • Are all identified cultural resources recorded and evaluated under all four NRHP and CRHR criteria? Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 101 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines • Have the criteria of adverse effect been applied to all significant cultural resources? • Have Standard Conditions, Standard Treatment Measures, or Non-Standard Treatment Measures been proposed, if applicable? • What federal agency approvals or permits, if any, will be required? • What state agency approvals or permits, if any, will be required? • What local agency approvals will be required? If the documentation is not complete or is not in conformance with these Guidelines, it will be returned to the project proponent with an explanation and request for additional information. Until the requested information is submitted to the City, processing of the cultural resources compliance will pause. However, tribal consultation will proceed in accordance with the schedules noted in AB 52 and SB 18, as applicable. 11.3 Consultation The city shall verify that all information identified on the Cultural Resources Compliance Review Checklist has been received and that no additional cultural resources information is required in conjunction with determining the overall project's completeness in accordance with Section 15060 of the CEQA Guidelines. When such determination is made, the City shall issue a written Notice of Completeness to the applicant and shall initiate the following actions within 14 days: • Only if applicable, the City shall notify the point-of-contact for each agency that is expected to issue a federal approval or permit for the project by letter (or other agreed upon notification method). The notice shall serve to alert the agency that consultation under Section 106 may be required and request coordination of efforts. • The City shall mail project notification letters to each tribe who requested notification letters under AB 52 and afford them an opportunity to consult on the project if they respond affirmatively within 30 days. • If the project requires a federal permit, approval, or funding, the City shall mail separate project notification letters to each tribe identified on the NAHC contact list to solicit information about the project, and shall copy the federal agency on all letters. • If the project requires a General Plan or Specific Plan adoption or amendment, or the dedication of open space that includes a tribal resource within it, the City shall mail separate project notification letters to the tribes identified on the SB 18 list obtained from the NAHC, and offer them an opportunity to consult if they respond within 90 days. • The City shall notify any other consulting parties it feels appropriate. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 102 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines The City shall conduct the consultation in accordance with the regulatory requirements, which may require meetings, field visits, providing copies of or making revisions to cultural resources technical reports and documents, or both. 11.4 Compliance Verification The City shall be responsible for ensuring that any mitigation or permit conditions are implemented. Upon verification that all requirements are satisfied in full, and unless the mitigation requires further coordination and review by other agency staff, the City shall issue a written notice to the other lead agencies to notify them of the completion of mitigation requirements. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 103 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines 12.0 References Cited ACHP 2012 Native American Traditional Cultural Landscapes and the Section 106 Review Process: Questions and Answers. Electronic document dated July 11, 2012, http://www.achp.gov/docs/landscapes%20q%20&%20a%207-ll-12.pdf. Allen, Mary and John Harmon, Jr. n.d. A History of Carlsbad. Friends of the Library. Carlsbad Historical Society. http://www.carlsbadhistoricalsociety.com/Car1sbad%20Historical%20Society files/ AHistoryofCarlsbad.htm Anderson, Dan 2007a Carlsbad: Rancho Agua Hedionda. Carlsbad, California. http://www.carlsbad.ca.us/hedionda.html 2007b Carlsbad History Tour. Carlsbad, California. http://www.carlsbad.ca.us/hedionda.html Basgall, Mark E. 1987 Resource Intensification Among Hunter-Gatherers: Acorn Economies in Prehistoric California. Research in Economic Anthropology 9:21-52. Bean, Lowell J., and Florence C. Shipek 1978 Luisefio. In Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 8: California, edited by Robert F. Heizer, pp. 550-563. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. Bean, Lowell J., and Charles R. Smith BLM 1978 Serrano. In Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 8: California, edited by Robert F. Heizer, pp. 570-574. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. 2016 General Land Office Records. U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Land Management. http:ljwww.glorecords.blm.gov/default.aspx Brown, Jeffrey D., Geologic Formations of Western San Diego County. http:Uwww.geiconsultants.com/stuff/contentmgr/fi1es/0/3aaf5188d802ff649166ba80c318e43 3/download/geologic formations of western san diego.pdf California Department of Transportation 2016 Standard Environmental Reference, EH Vol 1, Chapter 8. http://www.dot.ca.gov/ser/vol1/sec3/physical/Ch08Pa1eo/chap08paleo.htm California Natural Resources Agency 2016 CEQA: The California Environmental Quality Act. http://resources.ca.gov/ceqa/ Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 104 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines Carlsbad Spa 2016 Home and History. Carlsbad Mineral Water Spa. http://www.carlsbadmineralspa.com/ralspa.com/ Carrico, Richard 2008 Strangers in a Stolen Land. Sunbelt Publications, San Diego. Castillo, Edward D. 1978 The Impact of Euro-American Exploration and Settlement. In Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 8, California, edited by R. F. Heizer, pp. 99-127. Smithsonian Institution, Washington D.C. Christenson, Lynn E. 1990 The Late Prehistoric Yuman People of San Diego County, California: Their Settlement and Subsistence System. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, Arizona State University, Tempe. UMI Dissertation Services, ProQuest, Ann Arbor. Cleland, Robert G. 1941 The Cattle on a Thousand Hills: Southern California, 1850-1870. Huntington Library, San Marino, California. Clevenger, Joyce M., Roxana Phillips, and Dennis Gallegos CIAP 1990 Cultural Resource Evaluation at Prehistoric and Historic Sites at Rancho Lilac, San Diego County, California. ERC Environmental and Energy Services, Co., San Diego. Report #1122412 on file at the South Coastal Information Center, San Diego State University. 2004 2004 Field Directory of the California Indian Community. California Indian Assistance Program (CIAP), Department of Housing and Community Development, State of California. Sacramento. City of San Diego, 2007 Draft General Plan; 3.11 Paleontological Resources. https:ljwww.sandiego.gov/sites/default/files/legacy/planning/genplan/pdf/peir/pale ontological.pdf City of San Diego Development Services 2011 California Environmental Quality Act, Significance Determination Thresholds. https://www.sandiego.gov/sites/default/files/legacy/development- services/pdf /news/sdtceqa.pdf Demere, T.A. and Walsh, S.L., 1993 Paleontological Resources, County of San Diego. Prepared for the San Diego Planning Commission. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 105 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines Department of Planning and Lane Use Department Work, 2009 County of San Diego Guidelines for Determining Significance and Report Format and Content Requirements; Paleontological Resources. http://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/dam/sdc/pds/ProjectPlanning/docs/Biologi cal Guidelines.pdf Evans, Michael J., Alexa Roberts, and Peggy Nelson 2001 Ethnographic Landscapes. CRM 24(5): 53-56. Gallegos, Dennis 1991 Antiquity and Adaptation at Agua Hedionda, Carlsbad, California. In Hunter-Gatherers of Early Holocene Coastal California, edited by J.M. Erlandson and R.H. Colten, pp. 19-41. Perspectives in California Archaeology, Volume 1. Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles. Gudde, Erwin G. 1969 California Place Names: The Origin and Etymology of Current Geographical Names. Third edition. University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles. Gunther, Jane D. 1984 Riverside County, California, Place Names: Their Origins and Their Stories. Rubidoux Printing Company, Riverside, California. Haenszel, Arda M., and Jennifer Reynolds 1975 The Historic San Bernardino Mission District. San Bernardino County Museum Association, Redlands, California. Hanks, Richard A. 2012 This War Is for a Whole Life: The Culture of Resistance Among Southern California Indians, 1850-1966. Ushkana Press, Dorothy Ramon, Learning Center, Inc., Banning, California. Keller, Timothy J. and Genevieve P. Keller n.d. How to Evaluate and Nominate Designated Historic Landscapes. National Register Bulletin 18. National Park Service. Kennedy, Michael P., and Tan, Siang S. 2007 Geologic Map of the Oceanside 30' x 60' Quadrangle, California. California Department of Conservation California Geological Survey. http://ca.water.usgs.gov/sandiego/data/gis/geology/kennedy2005/RGM2 Oceanside 2007 Pamphlet.pdf Koerper, Henry C., Paul Langenwalter II, and Adella Schroth 1991 Early Holocene Adaptations and the Transition Problem: Eviden~e from the Allan 0. Kelly Site, Agua Hedionda Lagoon. In Hunter-Gatherers of Early Holocene Coastal California, edited by J.M. Erlandson and R.H. Colten, pp. 81-88. Perspectives in Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 106 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines California Archaeology, Volume 1. Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles. Kyle, Douglas 2002 Historic Spots in California. Stanford University Press. Stanford, California. Luomala, Katharine 1978 Tipai-Ipai. In Handbook of North American Indians, Volume 8, California, edited by R. F. Heizer, pp. 592-609. Smithsonian Institution, Washington. Masters, Patricia M. and Dennis R. Gallegos 1997 Environmental Change and Coastal Adaptations in San Diego County during the Middle Holocene. In Archaeology of the California Coast During the Middle Holocene, edited by J. M. Erlandson and M.A. Glassow, pp. 11-21. Perspectives in California Archaeology, Volume 4. Institute of Archaeology, University of California, Los Angeles. Melnick, Robert 1984 Cultural Landscapes: Rural Historic Districts in the National Park System, NPS, Park Historic Architecture Division McClelland, Linda F., J. Timothy Keller, Genevieve P. Keller, and Robert Z. Melnick 1999 Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Rural Historic Landscapes. National Register Bulletin 30. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. http://www.nps.gov/ history/nr/publications/ Native American Historic Resource Protection Act; Archaeological, Paleontological, and Historical Sites; Native American Historical, Cultural, and Sacred Sites; Public Resources Code Section 5097-5097.993. http://online.sfsu.edu/mgriffin/California%20Public%20Resources%20Code%205097.pdf Parker, Patricia L. and Thomas F. King 1998 Guidelines for Evaluating and Documenting Traditional Cultural Properties. National Register Bulletin 38. U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service. Phillips, George H. 2014 Chiefs and Challengers: Indian Resistance and Cooperation in Southern California, 1769-1906. University of Oklahoma Press, Norman. Pourade, Richard 1961 The History of San Diego: Time of the Bells. San Diego Historical Society. http://www.sandiegohistory.org/books/pourade/time/timechapter9.htm Robertson, Donald B. 1998 Encyclopedia of Western Railroad History, Volume IV, California. The Caxton Printers, Caldwell, Idaho. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 107 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines Robinson, W. W. 1948 Land in California: The Story of Mission Lands, Ranchos, Squatters, Mining Claims, Railroad Grants, Land Scrip, Homesteads. University of California Press, Berkeley. San Diego History Center 2016 Cave Johnson Couts (1821-1874). Biography. San Diego History Center. http:ljwww.sa nd ieg ohistory.org/a rch ives/biog ra physu b ject/c jcouts/ Scott, E., and Springer, K. 2003 CEQA and fossil preservation in southern California. The Environmental Monitor, Winter: 4-10, 17. Scott, E., Springer, K., and Sagebiel, J.C., 2004 Vertebrate paleontology in the Mojave Desert: The continuing importance of "Follow- Through" in preserving paleontological resources. In M. W. Allen and Reed, J. editors, The Human Journey and ancient life in California's deserts: proceedings from the 2001 Millennium Conference, 65-70. Sutton, Mark Q. 2011 The Palomar Tradition and Its Place in the Prehistory of Southern California. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly 44(4):1-74. Sutton, Mark Q. and Jill K. Gardner 2010 Reconceptualizing the Encinitas Tradition of Southern California. Pacific Coast Archaeological Society Quarterly 42(4):1-64. True, D. L. 1958 1980 An Early Complex in San Diego County, California. American Antiquity 23:255-263. The Pauma Complex in Northern San Diego County. Journal of New World Archaeology IIl(4). 1990 Site Locations and Water Supply: A Perspective from Northern San Diego County. Journal of New World Archaeology VIl(4):37-60. True, D. L., Clement W. Meighan, and Harvey Crew 1974 Archaeological Investigations at Molpa, San Diego County. University of California Publications in Anthropology 11. True, D. L., R. Pankey, and Claude N. Warren 1991 Tom-Kav: A Late Village Site in Northern San Diego County, California, and Its Place in the San Luis Rey Complex. University of California Publications, Anthropological Records, vol. 30. University of California Press, Berkeley. True, D. L. and Georgie Waugh 1982 Proposed Settlement Shifts During San Luis Rey Times, Northern San Diego County. Journal of California and Great Basin Anthropology 4:34-54. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 108 September 2017 Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Guidelines Wallace, William J. 1955 A Suggested Chronology for Southern California Coastal Archaeology. Southwestern Journal of Anthropology 11:214-230. Warren, Claude N. 1967 The San Dieguito Complex: a Review and Hypothesis. American Antiquity 32:168-185. 1968 Cultural Tradition and Ecological Adaptation on the Southern California Coast. In Archaic Prehistory in the Western United States, edited by Cynthia Irwin-Williams. Eastern New Mexico University Contributions in Anthropology 1(3):1-14. Portales, New Mexico. Waugh, Georgie 1986 Intensification and Land-Use: Archaeological Indications of Transition and Transformation in a Late Prehistoric Complex in Southern California. Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Anthropology, University of California, Davis. UMI Dissertation Services, ProQuest, Ann Arbor, Michigan. Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines City of Carlsbad 109 September 2017 I LIST OF ATTACHMENTS Attachment A -Carlsbad City Council Policy No. 83 l ll • ATTACHMENT A I Carlsbad City Council Policy No. 83 .. .. (t') CITY OF ,.~CARLSBAD Council Policy Statement Category: TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCE PROTECTION Policy No. Date Issued: Effective Date: Resolution No. Cancellation Date: Supersedes No. 83 February 23, 2016 March 1, 2016 2016-042 n/a n/a Specific Subject: Tribal Consultation and Treatment and Protection of Tribal Cultural Resources PURPOSE: It is the intent of the City Council that the City of Carlsbad recognize its responsibility to protect with improved certainty the important historical and cultural values of current Tribal Cultural Resources within the City limits and to establish an improved framework for the City's consultations with Native American Tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the City of Carlsbad including the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians. BACKGROUND: The City of Carlsbad is proudly home to California Native American Tribes that have been here for more than ten thousand years. The City is acknowledged by California Native American Tribes, archaeologists, ethnographers, and anthropologists to be rich in Tribal Cultural Resources. These Tribal Cultural Resources are significant for their traditional, cultural, spiritual and religious ties to the California Native American people living today and the cultural significance these resources have to the lives of California Native American Tribal people in the present. Currently, in the design and construction of development projects on private property and projects on City-owned properties, the City of Carlsbad Cultural Resources Guidelines and General Plan Policies 7- P.7 through 7-P.11 are implemented. In addition, during the project review process City staff, as the City's representative managing both projects on private and City-owned properties, must implement their best professional judgment to attempt to avoid or substantially reduce impacts to Tribal Cultural Resources, historical, archaeological and paleontological resources by developing mitigation measures for appropriate treatment and protection of such resources. However, the City's Cultural Resource Guidelines (1990) require updating to ensure consistency with State law and the City's General Plan Policies, define a predictable and reliable means of approving projects, and ensure appropriate long term protection of Tribal Cultural Resources. To meet these goals the City, within the areas of its authority, will establish improved guidelines for Native American tribal consultation and the protection of Tribal Cultural Resources in a way that is respectful to California Native American Tribes. POLICY: To the extent allowed under the authority of the City, the City shall guide all development projects on private property and projects on City-owned properties to be designed and constructed in a manner to avoid or substantially reduce impacts to Tribal Cultural Resources, as they are defined by State Law, and to establish and adopt preservation measures to maintain their permanence in protection. To facilitate this Policy, the City shall consult with