There are lots of other things that can be done too.
If we can just muster the courage to be more generous, we can solve this problem!
APPENDIX F
Strategic Plan Survey Responses Mentioning the Coast
Code Coastline Comments
Coastline Fiscally well run. Great balance between open spaces, preserving the small beach town feeling while developing and updating the Village, Barrio and coastline.
Coastline Access to the coast.
Coastline Open parking for beach, great parks, family activities, access to outdoor activities Coastline Access to the beach
Coastline Beaches not cluttered with commercial stores, shops, food stands, restaurants.
Coastline Beach access.
Coastline Access to great parks, trails, golf and beaches.
Coastline Charming downtown village area with easy access to the ocean.
Coastline Free street parking along the beach. This allows people access to the beach for a quick visit and, in some spots, lets people enjoy an ocean view from their cars when they can’t get out for a walk.
Coastline The small village like atmosphere and free beach parking, don’t want to change.
Coastline One of the things we love about Carlsbad is that the coastline is visible, open and accessible to everyone. We love that as we drive or walk along Carlsbad Blvd, we can clearly see the coast, ocean and horizon. Additionally, we love the quaint and small town feel of downtown Carlsbad.
Coastline Open views of beach from so Carlsbad blvd
Coastline The outdoor fac lities and parks, as well as the beaches.
Coastline The beach.
Coastline Access to the ocean and parks
Coastline I love the easy access to the beaches and lagoons Coastline Open spaces, south Carlsbad along the ocean (no change in Hwy 1 between Palomar Airport Rd and Poinsettia.
Coastline Open space along our beaches
Coastline Open spaces and ease of free parking near the beach Coastline Access to great restaurants and beaches. I also like the look and feel of the Carlsbad Village.
Coastline Foliage and beauty, access to coastline.
Coastline Open spaces such as parks, beaches and no high rises ruining our shoreline views/skyline Coastline The Open Space near the ocean.
Coastline beach access
Coastline Easy access to the ocean and the abi ity to walk and bike in and around the City.
Coastline Access to the beach
Coastline Public beach access
Coastline Family friendly. Few bars, decent restaurants, nice beaches.
Coastline The casual beachy vibe and beaches aren't too busy.
Coastline Quiet beaches
Coastline Free access & Parking LAGOONS & BEACHS Coastline I appreciate the lack of high rises on the coast. Makes Carlsbad Village feel smaller and more quaint Coastline SO MANY THINGS! But the thing I am most proud of are the beautiful, clean beaches and the vast open coastline.
Coastline Beach access and beach parking, already bad but getting worse with development Coastline Beach access and free parking
Coastline The beaches and the openness
Coastline the clean beaches
Coastline Clean beaches and lively Village
Coastline The beautiful beaches
Coastline Ocean access and unrestricted views of the water from PCH.
Coastline Beaches
Coastline Open coast ine not lined completely by homes or resorts.
Coastline The ocean and the walkways by it.
Coastline the ocean
Coastline Charming downtown (State St) and easily accessible beaches Coastline The beach walk between Cannon and Pine
Coastline Access to the beaches
Coastline Beach walk
Coastline The large amount of coastline and the Village Coastline The beach
Coastline the beaches
Coastline The ocean
Coastline The walk near the ocean off Carlsbad Village Drive Coastline The beaches, specifica ly around Terramar bluffs… don’t change the open space on those cliffs! Coastline The open land on the beach side of 101
Coastline Beaches but they need sand
Coastline schools, access to beaches and trails
Coastline The ocean and clean sandy beaches....downtown...still small with shops ! Coastline I don’t want to see a l these condominiums being built . I love that small town atmosphere where you can walk around and by the beach without mega crowds Coastline Beach walk
Coastline The beaches and lagoons
Coastline Open outdoor parks and trails and free and open beaches Coastline Beaches and access to beach
Coastline The beach and access to it
Coastline the open space along the coast, ie across from Ponto Coastline Carlsbad Village and beach access
Coastline the beaches, and the variety of restaurants and shops in the village Coastline the beaches
Coastline obviously the open coast line, accessible to all. Love Carlsbad Village for myself as well as tourists Coastline The green spaces, the beach access, keeping the nature in Carlsbad.
Coastline Beach access
Coastline Beautiful beaches and trails, great schools, safety Coastline The beach and it’s walking path.
Coastline The Village. It is a true Southern California Beach Community. Not too many large buildings, still has plenty of beach access. It is just right.
Coastline The coastal sidewalks upper and lower
Coastline Beach access and free parking along the coast; open space throughout the city Coastline Beaches
Coastline Beach
Coastline Beautiful beaches, parks and protected areas ike the Batiquitos Lagoon.
Coastline Access to beaches; maintain parking and availability to Teramore cliff/beach area and stairs.
Coastline Lots of FREE beach parking and access.
Coastline The open spaces and beaches
Coastline Beaches, parks, city services
Coastline The quiet beach access.
Coastline I love the coastline, especially the walking park near Dave's Beach where rc fliers can go slope soaring.
Coastline Access to the beach
Coastline Downtown and the beach walk
Coastline Easy and free access to the beach.
Coastline Open land by lagoons and coast
Coastline Ocean access without big developments
Coastline Coastal access
Coastline Beach beauty
Coastline Our beaches and ocean spaces - the open space of canyon in south carlsbad/LaCosta area Box Canyon. Love the village but the construction building taking place feels like it is taking away our simple and quaint village feeling. More parking needs but where can you add parking ???? Coastline Our connection with the Pacific ocean and the amount of publicly owned oceanfront.
Coastline Access to beaches.
Coastline Beach Access
Coastline The public green space, parks and gardens and beaches.
Coastline Beaches
Coastline unobstructed views of the ocean
Coastline The access to the coastline and developing businesses around it.
Coastline Hiking -- whether along the coast or in Calaveras. Since Covid, I am working from home and need to walk/hike daily, so more trails would be wonderful.
Coastline Access to the ocean and open space
Coastline The ease of access to the beautiful Carlsbad beaches.
Coastline The beauty of the ocean and open space
Coastline Unobstructed view and access to our beautiful beach! Coastline Open coast ine free of development.
Coastline Lack of big buildings, particularly in coastal area Coastline Beaches, trails, open spaces
Coastline public beach access
Coastline Bike friendly. Nice beaches. Great restaurants and shops Coastline Low density and low building height limits near the ocean Coastline Sandy beaches and seawall for walking
Coastline Great beaches
What is one thing you love about Carlsbad and don't want to change? What would make Carlsbad even better than it is today?
Coastline Love to walk on Carlsbad beaches. But not enough boardwalks or trails along the ocean Coastline A (relatively) undeveloped coastline with easy access Coastline the beaches
Coastline Dog free beaches.
Coastline The boardwalk along the beach!
Coastline beach
Coastline The clean beaches and the downtown village atmosphere Coastline Beach, number of trees
Coastline Free access to beaches. Beach walking.
Coastline Access to the beach
Coastline Beaches open for public
Coastline Lots of open natural space to include beaches, lagoons, trails & Parks Coastline The beaches and beach access
Coastline We love the open space vistas of lagoons and farm fields and coastal hills with unfettered views to the Pacific !! Stop development of open space by only allowing infill of vacant lots! Rancho Carlsbad is a jewe ! Stop the development of College road to Sage Creek High, that will be a 200 million do lar roadway that rapes farmland and stunning Calavera vistas. Protect the open space and support the 40percent undeveloped commitment in our Comprehensive Plan. That open space is why we live here and love living here to raise our children. Thank you for this opportunity to make a difference before it is too late.
Coastline The village atmosphere, cute shops, restaurants, great walk along the main beachfront.
Coastline Beaches
Coastline I love having access to the beach with beautiful views and in hampered by buildings; I like having open spaces that are natural and not filled with buildings.
Coastline The beach vibe
Coastline Beachy vibe
Coastline Easy access to park on sand at Ponto Beach, open space,less congested compared to communites further south.
Coastline Clean beaches
Coastline open spaces and beaches
Coastline Beaches and hiking trails
Coastline Access to the beaches
Coastline Open spaces, including along the beach
Coastline The ocean
Coastline Access to ocean views
Coastline Our coastline the way it is right now, don't change a damn thing. Also no more 5 story buildings from the 5 to Carlsbad Blvd, none.
Coastline The geography, coastal beaches, parks, etc
Coastline Beach access which is the best in North County. Do not do anything that limits or blocks that access.
Coastline clean streets near beach
Coastline Free access to beaches and walking trails
Coastline the walkability of the village, and our beautiful beaches Coastline ocean beach access with free parking
Coastline Nature, from beaches to trails to trees. Please leave it natural! Coastline Clean beaches
Coastline The accessibility and visibility of our beaches, the priority we put on parks Coastline beaches
Coastline beaches and open space
Coastline Natural beauty of beaches, parks and dedication to outdoor activities with sports fields and courts.
Coastline The ocean walk and downtown
Coastline beaches, parks, lagoons, trails
Coastline beaches, small businesses, trails, wildlife, lagoons, and parks Coastline Clean, well-maintained city with accessible beaches Coastline Access to beach.
Coastline I love the beaches.
Coastline Beautiful beaches and parks
Coastline The sense of community and open land. Less commercial buildings/hotels by the coast.
Coastline I love that Carlsbad has many undeveloped stretches of beach and ocean.
Coastline The beach.
Coastline SAFE AND ACCESSABLE BEACHES AND PARKS
Coastline The village’s older buildings. Please, no more 3 story buildings, we don’t want to look like Oceanside with the tall hotels.
Coastline The beaches!
Coastline The beaches and coast.
Coastline A lot of open space to walk and spend time outdoors - walking trails, beaches Coastline The character of the village concept and the fact that beach area parking is free and would stay that way.
Coastline Not too many big corporate buildings downtown/free beaches and parking Coastline Coast and lands/trails preservation
Coastline Oceans
Coastline Open spaces of canyon and beach and meadow views Coastline The breathtaking oceanfront
Coastline Open parks and beaches
Coastline I love the yearly Street Faire. Carlsbad is clean and the stores downtown are family operated and small. The beaches are very clean: no dogs, fires or trash laying around.
Coastline Plentiful beach access
Coastline It's not built up near the ocean like oceanside Coastline Beaches and lagoons
Coastline Access to beach, nature open spaces
Coastline Undeveloped coastline from La Costa to Oceanside (St Malo) Coastline The cleanliness around the beaches and neighborhoods Coastline Easy access to beach & village
Coastline The Beaches
Coastline The beach
Coastline Local small businesses instead of chains and large corporations, Beach seawall area, Coastline The (diminishing) abundance of open space, compared with other coastal communities.
Coastline The open space and undeveloped areas. Seeing ro ling hills and extended vista to the mountains and oceans is pleasant.
Coastline Please don’t allow any commercial buildings to be built or developed near Ponto. Leave the beach free of hotels, businesses and commercialism. Let us enjoy a community beach without crowds.
Coastline Aquatic centers, and beaches
Coastline It's beautiful. Great beaches
Coastline City organized classes and free parking near the beaches Coastline the beautiful beaches, nature trails, and great places to eat out Coastline Beach Access
Coastline The Beach (should be free parking)
Coastline Open space areas and beach
Coastline beaches
Coastline Wonderful and well maintained beach walk, parks and paths Coastline easy access to beaches.
Coastline Free parking at the beach and Village
Coastline Beach and boardwa k.
Coastline The beaches
Coastline Open spaces and nature trails, access to the ocean Coastline Maintain the green spaces, lagoon, walking trails and easy beach access. Don't overbuild.
Coastline It's clean and walkable. Love the beaches and restaurants. I'm happy there are no marijuana businesses in Carlsbad.
Coastline Clean beaches
Coastline Weather, pristine beach, Carlsbad 5000
Coastline Clean, accessible beaches
Coastline Access to the beach walkable downtown
Coastline I love so much about this city, but above a l I love to surf in Carlsbad I don’t want the beach to become so overcrowded it is not like hone anymore. The growth of tourism is changing Carlsbad and it is not good.
Coastline Beach replenishment
Coastline The beach
Coastline The beaches
Coastline access to the beach
Coastline Parks and beaches
Coastline Beaches
Coastline Beach boardwalk
Coastline Our coastline. No more high buildings.
Coastline The Beach
Coastline Beach
Coastline The beaches
Coastline The beach and parks
Coastline Beautiful beaches and unique shops/restaurants, not chain restaurants.
Coastline Access to the beaches and free parking.
Coastline Open space, beaches
Coastline Sidewalk at the beach
Coastline Sand on the beaches
Coastline Access to south Ponto beach! I live bee we ing able to park in the sand! Love the rustic feel Coastline Beach walkways. Downtown’s quaint shops/restaurants Coastline The beaches and the village
Coastline The downtown area and the ocean
Coastline The beach accessibility and love that there are no dogs on Tamarack beach Coastline The parks, beaches, lagoons and walking areas.
Coastline protected coastline
Coastline The population density isn’t too high by the beach- Hope we don’t knock down every single family house with condos.
Coastline Beaches
Coastline Carlsbad feels like a hidden gem. There are enough shops in the Village, we can bike where we need to go and the beaches are clean.
Coastline Our coast. I'm hopeful Carlsbad doesn't turn into Pacific Beach. The downtown is starting to look similar. Please keep our coast open with low buildings.
Coastline Green space, parks, beaches
Coastline Well maintained roads parks and beaches
Coastline Access the the beach…open spaces
Coastline No plazas by the ocean
Coastline Free parking in downtown Carlsbad and at some beaches Coastline No big buildings near the coast everything under 3 stories. Keep the village the same don’t bring big business in keep the family businesses.
Coastline The beaches and open space.
Coastline The open spaces and stretch of the beach views with no houses there Coastline Beach access
Coastline Access to the beaches; lack of free beach parking is a problem Coastline The old village feel. I don't want the continues building in the Village and along the coast, and especially don't want the powerr plant to be another hotel or condos.
Coastline Simple and easy, parking. Access to beach and entertainment/dining Coastline Clean and beautiful beaches. Not too commercial.
Coastline Beautiful parks and beaches
Coastline Clean free beaches
Coastline Access to the ocean.
Coastline The undeveloped areas near the beaches, especially the Batiquitos Lagoon area across from Ponto Coastline Lovely Beaches
Coastline Downtown and beach.
Coastline Beach access and the Village! Free Beach parking! Coastline access to beach walk.
Coastline Small town feel with many amenities and most importantly long stretch of beautiful coast line Coastline small town feel, do not like the direction of expanding buildings up along the coastline and building into open spaces Coastline Natural beauty - beaches, trails, parks
Coastline The way Carlsbad manages our coastal land
Coastline Free, easy access to the beach
Coastline Beautiful beaches along the coastline with great walking paths Coastline Coastal access
Coastline Beaches, beach access. Free to access most beaches.
Coastline Sandy beaches
Coastline Beautiful blend of trees, beaches and 92011 is pretty safe.
Coastline Some of the coastal areas are sti l fairly undeveloped and that’s good Coastline Beach and open space access for the public
Coastline I love the beautiful beaches. They are always clean and they feel safe.
Coastline The beach boardwalk and beach access
Coastline Beach view and accessd
Coastline the open stretch of coastline around Palomar Airport Rd./Pointsettia that is undeveloped Coastline Easy beach and freeway access
Coastline Open space. Access to lagoons and trails. Better access to beaches.
Coastline Beach access
Coastline The beaches and the commitment to maintain and improve.
Coastline The Village and the coastline. Please hear this...these are precious places to our community. They require Preservation, not destruction, not developers building what we don't want or need.
Coastline beach access
Coastline The beach free parking
Coastline It’s absurd that I can’t take my dog to walk on leash cars at any Carlsbad parks or beaches. We are considering moving out of Carlsbad 100% for this reason.
Coastline A dog beach or at least some off leash hours at the beach.
Coastline Fixing the erosion on three beach bluff off of Palomar Airport Coastline Dog beach
Coastline Provide more parking at the beach. Remove temp. restaurant space that impedes sidewalks. Fewer high density housing in the Village. Am concerned about traffic increases.
Coastline Bus or shuttle transportation to train station, shops, beaches.
Coastline More walking path along the beach, parks and good schools. Affordable housing for young people.
Coastline Better beach access (more parking and trails to and from) Coastline Keep the laid back, small town community feel of Carlsbad by ensuring that the coastal beach areas remain as natural, open space with walking and bike trails. Please do not commercialize the coastal area of southern Carlsbad by building hotels, restaurants, shops, etc.
Coastline Dogs allowed in parks and beaches
Coastline More level in parking at the beach a light a so Carlsbad st beach parking to make a left out of so Ponto beach parking. U turn at la costa is so dangerous.
Coastline if the sea wall was extended from Cannon to La Costa and more bathrooms and showers were at the beaches Coastline Dog beach
Coastline I think the new potential changes to the coastline will be a huge benefit. More parking down at Ponto and all the way to Palomar area along the beach. Also, there should be a type of cement strand that goes along the eastern edge of the Ponto beach, so people can park in the lot and not drag a ton of stuff in the sand.
Coastline Many more off-leash trails, a beach area, and GRASSY large open dog parks for our furry FAMILY members! Coastline completion of the Coastal Rail Trail with more ways to cross the tracks & lagoons Coastline That is a hard one it is so great here, maybe off leash dog park near beach Coastline dog beach!
Coastline Continue to enhance the open space, trails, and beaches.
Coastline A dog beach or dog hours on the beach.
Coastline Stop allowing developers to build multi-use buildings in the village and condos at the beach Coastline We have got to create safe bike paths along the coast so that we can all enjoy the beautiful outdoors without having everyone needing to drive their cars. Also, we definitely need more pickleball courts at our parks. I cannot fathom how a decision was made at Poinsettia park to add a monstrous dog park instead of adding some additional pickleball courts.
Coastline That it stays as is. More trails to walk along beach. Rock free beaches at Carlsbad state beaches Coastline let us take our dogs for walks on the beach, They are after all part of the family. Also making pub ic transportation more accessible and safe, that would be really helpful.
Coastline Beach shuttle
Coastline With the increase in e-bikes, it would be nice to have additional bike paths especially by the beach/in parks rather than on the road Coastline Connecting the Coastal Rail Trail between downtown Carlsbad to Cannon road and further south.
Coastline More enforcement of the "modified exhaust" vehicle noise along 101. Loud vehicles cruising the coast should be discouraged.