California Native American tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the City, including San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians, early in the design process of development projects on City-owned properties and early in the permit process of development projects on private property to avoid or substantially lessen potential adverse impacts to Tribal Cultural Resources that may occur as a result of a proposed project. The City shall Page 1 update its Cultural Resource Guidelines to incorporate State definitions of Tribal Cultural Resources, require consultation in the detection, treatment and protection ofTribal Cultural Resources for all Projects on City-owned lands and on private property to the full extent of the City's authority, ensure a complete understanding by project proponents, including the City and Tribal Representatives, of current and previous mitigation commitments for Tribal Cultural Resources, and provide improved protocols for ensuring the permanence of preservation mitigation measures. Page 2 of2 This page is intentionally blank. Appendix C. Cultural Resources Letter Report This page is intentionally blank. hdrinc.com June 3, 2019 Elmer Alex, Principal Engineer, Sewer Utilities 200 Civic Center Drive Vista, CA 92084 Reference: Cultural Resources Study for the Vista-Carlsbad Trunk Sewer Access, Reach 1 (VC1), Carlsbad, California (Confidential) Introduction This letter report provides the results of cultural resources study for the proposed access improvements to Reach 1 of the Vista-Carlsbad Trunk Sewer (VC1 or project) as proposed by the City of Vista (City) in the City of Carlsbad, California. The proposed project is subject to compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as amended through 2019 and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA). Therefore, cultural resources management work was conducted in compliance with the CEQA and NHPA Statutes and Guidelines. The cultural resources study was conducted in support of the implementation of the VC1 project, which is covered under the City's 2017 Comprehensive Sewer Master Plan (CSMP) and Supplemental Program EIR (SPEIR). Mitigation Measure CULT-2 in the City's Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) requires the preparation of a project specific archaeological survey prior to project implementation to reduce potentially significant impacts identified for CSMP Categories 1, 2, 3, and 4. According to the SPEIR, the project is identified as a Category 4 project and is subject to the requirements of Mitigation Measure CUL T-2. This cultural resources assessment encompassed background and archival record searches and a thorough pedestrian survey of the project area of potential effect (APE). The APE encompasses an area on the north side of Buena Vista Creek and south of CA Hwy 78 and between the eastern terminus of Haymar Drive (west of College Boulevard) and the western terminus of Haymar Drive (east of El Camino Real) (Figure 1 and Figure 2). The majority of the project site is within the Buena Vista Creek Ecological Reserve. The proposed action within the APE consists of the rehabilitation and improvement of the existing VC1 access road. Planned activities would include vegetation removal or trimming, grading, limited excavation, soil stockpiling, and roadway compaction. Ground disturbance would include excavation of up to six feet in depth for the road cut in the eastern half of the APE and excavation of up to 2 feet in depth for the road cut in the western half of the APE. Construction would require a temporary easement of up to 50 feet in width. HOR archaeologists Dan Leard and Dan Leonard conducted the survey of the entire APE on April 19, 2019. 591 Camino de la Reina, Suite 300. San Diego, CA 92108 T 858 712 8400 F 858 712 8333 Figure 1. Project area shown on the USGS 7.5' quadrangle 500 1,000 2,000 --===---■Feet --==---Meters 0 150 300 600 N A 1:24,000 PrOJection NAO 1983 UTM ZONE 11 N Data Source· USA Topo Maps 2 Figure 2. Aerial overview of the Project Area of Potential Effect II II Project Area N 0 0 200 400 800 A Feet Meters 50 100 200 1:8,000 Pr01ecbon. NAO 1983 UTM ZONE 11N Data So1Xce: San O,ego 2017 4-w,ch Imagery 3 Background Studies As part of the study, HOR conducted a background and archival records search of the project area that included a search of the cultural resources databases housed with the South Coastal Information Center (SCIC), the Sacred Lands File (SLF) kept with the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), and any available historic documentation and aerial imagery for the area. On February 21 , 2019 a request was submitted to the SCIC for a record search of all archaeological and historical resources within ½ mile of the APE. The record search identified 53 cultural resource projects and 22 cultural resources. On April 3, 2019 a letter was sent to the NAHC requesting a review of the SLF for any registered cultural resources, traditional cultural properties, or areas of heritage sensitivity within the vicinity of the project area. The results of the SLF were negative. Previous Cultural Resource Studies The record search identified 53 cultural resource survey, excavation, and monitoring projects within a half mile of the APE. The entirety of the project area has been previously surveyed between 1977 and 2017. Table 1. Previous cultural resources studies within 1/2 mile of the project area -• Affiliation Title Report Type Carrico, Archaeological SD-Richard WESTEC Investigations of the Archaeological, Field 1977 Master Plan 300 Acres 00291 and Lesley Services, Inc. Project Oceanside, study McCoy California. Cultural Resource Survey Gallegos, and Assessment and Archaeological Testing of SD-Dennis and 1984 WESTEC Site Sdi-9967 (W-3492) Archaeological, Field 00675 Richard Services, Inc. for South Coast Asphalt study Carrico Products Company Carlsbad, California Gallegos, Cultural Resource Survey SD-Dennis and WESTEC and Assessment for Archaeological, Field 1985 Epoch/Pacific Capital 01033 Richard Services, Inc. Project Oceanside, study Carrico California An Archaeological Survey Report for a Widening of SD-Lay lander, 1988 CAL TRANS State Route 78 (1-5 to Archaeological, Field 01154 Don East of College study Boulevard) Oceanside, California. Pigniolo, ERC Cultural Resource Survey SD-Andrew Environmental of Improvements to Archaeological, Field 1989 and Energy Melrose Drive and North 01328 and Dennis Services Santa Fe Avenue Vista, study Gallegos Company California. 4 Table 1. Previous cultural resources studies within 1/2 mile of the project area -• Affiliation Title Report Type Wade, Sue Archaeological Monitoring A. and of the Encina Gas Pipline SD-Susan M. 1986 RECON Project Profiles of Archaeological, Field 01579 Hector Subsistence Patterns study Ph.D. Along the South Shore of Agua Hedionda Lagoon An Evaluation of the Wlodarski, Impacts Upon Cultural Pence Resources Located on 95 SD-Robert J. 1981 Archaeological Acres, Buena Vista Archaeological, Field 01643 and Gwen Consulting Creek, City of Carlsbad, study R. Romani County of San Diego, California Archaeological SD-Wade, Sue Excavations at SDi-Archaeological, 1987 RECON 4926/SDM-W-2131 Oak 01662 A. Riparian Park City of Excavation Oceanside, California SD-Wade, Sue Archaeological Mitigation Archaeological, 01664 A. 1985 RECON of SDi-9898, Del Oro Hills Excavation, Field Oceanside, California study Archaeological Archaeological, Evaluations At Calavera SD-Hills SDl-5416, Evaluation, 02598 Wade, Sue 1992 RECON Archaeological Testing At Excavation, Field SDl-12470, SDl-12471. study, Carlsbad ManagemenUplanning Draft Environmental SD-Larry Impact Report Revised 1982 Larry Seeman Parks and Recreation Other research 04111 Seeman Element, Carlsbad, California SD-Richard 1977 WESTEC Fairbanks Ranch, San Archaeological, Field 04124 Carrico Diego County study An Archaeological SD-Bull, 1977 Charles S. Reconnaissance Of The Archaeological, 04229 Charles Bull Lake Calvera Hills Plan Evaluation Area Final Report For An SD-Caltrans 1982 Caltrans Archaeological Test Archaeological, Field 04833 Excavation At Site Ca-study SDl-9473, Carlsbad, Ca. Summary Report For An Archaeological Test SD-Corum, 1982 Joyce Corum Excavation At Site Ca-Archaeological, Field 04835 Joyce SDl-9473, Oceanside, study Ca. 11-SD-78 P.M. 0 .0/3.1 Historic Property Survey SD-Gallegos, Gallegos & Report Rancho Del 2000 Oro/SR 78 Interchange Other research 05403 Dennis Assoc. Volume 1 Of 2 Oceanside, California 5 Table 1. Previous cultural resources studies within 1/2 mile of the project area -• ' Title 1 Affiliation Report Type Kyle, Cultural Resources Carolyn, Survey For The Proposed SD-Roxana 2002 Gallegos & State Route 78/Rancho Archaeological, Field 05404 Phillips, Assoc. Del Oro Interchange study and Dennis Project-City Of Gallegos Oceanside, California SD-Laylander, Historic Property Survey 1988 Don Laylander Report For A Widening Of Other research 05845 Don State Route 78 Robbins- SD-Wade, Cultural Resources Archaeological, 06195 Mary and 1989 Affinis Inventory: College Fair, Evaluation Timothy G Oceanside, California Gross SD-Robbins-Cultural Resources Archaeological, Wade, 1989 Affinis Inventory: College