Coastline get rid of the hotels and giant apartment buildings by the beach Coastline Add more park space near to the ocean.
Coastline Prioritize restoration of Buena Vista Lagoon/have pet owners keep dogs off beach and pick up pet waste from sidewalks Coastline more ocean restaurants
Coastline Park in south coastal carlsbad, l ke there is supposed to be Coastline A coastal park at Ponto
Coastline Clean ocean
Coastline Safer pedestrian and bike pathways to the beach from the La Costa area. More protected bike lanes in general.
Coastline Beach Parks, greater access to the beaches, no large condo projects or hotels on the beaches.
Coastline More pickleball courts. Not allowing RVs to park all day in front of public beaches like Ponto.
Coastline Better/wider sidewalk along beach
Coastline Safety near beach and certain neighborhoods
Coastline free beach parking passes for local residents Coastline Cleaner downtown, less crowded beaches, more local small businesses Coastline Free parking at the beach like it was many years ago.
Coastline Minimize new development taking away open space for wild life throughfares. Update existing shopping centers instead of building new ones. More parking for beach access. More community gardens.
Coastline I would like to see more patrol on Coast Highway. Cars speed down the road, drivers are distracted (typically on phones), or smoking weed while parked and then driving off. This is really dangerous for those of us trying to exercise along the coast highway.
Coastline Affordable housing, more beach parking, housing for the homeless, better pay and support of teachers, real police-reform, and so much more.
Coastline Ocean view dining that is affordable
Coastline Retaining open space near beach and 101
Coastline Make the best use of the limited land Carlsbad has left. We need more parking closer to the beach. Don't put a large park at Ponto, that is the gateway to our Coast. Keep it for hotel, commercial/mixed use that is cohesive with our beach environment. Look at the great job Encinitas did with the new Alila Marea! Coastline More beaches and park spaces
Coastline View blockage laws to save our ocean views.
Coastline Charging for parking at the beach, but give Carlsbad residents free parking permits.
Coastline STOP DEVELOPING, LESS AREAS FOR BIKES TO RIDE, AND A PARK WHERE THE POWER PLANT IS CURRENTLY BEING DISMANTLED ALONG THE BEACH Coastline More open spaces besides the beach
Coastline Bathrooms at the beach, bathrooms in parks, more parks, more open spaces, more trails Coastline Protected wild areas along the beach
Coastline Keep the coast as clear of new development as possible - we do not need more resort like places - the power plant is/was a landmark - that area DOES NOT NEED TO BE A PLACE FOR RESORTS OR HOUSEING Coastline Dedicated beach cruising lanes by the coast
Coastline restrict big hotels along the coast to no more than 2 stories Coastline Please make a small part of Tamarack/Carlsbad State Beach dog friendly!!!! I hate having to drive all the way to Del Mar!!! Coastline Preserve & protect the remaining green space adjacent to Batiquitos Lagoon as wildlife habitat. Keep a small limited time parking area near the storage facility that couldn't be used for all day beach parking over-sized vehicles. Keep land use access pedestrian only. Also consider a small dog park. Limit commercial development at the old power plant site to open air recreation and green space. Enforce fines for excessive motor vehicle noise.
Coastline More city sponsored, low cost or free family-friendly activities (parents night out, events like the pumpkin plunge, etc). More free beach parking Coastline There should be uninterrupted access for pedestrians and bike along the coast as well as greater access for parking for residents.
Coastline A coastal park
Coastline Sand on the beaches
Coastline The beach parking is very limited and during peak times, we often don’t go. Better parking for locals and tourists al ke.
Coastline Reduce crime even further; build more beach walks and trails Coastline dedicated East-West bike paths from El Camino Real to beach Coastline Pedestrian overpass over tracks at Chestnut to access beach Coastline Maintaining our beaches and getting homeless off the streets Coastline more parking at the coast for quick and short-term access Coastline Stopping development everywhere and stopping all modifications of the natural beach landscape Coastline drop the railroad tracks/cover it with a dog park and paths to the beach.
Coastline A public park in the Ponto area. Southwest coastal Coastline 1) An upgrade of Ponto beach, 2) a nice bicycle path, 3) replace the RV-park on the coast with gardens and beach access that the community can enjoy! Coastline Leashed dogs allowed on beach
Coastline Create walking park by the natural beauty by the ocean Coastline Bring send to South Carlsbad state beach
Coastline More attention paid to South Carlsbad starting with access to Ponto beach without driving north or making numerous (and often illegal) Uturn Coastline Dog Park/Dog Beach
Coastline Less development at the beach and more parking at Ponto MORE SAND AT PONTO BEACH Coastline continued beach maintenance
Coastline Dog friendly beach
Coastline Public access to new developments on coast where the tower has been taken down recently for potential beach and tenant or hotel construction Coastline make so. carlsbad blvd 1-way north (2 lanes already, best ocean views in all north county) retired 2 southbound lanes make them linear park = lookouts, benches, parking, walking trail; this is our jewel and cheapest way to retire those lanes which the ocean is reclaiming anyway; best use of precious coastal views, beach access; loop southbound through paseo del norte which would also allow 2 lanes going east over the palomar airport rd. tiny bridge over the rr tracks (this bottleneck backs up traffic and would be better traffic flow if 2 lanes east and no westbound traffic, westbound traffic diverted to paseo del norte to poinsettia west to so. carlsbad blvd. north for easy loop to timeshare/very few homes, hilton garden view hotel, solamar = best ocean view along entire carlsbad coastline!) thank you for this consideration, carlsbad is special and this small stretch of coastline is both unique and stunning, a really great entrance into carlsbad from all points south Coastline Progressive leadership to preserve the coastal open spaces for generations to come.
Coastline More ease of accessibility to the beach for beach go-ers, & parking Coastline Curb coastal development
Coastline Use oceanfront (i.e. power plant space) for PUBLIC benefit like parks or open space. Carlsbad has more than adequate oceanside hotels now. The amount of open commercial office space in business parks is staggering.
How can these spaces be used for the benefit of the people of Carlsbad? In my 25 years as a resident, I believe the Bud Lewis vision for limited commercial development has been substantially violated. Tax revenue should not drive all decisions.
Coastline More parking at the beach- possibly. Not sure how this would affect traffic and the overall beach going experience.
Coastline Protect our neighborhoods, businesses, open spaces and beaches.
Coastline Greater access to beach and coastline green belt.
Coastline More bike paths that connect, ie the rail trail all the way to the southern edge of Carlsbad, skateparks for kids, a mountain bike park, more green space and open space along the coast, safer crossings on coast highway especially south of the tamarack jetty
Coastline More open space - particularly by the beach, fewer new businesses that add traffic.
Coastline More parks and free parking at the beach
Coastline More parking for access to the beach
Coastline A dog beach
Coastline Get rid of the bums at the beach…homeless.
Coastline Better development of beaches, sports facilities, hiking trails Coastline More beach front parks/space
Coastline World renowned pedestrian corridor along coast from northern/southern city limits Coastline Stop green-lighting projects like the hotel near Ponto that effectively transformed an amazing "local" beach where families and friends could meet into a tourist destination that blighted some incredibly rare open space. The short-sightedness of this decisions is incredibly stupid.
Coastline We need more beach parking, more walking trails by the beach and stairs down to the beach. San Clemente is doing it right and Carlsbad could take a page out of their book. Their beach access is fabulous. They also have a miles long trail next to their railroad tracks.
Coastline Free beach parking and more of it.
Coastline no more hotels. preserve open space. don't crowd our beaches with tourists by adding more hotels. keep our community beautiful and safe for its residents.
Coastline Dog friendly beach And regulation in hotels
Coastline Dog beach
Coastline Lock down all open space in particular along the coast. Stop building new tract housing developments Coastline Poiice patrol along the beach.
Coastline Remove more homeless. They sleep in benches by the beach and if we are not proactive the problem will only get bigger. Encinitas is having major issues trying to “help” homeless but are actually attracting more. We need to need to help those who want to contribute to the city and move along those who are taking resources and trashing areas or making it unsafe due to mental illness.
Coastline We need more recycling receptacles at the beaches.
Coastline Easier access to beach and less restrictions on beach.
Coastline A dog beach, even if it is only for part of the year like Del Mar.
Coastline Bring back Koko Beach Restaurant, add in a dog park or beach, stop building more new homes, and do an awesome recreation park area by beach where power plant was.
Coastline Less destructive behavior to our beaches and open spaces by visitors Coastline More parking for beach access. Stop overbuilding with inadequate parking.
Coastline Redevelop the ponto area south of the Hilton to include open space, restaurants, coffee shops. South Carlsbad needs a coastal community space. But not big resorts.
Coastline If you made Coast Highway more pedestrian and family friendly with less traffic Coastline parking spaces at the beach
Coastline Add a walking Pier over the Ocean.
Coastline Easy parking in the village and at the beaches Coastline Quaint high end centers for restaurants and retail walkable for neighborhoods outside the village. Development in Robertson Ranch doesn't seem to be underway anytime soon, we bought in this neighborhood because of that promise. It would also be nice for Carlsbad City Coucil to require new developers put in pocket parks that appeal to children over the age of 10. Tot lots are outgrown quickly and leave no activity option within walking distance in the neighborhoods for 10-15 year olds to shoot hoops or use a backstop for handball. The main parks in Carlsbad are too far from home for children to walk to. The intense mandate by the city to control basketball hoops in front of peoples homes is too much, especially when they are located in culdesacs and several neighborhood kids from surrounding streets come to enjoy. Carlsbad City can be uptight with rules and control. This isn't news but it would be awesome if RV's were banned from parking at the beach, they take up all the parking spots all summer and make it extremely difficult for residents to park and enjoy the beach. We pay mello-roos in addition to regular property taxes, we pay a premium to live in Carlsbad it would be nice if we could easily enjoy beach parking with residents stickers that are issued to home owners who provide documents. There should be a perk to the people who pay to keep this city earning the revenues it does. We've been business owners in Carlsbad since 2003, we pay business tax as well, the tax we pay simply maintains our ability to live and work here. Perks for native residents and business owners would be nice.
Coastline A park near the coast.
Coastline More casual restaurants on or close to the ocean and shopping!! Coastline If you would reverse your recent decision for the undeveloped areas around Ponto Beach and address the open space and park deficits in this quadrant.
Coastline Two things: KEEP Palomar Airport D2 and runway at 200 feet extension. Also, create a rational plan for beach sand replenishment Coastline Make more open space and youth sports fields. And do something with the open space. Make the power plant into a community meeting area with a live music venue and a few restaurants, bars, or space for food trucks.
Actua ly have some space in the coast that residence and tourists can go to rather than more hotels Coastline Connected hiking trails and bike trails, outdoor cafe/restaurants outside the village, more green space near the beaches Coastline Better bike lanes in some areas. Parking by beach.
Coastline Strict adhesion to No pets, skateboard or bicycles on beach and sea wall. I have seen a lot of them lately.
Coastline A robust program to prevent Carlsbad's contribution to ocean pollution. This should include funding for a full-time engineer specialized in Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP), who is responsible for ocean- related programs including review and approval of BMP initial design, inspection of initial installations and subsequent monitoring of BMP installations. This will ensure the City of Carlsbad meets requirements for the MS4 Permit, and will help keep our most precious asset, the ocean, clean.
Coastline Some snack bars on the beach
Coastline Make the beach more accessible. Parking is a problem. Add shuttles/trolleys from park & ride. Build protected bike paths that will make beach more accessible by bikes. Build parks/coffee shops/little food places on Ponto to allow the residents sit down and enjoy the beautiful ocean views.
Coastline stop se ling out to big businesses/hotels on our beautiful coastlines. Keep from growing tall buildings and too many of them Coastline Better beach access and amenities (restrooms, parking, places to eat/drink near the sand) Coastline Maximize parking for beach area, but try to limit traffic in those areas. Maybe diagonal parking in places that make sense.
Coastline priority/some reserved spaces for locals at coastal campgrounds; better kid-friendly beaches (like moonlight beach in Encinitas) Coastline Better access to beaches including more parking like diagonal parking Coastline Fewer homeless, allow dogs on the beach on leash Coastline less dog poop runoff into ocean when it rains Coastline More ethnic diversity. And maybe more beach parking? Coastline Better beach access, e.g., train track crossing at Chestnut Coastline Expand dog park hours, add dog beach section, expand youth sports options
APPENDIX G
Stakeholder Meeting Summary Reports and
Associated Input Documents
Carlsbad Coastline Project
Outreach Meeting Form
Date: February 3, 2022
Organization: Batiquitos Lagoon Foundation
Attendees: Deborah Mossa (Board Vice President), Lance Schulte (Board Member) Project Team:
Nathan Schmidt (Transportation Planning and Mobility Manager), Kyle Lancaster (Parks and Recreation Director), Nikki Matosian (Community Relations Manager), Tiffany Metti (Public Outreach Team), Jessica Ceja (Public Outreach Team)
Summary: Batiquitos Lagoon Foundation priorities include coordination, trail connections, habitat preservation, water quality and access.
Concerns: • Ensuring coordination with the state.
• Batiquitos Lagoon, endangered species and surrounding habitat. • Runoff/harmful chemicals coming into Batiquitos Lagoon (an impaired body of water).
• Ultimate sea level rise consideration.
• Emergency response times.
• Project costs.
Priorities/Needs • Preserve and increase open space for wildlife. • Improve connectivity (human/bike access, trails and habitat). • Plot and account for long-term sea level rise impacts. • Clearly map fresh water and coastal endangered species habitat and how they will connect. Protect and connect habitat areas. • Provide water quality testing and mitigation through natural detention basins to clean the water. Conduct dry and wets season water testing. Implement water quality control measures.
Requests: • The Batiquitos Lagoon Foundation is striving for a contiguous trail along the north shore of Batiquitos Lagoon. Complete a unified trail system. Ensure connectivity and a contiguous trail from sand to sea.
• Parking developed to the west would be a concern.
• Provide restrooms.
Questions: • How will our organization’s feedback be communicated to City Council?
• What is the project timeline?
• Can you provide data for this project’s estimated cost? • What is the water quality method being used and what are the impacts from stormwater?
• Can you provide more sea level rise analysis data and plot long- term sea level rise on alternatives?
• How can the Rosalina Trail and San Pacifico Trail extension relate to additional open space or trail connections?
• Is there any plan to reduce lane capacity from four lanes to two lanes?
• Are emergency response times being considered?
Next Steps: Provide updates on later phases.
Carlsbad Coastline Project
Outreach Meeting Form
Date: February 24, 2022
Organization: Bike Walk Carlsbad
Attendees: Judy Frankel (Chairperson), Michael von Neumann (Member) Project Team:
Nathan Schmidt (Transportation and Mobility Manager), Nikki Matosian (Community Relations Manager), Tiffany Metti (Public Outreach), Jessica Ceja (Public Outreach)
Summary: Bike Walk Carlsbad is interested in connectivity and improved access to the beach and trail systems. Bike Walk Carlsbad would like a reduced speed limit to improve safety. Bike Walk Carlsbad is concerned about commercial development.
Concerns: • Commercial development.
• Over commercialization.
• Speed limit.
• Incomplete trail system.
• Gated trails.
Priorities/Needs • Move the road off the beach.
• Single lane of traffic in each direction.
• Implement traffic calming.
• Lower the speed limit.
• Improve mobility.
• Connect trails to the beach.
• Complete a holistic trail system, including the Coastal Rail Trail. • Open gates to trails.
• Include as little commercial as possible.
Requests: • Include wide buffered Class 2 bike lanes.
• Include a separate facility with different kinds of pavement (for runners, walkers, strollers, etc.).
• Add a protected separate bikeway but not on or next to road. • Have a single lane of traffic in each direction.
• Utilize roundabouts.
• Get rid of signals.
• Open a green area to enjoy the outdoors.
• Leave the area wild.
Questions:
Next Steps:
• Can you please provide contact information about the trails? • Are all departments working on the connectivity issue and this project together?
Provide updates on later phases.
Carlsbad Coastline Project
Outreach Meeting Form
Date: January 31, 2022
Organization: Cape Rey Carlsbad Beach and Hilton Garden Inn Carlsbad Beach Attendees:
Bill Canepa (Owner of Wave Crest Resorts), Rob Stirling (Cape Rey Carlsbad Sales and Marketing Manager), Thomas Lee (Cape Rey Carlsbad Area General Manager)
Project Team:
Tom Frank (Transportation Director), David Graham (Chief Innovation Officer), Gary Barberio (Deputy City Manager Community Services), Nikki Matosian (Community Relations Manager), Melina Meza (Public Outreach Team), Tiffany Metti (Public Outreach Team)
Summary: Hilton is interested in the access and dining/entertainment possibilities that this space could provide guests. They are also interested in the possible traffic calming measures.
Concerns: • Ocean view obstruction.
• Construction disruptions.
Priorities/Needs • Implement measures to slow down traffic. • Include both tourist and resident uses.
• Improve bike and pedestrian access.
• Maintain bike lane continuity.
• Provide improved access for their guests to walk the area and access the beach.
• Include entertainment/dining options.
• Traffic calming, biking and hiking, beach access, view obstruction mitigation and safe access for guests.
Requests: • Provide more information as the project moves forward. • Not enough night life in Carlsbad, possibly add an amphitheater or concert venue.
• Prefer two-lanes, one in each direction if feasible and sustainable.
Questions: • What will occur with the 10-acre area near Palomar Airport Road? • Will the east portion of Palomar Airport Road be changed? • Could the road sustain two lanes only (one in each direction)? • Are there hopes to work with the state on beach access? • Are there plans to move the northbound lanes? How will this impact the hotel entrance?
Next Steps: Provide updates on later phases.
Carlsbad Coastline Project
Outreach Meeting Form
Date: January 26, 2022
Organization: Circulate San Diego
Attendees: Dara Braitman (Director of Planning)
Project Team:
Tom Frank (Transportation Director), Nathan Schmidt (Transportation Planning and Mobility Manager), Nikki Matosian (Community Relations Manager), Melina Meza (Public Outreach Team), Tiffany Metti (Public Outreach Team)
Summary: Circulate San Diego is pleased to see possible improvements that fall in line with their mission. Circulate San Diego indicated that they liked the idea of opening up space. However, engagement will be important to the project.
Concerns: • Equity.
• Equal access to the area for all.
• Pedestrian safety.
Priorities/Needs • Include elements that accommodate everyone, for example, elements that accommodate wheelchairs (such as a playground for children in wheelchairs).
• Implement measures to slow down traffic.
• Include elements to show that it is a pedestrian area. • Create a sense of place, to get people to be more cognizant that the area is a pedestrian space, as opposed to a highway.
Requests: • Provide more information as the project moves forward. • Upon very initial review and at face value, would like two lanes to create a slowed down corridor.
• Possibly add a sexy cycle track.
• Add murals and race crossings to delineate the pedestrian area and create a sense of place.
Questions: • Where will traffic go and where will connectors land? • What are the effects of moving traffic?
• Where would parking access lie?
• What are the bike connections and any gaps for cyclists? Next Steps: Provide updates on later phases.
Carlsbad Coastline Project
Outreach Meeting Form
Date: March 21, 2022
Organization: City of Carlsbad Parks and Recreation Commission Attendees:
Commissioners Chair Luna, Vice Chair Martinez, Commissioners Allemann, Steketee, Sebahar and Winston
Absent: Commissioner Thorp
Project Team: Kyle Lancaster (Parks and Recreation Director), Nikki Matosian (Community Relations Manager)
Summary:
Concerns: • Comprehensively plan the entire realignment. Plans for the one mile will impact the rest of the area. Two vs. four lanes would impact how much land is available.
• Consider all the constraints that need to be overcome when repurposing the land and the associated costs.
• Consider that the project only repurposes, does not create new land.
• Per a 2001 city feasibility study, only 4 to 10 acres are even possible to be created.
• Address the city’s failing park system by requiring more park land from developers and improving the amount of city park land and access to those parks.
Priorities/Needs • Look at trails. Focus on recreation for bikers, walkers and runners. • Build parks close to where people live. There are a couple hundred homes that do not have a park to which they can walk. Kids kicking a ball along the sidewalk with some grass on one side or the other, next to a major highway is not a park.
• Move the road. This coastline is eroding slowly. From a climate change perspective this project makes sense.
• Provide numerous opportunities for feedback.
• Make the project equitable for the area and those that travel through it.
• Consider all forms and sources of funding.
• Review all documents before forming opinions on the project. • Parking is a premium; extra parking is a good thing but having open space and not paving it over is important.
Requests:
Questions:
Next Steps:
Carlsbad Coastline Project
Outreach Meeting Form
Date: February 7, 2022
Organization: City of Carlsbad Traffic and Mobility Commission Attendees: Commissioners Linke, Penseyres, Fowler, Coelho and Proulx
Absent: Chair Perez
Project Team: Tom Frank (Transportation Director), Nikki Matosian (Community Relations Manager)
Summary:
Concerns: • People think there are already traffic problems. • People are skeptical and inquiring how many high rises will be built on the open area.
• Against any major developments along the coastline
Priorities/Needs • Supports movement of the road to the east and open up the entire area for public use.
• Area is a large piece of wide open land which give us a lot of options to put in nice bike lanes which could be separated as there are not a lot of intersections.
• Carlsbad Blvd is a good candidate for a road diet
Requests:
Questions: • What’s the current zoning? Where would commercial be allowed? • Do we know the traffic volumes now?
Next Steps:
Carlsbad Coastline Project
Outreach Meeting Form
Date: March 10, 2022
Organization: Encina Wastewater Authority
Attendees: Scott McClelland (General Manager), Alicia Appel (Director of Environmental Compliance)
Project Team:
Tom Frank (Transportation Director), Katie Hentrich (Climate Action Plan Administrator), Nikki Matosian (Community Relations Manager), Tiffany Metti (Public Outreach Team), Jessica Ceja (Public Outreach Team) Summary: Encina Wastewater Authority is interested in preventing flooding at Encina Creek. Encina Wastewater Authority indicated that over course of this project, the City of Carlsbad might consider the area as it relates to potential mitigation. Encina Wastewater Authority would like to work in collaboration with the City of Carlsbad, Seapointe Resort and regulatory agencies to address debris removal and maintenance to keep the area clear and protect important infrastructure.
Concerns: • Flooding of Encina Creek.
• Drainage maintenance.
• Infrastructure protections.
• Environmental disaster.
• Sensitive habitats.
• Water sheds.
Priorities/Needs • During the course of this project, be aware of and consider the portion of Encina Creek that runs from Encina Wastewater Authority.
• Include Encina Wastewater Authority in any discussions regarding restoration and maintenance of this area.
• Consider opportunities to utilize this area as project mitigation. • Consider this area and the Encina Wastewater Authority as the City of Carlsbad plans the area including transportation planning, open space and wetland mitigation and restoration.
Requests: • Partner on mitigation planning.
• Share resources.
• Prevent overnight parking and people accessing sensitive areas. • Set up boulders to prevent vehicles from littering on the beach.
Questions: • Does the City already have a plan for clearing the drainage? Next Steps: Provide updates on later phases.
Carlsbad Coastline Project
Outreach Meeting Form
Date: February 23, 2022
Organization: Friends of Cardiff and Carlsbad State Beaches Attendees: Stephen Flynn (Board of Directors), Deborah Flynn (Board of Directors) Project Team:
Nathan Schmidt (Transportation and Mobility Manager), Kyle Lancaster (Parks and Recreation Director), Nikki Matosian (Community Relations Manager), Tiffany Metti (Public Outreach Team), Jessica Ceja (Public Outreach Team)
Summary: Friends of Cardiff and Carlsbad State Beaches are interested in open space, recreation opportunities and accessibility. Friends of Cardiff and Carlsbad State Beaches would like to see ongoing collaboration with state parks in improving this area of land.
Concerns: • Bluff stability.
• Changes to topography.
• Speed limit.
• Traffic volumes.
• Two-lane traffic that would increase backups.
Priorities/Needs • Improve accessibility.
• This is an opportunity for recreation, exercise, etc. • Include areas for passive recreation and a grassy area for informal play.
• Provide for safe walking and biking.
• Separate pedestrian and rider tracks.
Requests: • Work closely with the state.
• Minimize disturbances.
• Make Old Highway 101 more accessible.
• Add more walkways (pathways/trails).
• Include restrooms.
• Improve parking.
Questions: • Will the city talk to the state to improve their land? • Will the area with the dip be transformed and alleviated? • What other groups have you talked to?
• When is the power plant being removed and are you considering it when designing this project?
Next Steps: Provide updates on later phases.
Carlsbad Coastline Project
Outreach Meeting Form
Date: March 3, 2022
Organization: Hanover Beach Colony
Attendees:
Lisa Dannenfeldt, Skip Coomber, Dana Andrews, Diane O’Connell, Stephanie Connolly, Chris Wheeler, Phong Le, Tim Easton, Craig Dunn, Ann Rhoads, Thomas Brislin, phone participant.
Project Team:
Nathan Schmidt (Transportation and Mobility Manager), Nikki Matosian (Community Relations Manager), Tiffany Metti (Public Outreach Team), Anika Fisch (Public Outreach Team)
Summary: Hanover Beach Colony is interested in maintaining open space and improved pedestrian and bike opportunities. Hanover Beach Colony is concerned about traffic, overcrowding and safety, as well as impacts to views and the environment.
Concerns: • Overcrowding.
• Traffic and congestion including recreational vehicle traffic. • Parking directly across from homes.
• Road/traffic encroaching closer to homes.
• Safety.
• Speeds.
• Impacts to the views, environment, sensitive habitat and vegetation. • Sea level rise.
• Commercial development.
Priorities/Needs • Reduce the speed limit and make streets safer. • Separate bike and pedestrian areas.
• Preserve open space.
• Maintain views.
• Improve Old Highway 101 for pedestrians, add greenery. • Protect emergency response times.
Requests: • Add playgrounds and dog park.
• Do not add commercial buildings, especially not near homes. • Include farmer’s markets and small local businesses but keep them away from homes and limit building structures.
• Do not make this area like north Carlsbad or Venice Beach. • Make the area more like a mini-Monterey.
• Look to Heisler Park in Laguna Beach as an example of a good use of the cliff with walkways and vegetation.
• Look at surrounding land uses.
• Be considerate of the equity of park spaces in the south. • Keep four lanes to prevent more traffic.
Questions: • How far out is the project?
• What impact does the Coastal Commission have on this project? • What is your vision for local businesses?
• Would anything impact views?
• Does this count as open space?
• Is Old Highway 101 part of this project?
• Do you have specific examples of what the community wants? • Would this plan impact the emergency response time in our neighborhood?
• What are we doing with the powerplant that is being dismantled? Next Steps: Provide updates on later phases.
Carlsbad Coastline Project
Outreach Meeting Form
Date: February 3, 2022
Organization: Lakeshore Gardens
Attendees:
Lizanne Clark (Board Vice President), Connie Shorr (Community Board Secretary), Robin Ferencz-Kotfica (Web Administrator), Kathee Eskridge, (Carlsbad Resident), Margie (Joined via phone)
Project Team:
Nathan Schmidt (Transportation Planning and Mobility Manager), Nikki Matosian (Community Relations Manager), Jessica Ceja (Public Outreach Team), Tiffany Metti (Public Outreach Team)
Summary: Lakeshore Gardens is interested in the possibilities, including more open space, more areas for walking and added locations to look out over the lagoon. Lakeshore Gardens would like some public amenities considered in planning.
Concerns: • Different modes of transportation operating in the same area. • Limitations on people walking their dogs.
• Unsafe walking paths.
Priorities/Needs • Add more paved walkways with dividers for walkers and bicycles. • Provide a recreational area that is pedestrian friendly. • Consider families with strollers and wheelchair access. • Improve parking access.
• Increase places overlooking the lagoon and pockets of solitude. • Add a bathroom and washroom. Make the restroom area paved. • Add a snack bar, benches, and picnic tables.
Requests: • Maintain the natural environment, habitat and open space. • Maintain high elevations for views.
• Consider an electric bus with hop-on-hop-off possibilities going up and down the coast.
• Look into the Ponto Dr. area to see how it could be beneficial for public use.
• Clear up confusion that this area will be developed vs. open space. • Provide more information as the project moves forward.
Questions: • I hear property to the south was sold to a developer and they are implementing a hotel?
Next Steps: Provide updates on later phases.
Carlsbad Coastline Project
Outreach Meeting Form
Date: March 1, 2022
Organization: South Carlsbad Residents/Neighbors
Attendees:
Steven Rigler (Lanikai), Victor Cavataio (Poinsettia Cove), Kris Doan (San Pacifico/Santander), Babs Soller (Poinsettia Cove),Ms Wright (Kris Wright), Lamia Nahoul (Poinsettia Cove), Barbara Campbell, Lara Nelson (Waters End), Donald Keisler, Hilary Kooyers (Lanikai), Nancy Adams, Bruce Kaldor (Poinsettia Cove), Paul Gros (San Pacifico), Joseph VanBeeck (San Pacifico), Gary McGrath (San Pacifico), Hope Nelson, James Betts (Lanikai), Diana Cavallaro (Lanikai), Glenn Speirs (Ponsettia Cove), Jeanette Weeks, Glenn Rhoades, Michael Supancich, two joined via phone
Project Team:
Tom Frank (Transportation Director), Nathan Schmidt (Transportation and Mobility Manager), Nikki Matosian (Community Relations Manager), Tiffany Metti (Public Outreach Team), Jessica Ceja (Public Outreach Team)
Summary: South Carlsbad residents are interested in preserving the natural beauty and open space of the area for future generations. They would like to see safer streets by implementing reduced speed limits and separated pedestrian and bike facilities.
Concerns: • Commercial development.
• Traffic, congestion and associated noise.
• Beach access.
• Views.
• Pollution and ecological changes.
• E-bikes.
• Sand retention.
Priorities/Needs • Improve beach access. Add stairs to climb down the bluff. • Include open space, trails, a strand for biking and walking and recreational areas.
• Include separated pedestrian and bike facilities.
• Improve connectivity as well as street and intersection safety, including shorter crossing distances.
• Slow the speed limit and reduce noise.
• Add seating areas/benches.
• Implement a U-turn to circle back to Ponto.
• Keep people on electric bikes off the sidewalks.
• Plant drought resistant trees and plants.
Requests: • Keep the coastline natural and do not add any development. • Make this mindful, comprehensive development.
• Preserve the area for future generations.
• Maintain an area for healthy living.
• Make workshop times more accessible, especially for families. • Create space for events such as concerts, weddings, etc. • Look at the 15th Street Park in Del Mar as inspiration. • Move the south campground service shed area, which is often vacant, to the north end of the campground and incorporate that land as part of a park.
• Complete the Coastal Rail Trail Project.
• Include trees to attract more raptors that can keep squirrels from eroding the cliffs with burrowing.
Questions: • Will this come to a city-wide vote?
• If approved, when would this project start?
• Is there a pilot project?
• What is the current and proposed land use and zoning? • How do we handle the traffic from hotels and event facilities already being built? Will this project include this traffic in the analysis, to ensure traffic will not be further compounded? • Would the roadway be closer to residents?
Next Steps: Provide updates on later phases.
Carlsbad Coastline Project
Outreach Meeting Form
Date: February 14, 2022
Organization: North County Cycle Club
Attendees: Norval Lyon (President), Kenneth Chin-Purcell (Vice president) Project Team:
Nathan Schmidt (Transportation Planning and Mobility Manager), Nikki Matosian (Community Relations Manager), Tiffany Metti (Public Outreach Team), Jessica Ceja (Public Outreach Team)
Summary: North County Cycle Club is interested in improving safety and reducing points of conflict for cyclists. North County Cycle Club would like to see improved and separated, pedestrian and bike facilities, public restrooms, safe parking implementation and a low stress network.
Concerns: • Accommodating all modes of transportation. • Points of conflict and stress for cyclists, including intersections, freeway crossings, and parallel parking with cars backing into cyclists.
• Narrow bike lanes that cause safety issues.
• Lack of a dedicated pedestrian facility.
Priorities/Needs • Add sharrows.
• Add restroom facilities.
• Separate bike and pedestrian facilities.
• Clearly delineate bike lanes.
Requests: • Consider e-bikes and where to put them.
• Avoid/do not like cycle lanes that are completely enclosed. • Improve pedestrian facilities so they do not spill into bike lanes. • Choose Class 1 over protected Class 4.
Questions: • What is the contemporary thinking about roundabouts? • Where would you put e-bikes?
• Is there something you can do to make turns safer for cyclists? Next Steps: Provide updates on later phases.
Carlsbad Coastline Project
Outreach Meeting Form
Date: February 23, 2022
Organization: People for Ponto
Attendees: Jane Naskiewicz (Committee Member), Lance Schulte (Committee Member)
Project Team:
Tom Frank (Transportation Director), Nathan Schmidt (Transportation and Mobility Manager), Nikki Matosian (Community Relations Manager), Tiffany Metti (Public Outreach Team), Jessica Ceja (Public Outreach Team) Summary: People for Ponto is interested in addressing the open space and park deficit in the area. People for Ponto wants to ensure comprehensive planning, added open space and quality park space. People for Ponto wants places for children to play and habitat protection. People for Ponto wants this area to be thoughtfully planned in partnership with the community’s longstanding requests and in the context of the legacy opportunity it provides for future generations.
Concerns: • Bifurcation.
• Ensuring comprehensive planning.
• Ensuring thoughtful use of dwindling vacant land.
• Significant open space deficit.
• Area density and insufficient park space/areas for children to play. • Playing near natural habitat, which is detrimental for overall safety and habitat preservation.
Priorities/Needs • Provide 30 acres of (Growth Management Plan) useable open space, within Local Facilities Management Plan Zone 9.
• Provide a 7-acre real park, not a thin strip of land. • Include a grassy, multi-use open space in the Ponto area with sufficient land area for people to spread out and play. • Provide quality park space (not next to a major highway or the associated noise and other impacts). The promenade is a walkway not a park.
• Include places to watch the sunset in a tranquil park experience. • Implement accessible parking, including added parking at the beach so it is safer to access and walk on the beach at night. • Add a soccer field.
Requests: • Provide clarity on how much useable land is available when factoring in sea level rise, constraints and opportunities. • The City of Carlsbad needs to make the investment in the community, which the community has been asking for over the past seven years. Fund and make it happen.
• Review and utilize the maps and materials provided from our organization to the City of Carlsbad.
• Engage with the San Pacifico Community as a full partner. • Enforce open space requirements.
• Correct the issue of this highly dense area lacking a park. • Increase places for children to play, which is not the street or near wildlife habitat.
• Take a comprehensive approach to planning the area, including overall connectivity and coordination with the state.
• Implement comprehensive planning and coordination the first time around as this redevelopment opportunity will not be available again.
• Realize the importance of the project as it relates to the future of Carlsbad and a legacy for generations.
Questions: • Is there any city policy regarding what issues are connected and which are not?
• What is the stance on the campground and is the city going to lose that land?
• Will this feedback be reported to City Council?
Next Steps: Provide updates on later phases.
People for Ponto Citizen Input on Coastal South Carlsbad PCH Modification Proposal: 1 of 2
Since 2017 People for Ponto Carlsbad citizens and visitors and other north county citizens have provided the City and CA Coastal Commission (CCC) with extensive documented data files, overwhelming public testimony, and well over 5,000 public comments/desires, on the future of Ponto, and Coastal South Carlsbad as part of Carlsbad’
s proposed Local Coastal Program Amendment, Parks Master Plan Update, Housing Element Update, many years of City Budget input, and now the ‘PCH Modification Proposal’.
The overwhelming Citizen issues raised since 2017 are still the same, and all this input since 2017 should be again be incorporated in the City’s PCH Modification Proposal. The following lettered bullets A-R summarize some key facts Citizens raised since 2017. These facts are still relevant; and applicable to the PCH Modification Proposal.
A. Existing land use at Ponto (census block 06071.17813.1) is developed at a population density 35% more dense (population per land square mile) than the rest of the Carlsbad. Ponto’ s 35% higher
population and development density is a result of City land use planning that increased residential land use, did not provide City Parkland, did not require Ponto developers to provide their required useable Open Space at Ponto; and eliminated 12.8 acres of prior planned Coastal Recreation Commercial land use at Ponto. Census data reflects the City created Park and Open Space inequities and increased residential land use from elimination of 12.8 acres of Coastal Recreation land use.