Fair 07858 Mary Oceanside, Ca Evaluation SD-Rosen, 2003 Martin D. Final Historic Property Other research 08484 Martin D. Rosen Survey Report An Archaeological Survey SD-Harley, 1983 Geoff Harley Of The Tri-City Plaza Archaeological, 08748 Geoff Shopping Center Evaluation Property Murray, SD-Matt and Via Las Rosas Archaeological, Mary 2003 Affinis 08883 Robbins-Archaeology Evaluation Wade SD-Rosen, 2004 Positive Historic Property Other research 09003 Martin D. Survey Report Cultural Resource Assessment For Cingular SD-Kyle, 2002 Kyle Wireless Facility Sd7 41-Literature search 09079 Carolyn Consulting 01 , City Of Oceanside, County Of San Diego, California Gallegos, Historical/Archaeological SD-Dennis and Gallegos And 09136 Ivan 1991 Associates Survey Report For Larwin Other research Strudwick Park, Carlsbad, California SD-Rosen, State of Historic Property Survey 2005 California -Architectural/Historical 09366 Martin D. BTHA Report -Rancho del Oro Guerrero, City Of Carlsbad Water SD-Monica C Gallegos & And Sewer Master Plans Archaeological, 09571 and Dennis 2003 Associates Cultural Resource Evaluation, R. Gallegos Background Study City Of Management/planning Carlsbad, California Robbins- SD-Wade, Affinis Del Oro Heights Tentative Archaeological, 09745 Mary and 2005 Environmental Map-Archaeology (Affinis Evaluation, Other Andrew Services Job No. 2073) research Giletti 6 Table 1. Previous cultural resources studies within 1 /2 mile of the project area 1111 II Affiliation Title Report Type SD-Carrico, Richard Environmental Impact Archaeological, 09884 Richard 1973 Carrico Report Archaeological Evaluation, Other Survey research Beaumaris Properties SD-Robbins-Affinis Vista Way/Rancho del Archaeological, 10155 Wade, 2006 Environmental Oro Parcel -Evaluation, Other Mary Services Archaeological (Affinis research Job No. 2115) Cultural Resources Final SWCA Report Of Monitoring And Archaeological, SD-Arrington, 2006 Environmental Findings For The Qwest Evaluation, Field 10551 Cindy Consultants Network Construction study, Monitoring, Project, State Of Other research California SD-Robbins-"Panhandle" Property Archaeological, Wade, 2008 Affinis Evaluation, Other 11778 Mary Archaeological Survey research Cultural Resources Robbins-Study, Former South Archaeological, SD-Wade, 2008 Affinis Coast Material Quarry Evaluation, Other 11786 Mary Amended Reclamation research Plan, Oceanside, San Diego County, California Clowery-A Phase I Archaeological SD-Moreno, Brian F. Smith Assessment Of The Archaeological, 12412 Sara And 2008 & Associates College Boulevard Evaluation, Other Brian F. research Smith Widening Project A Cultural Resources Ni Inventory For The Route SD-Ghabhlain, ASM Affiliates, Realignment Of The Archaeological, Sinead and 2001 Proposed Pf. Net / AT&T Evaluation, Other 12422 Drew Inc. Fiber Optics Conduit research Pallette Oceanside To San Diego, California Rancho Del Oro Drive/ Archaeological, SD-Rosen, 2003 Caltrans State Route 78 Evaluation, Other 12872 Martin D. Interchange, San Diego research County, California TCM Access Road Archaeological, SD-Morgan, 2011 HOR Grading Project, Cultural Evaluation, Other 13626 Nichole B. Resources Inventory research Report Robbins- SD-Wade, Cultural Resources Archaeological, Mary and 1989 Affinis Inventory: College Fair Evaluation, Other 13844 G. Timothy Oceanside, California research Gross SD-Robbins-Via Las Rosas Archaeological, 13948 Wade, 2003 Affinis Archaeology Evaluation, Other Mary research 7 Table 1. Previous cultural resources studies within 1 /2 mile of the project area Ill • Affiliation Title Report Type Ni Ghabhlain, A Cultural And Historical Sinead, Resources Survey And Mark Archaeological, SD-Becker, 2012 ASM Affiliates, Evaluation For The Evaluation, Other 14039 Adam Inc. Quarry Creek Project research Giacinta, EIR, City Of Carlsbad, and Tony California Quach Cultural And Historical Resource Study For The SD-Ni ASM Affiliates, City Of Oceanside Archaeological, Ghabhlain, 2011 General Plan-Circulation Evaluation, Other 14069 Sinead Inc. Element Update Program research Environmental Impact Report (PEIR) Robbins-Archaeological Monitoring Wade, For The Former South Archaeological, SD-Coast Material Quarry 14157 Mary and 2013 Affinis Amended Reclamation Evaluation, Other Andrew Plan, Carlsbad, San research Giletti Diego County, California Cultural Resource Survey SD-Baksh, Tierra For The Proposed Archaeological, 14564 Michael 1996 Environmental College Boulevard Evaluation, Other Services Widening Project In research Oceanside, California Stropes, Brian F. Smith A Phase I Archaeological Archaeological, SD-Tracy A. And Assessment Update For Evaluation, Literature 14800 and Smith, 2014 Associates, The College Boulevard search, Other Brian F. Inc. Widening Project City Of research Oceanside Archaeological Survey for Susan M. NWB the SDG&E Quarry Creek SD-Hector and Environmental Overhead Conversion, Archaeological, 15503 Joshua A. Services, LLC San Diego County, Monitoring Tansey California (SDG&E eTS #29953) Cultural Resources Survey Report For The Art/Music Storage SD-Roger D. 2015 ECORP Buildings And Archaeological, Field 16174 Mason Consulting Theatre/Dance Building study Project Mira Costa College Oceanside, San Diego County Visual Effects Assessment On The Marron-Hayes Adobes SD-Davis, ASM Affiliates Historic District For The Architectural/Historical 16406 Shannon Quarry Creek Master Plan Environmental Impact Report, Carlsbad, California 8 Table 1. Previous cultural resources studies within 1/2 mile of the project area Ill II Affiliation Title Report Type A Cultural And Historical Ni Resources Survey And SD-Ghabhlain, 2014 ASM Affiliates Evaluation For The Archaeological, 16407 Sinead Quarry Creek Project, Architectural/Historical City Of Carlsbad, California Cultural Resources Survey Mira Costa College/ ENSITE #18547 SD-Perez, Don EBI (270195) 2 Barnard Archaeological, 2014 Drive, Oceanside, San 16484 C. Consulting Diego County, California Evaluation 92058 NW1/4 SE1/4 S28 T11S R4W, EBI Project No.61142765 Stringer-Historic American SD-Bowsher, 2014 ASM Affiliates Buildings Survey Marron-Architectural/Historical 16613 Sarah Hayes Adobes Historic District Archaeological Monitoring SD-Castells, ASM Affiliates, For The Quarry Creek Archaeological, 17210 Shelby 2017 Inc. Project, City Of Carlsbad, Excavation, Gunderman San Diego County, Monitoring California Robbins- SD-Wade, Helix Vista Pacific Project -Archaeological, Field Mary and 2017 Environmental 17342 Nicole Planning Cultural Resources Study study Falvey Archaeological Resources The record search identified 22 previously recorded archaeological resources within a half mile radius of the APE. The previously recorded resources include 15 prehistoric habitation sites, one possible prehistoric village site, one isolated bedrock milling station, one prehistoric lithic isolate, two multicomponent historic and prehistoric habitation sites, one historic habitation site, and one multicomponent site with a historic adobe structure and prehistoric habitation. Of the 22 resources, four are within the APE (Figure 3). These include P-37-005652, P-37-009472, P-37-009473, and P-37-009474. P-37-005652 (CA-SDl-5652) was originally recorded by James Edwards in 1977. The site includes the restored Marron/Hayes adobe residence and pump house, a historic artifact scatter, a prehistoric artifact scatter, and prehistoric shell midden. The artifact assemblage included historic stone, leather, and a brass button, and prehistoric lithics, including choppers, scrapers, hammerstones, a mano fragment, and two projectile points. In 1998, Gallegos & Associates updated the site and performed subsurface testing of the prehistoric loci. P-37-009472 (CA-SDl-9472) and P-37-009473 (CA-SDl-9473) were originally recorded by Dennis Quillen in 1982 and described as Chione sp., Pecten sp., and Mytilus sp. shell 9 remains and basalt flakes present in rodent den mounds. Possible fire-cracked rock was also observed at CA-SDl-9473. The sites were recorded on two separate small ridges on the south side of Hwy 78 and north of Buena Vista Creek. Construction of Hwy 78 may have impacted the sites. P-37-009474 (CA-SDl-9474) was originally recorded by Dennis Quillen in 1982 and described as a historic habitation with two privy features and scattered historic debris consisting of historic bottle glass, ceramic sherds, brick, and hand-forged iron fragments all dating to the 1920s. The site is likely the remnants of a historic building that appears at this location on historic quadrangle maps. Two looter pits were observed at the site. Table 2. Previously recorded resources within ½ mile of the project area 11tflll:BIU■B·B1 • Eligibility P-37-CA-SDI-Site AP2 Prehistoric lithic artifact 1958 Unevaluated 000631 631 scatter, reported as likely destroyed P-37-CA-SDI-Site 000632 632 P-37-CA-SDI-Site 000633 633 P-37-CA-SDI-Site 000634 634 P-37-CA-SDI-Site 005601 5601 P-37-CA-SDI-Site 005651 5651 P-37-CA-SDI-Site 005652 5652 AP2 AP4 AP2 AP2 AP2 AP2, AH4, HP2, AP15 Mano fragment and possible midden deposit Prehistoric campsite with bedrock metate Prehistoric campsite with lithic scatter Large prehistoric site with four concentrations of lithic artifacts and shell Extensive lithic and shell artifact scatter - considered eligible for the NRHP Restored Spanish style adobe house with historic and prehistoric artifact scatter and buried shell midden deposit Approximately 3,000 artifacts and ecofacts were recovered during testing. 