B. There is so little remaining unconstrained Vacant Coastal land left in Ponto and Carlsbad to correct documented City Park Inequities at Ponto and the complete lack of a Coastal Park for South Carlsbad, along with providing an adequate amount of the other CA Coastal Act High-Priority land use – low-cost visitor accommodations. Once the last bits of Vacant Coastal Land are developed they are lost forever as a means to address long-term Coastal land use needs. Ponto Vacant Lands include 11-acre Planning Area F, 14-acre Kam Sang site, and 5-acres of City’s Site 18.
C. The proposed PCH Modification Proposal does not buy any new vacant land but is a final attempt to try to rearrange PCH right-of-way landscaping and/or by reducing roadway capacity. Rearranging PCH land may add some more useable area beyond the existing parkway areas along PCH. The net usable amount may be modest, but should be accurately compared with the existing usable parkway areas. See attached City PCH map, with notes on various existing and required land and land use features from the City’s 2013 PCH Modification Design, along with some potential issues.
D. Sea level rise impacts will impact/reduce much of the State Park and Campground at Ponto – a CA Coastal Act High-priority land use. See 7-page Sea Level Rise & Carlsbad’s LCP projected/planned Loss of Open Space at Ponto data file provided to the City & CCC.
E. Carlsbad’s Coastal land use planning of the Ponto Vacant Lands, and/or potential useable areas from a PCH Modification will be the last, final, and only means Carlsbad and CCC have to address the Forever or Final CA Coastal Act high-priority land use needs at Ponto and South Carlsbad and how these areas will finally provide Coastal Recreation and low-cost accommodations land uses for the growing amount of CA residents and visitors.
F. As the Final Local Coastal Program (LCP) Amendment for Carlsbad, what land uses are ultimately approved by the CCC in the next year or two will Forever define Carlsbad’s final amount, distribution and quality of City Park land and ‘
High-Priority Coastal Land Uses’ – Coastal Recreation and Low-cost Visitor Accommodations. The CCC approved LCP Amendment will Forever lock-in the amount of City Park land, Coastal Park land and ‘High-Priority Coastal Land Uses’ to address the Forever population and visitor growth needs for these land uses. Already these Coastal land uses are heavily used and many-times demand exceeds supply. See 30-page Coastal Recreation land use data file provided to the City and CCC.
G. Sadly Carlsbad requires/provides 40% less City Park land than the Cities of Encinitas and Oceanside require/provide. Sadly Carlsbad also promotes Park Inequity by not requiring developers (and City) to provide Carlsbad Parks adequately and equitably distributed so as to be within accessible walking distance of all residences. Encinitas and Oceanside require developers (and City) to provide parks accessible to all. Carlsbad is also below average nationally in providing both park acreage and walkable accessibility to parks. The lack of City Park acreage and accessibility is clearly evident at Ponto. Carlsbad’s Park Master Plan maps Ponto as an area ‘unserved by City Parks’ and area of ‘Park inequity’ where future City Park investments should be made. See 30-page Coastal Recreation land use data file provided to the City and CCC.
H. The CCC rejected Carlsbad’s Ponto Vision Plan in 2010 because it failed to address the need for ‘
high-priority Coastal Land Uses’ at Ponto (“i.e. Public Park” and low-cost visitor accommodations) – specifically Planning Area F’s land use requirement in the 1996-current Local Coastal Program. See 5- page Planning Area F Existing LCP LUP & CCC direction data file provided to the City and CCC.
I. Oddly Carlsbad’s 2015 General Plan again followed the Ponto Vision Plan that the CCC rejected in 2010 and again in 2015 the City failed to address the need for these “high-priority Coastal Land Uses” at Ponto – specifically Planning Area F’s land use requirement in the 1996-current Local Coastal Program. Carlsbad Public Records Request # 2017-260 asked to see City compliance with Planning Area F LCP Policy and no records of City compliance with that LCP Policy was provided. See official Carlsbad Public Records Request #2017-260 and 5-page Planning Area F Existing LCP LUP & CCC direction data file provided City and CCC.
J. The CCC provided Carlsbad with specific comments in 2017 on how to address Planning Area F’s LCP requirement on providing for the need for “high-priority Coastal Land Uses” at Ponto and citywide.
See 5-page Planning Area F Existing LCP LUP & CCC direction data file provided to the City and CCC.
K. Carlsbad’s official Public Records (R002393-092121) also show that since the 1980’s Carlsbad did not comply with Mello II Segment Local Coastal Program land use policies regarding providing for future “high-priority Coastal Land Uses” – Parks and Campground expansions. See Oct 8, 2021 email provided to the City and CCC.
L. Carlsbad’s 2017 & 2020 Sea Level Rise Report shows Ponto/South Carlsbad will lose over 32-acres of “High-priority Coastal Land Use” due to coastal erosion and flooding. (14+ acres of Coastal Recreation and 18+ acres of Campground will be lost) in Carlsbad’s General Plan. See 7-page Sea Level Rise & Carlsbad’s LCP projected/planned Loss of Open Space at Ponto data files provided to the City and CCC.
M. Carlsbad’s 2015 General Plan did not consider the 2017 & 2020 Sea Level Rise data. New actions and a new General Plan are needed to address this 32+ acre loss AND State required unlimited increase in population/visitor demand for “High-priority Coastal Land Uses”.
N. The State of CA has recently temporarily (and maybe permanently) mandated in SB 330 that Cities must plan to accommodate unlimited growth in population visitors forever. Yet SB 330 and the State of CA has not similarly required cities to plan to adequately meet the unlimited population and visitor demand for City Parks, and for CA Coastal Act high-priority Coastal Recreation and Low-cost Visitor Accommodations. Requiring only adding to population demand without concurrently requiring adding needed City Park and Coastal Park land acreage (and other needed public land uses) is illogical and will result in the overcrowding and degradation of current State of CA, City, community and neighborhood quality of life. Carlsbad’s 2015 General Plan also did not incorporate the recent SB 330 State requirement for ‘
unlimited population growth’ – i.e. buildout. Carlsbad is thus embarking on a revision of its General Plan –Growth Management Plan. A complete Revision of Carlsbad’s 2015 General Plan and Growth Management Plan is needed to address a commensurate unlimited amount of City and Coastal Recreation land - “High-priority Coastal Land Uses” to address unlimited population growth prior to any LCP Amendment. This needs to be done before the City
BEFORE an old out-of-date 2015 General Plan is used as the basis for the LCP Amendment. If population growth is required to be unlimited then General Plan and LCP mechanisms to concurrently provide unlimited park land acres needs to be required also.
O. There is a 10-year old and still current 6.6+ acre City park deficit in Coastal Southwest Carlsbad and a 30-acre useable Coastal open-space deficit in Zone 9 (Ponto area – west of I-5 and south of Poinsettia) that only gets worse we lose 32+ acres of Coastal Open Space from Sea Level Rise. See 30-page Coastal Recreation land use data file, and 7-page Sea Level Rise & Carlsbad’s LCP projected/planned Loss of Open Space at Ponto data files provided to the City and CCC.
P. Carlsbad’s Park Master Plan documents City Park Inequities at Ponto and Coastal South Carlsbad.
See 30-page Coastal Recreation land use data file provided to the City and CCC.
Q. The PCH Modification Proposal is not a committed or funded ‘Project’, nor is it even a required
planned land use to be implemented in Carlsbad’s Local Coastal Program. The City’s proposed LCP Policy LCP-2.p.19 requires nothing to be done regarding PCH Modification in South Carlsbad, while LCP Policy LCP-2.p.20 requires “ensuring” commercial development of Ponto. PCH Modification (except in North Carlsbad) is an uncommitted ‘maybe proposal ‘studied for decades. Several City ‘feasibility reports’ raise interesting questions relative to proposed LCP Policies LCP-2p.19 and 20 (See City’s 2001 Carlsbad Blvd Realignment Study Phase II: Preliminary Financial Analysis by ERA).
Based on the City’s over 20-year past history and proposed LCP Polices, it seems unlikely the Council will ever fund PCH Modification in South Carlsbad to provide a needed Coastal park. The Council funded PCH Modification at Terramar (CIP Project #6054) in North Carlsbad is about $13 million per mile. Vacant Ponto land costs are between $1.4 and $2.4 million per acre based on recent recorded sales (SD Recorder Doc# 2015-0549555 & 2021-0854875). Tax-payer value of a PCH Modification Project relative to the Council option of buying vacant land to provide a much needed Coastal Park in South Carlsbad should be fully disclosed and vetted early in any process before vacant land is developed. See 3-page General Comparative tax-payer Costs/Benefits Analysis of Ponto Park and Promenade provided to the City and CCC.
R. The most recent PCH Modification Proposal concept plans show significant land use constraints, making much of the cited ’62-acres’ effectively unusable. Use constraints include slopes, protected habitat, water, existing/required water quality dentition basins, existing beach parking that must be accommodated, and (most commonly) thin dimensions too narrow or constrained to provide much added utility beyond what utility exists there now in the current configuration. See attached City’s PCH map with notes on land use constraints and issues.
Supported by the above A – R lettered data bullets People for Ponto Citizens have and still are telling the City Council (with regard to any PCH Modification Proposal) to:
1. Address the true neighborhood park needs for Ponto (minimal 7 acre City Park to serve minimal neighborhood park needs based on Ponto buildout-population standard). Ponto Park should be an appropriately wide, viable, flat and fully useable multi-use grassed field – allow kids space to play informal sports. No thin strip of non-park land.
2. Address the City and Coastal Park inequity of Ponto, and South Carlsbad as shown in Parks Master Plan Park Service Area maps/text. South Carlsbad (the 62% majority of Carlsbad’s population) has NO Coastal Park and zero park acres, while North Carlsbad (38% of Carlsbad’s population) has ten (10) City and Coastal Parks totaling over 37-acres.
3. Address loss of 32+ acres of Coastal Open Space Land from sea level rise by providing for Non- neighborhood City and State buildout-population and visitor demands for both Coastal Recreation land use and the loss of the Campground. Provide sufficient Coastal Recreation and low-cost visitor
accommodation land use to address the CA Coastal Act and City/State ‘buildout population/visitor demand’, and planned loss of current supply due to planned sea level rise.
4. Disclose and address the 2017 CA Coastal Commission directive to City on the Ponto Vision Plan, and Planning Area F Existing LCP and Proposed LCP Amendment in the PCH Proposal.
5. Fully address Sea Level Rise impacts consistent with CA Coastal Act & Commission on current and future ‘buildout’ Coastal land use and land acreage by plotting the Seal Level Rise inundation and coastal erosion/bluff hazard areas on the PCH Modification Proposal maps, and in the PCH Project replace all 32+ acres of high-priority Coastal land use that will be lost to sea level rise and coastal erosion and increase the supply of these high-priority Coastal land uses to address increased City/State ‘
buildout’ population and visitor demands.
6. Fully disclose and consider the 3-page General Comparative tax-payer Costs/Benefits Analysis of Ponto Park and Promenade, to assure tax-payers (City and/or State) are getting the best and most value for their tax-payer dollars. The City should use tax-payer money as wisely as possible.
7. Incorporate the 5,000+ written/emailed petitions to the Council & CA Coastal Commission, and the Letters from Carlsbad visitor industry, Surfrider Foundation, and Batiquitos Lagoon Foundation.
8. Within the Local Facilities Management Plan Zone 9 portion fully provide the 30-acres of documented missing Unconstrained Growth Management Open Space that developers were supposed to provide. Also fully disclose and incorporate the Ponto Open Space recommendations from North County Advocates per the City’s lawsuit settlement.
9. Fully preserve or mitigate sensitive habitat areas within and adjacent to the PCH Project area consistent with Federal and State Resource agency requirements.
10. Fully provide required storm water quality purification/detention basins in the PCH Project before storm water from and passing through the project area are discharged into the ocean and Batiquitos Lagoon consistent with Federal and State Water Quality regulations and agency requirements.
11. Since PCH Modification will be an expensive Final and Forever design it needs to address Final and Forever vehicle traffic/bike/pedestrian volumes along with unlimited population/visitor growth.
There likely is concern about a PCH Modification Project more than doubling current traffic congestion along Coast Highway. Before PCH capacity is forever removed, we should know with 100% certainty that that current capacity will never be needed. Providing much needed (and delayed) pedestrian and bike ways and other needed Coastal land uses can be provided along existing PCH. It is not appropriate to try to pass off a nice pedestrian walkway as “linear park”.
12. Lastly,
as requested since 2017, directly engage and specifically involve the San Pacifico Community Association and Ponto Community in the planning and design of that portion of the City’s PCH Project in front of those communities. The City did not provided this engagement in prior City PCH Modification Proposal work.
We request the above citizen issues be fully addressed in the City’s PCH Modification Project.
Thank you,
Lance Schulte
People for Ponto
City’s PCH Modification Proposal Area Map with notes on usability Constraints and Issues: P4P Input 2 of 2
The City’s map below is marked with the following numbered list of Area Constraints and Issues. The Constraints are from the City’s 2013 PCH Modification designs, the City’s older 2017 Sea Level Rise Impact Study, and on-site observations. The Constraints will limit any fundamental change to the existing PCH landscape. For instance existing slope and habitat area will remain or have to be relocated which will limit the use of any excess land area from PCH Modification. These Constraints will then reduce from 62 acres the actual number of unconstrained and acres that are actually useable and can be used for different uses than currently exist.
1. Loss of the last section of Old "Historic 101" design, ambiance, and openness. Will it be replaced with typical urban arterial design?
2. Freshwater habitat
3. Sewer pumping facility
4. City's 2013 PCH plan for RESTORED RIPARIAN HABITAT
5. Sea Level Rise 2 meter Impact Area
6. City's 2013 PCH plan for BIO SWALE AND RESTORED RIPARIAN HABITAT
7. Existing beach parking to be retained
8. Least Tern habitat
9. Major storm water detention basin
10. Water
11. Slopes will likely need retaining walls to move road inland closer to proposed Kam Sang Resort
12. Endangered Species Habitat
13. City's 2013 PCH plan for COASTAL SAGE SCRUB RESTORATION
14. City's 2013 PCH plan for NATIVE GRASSLAND RESTORATION
15. City's 2013 PCH plan for BIO SWALE AND RESTORED RIPARIAN HABITAT
16. Eliminating access road for homes/businesses south of Cape Rey Resort. Who pays to replace?
17. Removes Cape Rey Resort developer required GMP Open Space for this LFMP. This GMP Open Space will have to be replaced. Who Pays?
18. City's 2013 PCH plan for L.I.D. BASIN / BIO SWALE
19. City left several acres vacant for 20+ years. This area can cost-effectively provide 200-500 more parking spaces w/o any PCH relocation.
20. Unusual jog in roadway. Is this viable?
21. City's 2013 PCH plan for RESTORED NATIVE LANDSCAPE
22. Habitat & need to provide major storm water quality detention basin before discharging urban and creek runoff into ocean.
23. Slopes will likely need retaining walls to move road inland closer to mobile home community.
24. Steep unusable slopes needed for Palomar Airport Road overpass over railroad corridor.
For a Cost/Benefit
reference point, the City’s PCH Modification at Terramar (CIP project #6054 from Cannon to Manzano) that is less constrained and simpler than South Carlsbad is projected to cost around $13 million per mile. Vacant primarily unconstrained land sale costs at Ponto are documented at around $1.4 to $2.4 million per acre. Honest Cost/Benefit of these two options should be a public tax-payer discussion. 0 250 600
I I II I I
i.000 eet
I I
c::::I Proposed ROW (Approxima y 3 acres)
Ar Availabl or 0th r Uses ( ppro ·mat Y 62 ac'mfu 14
• .. ge_,y, R.igk ;.of-w.. bound .. :. .. nd ..ges ~ .ind · af for .. na • only, * For comparative visual reference the area is the 6.5 acr@ eastern portion of Planning Area F.
EXHIBIT 17
August 31, 2017
To:
Carlsbad City Council [email protected]
Carlsbad Parks & Recreation Commission at [email protected] Carlsbad Planning Commission at [email protected]
Kevin Crawford, City Manager at [email protected]
Chris Hazeltine, Parks & Recreation, City of Carlsbad [email protected] Don Neu, Planning, City of Carlsbad [email protected]
Subject: City Park Standard in Southwest and South Carlsbad
Dear Carlsbad City Council:
The San Pacifico Community Association (SPCA) represents over 450 homes (around 1,000 Citizens) in the Southwest Quadrant/Park District of Carlsbad, and is the primary component and stakeholder of the Poinsettia Shores Planned Community (Poinsettia Shores Master Plan and Local Coastal Program). SPCA supported the residents in creating the Ponto Beachfront Development Review Committee (PBDRC) to:
Provide information to all San Pacifico residents (and surrounding neighborhoods) on the developments. (See www.PontoLocals.com)
Obtain and consolidate constructive feedback from the residents. Give this feedback to the residents, developers and City so that we can have productive/timely input into the projects and their designs.
Act as a strong, unified voice and with the support of our residents in upcoming Planning, Council and Coastal Commission meetings.
Since PBDRC has been formed there has been a growing participation and concurrence from other Carlsbad areas and groups on the consensus PBDRC has consolidated.
PBDRC and the SPCA are pleased that the City has taken action to fix a timeline defect in the Growth Management Program related to meeting a City Park standard. However there is another truly once in a lifetime opportunity to improve how the City Park standard is proposed to be met in Ponto and coastal South Carlsbad that we would like to request of the City Council. This opportunity stems from the fact that Ponto is the only vacant coastal land in South Carlsbad and is currently being evaluated for low- priority housing and other types of development. Should it be developed in this way, there will never be another opportunity to have a meaningful park in coastal Southwest Carlsbad west of Interstate 5. The request is to work with Pontolocals to provide a comprehensive and open process for citizens of the City [primarily Southwest and Southeast Carlsbad Citizens] to discuss and define possible better approaches to implement a coastal park in Southwest that can serve all of South Carlsbad. We recently had a community meeting attended by approximately 200 people and this letter reflects some of the near unanimous (90%+) concerns from that meeting. We believe these concerns are also likely to be reflective of many others living in South Carlsbad, and also in North Carlsbad.