1958 Unevaluated 1958 Unevaluated 1958 Unevaluated 1977 Unevaluated 1977 Recommended eligible 1977 Eligible P-37-CA-SDl-Site AP2, AP15, AH4 Possible prehistoric village site with prehistoric and historic artifact scatter and 1978 Unevaluated 006139 6139 P-37-CA-SDI- 008913 8913 P-37-CA-SDI- 008914 8914 P-37-CA-SDI- 009472 9472 P-37-CA-SDI- 009473 9473 Site Site Site Site AP2 AP2 AP2 AP2 midden deposit Light prehistoric lithic 1981 scatter with groundstone and shell Light prehistoric lithic 1981 scatter with shell Light scatter of prehistoric 1982 lithic debitage and shell Light scatter of prehistoric 1982 lithic debitage, shell, and possible FCR Unevaluated Unevaluated Unevaluated Recommended ineligible 10 Table 2. Previously recorded resources within ½ mile of the project area 11tldiSt¥lli\1t■t1·N • Eligibility P-37-CA-SDI-Site AH2, AH4 Building remnants, two 1982 Recommended 009474 9474 privies, and historic trash Eligible scatter P-37-CA-SDI-Site AH2, Prehistoric habitation with 1984 Recommended 009967 9967 AH4, AP2, shell and lithic scatter; ineligible AP15 historic house foundation and refuse P-37-CA-SDI-Site AP2 Small lithic scatter 1985 Unevaluated 010235 10235 P-37-CA-SDI-Site AP2 Small lithic scatter 1985 Unevaluated 010236 10236 P-37-Isolate AP2 Mano fragment 1991 Unevaluated 015016 P-37-CA-SDI-Site AP2, Prehistoric campsite with 2000 Unevaluated 018878 15732 AP15 shell midden, lithic scatter, and groundstone P-37-CA-SDI-Site AP16 Small shell scatter 2006 Unevaluated 027329 17863 P-37-CA-SDI-Site AP16 Shell scatter with 1 flake 2006 Unevaluated 027330 17864 P-37-CA-SDI-Site AP2, Small prehistoric scatter 2011 Unevaluated 032876 20776 AP15 P-37-CA-SDI-Site AP2, Small prehistoric scatter 2011 Unevaluated 032877 20777 AP15 11 Figure 3. Previously recorded resources within ½ mile of the project area (Confidential) II II Project Area c:J 1/2 Mile Buffer -Previously Recorded Site N • o-■s■oi:0=1::::i,o■o■o--■211,~~et --=:::::11---■Meters 0 150 300 600 A 1:20,000 Protection· NAO 1983 UTM ZONE 11N Data Source San Diego 2017 4-.,ch Imagery 12 Survey Methods HOR cultural resources specialists conducted a thorough pedestrian surface inspection of the entire project footprint. The pedestrian survey was consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's (SOI) Standards and Guidelines for Archaeology and Historic Preservation (48FR 44716, September 29, 1983) with the intent to locate and record all cultural resources. Survey methods conformed to prevailing State of California and the SOi's Standards and Guidelines. HOR pedestrian survey transect intervals did not exceed 15 meters. All cultural resources encountered were fully documented and photographed and all spatial data was recorded using a Trimble GeoXT handheld GPS unit with sub-meter accuracy. Field sketches, field artifact inventories, and detailed field notes were employed to document cultural resources. Survey Results The VC1 project area extends along a narrow valley on the south side of California Highway 78 and on the north side of Buena Vista Creek (Photograph 1 ). The terrain includes steep to moderate south-facing side slopes in the eastern half and flat valley floor across the western half. As a result of the survey, four previously recorded archaeological sites were relocated and updated. These include CA-SOl-5652, CA-SOl-9472, CA-SOl-9473, and CA-SOl-9474. No new cultural resources were identified during the survey. Photograph 1. Overview of the VC1 project area, facing west 13 CA-SDl-5652 CA-SDl-5652 was originally recorded by James Edwards in 1977. The site includes the restored Marron-Hayes Adobe residence and pump house, historic artifact scatters, and prehistoric artifact scatters. The artifact assemblage included historic stone, leather, and a brass button, and prehistoric lithics, including choppers, scrapers, hammerstones, a mano fragment, and two projectile points. In 1998, Gallegos & Associates updated the site and identified two concentrated areas of prehistoric material in the southern half of the site, designated Locus A and Locus B (Kyle, Phillips, and Gallegos, 2002). Gallegos & Associates implemented a subsurface testing program of the prehistoric component that consisted of excavation of 30 shovel test pits (STP) and six 1 x 1 meter test units. Subsurface testing identified two separate shell midden features and a sparse scatter of shell and artifacts over the remainder of the site. Cultural material recovered during testing included 2,800 pieces of debitage, 4 bifaces, 8 flake tools, 11 core/cobble tools, 1 core, 16 manos, 2 metate fragments, 1 stone bowl fragment, 29 ground stone fragments, 38 ceramic sherds, 2 olivella shell beads, 1 bone bead, 1 punched Argopecten sp. shell, 10 otoliths, 1 antler fragment, faunal remains, shell, and historic debris. Radiocarbon analysis from small charcoal and shell samples yielded dates from 1330 to 1970 years B.P. Based on the results of the testing, CA-SDl-5652/H was recommended eligible for inclusion in the NRHP and the CRHR. In 2015, ASM Affiliates completed a HABS documentation and National Reg ister nomination for the Marron-Hayes Historic Adobes District (Stringer-Bowsher et al 2015). The Marron- Hayes Adobe, along with the no longer extent Hayes Adobe (CA-SDl-9474H), comprises the Marron-Hayes Historic Adobes District. It was constructed ca. 1854 and altered in 194 7. The Marron -Hayes Adobes Historic District was once part of a much larger 362-acre ranch and is significant for its association with Silvestre Marron , one of the first non-Indian settlers of the present-day Oceanside-Carlsbad area, and John Chauncey Hayes, an influential late 19th c. and early 20th c. lawyer, judge, newspaper man, farmer, real estate developer, and one of the founders of Oceanside. The extant Marron-Hayes Adobe is significant as a rare and intact example of a late Mexican-style adobe in San Diego County (1850-1906), as well as an excellent example of mid-20th c. (1947) Mission Revival architectu re. 14 Photograph 2. Overview of CA-S01-5652 from Locus A, facing west Most of the southern half of the site is within the current study area. This portion of the site is on a gentle south facing slope on the north side of Buena Vista Creek. Most of the site is covered with dense coastal sage scrub and annual grasses (Photograph 2). Both of the previous site recorders noted that this area has been used for agriculture. Currently, this area is part of the Buena Vista Creek Ecological Reserve. Despite poor ground visibility, both Loci A and B were easily relocated. Locus A covers the southeast corner of the site and consists of a dense surface scatter of crushed shell. Shell midden deposit and fire-cracked rock (FCR) are exposed on the surface of an intersection of dirt/gravel roads that cut through Locus A (Photograph 3). Buried midden soil is visible in erosional ruts at the road intersection. These ruts extend down to depths of at least 20 cm below surface level and show dense shell deposit (Photographs 4 and 5). One lithic tool was identified within Locus A (Artifact 1 ). Artifact 1 is a double-sided chopper of metavolcanic material. As a result of the survey, the boundaries of CA-SDl-5652 were expanded to cover the full extent of Locus A. 15 Photograph 3. Overview of CA-SDl-5652 Locus A, facing northwest Photograph 4. Shell and midden soil exposed in the road at Locus A 16 Photograph 5. Shell and midden soil exposed in the road at Locus A Locus B covers part of the southwest portion of the site and consists of moderate to dense shell scatter with some FCR and midden soil mostly visible in area of rodent burrowing (Photograph 6). Photograph 6. Overview of CA-501-5652 Locus B, facing south 17 Two possible historic features were also identified at the site. Feature 1 is a water pump with a rectangular concrete base and a rusted metal pump mechanism (Photograph 7). Tags on the mechanism read "Serial Number S27 Model 9R1 " and "A PEERLESS PUMP DIVISION/ FOOD MACHINERY AND CHEMICAL CORPORATION/ LOS ANGELES, CA/ INDIANAPOLIS, IND," with an "fmc" logo. The pump likely dates to the mid-20th Century. It is unclear if this is related to the historic pump house noted by Edwards in 1977. Feature 2 is a large eucalyptus tree on the northeast edge of Locus B. The tree was likely planted during the historic occupation of the site. Photograph 7. Overview of CA-S01-5652 water pump feature, facing east Previous excavations of the prehistoric portions of the site have yielded information important to the prehistory of the area. The site also likely contains additional subsurface deposits that have the potential to yield further information. Therefore, the prehistoric component of the site should be considered eligible for the California Register of Historic Resources (CRHR) under Criterion 4 and for the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) under Criterion D. The historic Marr6n-Hayes Adobe structure is eligible under Criteria B and C. Additionally, the site boundary is within the National Register nomination boundaries of the Marron-Hayes Historic Adobes District as drawn by Stringer-Bowsher et al (2015). CA-501-94 72 CA-SDl-9472 was originally recorded by Dennis Quillen in 1982 and described as Chione sp., Pecten sp., and Mytilus sp. shell remains and basalt flakes present in rodent den mounds. The site measured 30 m x 25 m and was recorded on a small ridge on the south side of Hwy 78 and north of Buena Vista Creek (Quillen 1982a). 18 The site was relocated on top of low, broad ridge extending between Hwy 78 and Buena Vista Creek adjacent to the west of the previously recorded location (Photograph 8). A diffuse scatter of Chione sp., Argopecten sp., and Donax sp. shell remains was observed scattered over an area measuring 73 x 39 m. One basalt tertiary flake was observed on the surface. Vegetation on the site consists of coastal sage, sweet fennel, and other grasses. Approximately 50 percent of the surface has been disturbed by vehicular use. The site likely extended further to the north prior to the construction of Hwy 78. The site may also extend further south to the creek; however, due to dense riparian vegetation ground visibility to the south is effectively zero. CA-SDl-9472 has not been tested or evaluated for eligibility to the CRHR or the NRHP. Subsurface testing would be necessary to assess the site's significance and potential to yield important information. Photograph 8. Overview of CA-S01-9472, facing southeast CA-SDl-9473 CA-SDl-9473 was originally recorded by Dennis Quillen in 1982 and described as a surface scatter of Chione sp., Pecten sp., and Mytilus sp. shell remains, possible FCR, and basalt flakes visible in rodent den mounds. The site measured 35 m x 25 m and was recorded on a small ridge on the south side of Hwy 78 and north of Buena Vista Creek (Quillen 1982b). Caltrans archaeologists tested the site in 1982 to assess its eligibility for inclusion in the NRHP (Corum and White 1982). Testing included excavation of twelve 1 x 1 m test units, power auguring of ten 30 cm diamter test probes, and hand excavation of one 30 cm x 30 cm test probe. Artifacts recovered from the site included debitage, flaked lithic tools, ground stone, one projectile point, ceramics, and fire-affected rocks. Caltrans determined that the site was not eligible for inclusion on the NRHP due to extensive disturbance (Corum and White 1982). 19 The site was relocated on top of low, narrow ridge extending between Hwy 78 and Buena Vista Creek approximately 90 m the west of the previously recorded location (Photograph 9). A dense surface scatter of Chione sp., Argopecten sp., and Donax sp. shell remains was observed scattered over an area measuring 58 m x 33 m (Photograph 10). Two basalt flakes and several small fragments of possible FCR were observed on the surface. Vegetation on the site consists of dense coastal sage, sweet fennel, and other grasses. Other than the dirt road which bisects the site, no obvious ground disturbances were observed. The site may have extended further to the north prior to the construction of Hwy 78, and also may have extended further south to the creek; however, due to dense riparian vegetation ground visibility to the south is effectively zero. Photograph 9. Overview of CA-S01-9473, facing southwest 20 Photograph 10. Shell varieties at CA-SOI-9473 CA-SDl-9474 CA-SDl-9474H was originally recorded by Dennis Quillen in 1982 and described as a historic habitation measuring 50 x 30 m with two privy features and scattered historic debris consisting of historic bottle glass, ceramic sherds, brick, cattle bone and hand-forged iron fragments dating to the 1920s. The larger of the privies was measured at 1.5 m across at the top by 2 m in depth. The site is likely the remnants of a historic building that appears at this location on the 1906 historic quadrangle maps. Two looter pits were observed at the site (Quillen 1982c). Based on historical research, Gallegos & Associates identified the location of CA-SDl-9474H as the site of the Hayes Adobe, an adobe house built for John Chauncey Hayes and Felipa E. Marron. The Hayes Adobe was constructed ca. 1875 and reported to be in disuse by the 1930s and "almost entirely in ruins" by 1965 (Stringer-Bowsher et al 2015). Gallegos & Associates conducted additional archaeological fieldwork at CA-SDl-947 4H in 1998 that included a surface collection of cultural materials, excavation of STPs, a ground penetrating radar (GPR) study, and backhoe trenching (Kyle, Phillips, and Gallegos, 2002). At the time of their investigations, no evidence of the structure could be seen on the surface. GPR was used to determine the presence of subsurface remnants of the adobe structure, privies, and/or trash dumps. The surface collection and excavation produced a variety of cultural materials including ceramics, glass, metal, and faunal remains. The GPR study identified a linear anomaly that corresponded with the documented orientation of the Hayes Adobe and was interpreted as potential wall remnants. Based on the results of the investigations, Gallegos & Associates recommended the site eligible for listing on the NRHP under Criterion A for association with the pioneer settlement of the Oceanside/Carlsbad area; Criterion B for association with the Hayes and Marron families; and Criterion D on the basis that it may likely yield information important in history. Additionally , the site considered a contributing element 21 to the proposed Marron-Hayes National Register Historic District that also includes CA-SDl- 5652H. Photograph 11 . Overview of CA-S0I-9474, facing south The site was relocated at the previously recorded location on the edge of a flat knoll above and north of Buena Vista Creek (Photograph 11 ). A wire fence borders the site on the east and the Hwy 78 ROW borders the site on the north. The west and south edges of the site are truncated by sewer infrastructure. Resurvey of the area identified a sparse surface scatter consisting of 3 fragments of whiteware ceramics, 1 piece of porcelain ceramic, 3 fragments of lightly solarized amethyst glass, 2 fragments of aquamarine bottle glass, 1 adobe brick fragment, several pieces of mortar or cement, 1 possible sandstone mano fragment (Photograph 12), 1 basalt secondary flake, and a thin scatter of shell fragments. With the exception of the lithics, the artifacts appear to date to the early 20th century and match the assemblage recorded by Quillen. The shell scatter includes Chione sp., Tivela sp., and Haliotis sp. One historic feature was identified at the site. Feature 1 consists of a rectangular rock alignment measuring approximately 6 ft x 5.5 ft (Photograph 13). The feature is made of granitic rock cobbles with a piece of 2 x 4 inch wood plank in the southeast corner. It is possible that this is the remnants of one of the privy features recorded by Quillen. If so, the feature has since been filled in. 22 Photograph 12. Mano fragment Photograph 13. Overview of Feature 1 CA-SDl-9474 has been recommended eligible for listing on the CRHR or NRHP. Based on a surface examination of the site, it appears that all structural elements of the historic habitation have been destroyed. The current surface assemblage is sparse and lacks any diagnostic artifacts that might yield further information about the historic or prehistoric occupation. However, subsurface testing would be necessary to evaluate the impacts of construction on the significance of the site. [Note: Archaeological testing and evaluation required at location of the road cut.] 23 Impact Evaluation As defined in Appendix G of the 2019 CEQA Statute & Guidelines, project impacts to cultural resources would be considered significant if the project was determined to: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines; b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource as defined in Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines; c) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries; or d) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a Tribal Cultural Resource as defined in Public Resources Code §21074? The following evaluation considers the potential impacts to the cultural resources identified within the APE project improvements identified in Figure 4 and Figure 5. a) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines? As provided in Section 4.3 of the SPEIR, project construction activities could include the use of equipment that could generate high levels of vibration. The highest vibration levels for construction identified in the SPEIR was that associated with the operation of a vibratory roller (0.210 peak particle velocity [PPV] at 25 feet). This assumption would remain accurate for the project in that no blasting is proposed to facilitate realignment of the roadway as proposed. 