The City Park Standard is “3.0 acres of Community Park or Special Use Area per 1,000 population within the Park District”. So for every 1,000 Citizens in a Park District, such as the coastal Southwest Quadrant Park District, there is to be 3 acres of City Park to meet the standard. The rational for such a location specific standard is that parks should be distributed so as to be reasonably accessible by all citizens. It is also important to have reasonable and safe park access via walking and biking, not just by motor vehicles. The staff report on correcting the timeline defect in the Park Standard stated that correcting the timeline to correct the park quadrant deficits is “… specifically relevant to the southwest and southeast quadrants. As stated in the report a need for more park acreage in those two quadrants was identified four years ago (during FY 2012-13).” A 6.6 acre park deficit within the Southwest quadrant was identified in the Growth Management Monitoring Report for FY 2014-15. However the report indicates that “Based on the Fiscal Year 2015-16 Capital Improvement Program list of projects, Veteran’s Memorial Park (91.5 acres, with 22.9 acres applied to each quadrant) is proposed to be constructed prior to buildout.” Under this proposal the future Veteran’s Park, that is located in the Northwest Park District and located many miles away from the coastal Southwest and Southeast Quadrants and Park Districts, would be used meet the population and citizen demand for Parks for citizens within the coastal Southwest and Southeast Quadrant’
s Park Districts. We know there is an outstanding opportunity for the City to do a great thing for the community and to add tremendous value to the quality of life by augmenting, enhancing, and/or adjusting planned park supply to better serve citizens and the City; and be more consistent with the General Plan and core values of the Growth Management Plan.
The fundamental intent of creating four Park Districts (one for each quadrant) and managing and matching demand and supply of City Parks into smaller geographical areas (quadrant park districts) is to make the supply of City Parks reasonably accessible to their demand and more equitably distributed for citizens. Equitable distribution of City Park facilities is the right thing to do and has many citizen and city benefits:
Children and elderly can more easily walk and bike to City Parks when they are close by and within a safe walking and bicycling distance with properly designed access pathways; Park supply created so far away from park demand creates the need to drive in a car to access the park, thus increasing vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Depending on locations this also limits park access for citizens without cars or unable to drive; When city parks are accessible to their demand by walking/bicycling then less city park land is need to park cars. Citizens get more actual useable park space for each acre of park land; When city parks are close to their demand busy families can quickly get to them after their workday which allows more park time for families during busy weekends; Nearby city parks create a stronger sense of stewardship for the “neighborhoods’” park and city parks in general. Citizens watch out and care for their nearby park; Nearby city parks that are equitably distributed and based on surrounding neighborhood demand serve to strengthen neighborhood quality and property values by providing park amenities close by. It is both a good neighborhood and economic development strategy to assure park demand and supply are locationally matched; and Fundamentally it is the right thing to do to place park demand and supply in close proximity to each other and promote and equitable distribution public facility demand and supply.
In coastal Southwest Carlsbad and South Carlsbad we have some glaring gaps in demand and supply of city parks. For instance:
The Carlsbad General Plan Open Space, Conservation and Recreation Element, Figure 4-3 Parks: Shows no existing or planned coastal parks or special use areas west of Interstate 5 for all of South Carlsbad. In North Carlsbad there are 10, parks and special use areas west of Interstate 5 and on or close to the beach (9 of these are existing parks and 1 is a future park). This seems a clear and inherently unfair distribution of coastal park facilities. This unfair distribution severely reduces critical access to coastal park open space near the beach for South Carlsbad Citizens (half the City and over 26,000 homes, and over 64,000 citizens).
This unserved demand for city park space in coastal South Carlsbad is evidenced by the dangerous use of the Carlsbad Boulevard [old highway 101] road shoulder and bike lanes and campground road for recreational purposes, parking demand and the frequent unauthorized recreational use of Ponto vacant land. People are using whatever land they can for needed recreational use. South Carlsbad Citizens in Aviara, La Costa, Rancho Carrillo, Bressi Ranch, La Costa Valley and all the other South Carlsbad inland neighborhoods have no coastal South Carlsbad City Beach Park areas to access the coast. Their only option is to drive significant distances (with increase VMT and greenhouse gas emissions] crosstown to access city beach parks in the North, or travel to Encinitas. This forces increased VMT and greenhouse gas emissions which is counter to both State and General Plan goals. Citizens in South Carlsbad only have a State Beach pay parking lot and a retreating primarily steep cobble beach as their “local” beach.
The non-beach portion of the South Carlsbad State Beach campground is a road and lodging facility for primarily out-of-town visitors that are near this beach. It is not a city park. The Campground is not designed to serve the park needs of Carlsbad citizens, but is a great place primarily for visitors to affordably pay to spend nights camping near the beach. The lack of any park facilities at the campground is evidenced by the frequent use of the campground driveway (a significant area of the campground) by children and adults as a play area.
There is an added benefit in that adding a coastal South Carlsbad Ponto Beach Park would help alleviate growing overcrowding, and increased traffic and parking congestion at North Carlsbad’s coastal parks.
Citizens west of Interstate 5 in South Carlsbad have very limited access to a city park. Depending on the neighborhood one lives in, access our nearest park [Poinsettia Park] is between a 2 to 4 mile trip.
Residents must cross Interstate 5 using one of only two crossings in the space of over 3 miles. These crossings are on major multi-lane, higher speed roadways (Poinsettia Lane or Palomar Airport Road).
The route is not the most safe or direct, and it forces one to drive in a vehicle to access a park which increases VMT. Park access for children, the elderly, and those walking dogs west of Interstate 5 in South Carlsbad is severely restricted or effectively eliminated.
Coastal Southwest and all of South Carlsbad have not met their quadrant’s Park area standard since 2012 (per the City’s Growth Management Program). A specific comprehensive and open discussion with the Southwest and all if South Carlsbad citizens on how that deficient should be resolved should occur.
The current City solution to meet local park needs of coastal Southwest and South Carlsbad with a paper allocation of park acreage in the Northwest part of the City that is many miles away does not seem right.
It seems inconsistent with the core values and Vision of our City.
From Carlsbad General Plan Community Vision:
“…the Carlsbad Community Vision, which is the foundation for this plan.” This is the foundation for the General Plan.
“…In the future, … social connections will be enhanced through … more public gathering places, family- friendly activities, and open spaces within walking distance of people’s homes …”
“The community is proud of the exceptional amount of open space in the city, and envisions a future of continued City commitment to open space protection and strategic acquisitions to further the city’s open space system.”
“Parks, Fields, and Facilities for All Ages: The network of parks and recreation facilities will be improved to meet the community’s active lifestyle needs. Such improvements may include the strategic addition of more parks, … New facilities will be located to maximize use and access by all neighborhoods, tailored to the needs of local populations, and designed with all ages in mind.”
“Beach Uses and Improvements: The beach is an important outdoor recreational resource, and protecting and enhancing access to the beach and the quality of the beach experience is a top community priority.”
“ … Access to the beach and the quality of the beach experience will be improved through new compatible and supportive uses on or in close proximity to the beach, which may include … a park …”
“Tailored Tourism Strategy: Tourism is an important component of the city’s economy today, and it remains an attractive economic sector for the future since it emphasizes the very resources that make the city attractive to existing residents—the ocean and beach …”
“Easy and convenient pedestrian connections will be available from every neighborhood to help children get safely to schools and parks.”
From General Plan Land Use Element:
“Beach Access and Activity: …the community expressed an overwhelming preference for an active waterfront development strategy, which provides opportunities for activities and uses to be more integrated with the ocean. … Access to the beach will be enhanced through … open space, parking, and amenities …”
General Plan Land Use Policy: “2-G.20 Develop an active ocean waterfront, with new growth accommodated west of Interstate 5, to enable residents and visitors to enjoy more opportunities for … recreating along the coastline. Develop public gathering places and recreational opportunities along the coastal corridor.”
The City’s Park and Recreation Master Plan includes many areas of direction that strongly support a coastal park west of interstate 5 in South Carlsbad. Many of the most important park facilities and program needs identified in the City’s Park and Recreation Master Plan could be most efficiently addressed with a coastal park in the Ponto area. There are also significant and unique opportunities to create both public/private and public/public partnerships that would not only help reduce City recreation costs but also expand and create unique and special recreational program opportunities currently identified in the City’s Park and Recreation Master Plan.
A Ponto city coastal park also implements a major General Plan policy which calls for an active waterfront and creates solutions to long standing Local Coastal Program policy and State Parks Campground issues. There are very unique and special land use compatibility opportunities and synergy from a coastal city park in south Carlsbad and Ponto area that are inline and implement high priorities identified in the City’s Park and Recreation Master Plan.
In summary, Carlsbad has a once in a generation opportunity to create very special coastal South Carlsbad Ponto Beach Park in South Carlsbad. This opportunity will be true to our Carlsbad Community Vision and General Plan and the heart and soul of our Growth Management Plan’s standard of matching park demand with park supply within a particular park district. We believe this request benefits not only coastal Southwest Carlsbad and South Carlsbad but all of Carlsbad and is more consistent with the City General Plan, Growth Management Program, and Parks Master Plan and will result in a better, more valued and more sustainable City.
We are a key Stakeholder in Ponto and the Poinsettia Shores Maser Plan and Local Coastal Program. We have been hearing similar concerns from other Carlsbad citizens about coastal beach park access and request that the City Council seize this opportunity to work with us to establish a comprehensive and open community discussion about the strategic acquisition of a coastal South Carlsbad Ponto Beach Park for South Carlsbad citizens and businesses. We also request before a solution to the 2012 Southwest quadrant park standard deficit is created we have an open citizen discussion with the Citizens of coastal Southwest Carlsbad on how that solution can better address the park demand created in the Southwest Park District with a better park supply created within that District. Like our City Park Standard says: “3.0 acres of Community Park or Special Use Area per 1,000 population within the Park District”. We request that a coastal City Park West of Interstate 5 be developed in South Carlsbad to be fair and equitable and to meet the needs of South Carlsbad for a coastal City Park to serve all the Citizens of South Carlsbad. This can take advantage of special land use synergies to help promote public/private collaboration, create added property and transit occupancy tax revenues for the City by creating a valuable and synergistic amenity [where none now exists] for over half the City and over 26,000 homes, along with providing support to our City’s visitor serving businesses and activities. It is the right and smart thing to do.
The San Pacifico Community Association and PBDRC as key Stakeholders in Ponto wish to be a key participant any proposed City or CCC actions regarding these subjects, and would like to meet with you to see how we can discuss and advance this for the benefit of South Carlsbad Citizens. As we are citizen volunteers we sincerely appreciate advance notification to allow for preparation and coordination with our work lives and to communicate back to our members and other South Carlsbad Citizens. We wish to be notified in advance of any proposed actions related to the issues in thus letter. The San Pacifico Community Association contact information is:
San Pacifico Community Association and PBDRC
c/o Walters Management, Lee Leibenson
9665 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 300
San Diego, CA 92123
[email protected]
The Ponto Beachfront Development Review Committee conducted the research cited in this letter.
Along with general communications, please contact the following if you have technical questions regarding this letter. Key Committee contact information is:
[email protected]
[email protected];
[email protected]
Thank you for your consideration.
San Pacifico Community Association Board of Directors:
Mr. Jim Nardi [email protected]
Mr. Bill Van Cleve [email protected]
Mr. Adriaan van Zyl [email protected]
Mr. Tony Ruffolo [email protected]
Mr. Chas Wick [email protected]
cc:
Board of Directors
California Coastal Commission at [email protected] and [email protected]
Carlsbad Coastline Project
Outreach Meeting Form
Date: February 10, 2022
Organization: San Diego County Bicycle Coalition
Attendees: William Rhatigan (Advocacy Manager), Andy Hanshaw (Executive Director)
Project Team:
Nathan Schmidt (Transportation Planning and Mobility Manager), Katie Hentrich (Climate Action Plan Administrator), Tom Frank (Transportation Director), Nikki Matosian (Community Relations Manager), Tiffany Metti (Public Outreach Team), Jessica Ceja (Public Outreach Team) Summary: The Bicycle Coalition is most interested in safe, connected bike networks to help increase ridership, as well as centrally located bike stations and lockers, public restrooms, and updated buffered lanes.
Concerns: • Bike safety.
• Car speeds.
• Turning conflicts.
• Parking that does not conflict with bike lanes.
• Continuity with other coastal cities.
Priorities/Needs • Slow vehicle speeds to 20-25 mph.
• Utilize mid-block crosswalks.
• Put in a multi-use path for inclusivity and a softer surface walking trail.
• Make a natural surface path for less impact on knees. • Provide secure bicycle parking and centrally located bike stations. • Provide safe bike storage facilities/bike lockers.
• Include charging opportunities for e-vehicles and e-bikes. • Include public restrooms.
Requests: • Maintain a large connected recreational corridor that has continuity with other coastal cities.
• Think of riders of all ages and abilities.
• Maintain buffered bike lanes.
• Would support protected bikeways.
• Design a space where people can take transit through the coast. • Conduct climate planning.
• Conduct Ciclovias (open street events).
Questions: • Will we be seeing drafts of the Climate Action Plan? Next Steps: Provide updates on later phases.
Carlsbad Coastline Project
Outreach Meeting Form
Date: February 26, 2022
Organization: San Pacifico
Attendees:
Michael and Bonnie Bart, Jon Prentice, John Gama, Pam and Tom Ferraro, John Sherritt, Dale Ordas, Carol Lageder, Kevin Smith, Blair Ruffner, Vickey Syage, Jane Naskiewicz, Steve and Barbara Oetting, Bonnie Shaw, Bill Bradford, James Shaw, Jodi Jones, Chas Wick.
Project Team:
Tom Frank (Transportation Director), Nathan Schmidt (Transportation and Mobility Manager), Tiffany Metti (Public Outreach Team), Anika Fisch (Public Outreach Team)
Summary: San Pacifico wants Ponto Park developed. San Pacifico would like to see action taken on their ongoing request for a park for nearly a decade. San Pacifico wants to see significant park and open space deficits addressed.
San Pacifico wants a place for children to play. San Pacifico wants safer intersections and pedestrian crossings, improved coastal access, less congestion, improved safety for bicyclists and trail connectivity. San Pacifico wants to ensure that traffic from all development in process, approved and future will be adequately studied and considered as part of planning. San Pacifico does not want the area deemed for visitor-serving commercial and wants to protect the character of the area.
Concerns: • 7-acre park deficit and a 30-acre open space deficit. • Lack of action to build Ponto Park.
• Increased traffic and congestion.
• Adding more traffic in addition to that added by
approved/planned and new residential and hotel projects. • Visitor-serving commercial.
• Negatively impacting the character of the area.
• Creating Pacific Beach or Mission Beach.
• Getting across Carlsbad Blvd. safely
Priorities/Needs • Provide park space.
• Keep it open and natural.
• Decrease congestion.
• Improve safe access to the beach.
• Provide a footbridge over Carlsbad Blvd. and the train tracks. • Separate walking and biking paths.
• Do not include/zone area for visitor-serving commercial. • Implement sand retention measures.
• Create barriers for bicycle lanes.
Requests: • Listen to citizens and build Ponto Park.
• Utilize funding for Ponto Park.
• Honor the in-lieu park fees that members of the community paid when they bought their homes by building Ponto Park.
• Invest in the community need for a place for children to play. • Fix the dangerous Avenida Encinas intersection.
• We do not want to live in Irvine.
• Do not do what Cardiff and Leucadia did for cycling.
• Do not allow fences to be built along the coast that prevent use of the coast.
• Connect the existing walking path/trail around the San Pacifico community and on the east side of the 5 now to improve quality of life.
• Do not include underground tunnels, which are dangerous. • Do not include electric bikes.
• Improve accessible, safe parking.
• Include access for elderly.
Questions: • How does your plan fit in with what the residents, taxpayers have already said?
• How are you going to improve access to state property? • How does long-term sea level rise impact the planning, design and timing?
• Is the grant restricted to design this one-mile stretch, or can it be used for other purposes?
• How will traffic studies adequately consider traffic volumes generated by new residential and hotel developments, including those in process of being built, approved, and planned? • Is the right of way going to become visitor-serving commercial? • Is there an automatic default for the land?
• Would you consider putting solid barriers to separate the cars to improve bike safety as it relates to drifting?
• If it is going to take that long, how are the effects of sea level rise and the findings from the 2017 study going to play into that knowing that the project is going to take so much time? • Do you have data that reflects demographics and is the average age in Carlsbad going up?
• How are you incorporating the elderly generation in your mobility plan?
Next Steps: Provide updates on later phases.
Carlsbad Coastline Project
Outreach Meeting Form
Date: February 28, 2022
Organization: Carlsbad Seapointe Resort
Attendees: Tim Stripe (Co President at Grand Pacific Resorts), Diane Proulx (Special Assistant Grand Pacific Resorts)
Project Team:
Nathan Schmidt (Transportation Planning and Mobility Manager), David Graham (Chief Innovation Officer), Gary Barberio (Deputy City Manager, Community Services), Nikki Matosian (Community Relations Manager), Tiffany Metti (Public Outreach Team), Anika Fisch (Public Outreach Team) Summary: Carlsbad Seapointe Resort is interested in creating more beach access.
Carlsbad Seapointe Resort would like the area to be configured so that the park and beach are next to each other. Carlsbad Seapointe Resort wants to see public facilities and some food and drink options.
Concerns: • Bifurcation.
• Overnight parking on Surfside Lane.
Priorities/Needs • Improve beach access.
• Enhance public access to stairways.
• Add bathroom and shower facilities.
• Add parking.
• Add buffered bike lanes.
• Include more paths.
• Include food/drink and beach rentals to electrify the area.
Requests: • Place the beach and grass area next to each other. • Push lanes to the east to create a large amenity parcel. • Would support an overlook on Surfside Lane for recreational use. • Close the north on-ramp.
• Keep cars low profile.
Questions: • Does the plan include slowing down traffic and added parking on Carlsbad Blvd.?
• Could the parcel of land that we control, between Carlsbad Seapointe Resort and the manufactured home park to the north, be incorporated? Could that space be used for a parking garage or other parking improvements?
• Does this increase open space to meet our growth plan? Next Steps: Provide updates on later phases.
Carlsbad Coastline Project
Outreach Meeting Form
Date: February 2, 2022
Organization: Sierra Club
Attendees: Simon Freedman (Sierra Club Member), Karl Aldinger (My Generation Sierra Club Conservation Organizer)
Project Team:
Tom Frank (Transportation Director), Katie Hentrich (Climate Action Plan Administrator), Nikki Matosian (Community Relations Manager), Melina Meza (Public Outreach Team), Tiffany Metti (Public Outreach Team) Summary: The Sierra Club is most interested in bike improvements and safety. The Sierra Club is in favor of more open space by the ocean and would like to see a rural setting with trees, restrooms, improved transit access and safe bike storage, mobility hubs.