24 Figure 4. Proposed Access Road (West) J,. LEGEND D ProJectArea ••··· 2017 0 & M Access Road Alignment (from SPEIR) D Proposed Access Road t:.".": Buena Vista Creek Ecological Reserve -Vista-Carlsbad Sewer Existing Sewer Manhole --Oceanside Sewer 0 0 Feet 200 25 Figure 5. Proposed Access Road (East) LEGEND D Proiect Area · · · · · 2017 0 & M Access Road Alignment (from SPEIR) D Proposed Access Road ~·:::: Buena Vista Creek Ecological Reserve -Vista-Carlsbad Sewer Ex1st1ng Sewer Manhole --Oceanside Sewer 0 0 Feet 200 26 Based on criteria presented in the Federal Transit Administration's (FTA) Noise and Vibration Manual (2006), "fragile buildings" are subject to damage when vibration exceeds 0.20 PPV. As provided in the SPEIR, historic structures are often considered in this category due to their age of construction and the building codes enacted at the time of construction. As a result, construction activities within 25 feet of fragile structures could result in damaging vibration levels for historic structures, where present and eligible for the NRHP or CRHR. As provided in the SPEIR, the CRHR eligible Rancho Buena Vista adobe ranch house is located in close proximity to the project with actual work proposed at approximately 100 feet of the onsite structure. However, it is possible that one or more contributing elements could be located in closer proximity and therefore be subject to potentially significant vibration-related impacts. Mitigation Measure CULT-1 is proposed to minimize construction-related vibration impacts to historic structures to a level of less than significant. b) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource as defined in Section 15064.5 of the CEQA Guidelines? As described in Section 4.3 of the SPEIR, the City applied probable work limits for construction for the Category 4 improvements, including the project. This included approximating the area of direct impact for construction, adjacent staging areas, and/or other temporary work areas and averages 50 feet in width. These areas are now defined in Figure 4 and Figure 5 for VC1 at the project level. Based on the project APE, four previously recorded sites were identified within the area of direct impact. CA-SDl-5652 is a multi-component site consisting of the Marron-Hayes Adobe, historic and prehistoric artifact scatter, and prehistoric shell midden deposit. A subsurface testing program implemented by Gallegos and Associates in 1998 confirmed the presence of buried shell midden deposit within the study area. The Marron-Hayes Adobes Historic District was nominated by ASM Affiliates to the NRHP in 2015. The Marron-Hayes Adobe is a contributing historic resource to the historic district and is itself eligible for the CRHR and NRHP under Criteria A, 8, and C. The structure is within 500 feet of the APE. Additionally, the prehistoric component of the site should be treated as eligible for the CRHR and the NRHP under Criterion D. Construction of the access road will have a direct adverse effect on the site. Any ground disturbing activity within the vicinity of the site may encounter additional buried archaeological deposits. Prior to any ground disturbing activities a protection plan should be implemented to mitigate adverse effects on buried cultural resources. HOR also recommends that Mitigation Measure CUL T-3, Archaeological Monitoring, be implemented for all activities within the historic district. In addition, HOR recommends that the City comply with Carlsbad's Tribal Cultural Resources Procedures as defined in Section 8 of Carlsbad's Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Resources Guidelines (2017). CA-SDl-9474 is a multi-component site consisting of possible remnants of the Hayes Adobe, historic artifact scatter, and prehistoric artifact and shell scatter. A subsurface testing program and GPR study implemented by Gallegos and Associates confirmed the presence of buried cultural material and found evidence of subsurface structural remnants. The Hayes Adobe is a contributing historic resource to the Marron-Hayes 27 Adobes Historic District and the site is recommended eligible for the CRHR and NRHP under Criteria A, B, and D. Construction of the access road may have a direct adverse effect on the site. Any ground disturbing activity within the vicinity of the site may encounter additional buried archaeological deposits. Prior to any ground disturbing activities a protection plan should be implemented to mitigate adverse effects on buried cultural resources. HDR also recommends that Mitigation Measure CUL T-3, Archaeological Monitoring, be implemented for all activities within the historic district. In addition, HDR recommends that the City comply with Carlsbad's Tribal Cultural Resources Procedures as defined in Section 8 of Carlsbad's Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Resources Guidelines (2017). CA-SDl-9472 contains a prehistoric surface scatter consisting of lithic artifacts and shell debris. The significance of the site has not been evaluated. Subsurface testing would be necessary to determine the significance and eligibility under Criterion D. Unless demonstrated to be otherwise, th is site should be treated as potentially eligible. HDR therefore recommends subsurface testing and evaluation of the site. HDR also recommends that Mitigation Measure CUL T-3, Archaeological Monitoring, be implemented for all ground disturbing activities within the vicinity of these sites. CA-SDl-9473 also contains a prehistoric surface scatter consisting of lithic artifacts and shell debris. CA-SDl-9473 has been extensively tested and recommended ineligible for inclusion on the CRHR and the NRHP due to extensive disturbance. Assuming SHPO concurrence, no further testing or evaluation is necessary. • To remain consistent with the prior SPEIR analysis and based on the results of the archaeological survey, the project has potential to cause significant impacts to cultural resources eligible for listing on the CRHR and NRHP. Project related excavation within the archaeological resources may cause the destruction, relocation, or alteration of buried archaeological deposits that may be likely to yield information important to prehistory or history. Thus, construction related to improvements to the VC1 access road has the potential to cause substantial adverse change in the significance of archaeological resources CA-SDl-5652, CA-SDl-9472, CA-SDl-9473, and CA-SDl-9474. This is considered a potentially significant impact and Mitigation Measure CUL T-3 is required. c) Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? As provided in Section 4.3 of the SPEIR, construction of the improvements proposed under the 2017 CSMP, including the project, would occur at the vicinity of existing facility locations. However, during the construction of these facilities, the potential for the unexpected discovery of interred human remains, either prehistoric or historic, is a possibility. The potential then increases in areas that have supported prehistoric and historic settlements, including the project area. These direct impacts could be significant. Mitigation Measure CUL T-5 is proposed to reduce these potential impacts to the unexpected discovery of interred human remains. 28 d) Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a Tribal Cultural Resource as defined in Public Resources Code §21074? As provided in (b), the project would result in direct impacts to CA-SDl-5652, which is a multi-component site consisting of the Marron-Hayes Adobes Historic District, and includes historic and prehistoric artifact scatter. This impact could include a substantial adverse change in the significance of a Tribal Cultural Resource pending further consultation with interested tribes. Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL T-2 is required . 29 Project-Level Mitigation Recommendations The cultural resources study was conducted as part of the implementation of Mitigation Measure CULT-2 (Project Specific Archaeological Survey). This mitigation measure, along with Mitigation Measures CUL T-1 and CUL T-3 are designed to reduce potentially significant impacts identified for CSMP Categories 1, 2, 3, and 4, including the project. Based on the implementation of Mitigation Measure CUL T-2, the project would result in a direct impact on cultural resources. As provided in Section 4.3 of the SPEIR, with the implementation of the following mitigation measures in combination with adherence to Carlsbad's Tribal, Cultural , and Paleontological Procedures (2017), these impacts would be reduced to a less than significant level. CUL T-1 Construction-Related Vibration. Prior to the issuance of project-specific construction documents for CIP Capacity and Condition Projects (Hardscape Environs), the City Engineer shall determine whether construction activities would occur within 25 feet of a NRHP or CRHR eligible or listed historic structure. For structures that have not been previously evaluated, the City Engineer shall consult with a qualified Architectural Historian approved by the City to conduct an evaluation of the structure. If the structure is determined eligible or already eligible or listed in the NRHP or CRHR, a structural evaluation shall be conducted by a Professional Structural Engineer to identify maximum allowable levels of vibration during construction . If a historic determination is required, the engineer shall provide recommendations on approaches to stabilization in conjunction with vibration monitoring. Permanent stabilization measures shall follow the Secretary of the Interior's guidelines for the treatment of historic properties. If the buildings are temporarily stabilized for the duration of construction activities, when removed, the buildings shall be restored to their pre-construction condition when the stabilization measures are removed . CUL T-2 Project-Specific Archaeological Survey. Prior to the issuance of project-specific construction documents for CIP Capacity and Condition Projects (Hardscape and Cross-County Environs}, Pump Station Rehabilitations , and Out-of-Service Area Projects, a Qualified Archaeologist approved by the City shall contact the NAHC regarding a Sacred Lands File Search for the project area. In addition, the City shall request a written response from the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians (SLR Band) (a tribe traditionally and culturally affiliated with the site) regarding whether the site of the 2017 CSMP improvement project may potentially affect Native American resources . If the NAHC and/or the SLR Band confirms potential known resources, a pedestrian survey (i.e., physical walk over) shall first be conducted by the Qualified Archaeologist and a TCA (traditionally and culturally affiliated) Native American Monitor. Should the pedestrian survey identify Native American cultural resources, the Qualified Archeologist shall, in consultation with the TCA Native American monitor and the SLR Band , make an immediate written evaluation of the significance and appropriate treatment of the resource, including any avoidance measures, additional testing and evaluations, or data recovery plans, and Pre- Excavation Agreements with the Tribe. If the SLR Band confirms, in consultation with 30 the Qualified Archaeologist, that there is a potential for unknown resources to be uncovered during construction activities, then Mitigation Measure CUL T-3, Archaeological Monitoring, shall be implemented (City of Vista 2017). CUL T-3 Archaeological Monitoring. Cultural resource mitigation monitoring shall be conducted to provide for the identification, evaluation, treatment, and protection of any cultural resources that are affected by or may be discovered during the construction of the proposed project. The monitoring shall consist of the full-time presence of a Qualified Archaeologist and a TCA (traditionally and culturally affiliated) Native American Monitor, and the monitoring activities shall be identified and defined in a Pre-Excavation Agreement between the City's Engineering Department and the San Luis Rey Band. The purpose of this agreement shall be to formalize protocols and procedures for the protection , treatment, and disposition of, but not limited to , such items as Native American human remains, funerary objects, cultural and religious landscapes, ceremonial items, traditional gathering areas and cultural items, located and/or discovered through the cultural resource mitigation monitoring program in conjunction with the construction of the proposed project, including additional archaeological surveys and/or studies, excavations, geotechnical investigations, soil surveys, grading, or any other ground disturbing activities. Other tasks of the monitoring program shall include the following: • The requirement for cultural resource mitigation monitoring shall be noted on all applicable construction documents, including demolition plans, grading plans, etc. • The Qualified Archaeologist and TCA Native American Monitor shall attend all applicable pre-construction meetings with the Contractor and/or associated Subcontractors. • The Qualified Archaeologist shall maintain ongoing collaborative consultation with the TCA Native American Monitor during all ground disturbing or altering activities, as identified above. • The Qualified Archaeologist and/or TCA Native American Monitor may halt ground-disturbing activities if archaeological artifact deposits or cultural features are discovered. In general, ground-disturbing activities shall be directed away from these deposits for a short time to allow a determination of potential significance, the subject of which shall be determined by the Qualified Archaeologist and the TCA Native American Monitor, in consultation with the San Luis Rey Band. Ground-disturbing activities shall not resume until the Qualified Archaeologist, in consultation with the TCA Native American Monitor, deems the cultural resource or feature has been appropriately documented and/or protected. At the Qualified Archaeologist's discretion, the location of ground disturbing activities may be relocated elsewhere on the project site to avoid further disturbance of cultural resources. • The Qualified Archaeologist and/or TCA Native American Monitor may also halt ground disturbing activities around known archaeological artifact deposits or cultural features if, in their respective opinions, there is the possibility that they could be damaged or destroyed. 31 • The avoidance and protection of discovered unknown and significant cultural resources and/or unique archaeological resources is the preferable mitigation for the proposed project. If avoidance is not feasible, a Data Recovery Plan may be authorized by the City as the Lead Agency under CEQA. If data recovery is required, then the San Luis Rey Band shall be notified and consulted in drafting and finalizing any such recovery plan. • Prior to the release of any Bonds associated with the construction of improvements noted in the 2017 CSMP, a Monitoring Report and/or Evaluation Report, which describes the results, analysis and conclusions of the cultural resource mitigation monitoring efforts (such as, but not limited to , a Data Recovery Program) shall be submitted by the Qualified Archaeologist, along with the TCA Native American Monitor's notes and comments, to the City's Director of Community Development for approval. • Implementation of the following mitigation measure would reduce significant impacts identified for 2017 CSMP Categories 1, 2, 3 and 4 as identified under Impact 4.3-4 to less than significant levels. The proposed mitigation would replace the mitigation measures adopted in the 2008 PEIR for potential impacts to human remains. CUL T-5 Disturbance to Human Remains. As specified by California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, if human remains are found on the project site during construction or during archaeological work, the person responsible for the excavation, or his or her authorized representative, shall immediately notify the San Diego County Coroner's office by telephone. No further excavation or disturbance of the discovery or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains (as determined by the Qualified Archaeologist and/or the TCA (traditionally and culturally affiliated) Native American Monitor) shall occur until the Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code 5097.98. If such a discovery occurs, a temporary construction exclusion zone shall be established surrounding the area of the discovery so that the area would be protected (as determined by the Qualified Archaeologist and/or the TCA Native American Monitor), and consultation and treatment could occur as prescribed by law. As further defined by State law, the Coroner would 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 shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) within 24 hours. The NAHC would make a determination as to the Most Likely Descendent. If Native American remains are discovered, the remains shall be kept "in situ" ("in place"), or in a secure location in close proximity to where they were found , and the analysis of the remains shall only occur on-site in the presence of the TCA Native American Monitor. 32 .. Thank you for the opportunity to work on this project. If there are any questions regarding the information provided in this letter or if additional information is needed, please contact me at the HDR San Diego office (858) 712-8273. Sincerely, Daniel Leard Staff Archaeologist 33 ' r References City of Vista. 2017. City of Vista Sewer Mitigation Program Supplemental Program EIR. City of Carlsbad. 2017 Carlsbad Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Resources Guidelines. Prepared for the City of Carlsbad, Prepared by ECORP Consultation 2017 Corum, Joyce M. and Chris White. 1982. Final Report for an Archaeological Test Excavation at Site CA-SDl-9473, Carlsbad, California 11-SD-78 P.M. 0.0/3.1 11206-086121 . Unpublished report on file at the SCIC, San Diego State University. Kyle, Carolyn , Roxana Phillips, and Dennis Gallegos. 2002. Cultural Resource Testing Program for Sites CA-SDl-5652/H and CA-SDl-9474/H SR 78/Rancho del Oro Interchange Project Oceanside, California. Quillen, Dennis K. 1982a. State of California Department of Parks and Recreation Archaeological Site Survey _Record , CA-SDl-9472. 1982b. State of California Department of Parks and Recreation Archaeological Site Survey Record , CA-SDl-9473. 1982c. State of California Department of Parks and Recreation Archaeological Site Survey Record , CA-SDl-9474H. Stringer-Bowsher, Sarah, Jennifer Gorman, and Shannon Davis (ASM Affiliates). 2015. Historic American Building Survey: Marron-Hayes Adobes Historic District, Carlsbad, San Diego County. HASS No. CA-2900. 34 ..