Concerns: • Bike safety.
Priorities/Needs • Consider the rise of e-bikes and create separate paths for e-bikes and peddle bikes.
• Consider Recumbent style bicycles in planning.
• Ensure enough area for bicycle paths and possible buffer space for changing bike uses.
• Set up transit to make it easier for people to use bikes. • Biking will be part of people's future. Every other street will be a corridor for bike ridership. It would be a lost opportunity if this is not a priority for the project.
Requests: • Provide separate paths for pedestrians and bicycles. • Include a decomposed granite path for walking.
• Include restrooms.
• Ensure easily identifiable bike lanes, similar to ADA signs. • Add green paint to cyclist areas.
• Add mobility hubs and options for safe bike storage.
• Add trees to protect from heat.
• Do not combine dog walkers on bike paths.
Questions:
Next Steps: Provide updates on later phases.
Carlsbad Coastline Project
Outreach Meeting Form
Date: February 17, 2022
Organization: Solamar
Attendees:
Lia Keane (Property Manager), Ken Barnett, Jim Davidson, Bill Fenner, Julie Martel, Mary Toohey, Richard Toohey, Bruce Hanson, Linda Hanson, Sheila Dean, Max Cavender, Mike Hunter, Joy Page, Donna Page, John Toth, Jim Kenny, Mark Warner, Frances Bonner, Karen Pearson, Nina Luisi, Sherrie Pecho, Mary Jensen, Clint Stanley
Project Team:
Tom Frank (Transportation Director), Nikki Matosian (Community Relations Manager), Tiffany Metti (Public Outreach Team), Jessica Ceja- (Public Outreach Team)
Summary: Solamar would like to see the area developed in a way that improves safety, access and conservation. Solamar would like to see comprehensive and coordinated planning in which views are maintained and parking, congestion and noise is minimized.
Concerns: • Congestion.
• Noise levels.
• Views.
• Property value.
• Safe crossings.
• Pollution.
• Cliff erosion.
• Park safety.
• Electric bikes and scooters on the beach.
Priorities/Needs • Coordinate with the state.
• Improve beach access.
• Do not include buildings and commercial.
• Protect views and property values.
• Manage speeds.
• Reduced parking setback from the coast.
• Provide safe buffered bike lanes and pedestrian walkways. • Add more walking areas
Requests: • Install flashing lights at intersections.
• Implement creative thinking for parking.
• Prevent congestion and trash that comes with parking lots. • Limit people parking in Recreational Vehicles across the street. • Do not build a wall near homes.
• Replenish sand/beach.
• Restore Coastal Sage.
• Preserve native plants/natural habitat, including raptor hunting grounds.
• Incorporate the quadrant of land below Solamar, if possible. • Meet with Native American tribes.
• Shrink the drive to two lanes to make it more of a scenic drive.
Questions: • Will the redesign put the southbound lanes at the same level/elevation as homes and will this impact views?
• Is there any thought on lowering the road on the north? • Are roundabouts being considered?
• Of the 60 acres, how much is incorporated from Solamar to Island way?
• How far from the cliff will we be able to use?
• What would happen to current undesignated trails down to the beach?
• Are you building a wall like they do next to freeways? • When the power plant is gone, how many acres are there? Will this be connected?
• Will the project in the Terramar area be completed first? • How close are you working with the transportation and environment group?
• How many people are evaluating this project?
• What is the timeline?
• How will you keep parks safe and reduce illegal activity? Next Steps: Provide updates on later phases.
Carlsbad Coastline Project
Outreach Meeting Form
Date: February 16, 2022
Organization: Surfrider Foundation
Attendees: Mitch Silverstein (Policy Coordinator), Ben Rubenson (Volunteer), Stephanie Lee (Executive Committee Member)
Project Team:
Nathan Schmidt (Transportation and Mobility Manager), Katie Hentrich (Climate Action Plan Administrator), Nikki Matosian (Community Relations Manager), Tiffany Metti (Public Outreach Team), Jessica Ceja (Public Outreach Team)
Summary: The Surfrider Foundation is most interested in preserving beaches, creating buffers for sea level rise, increasing beach access and safety. The Surfrider Foundation indicated that it makes sense to move the road for more open space and buffers related to sea level rise.
Concerns: • Sea level rise.
• Access and safety.
• Development that takes away from open space and impacts the environment.
Priorities/Needs • Focus on environmental sustainability, beach preservation and access.
• Discuss sea level rise as a threat.
Requests: • Add open space.
• Preserve unobstructed views.
• Carefully monitor any commercial being considered.
• Only add commercial if it complements the area, such as potentially mom and pop shops, etc.,
• Do not add hotels or other similar development.
Questions: • Sea level rise as a threat seemed to be buried a bit in the materials, why?
• I saw the 30% design language. What is it?
• What is the debate going to be with the city and state? • What will happen with the campground?
• Will the grant information be available to the public? • Does that grant work move independently?
• Can you help me understand how results of the survey will be used?
Next Steps: Provide updates on later phases.
Carlsbad Coastline Project
Outreach Meeting Form
Date: February 23, 2022
Organization: Terramar
Attendees:
Dan Walsh (Association President), Nadine Villalobos (Association Secretary), Mike Davis, Bob Pritchard, Laura Keany, Cathy Pritchard, Greg Hallinan, Jed Arrogante, Dana and Kent Whitson, Robert Hannahs, Ron Riccitelli, Sandra Hrna, Paul Miller, C. Ecilannett, David Ebershoff, Britta Wilson, Joannie
Project Team:
Tom Frank (Transportation Director), Nikki Matosian (Community Relations Manager), Tiffany Metti (Public Outreach Team), Anika Fisch (Public Outreach Team)
Summary: Terramar is interested in preserving natural beauty, enhancing pedestrian access, smart parking implementation and minimizing congestion. Terramar wants to preserve the character of the area and is concerned about commercialization.
Concerns: • Lack of public parking.
• Parking overflow into neighborhoods and related safety issues. • Concerned that a public park or tourism-serving commercial would make the area into another Pacific Beach, Mission Beach or Ocean Beach, which is not desired.
• Palomar Airport Road congestion.
Priorities/Needs • Preserve the natural beauty.
• Create a large natural path.
• Improve access.
• Alleviate traffic congestion.
• Add a pedestrian bridge.
Requests: • Separate parking away from the community. Provide alternative parking options. Limit parking in the neighborhood. Issue parking permits for residents. Think through parking. More parking for beachgoers.
• Minimize the idea that the coast has to be for commuting. • Create a bypass commuter route around Terramar, west of railroad tracks, connecting at south end of Palomar Airport Road. • Limit time people can park 2-3 hours max, no parking 9 pm to 5 am. • No motor homes or campers which park all day reducing the number of people who can come enjoy, have loud generators. • Minimize benches which can be used for sleeping.
Questions: • Will the team provide concepts?
• Are there any discussions about resolving congestion at Palomar Airport Road?
Next Steps: Provide updates on later phases.
As we look at the project along Carlsbad Blvd south of Cannon past Palomar Airport Road to la Costa please limit the ability of campers, large vehicles to take over parking from morning to night. Here are a few pictures from today along Carlsbad Blvd along the coast. Campers have stairs infringing on the sidewalk, extended beyond standard parking towards the bike lane, acting as this space is a campground vs. a public street. The dirt lot at Palomar Airport is the home to a host of oversized vehicles taking up space for standard vehicles.
Thank youll
This is an example of what I would prefer not to happe n wit h additional parking, campe rs, trailers running generato rs, infringing on walkways. As you can hear in the attac hed video the generators can be very noisy.
Much prefe r people to bri ng a chair and find a nice spo t to enjoy nature. Walk a nd run natu ral trails. Thank you for letting us provide input.
Carlsbad Coastline Project
Outreach Meeting Form
Date: March 7, 2022
Organization: Visit Carlsbad
Attendees:
Kim Sidoriak (President and CEO), Yolanda Hartley (Director of Sales at Home2Suites by Hilton Carlsbad), Michelle Zwirek (Director of Sales and Marketing, Omni La Costa Resort and Spa)
Project Team: Nathan Schmidt (Transportation and Mobility Manager), Nikki Matosian (Community Relations Manager), Jessica Ceja (Public Outreach Team) Summary: Visit Carlsbad is interested in more usable space adjacent to the ocean and more pedestrian areas.
Concerns: • Maintaining the character of Carlsbad.
Priorities/Needs • Improved pedestrian and bicycle accessibility.
Requests: • Keep the road during peak hours and for non-peak hours have it used for bikes and pedestrians.
Questions: • What is the timing of this project?
• Are you keeping bike trails in same area?
• Is there push back for the single lane option?
• What has been the biggest pushback?
• Is development proposed?
Next Steps: Provide updates on later phases.
APPENDIX H
Additional Input Documents
NO ON CHANGES IN # MILE CARLSBAD COASTLINE!!l
Kasha Cohen
lr C mrnurncatmns
RHt"r'tlLll P-:ilLL11 Cdrl.sibod &n,;:;il Relenlion ~ years I E-, Reply I
uOI "> 2117/21}2.J.
APPENDIX H
Reply All ➔ Forward 17
lmJ</ll/20cl 11 Jl AM
0 PARK, NO PARKING, NO LIGHTS IAS IN ALL YOUR PARKS), LEI\V E THE NATURAL SPACES, FAU NA AN D HORA ALONE! DO NOT KEEP TRYING TO CHANGE THE NATURA L ENVIRONMEN T, KILL OFF TH E ANIMALS W HO THRIVE IN TH IS AREA i NO WE DO NOT CARE FOR ANO TH ER PARK ... TOO LATE ... GO FI ND PARKS ELSEW HERE. OUR PARK ISTI-I E GREATEST PARK Tt-lATEVER COUL D BE ... TH E PACIFIC OCEAN . NO ON TH IS CHANG E! AND ... LISTEN UP ... $$5S$ ... I STOP DONATING TO ANYONE ONBOARD WITH T HIS PLAN!! !! ! KASAl~A COHEN
CAUTION; Do not ope n attachme nt s oc clicl< on links unless you recoanize the sender and know the con tent is safe .
The old 101 highway.
•
BiH Pitts
To Co 1 111 L1 11l.duun::•
11Y.ei1non Polr{) Cacrsoa,i El".ail Ret<'rrtion (2 year,, © You repned to tl>is ma<sage on 2/9/ l022 9:32 AM
Leave it alone.
'-"l>TH 2./9/2024
fhat. stret ch located nort h of La Costa Ave and south of Oceanside is as it was w hen I was a child. I am 72 now.
It is unto uched fo r the most part an d should stay the same . t:) R ply All ➔ F rward 11 :J
Wed 2/9(2022 936 AM
When you nger peop le com e for a visit, I take th em on thi s drive so that they can get a feel for wh at it mu st have been like in the 50' s! Leave it alone, please.
Tha r's the be au ty o f rt.
Thank you .
Wlll iam Pitts
• ~cTW o mm urnca 10ns
Retem,on Policy Carlstiact Email Rete n:ion (2 years)
(D You K_Plied to lhrs rne»ag e on 2/8/ 2022 3;58 PM,
If the'i'li arE problems with how this message is displayed, click here to view rt Tn a web browser. ~ Reply I <f_J Reply All
Expue, 2/8/2 024
Click here 10 download pictures. To help protect your privacy, Ourloo ~ pre1ented automatic download of somE pictures in this message. what a bunch of BS, no one has a say. No o ne has listened me anytime I have tried to speak . You treat people like garbage
APPENDIX H
Re: Have your say: Carlsbad 's southern coastline
cheryl griffiths fJ Reply
To
Reten 101'1 .ioi.~ Carlsbad Email Rerem:mri (2 yearsJ &1,1 e~ 2/5/2024 © Vou repii-ed to this message on 2f1/20'l2 J:28 PM
c11ct. her, to download p1ctmes To help protect you pnvacy Outlook prevented automallc download of some picture, 1n tins me.sage love this idea! l South Carlsba d needs t his recreational spot.
Cheryl Griffiths
Re: Have your say: Carlsbad's southern coastline
• Daniel Bollin!
lo (om,rnmicatiom
I fJ Reply I <~ Reply All
P..e•.,irtllor Po,,q f iitlsbad Emaiil ~i=r.en110-r, (2 ye.Mil =-pre• .?r.i/202.4 Q) ><lliow 11p. Start by Monda)', -,bruory7 , Wc2, :Jue oy Monday, rebrua,y 7, 202.1.
If lhere: are, probtem:s ;.iith ho"-' th1~ mUiagE' 1~ cllsr,Jated, r.lit~ he1 e: tn l'iPI\I ii il'I a "'eb rn'n">e1 Cilek her~ to do!Nntoad piaure:;-. To he,lp prot~a '(OUr priva-:y, OL'tb o l:: pr~ve.tted .ltrtorna1i! do.Nnload of s.ome plcr-uces in th..s. messsge_ ➔ farwaro IL
Sal 2/5/b122 9:1b AM
This is a very biased presentation, Using words like "ca r-centric" is a signal for a left-wing agenda. Carlsbad is car-centric, and that's fine . Sure, ther e are lots of people blcyding, but are th ey doinB erran ds th at most people use th eir ve hicles for, lilce groc ery shopping? When is the last time you saw someone bicycling along the 101 with a bag of groceries? I don't want all that junk like anwork alld shops, etc. along the beach, Leave it natural. You know? Like just plain nature? And all of tl1ese changes you propose will allow us to ''enjoy" tire coast? Excuse me, but we enjoy it a lot, just as it is, And the road doesn't need to be move d away from t ile coast. This is wrong . The part of the road tha t dips close to sea leve l can be raised, which is a much cheaper alternative tha n what you propose.
Please send an apology to everyone to whom you sentthis email. It is insulting . .Regards,
Daniel Boi li ni
Re: Have you r say: Carlsbad's southern coastline
•
SB
To
Rncrtfor, ~••trt Ca••maJ Email R~Len1100 (2 Y~•l>I
© follo w up Comp letr:.d on TlJesaay Februar1 B 202..2.
Yo" replied lo il, i, ,n.,;age on 2/812022 5;21 PM.
If tl1£re ate prt.iD.lem:; 1'!ith liow th-i.i me:;;.;ge is displayed dick hEra re vie1A ll 111 ~ web brovf!;er, :;p,r.,,; 2/4/N24
I ~J Reply I ~ Reply All I ➔ f orward 11 ·· ·
Fri ?}4/20l2 9:00 Ptvl
CliLk here to do~"Klload pictures:. To hQlp protlK! yo.Jt prwd~ . outtocl prQYented autoroat:C d0¥1nload e r some piaures In tlH;: rn2;sage.
People move to Carlsbad as it one of th e last areas with untouch ed nature. Why is the city determi ned to ruin the charm of th e area rn make it look more like dense Encinit as or Orange County?
APPENDIX H
Carlsbad open space
Karyn Stoffels ~ Reply I ~ Rer,ry All ➔ Forw rd ID
Tn C □ m m u n ,rat i □ ns Thu /27/2022 5:56 ftM
••1~ouon •olio/ Catl,b~d ~mall REt~ntio11 (2 ye«1s] E>p,re, l/27/2CZ~ Q) Y~u replied to 1hi, r,,e;so,1e or 1/2 7/1022 10:22 AM we rould not '12f"i fy Ule- Identity of th~ s:et1der. Clic.:k befE! 10 Jea--11 rum~.
You sent a survey a bo ut what to do ,vith the ope n s pace a long the coas t_ I pro pose d leaving it alone , but the city o f car lsbad ltkes to over deve lop any open space, so tha t isn't going to happen.
Instead of ask ing the p ubl ic, w hy not ask co llege students w ho a re stud yi ng la ndscape archi t ecture ~ Mira Costa, UC Davis and Cal State SLO a ll have Landscape Archit ectur e program s. These stud ents will have fresh ideas and it would be great for a school pro ject. let me know if I can help set you up with pro fessors there to coo rdinate in thi s effort.
CAUTION: Do not open c,ltachmen ts or d ick on links LJnles:s you rec osn i z:.e the sende r and know the conte nt is sa-fe.
Re: Help the city transform 60 acres of coastal land into welcoming public spaces • Pamela Chan
To COrn munfr:.a tio ni
P.19,te.,,IH:i.i Pon~.· c..a1tst.Jad ~nail Rc:terniu11 {2 yea.JS, (D You for»arded fris "110>>0g~ on 1/[//202110:18 ~M
Click ti ere to cJ011,1r1 1oad. p1dur-.i1,, To h;![p pro1.i!ct you1 prf~cy Out.lo I "') Reply
~pire, 1/26[202"-
<IE) ReplyAII -? klrwmd ID
Wed 1/2.GJW22 936i>M
Somet hi ng I did not rem em ber t o add t o su rvey w a5 tha t a coup le Times a week I wo uld drive my hand icapped e lderly mot h er t o the look o ut po int just south of Paloma r Airport Road wh ere we could park the car directly facing th e o cean w ith no obstr uctions t his was always a joy for her otherwise it was diffic ult to get her into a wheelchair get into a pathway ancl go along the ocean parallel whe re she could not tur n her head to look at the ocean very we ll so I ho pe in you r ne w p lan ts tha t you still provide some · ty pe of drive up Vista poi nt fac ing th e o cean. You a lso need add ition al hand icap parl<ing along the entire corridor. Also please make any path ways or trail s smooth so tha t a person in a whee lchair has a smooth ride and not a bumpy ride. Thank you
Se n t from my i Phone
Re: Have your say: Carlsbad in S years
•
MarcVo lpe
To Communications
~ Reply
Re!am,,.,n Pel ry I an,o,id Ern,111 Retentir>n •? y~er<) (D lfth (lre are problEms with how this mes sag~ 1:s ots'playr2d1 0 1&. ere to view rt in a ~ eb broHs.e.r C.llo,: hHf to download pict.1rtis.. To helo oro~ed. ynor pl'1\•acv. Outlook prE:n nted.a.utomati:::: onnlo=td o- '5.ome, p1ctu.re; in this me.ss:agf', Stop buildi ~g!
Fl/Marr:.
Re: Have your say: Carlsbad in 5 years
Winona Heather
T- Communications.
Rmrlion r~licy C-arisbau Email Retef\tion t'2 veah>
© 11 there d1"' p1ob!t!ms ith how thh IT'IEi ssage i5' ct..:.pla~1ed, dick.tte,e to ~~" it in 2 web Lro"·s~r- 'J Reply
:l.p r,; 1/21/2.02-1
( hij{ here to downloiJd p111ure.i To help prot~ct your pn...acy, Outlook prevented .3utornG-ttc do·j\'nload f 5ome pictures 1n this message <~ Reply AII
7 =c; /21 ,12022 5:20 PM
((:) Reply Al I -; Fo1Warcl
Fri 1/}1/20<2 5:47 PM
The appeal that the city has tor me is tha t houses an d streets are not crow ded like the y a re in an Diego. I' m not fill irig ou some bor ing survey. That' s all you set.
I-leather
Sent from my i Phone
From : Kent Whitson
Sent : Tuesday, February 1, 2022 3 :58 PM
To: Tom Frank <[email protected]>
Subject: 101 Alignment
Have you ever considered a by-pass route for Old 101 that would go.east of the entire Terra mar neighbor hood, west of the railroad tracks, connect at the south end at Palomar Airport Rd., and connect somewhat diagonally from cannon Rd. to t he existing 101 route along the beach.
Sincerely ..... Kent A. Whitson P.E.
(Carlsbad's first Traffic
Engineer)
From: keller tom
Se nt: Friday, Fe , :
To: Commun ications <Communication [email protected]>
Subje ct: South Carlsbad Coastal Region
Hello ,
APPENDIX H
As a Carlsbad Homeowner I would like to express my v iews about wha t I wou ld like to see h appen with the Sout h Coasta l Space. I would Jove to see a park there similar to the park on the coastline at 15th street in Def Mar. I don't know if the service shed area of il:he fu1thest south campground cou ld be incl uded but that wou ld be a great area for a park .
Could t hat serv ice area be moved to the Nort h end of the Campground where that group site 1s? They hard ly ever fill that site, and it stays vacant abou t 350 days a year. On the South1 park the view of the lagoon and beach ocea n would be a wo nderfu l place for peop le to ga,ther and even possibly host events like concerts or weddings, etc.. I thi nk it is supe r impo rtant to plan t appropria te drough t resistant trees and p lants and it would be a good idea to include some trees to attract some raptors. An osprey, sharp shinned hawk, and red tailed hawks would help w ith the cliff erosio n. The squ irre ls run rampant througho ut the campgrou nd and have burrowed through the cliff increasing the rate of decline expo n entially. There is one reel tailed hawk that goes in there seldom but we need a Jot more.
Carlsbad neve r reaffy comp lete.cl the Coasta l Rail Trail prnject years ago. It wou ld be ve ry nice to include bike lanes and pedestr ian lanes. This project will have to do the right thing by that.
Thank you for your time an d considera tion and Happy Friday ! Tom Keller (Poinset tia Cove Resident, HOA Presiden t, and l andscape Chair) Tom Keller DDS
Dolphin Pediatric Dentistr y
On Feb 17, 2022, at 10:31 AM, Carlsbad Web Team <webmaster @ca1lsbadc.:i.gov> wro te:
Message submitted from the <Carlsbad, CA> website.
Site Visitor Name: Clint Stanley
Site Visitor Email
Hi Tom, I have a home in Solamar the fourth one from t he North on Oceanview Dr. I'm trying to follow on zoom but th e PowerPoint is no longer visible. My concern is t hat with the curre nt north bound lanes at the same level as my home, will the redesign put the south bound lanes at that same level? If so we will lose a great part of our ocean view tha t has been in my family fo r 30 years. I am also concerned about increased traffic noise. That is my on ly real question, I wish fo r great beach access for all but hopefu lly not at the expense of my view and futu re property value. - ---Origin~I Messa -- -
From: Mike Hunter
Sent: Thursday, March 17, 2022 2:25 PM
To: Tom Frank <[email protected]>
Subject: South Carlsbad coastline project
Hi Tom,
We were at the meeting with Solamar HOA last month discussing the s Carlsbad coastline project.
Do you have any idea when the project will begin and how long it will ta ke? Has a plan been made yet as to what will happen in fro nt of Solamar?
Would you mind emailing us a link to anything that is available, Thanks
Mike Hunter
CAUTION: Do not open att achments or click on links unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
APPENDIX H
From : Carlsbad Web 1 eam <[email protected]~dc- .gQv> Sent '. Wednesday , February 23, 2022 9 .29 PM
To: Co1nmunkatton.s <Commur,Jcat,[email protected]:
SubJect : Feedback for Carlsbad, CA
You have received this feedba ck from Roben S Pritchard for the following pa&e:
https ·//www .carlsbadc..gov/dep;1rtments/rtreets traff,dtrifficiterramar <1rt!!,i-co.stal·1mprovement•pro,ect
APPENDIX H
HeOo· Grateful for Nikki, Tom and the team for ittending the Terramar Association Meeting tomgh t. We live on Shore Dnve and would lllte to provide SOIT\e input on the proposed project south of Marn ano Dr,ve. Ukethe Jdea of a bypass Lo help traffic avoid the neighborhood as n,entloned by Kent and others. We hear the loud motorcycles, cars, trucks at all hours. Any project should not Increase the amoun t of traffic on Carlsbad Blvd. Thls stretch is so beaut iful, welcome the thought o f natura l walking trails, preser11ing the openoess, not creating;, t rowded area . Very mucl'I do not lik.e the idea of concrete 01 aJphalt pat king areas on the west side, If we ,nust add please put on east side of Carls-bad Blvd. l(eep Lhe area as natural as possible. Limit lime peop le can parl< 2·3 hours ma>t., no park ing 9 pm lo 5 .1m, No motor homes or campers which park all day reducing the number of people who un come enjoy. Minimize benches which can be used for sleeping, along Carlsbad Blvd we alreadyha11e lsS\Jes with peop le sleeptn11 on/under flat benches and the round sittlog areas between Cann()II aod P,ne heading north. Ke-ep IL from being an area to congregate, Lile parking area by Palomar Road has a dlrt are. which at times gets 011ercrowded. keep it an area were people come, Wilk, brmg their own chairs sit and enJoy the sunset . Not an area full of c.trs and trucks. I do not think adding park1ng in this area wnl pull people from parking on El Arbol Drive, Los Robles Drive or Shore Orive, Please , please do not ln~rease traffi c and over crowd our area. Keep the natvr.if look and feel . Th,ink yo11 for .isking for our input. 8e5t Wishes
•
Cc
~ Reply <t:) Reply Alt
© a .. k t,.,,~ i.:, downlo.td pl<;l,.J1U lo ~JI p""-'"<1 y.,.,r P'"olCY Outlool< p,"""nlt'd .auton...ucdowslo.ld of 10111e piuu,es '" 1hi1 "'""""9" Nikki:
Camper with Gen video MOV v
MOVFile
APPENDIX H
-, Foiwa,d
Sun 2/27 /20ll <; 10 /.M
This is ,m example of what I would prefer not to happen with addit ional pafking, campers, trailers running generators, Infringing on walkways. As you can hear in lhe attached video the generators can be very noisy.
Muth prefer people to bring a cho1ir and find a nice spot to enjoy nature . Walk and run natural trails. Thank you for lett ing us provide Input,
APPENDIX H
l.
~ Camper with Gen video.MOV v
Q .MOVfne
Bob Pritchard
Oversized Vehicles/ Camper Parking Issues • Carlsbad Blvd - Palomar Airport • La Costa - Rol:<,rt. Pmcha,d--
w 1 ■ u,UJM111~
T ,tt.,"1 Meti f• .les%!1 tej;l
l(f1a,t ~- Uf.l:ibaCI Em.,i~C-!l"!lCln/2.WJI.C!
NiUI, Tltt;)ny, Jessia:
r .. ,112/J/J2.11
APPENDIX H
A.s we klok at the project along Carlsbad Blvd south o( Carmon past Paloma r Alrpo,c Road to ta Costa please limit t"8 ablli tv of campers, large .,..ehlc!e-\ to take over part ing from morni ng to night, Here are a few pictures from rod11y il()nr, Carlsbad Blvd along the. c~sf. Camper~ hivt-stalr;t 1nr,1ng11,e on the s.idtvialk, ewtended beyol"ld ~undard l)ark!ng towards rhe blkt-lane, ecting •.s this space 1s a campgrout'lcl v.s. s public:
1tree t , The d trt IQ.tat Pwk>mwr Airport ls. the home to 11 host ot OVCl"$iz.~ vohide s hik ing up JPfC<e for st,nd.ird Yehi¢1ei,. ,- •·- Ill
Thank youll
Bob Prltc.hilrd
APPENDIX H
FW: Carlsbad Parks Commission - 3-21 -22 mtg on PARK OPPORTUNITIES ALONG SOUTH CARLSBAD'S COASTLINE & Parks Master Plan Update - Public ...
A Lan<o Schul~
w -, •t~1l'.Ji, IC~ian
Gr,, 0:-n. i,.tc,~p p,.;,~rfl.-v--•~m
~ ~ l'l)l•t'- ,.,,...J,.;,11[rfi/'ll1!N t,n;,1 VM"
'°""""' ,..,
Nikki
lOl I Au~ SPOt..!:1,ot.nh C..rM>adPo nt.o &a11t:h Patlr lttc~ of~• Cl~l)df 255 01
S"~111 UIV" ~s~ llnQ c.rti;b.id Dt.CP UI~ plannvd l~)·,-ofO S .u1 F1;mt1;1.pa t f ll OI
p; asil! !'Ct! lt':11s c~l r and-att.ched nlr..iilbcut PO( ModiflcabDn/lleloaallon Costs.
P~a.:s~ ll!! me no.-Y If vau h~v!! ot~ r d.tta or, this.or h:avll!! ;1ny qtH!stiollsa" W d.t,1 I wa!I ,ab.h! to gathi'!'r. unce
Fnim. : Lani=e Schult
Sent : Tuesday, Ma
To: 'parksandrec:@lcar'5b>dc.>,go,'
Cc: 'Cl"'°"""'l @ca,lsbada.go,'; 'C"rt)I CletW; c..n. lloyle'; 'Ros,, [email protected]>I' ; 'lnfo@pooplelo,J)Of'llo,o,m' ; 'PtaN..-, Erl~ ' Subject: RE: Catlsba:l Parb Commissioo • 3-l l-22 mtg on PARK CJl'PORTI,JNmES ALONG SOLirn CARI.SllAD'S WASTLIN~ !l Park, MA- Pian ll;,d•"' • Pubfl< data and input □ear Plfl:5 CommwMJn .
➔ ta,w.nd
Tltiiloll yuu l~r Jl1h1~lngtu me ,,olnl oul ~e'\' poh,u lf1 the 3 da l;il t ij~~ 1,nd 1 i.upgott leitt~"'VOu1 re ltew ~cti ·•e h,, P unt.ot. ■ rlib6CI Cillte~ ,e~~•rtht!d 1nU P1C1Ylded, M I ~1'11lti:)nit-d .. t them ~ t,11-1.md m rny ~n,.111, I .,.m ilv.lliib la. to ..iruwe.---n~ qt.ll!s:tkim. you m.w h•\14!', W& ilarted in 2011 on th !! prini:iol~-'of p th11rl Alil filcts , c::ommunK:iillion r-icts to de:fln11 cihnn con54!nsus-•nd sh-1e those facts. il'lti co!lSWflSUJ" 1111ith thei □ tv ;md developers t SEe ou, lnltla.1 i!Ol 7 H!tter or reqtJl!'St to U,£! C...1\11- Ycru haa )e'Yeral q\lest1nffi ;st the meetJric t hat I could n.a~ qUID:lv prov ided ~ou mfotmarlon , as: we had done ~me cftha t raseirch already. :io l~l~erf'alJ and ettechme,,t'i try to answer 'W>ffle of your q~tt1111"1S yeste rdaY'
1. Cc:1.1tal l!fos1on h ii he 1nue a,,a wl..at erosm f'I woh occu , 1n the: full.Ire? ;i. Th. Cit._i did a·n IJ1i1 1~120-l? S.,1 bvl!!I ftwia lm piici (SlFI~ fuW1is.rrranl 1h11!i i11Wss~ 1:5.birin11: upd,1ll!!'l 1n RIT'll!!flb ID iidd'r-an. SL~ lmpgu bawd Qf1 mo~ ru rrlf',it ua11t1ft d.- 1<1.tndCA.COilst.l tcmm1ss1on !CC(} require ments. Th~d.it.i w;;is not 1m:luded 111 tl'le t.ity'6 2015 Gen.er.ii P•u'l .nd cu.nem !outdiiit:ed~ tlty P1oposfll loc:al Couti1I Plan Amiendmenl jLQIAl betor§ th~ CCC. 1he C.CC Is '¥e1yconte.tned .1bw! ~ toll e,osm . "The CCC h:n. the ut{pons ibl111~ tO ~e'l1t1 inln1 If ~rkt,xt ·• LCPA any 01y pro~CK-f'd PCH MocM hof'I/Ri:lolll!P'ITlf!flt n'IN!t. St:lltl! liiW ~nd C:ow.:UI policy. Attached is brief .wmmary of t:~y SUi da:i 1 CCC tCPA and opt:m ~Dace dat a at Pc nta/Coa:;.tal South Carlsbad. I can for\\ ard the Cstv the. e rit1re 2017 .Sli\ and ,n tml :i!OlCJ SLR 'Segment Updah!' if desln. bt thse a!"E larger file,t h.11t the CJt\l can bett~r t'JMl1 you
2.. Q.uMIIOIU on traru1tronJ"fi brt"Net!:n 4 a'KI 2 len~ at traff tt arid ~uai fl bt.ac:~ t,,3r~m« 1 a_ The 11CH. tra.fflL mrig@ on at t e,ramilr 11 ,1n e:nmpll!! of how trarJ!iiltlDns work.. A k:e'I' fa.a.or In mo11uie, rr-c>m a. 4-hme to 2·Wll!!: 10adW1t'f'h T.hl! ~ Jm1n-.1,1ian oftl'U!l 4.-tinP!. 'pa.uir .,g la~ . ElimmatJMI! uni!. lane of tl'aftic. ► n l!!ach d,r~IOn CDOCe,itn.u~ tfil~Tr. Into an~ lo1N ilnd ~hmonabng JIM!iln,: oppurh.irirbe-5 makl!! all fra.thc.pril't &ll as~ as tne slowi!!n car/truclc b. Adl!Q'Uiilte b@~ p,1rkil'ljl both now .ind tor future i;,opuli1llon/vf5"itor lf'"DW'li tS a kl!'l CCC i:nue flit!' ilt"t~ d111d fi lOD. Geo~J Compiilillbit!! Con/Elt H1efi t5 !iUTTlTTiiirltutht!! amoo nt Df H liUflB ilacf General Comparative cost-benefits of Completing PCH-PCH Modification-Ponto Park – part 1 Page 1 of 4 2022 General Comparative tax-payer Costs/Benefits of Completing PCH, PCH Modification, and Ponto Park to address planned loss of 30+ acres of Coastal Open Space Land Use at Ponto/West BL/South Carlsbad: Part 1 of 2
Key base facts regarding tax-payer Cost/Benefit comparison:
City Coastal Park Fairness: Ponto/Coastal South Carlsbad has ZERO Parks and ZERO Park acres v. 10 Coastal Parks in North Carlsbad. 62% of Carlsbad citizens and major visitor industries live in South Carlsbad with no Coastal Park. 38% of Carlsbad citizens have the entire City’s Coastal Parks. The City also falsely allowed Ponto Developers to NOT PROVIDE the required 15% unconstrained Open Space required by other developers in Carlsbad. Consequently Ponto is already developed at a density 35% higher than the rest of City.
What is missing from South PCH: The only missing components of a Carlsbad Livable (Complete) Street are adequate Coastal sidewalks/pedestrian paths. Better safer protected bike paths for the volume of bike traffic on a higher-speed roadway are highly desired. Both these missing features can be (and should have already long ago been) provided in the existing PCH configuration.
Generalized Costs: Costs come from publicly stated costs by Mayor Hall in a 2019 at Meet the Mayor Realtor luncheon at Hilton Garden Inn, City PCH Modification Cost Studies for South PCH, $13 million per mile cost for the simpler City CIP #6054 PCH Modification Project at Terramar, general City cost data from official public records requests, and vacant Ponto land costs of $1.4 to $2.4 million per acre from recent recorded land sales at Ponto.
Generalized Benefits: The number of acres and the quality and usability of each of those acres, and the number of new added beach parking for each of the known Option’s define each Option’s benefits.
There may be other unknown Options that have different benefits. The City’s 2001 PCH Modification Studies’ highest Park and Open Space Option (2001 ERA Financial Analysis “Alternative 1-parks and open space scheme”) only made possible a 4-acre Active Park north of Palomar Airport Road in North Carlsbad. The City’s 2013 PCH Concept design eliminated that 4-acre Active Park and only showed a few small open space areas with picnic tables. Any PCH Modification Benefits are limited by existing PCH constraints. See attached Part 2: City PCH map with numbered notes on various existing land use constraints from the City’s 2013 PCH Modification Design.
PCH Modification: PCH Modification does not add any new City land. Rearranging PCH land may add some usability beyond the usability of existing parkway areas along PCH. However significant land in PCH right-of-way is already constrained by habitat, slopes, and water quality detention basins. Past City Studies in 2001 and 2013 showed relatively modest changes in useable acreage from major PCH Modifications. Forever removing 2-travel lanes (over 50% of PCH capacity due to removing passing ability) will create Terramar traffic congestion, but could repurpose that City pavement for open space.
Any net usable amount of open space land will however be relativity narrow and may be modest once all constraints are accounted for. PCH Modification should be accurately compared with the existing usable and open space parkway areas in the existing PCH configuration and Ponto Park situation. See attached Part 2: City PCH map with numbered notes on various existing land use constraints from the City’s 2013 PCH Modification Design.
General Comparative cost-benefits of Completing PCH-PCH Modification-Ponto Park – part 1 Page 2 of 4
Comparative tax-payer Cost/Benefits:
1. Completing PCH & adding missing sidewalk/path and additional public parking and bike safety:
177 existing parking spaces along South Carlsbad Blvd
Existing 4 vehicle lanes and 2 bike lanes
The only missing component of “Complete/Livable Street” is a pedestrian sidewalk/path Total Cost to provide missing sidewalks per City data = $3-5 million (based on path width) Costs for desirable safety upgrade to existing bike lanes are not known Cost to add more Beach parking in abandoned PCH North and South of Poinsettia ranges from:
273 additional spaces = $ 0.76 million
546 additional spaces = $ 1.1 million
Plus an estimated $1.5 million for 2 signalized intersection upgrades for full 4-way access Cost per parking space is estimated at $19,275 to $13,899 per additional parking space Total cost: $ 3.8 to 6.1 million to provide missing sidewalk/path and add more parking + unknown amount for any desired upgrades to existing bike lanes
2. ‘2013 PCH Modification Proposal’ [AECOM 11/26/2013 Alternative Development Meeting] Total Cost is $75 million per Mayor Matt Hall. PCH Modification would be most the expensive City project so far. $75 million current cost appears consistent with 20-years of cost inflation of the basic (unmitigated environmental and traffic) 2001 costs of $26.5 to 37.3 million (in 2001dollars) identified by the City. The City’s 2001 Study indicated fully mitigated costs will be higher.
Total $75 million PCH Modification cost comes to:
$ 18.7 to 7.5 million per acre for narrow open space areas (from portions of city roadway) $872,093 per additional parking space
86 additional parking spaces created = 263 replacement spaces - 177 existing spaces removed Includes multi-use pathway (sidewalk) within primarily native/natural landscaping. Possible 50% reduction in vehicle lanes (from 4 to 2 lanes) with corresponding traffic congestion like at Terramar. Not clear if Citizens will approve spending $75 million to double traffic congestion. Includes about 4 - 10 acres for possible narrow passive Park area identified in City’s 2001 PCH Modification Studies. However City’s 2013 PCH Modification (AECOM) plans look like smaller acreage is provided.
Does not purchase any new land (only reconfigures existing City land) so requires Carlsbad Citizens to vote to expend funds per Proposition H.
2013 PCH Modification proposal did not consider and map City’ s 2017 sea level rise data to show
what areas would be lost due to sea level rise and account for any added cost and issues.
3. Ponto Coastal Park
Total Cost: $20 – 22 million to purchase and build 11-acres as Mayor Matt Hall has publicly stated $ 2 to 1.8 million per acre (per Mayor) for new and fully useable City Park area 175% to 10% more total park land than ‘PCH Modification options’ Includes adding 11-acres of new and viable parkland similar in shape (but larger in size) than Carlsbad’s Holiday Park. Site includes both habitat and E-W and N-S connections.
General Comparative cost-benefits of Completing PCH-PCH Modification-Ponto Park – part 1 Page 3 of 4 Since an Open Space land purchase per Proposition C acquisition voters exempted such purchases from Proposition H. NCA recommend the site be considered for purchase as Open Space per the City’s obligations under a lawsuit settlement.
Ponto Park’s cost savings over ‘PCH Modification’ = $55 to 53 million Ponto Park’s + adding missing sidewalks cost savings over ‘PCH Modification’ = $51 to 47 million Ponto Park’s + adding missing sidewalks + 273 additional parking spaces cost savings over “PCH Modification’ = $50.4 to 46.1 million
Ponto Park’s + adding missing sidewalks + 546 additional parking spaces cost savings over “PCH Modification’ = $50.1 to 45.8 million
4. Combining both #1-PCH Completion and #3-Ponto Park:
Combining #1 and #3 creates at cost effective and more beneficial Coastal Park-Coastal Parking- Completes Streets solution. This solution actually adds 11-acres of new City land for a needed Park, provides for a Complete PCH without increasing traffic congestion, does not forever congest PCH travel if future PCH traffic increases, adds comparatively more beach parking, and provides the City with Coastal land use and sea level rise planning flexibility to address future needs by not forever committing the City’
s PCH land to a Final solution. See map on page 4 showing land use synergy of combining #1 and #3.
$50.4 to 45.8 million in tax-payer cost savings are estimated from combining #1 & #3 compared to the estimated $75 million PCH Modification concept. Combining #1 and #3 provide all the features provided by more Benefits for a reduced
a. Ponto Park’s location allows it to use the 337-610 parking spaces created by #1 above (177 existing + 273 to 546 new parking spaces). The 337-610 parking spaces will allow Ponto Park to effectively host Carlsbad’s special community events. b. Acquiring Ponto Park’s 11-acres provides both the City and State of CA with important future land use options to address the Sea Level Rise and Coastal Erosion (SLR) planned by the City. These options are created by leaving the exiting South Carlsbad Blvd right-of-way substantially the same (except for adding needed sidewalks and using the existing Old paved roadway for parking) thus allowing future upland relocation of the Campground. If $75,000,000 is spent on #2 the likelihood this very expensive City expenditure would never be abandoned by the City to allow relocation of the Campground. c. Carlsbad’ 2017 Sea Level Rise study shows SLR will eliminate ½ of the State Campground – a high-priority Coastal land use under the CA Coastal Act. The CA Coastal Act calls for “upland” relocation of high-priority Coastal land uses due to SLR impacts. Ponto Park could also provide for “upland” relocation of the State Campground.
Part 2 of this Comparative analysis is a separate 2-page data file. This Part 2 file consists of the City’s PCH map with numbered notes to documented City data on PCH design constraints, mapping the City’s 2017 Sea Level Rise Impact Areas, and outlining the easterly 6.5 acre portion of the 11-acre Planning Area F site that could be Ponto Park for acreage comparison purposes.
General Comparative cost-benefits of Completing PCH-PCH Modification-Ponto Park – part 1 Page 4 of 4
Map 1: Cost effectiveiy using old carf.sbad 8llrd p,r,r,ement for beach , c~round & Ponto Park parkiJ1€ - Yehide access at Breakwater Rd, Poinsettia Lane, and Ponto Drive between t he
centers of
pa,kin~and
Ponto Park
central ,o.ad•.vay
linkmg inland South
Cartsl>ad to ltie Coast.
Sea Level Rise and Carlsbad’s DLCP-LUPA’s projected/planned Loss of Open Space at Ponto Page 1 of 7
Sea Level Rise and Carlsbad’s DLCP-LUPA’s projected/planned Loss of Open Space at Ponto
Introduction:
Carlsbad first documented Sea Level Rise (SLR) and associated increases in coastal erosion in a December 2017 Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Assessment (2017 SLR Assessment). Prior planning activities (2010 Ponto Vision Plan – rejected by CA Coastal Commission, and 2015 General Plan Update) did not consider SLR and how SLR would impact Coastal Open Space Land Use & CA Coastal Act ‘High-Priority’ Coastal Open Space Land Uses at Ponto. The 2017 SLR Assessment shows Open Space land and Open Space Land Uses are almost exclusively impacted by SLR at Ponto & South Coastal Carlsbad. The 2017 SLF Assessment also shows significant LOSS of Open Space land acreage and Land Uses. Most all impacted Open Space Land Uses are CA Coastal Act “High-Priority Coastal Land Uses” – Coastal Recreation (i.e. Public Park) and Low-Cost Visitor Accommodations. Existing Ponto Open Space Land Uses are already very congested (non-existent/narrow beach) and very high, almost exclusionary, occupancy rates (Campground) due to existing population/visitor demands. Future population/visitor increases will make this demand situation worst. The significant permanent LOSS of existing Coastal Open Space land and Coastal Open Space Land Use (and land) due to SLR reduces existing supply and compounds Open Space congestion elsewhere. Prior Ponto planning did not consider, nor plan, for significant SLR and current/future “High-Priority” Coastal Open Space Land Use demands.
Open Space and City Park demand at Ponto:
Open Space at Ponto is primarily ‘Constrained’ as defined by the City’s Growth Management Program (GMP), and cannot be counted in meeting the City’s minimal 15% ‘Unconstrained’ GMP Open Space Standard. Per the GMP Open Space Standard, the developers of Ponto should have provided in their developments at least 30-acres of additional ‘Unconstrained’ GMP Open Space at Ponto. City GIS mapping data confirm 30-acres of GMP Standard Open Space is missing at Ponto (Local Facilities Management Plan Zone 9).
The City of Carlsbad GIS Map on page 2 shows locations of Open Spaces at Ponto. This map and its corresponding tax parcel-based data file document Ponto’s non-compliance with the GMP Open Space Standard. A summary of that City GIS data file is also on page 2. The City said Ponto’s non-compliance with the GMP Open Space Standard was ‘justified’ by the City ‘exempting’ compliance with the Standard. The City ‘justified’ this ‘exemption’ for reasons that do not appear correct based on the City’s GIS map and data on page 2, and by a review of 1986 aerial photography that shows most of Ponto as vacant land. The City in the Citywide Facilities Improvement Plan (CFIP) said 1) Ponto was already developed in 1986, or 2) Ponto in 1986 already provided 15% of the ‘Unconstrained’ land as GMP Standard Open Space. Both these ‘justifications’ for Ponto ‘exemption’ in the CFIP were not correct.
The legality of the City ‘exempting’ Ponto developers from the GMP Open Space Standard is subject to current litigation.
The City proposes to continue to exempt future Ponto developers from providing the missing 30-acres of minimally required GMP Open Space, even though a change in Ponto Planning Area F land use from the current ‘Non-Residential Reserve” Land Use requires comprehensive Amendment of the Local Facilitates Management Plan Zone 9 to account for a land use change. City exemption is subject of litigation.
Ponto (west of I-5 and South of Poinsettia Lane) currently has 1,025 homes that per Carlsbad’s minimal Park Standard demand an 8-acre City Park. There is no City Park at Ponto. Coastal Southwest Carlsbad has an over 6.5 acre Park deficit that is being met 6-miles away in NW Carlsbad. Ponto is in the middle of 6-miles of Coastline without a City Coastal Park west of the rail corridor.
City GIS map of Ponto's (LFMP Zone 9)
Open Space:
• Light green areas meet the City's 15%
unconstrained Growth Management
Program Open Space Standard
• Most Ponto Open Space (pink hatch &
blue [water] on map) is "Constrained"
and does not meet the Standard
• Aviara - Zone 19, Ponto - Zone 9 and
Hanover/Poinsettia Shores - Zone 22
all developed around the same time
and had similar vacant lands.
• City required Aviara - Zone 19 east of
Ponto to provide the 15% Standard
Open Space. Why not Ponto? Aviara
had the same lagoon waters.
• City required Hanover & Poinsettia
Shores area Zone 22 just north of
Ponto to provide the 15% Standard
Open Space. Why not Ponto?
• Why Ponto deve lopers were never
required to comp ly with the 15%
Standard Open Space is subject to
current litigat ion
• Below is City GIS data from this map
toll
City GIS map data summary of the 15% Growth Management Standard Open Space at Ponto 472 Acres
(197 Acres)
275 Acres
X 15%
41 Acres
(11 Acres)
30 Acres
Total land in LFMP Zone 9 [Ponto]
Constrained land excluded from GMP Open Space
Unconstra ined land in LFMP Zone 9 [Ponto]
GMP Minimum Unconstrained Open Space requirement
GMP Minimum Unconstra ined Open Space required
GMP Open Space prov ided & mapped per City GIS data
Missing Unconstrained Open Space needed in LFMP Zone 9 [Ponto] to meet the City's minimum GMP Open Space Standard per City's GIS map & data 73% of the City's minimum 15% required Open Space Standard is missing due to over development of LFMP Zone 9 [Ponto]
Sea Level Rise and Carlsbad's DLCP-LUPA's projected/p lanned Loss of Open Space at Ponto Page 2 of 7 Sea Level Rise and Carlsbad’s DLCP-LUPA’s projected/planned Loss of Open Space at Ponto Page 3 of 7
Sea Level Rise impacts on Open Space and Open Space Land Use Planning at Ponto:
The City’s 2015 General Plan Update did not factor in the impacts of Sea Level Rise (SLR) on Ponto’s Open Space land. In December 2017 the City conducted the first Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Assessment https://www.carlsbadca.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=33958 . The 2017 SLR
Assessment is an initial baseline analysis, but it shows significant SLR impacts on Ponto Open Space.
More follow-up analysis is being conducted to incorporate newer knowledge on SLR projections and coastal land erosion accelerated by SLR. Follow-up analysis may likely show SLR impacts occurring sooner and more extreme.
Troublingly the 2017 SLR Assessment shows SLR actually significantly reducing or eliminating Open Space land at Ponto. SLR is projected to only impact and eliminate Open Space lands and Open Space Land Use at Ponto. The loss of Ponto Open Space land and Land Use being at the State Campground, Beaches, and Batiquitos Lagoon shoreline. The losses of these Open Space lands and land uses would progress over time, and be a permanent loss. The 2017 SLR Assessment provides two time frames near- term 2050 that match with the Carlsbad General Plan, and the longer-term ‘the next General Plan Update’ time frame of 2100. One can think of these timeframes as the lifetimes of our children and their children (2050), and the lifetimes of our Grandchildren and their children (2100). SLR impact on Coastal Land Use and Coastal Land Use planning is a perpetual (permanent) impact that carries over from one Local Coastal Program (LCP) and City General Plan (GP) to the next Updated LCP and GP.
Following are excerpts from the 2017 Sea Level Rise Vulnerability Assessment:
[Italicized text within brackets] is added data based on review of aerial photo maps in the Assessment.
Planning Zone 3 consists of the Southern Shoreline Planning Area and the Batiquitos Lagoon. Assets within this zone are vulnerable to inundation, coastal flooding and bluff erosion in both planning horizons (2050 and 2100). A summary of the vulnerability assessment rating is provided in Table 5. A discussion of the vulnerability and risk assessment is also provided for each asset category.
5.3.1. Beaches
Approximately 14 acres of beach area is projected to be impacted by inundation/erosion in 2050. … Beaches in this planning area are backed by unarmored coastal bluffs. Sand derived from the natural erosion of the bluff as sea levels rise may be adequate to sustain beach widths, thus, beaches in this reach were assumed to have a moderate adaptive capacity. The overall vulnerability rating for beaches is moderate for 2050.
Vulnerability is rated moderate for the 2100 horizon due to the significant amount of erosion expected as the beaches are squeezed between rising sea levels and bluffs. Assuming the bluffs are unarmored in the future, sand derived from bluff erosion may sustain some level of beaches in this planning area. A complete loss of beaches poses a high risk to the city as the natural barrier from storm waves is lost as well as a reduction in beach access, recreation and the economic benefits the beaches provide.
5.3.3. State Parks
A majority of the South Carlsbad State Beach day-use facilities and campgrounds (separated into four parcels) were determined to be exposed to bluff erosion by the 2050 sea level rise scenario (moderate exposure). This resource is considered to have a high sensitivity since bluff erosion could significantly impair usage of the facilities. Though economic impacts to the physical structures within South Carlsbad State Beach would be relatively low, the loss of this park would be significant since adequate space for the park to move inland is not available (low adaptive capacity). State Sea Level Rise and Carlsbad’s DLCP-LUPA’s projected/planned Loss of Open Space at Ponto Page 4 of 7
parks was assigned a high vulnerability in the 2050 planning horizon. State park facilities are recognized as important assets to the city in terms of economic and recreation value as well as providing low-cost visitor serving amenities. This vulnerability poses a high risk to coastal access, recreation, and tourism opportunities in this planning area.
In 2100, bluff erosion of South Carlsbad State Beach day-use facilities and campgrounds become more severe and the South Ponto State Beach day-use area becomes exposed to coastal flooding during extreme events. The sensitivity of the South Ponto day-use area is low because impacts to usage will be temporary and no major damage to facilities would be anticipated. Vulnerability and risk to State Parks remains high by 2100 due to the impacts to South Carlsbad State Beach in combination with flooding impacts to South Ponto.
Table 5: Planning Zone 3 Vulnerability Assessment Summary [condensed & notated]:
Asset Horizon Vulnerability
Category [time] Hazard Type Impacted Assets Rating
Beaches 2050 Inundation/Erosion, Flooding 14 acres (erosion) Moderate 2100 Inundation/Erosion, Flooding 54 acres (erosion) Moderate
Public Access 2050 Inundation, Flooding 6 access points Moderate 4,791 feet of trails
2100 Inundation, Flooding 10 access points Moderate
14,049 feet of trails
State Parks 2050 Flooding, Bluff Erosion 4 parcels [ <18 Acres] High [Campground - 2100 Flooding, Bluff Erosion 4 parcels [ >18 Acres] High Low-cost Visitor [loss of over 50% of
Accommodations] the campground &
its Low-cost Visitor
Accommodations,
See Figure 5.]
Transportation 2050 Bluff Erosion 1,383 linear feet Moderate (Road, Bike, 2100 Flooding, Bluff Erosion 11,280 linear feet High Pedestrian)
Environmentally 2050 Inundation, Flooding 572 acres Moderate Sensitive 2100 Inundation, Flooding 606 acres High
Lands
Sea Level Rise and Carlsbad’s DLCP-LUPA’s projected/planned Loss of Open Space at Ponto Page 5 of 7
l"\c,,,d c ~=..-1:Y
C e•·•o~:.o..•,:,,,-.t,,
....
figure 7: soutflern Shoraine PlaMingArEa- Year zoso
OJIIO ITOG
Sea Level Rise and Carlsbad’s DLCP-LUPA’s projected/planned Loss of Open Space at Ponto Page 6 of 7
[Figure 5 show the loss of over 50% of the campground and campground sites with a minimal .2 meter Sea Level Rise (SLR), and potentially the entire campground (due to loss of access road) in 2 meter SLF.]
Directions to analyze and correct current and future LOSS of Coastal Open Space Land Use at Ponto On July 3, 2017 the CA Coastal Commission provided direction to Carlsbad stating:
“The existing LUP includes policies that require certain visitor-serving developments and/or studies relevant to the Ponto … area. For example, Planning Area F requires the city and developer to "consider and document the need for the provision of lower cost visitor accommodations or recreational facilities (i.e., public park) on the west side of the railroad. … this study should be undertaken as a part of the visitor serving use inventory analysis described above. If this analysis determines that there is a deficit of low cost visitor accommodations or recreation facilities in this area, then Planning Area F should be considered as a site where these types of uses could be developed.”
Official Carlsbad Public Records Requests (PRR 2017-260, et. al.) confirmed the Existing LCP and its Ponto specific existing LUP polices and Zoning regulations were never followed in the City’s prior Ponto planning activities (i.e. 2010 Ponto Vision Plan & 2015 General Plan Update). The projected SLR loss of recreation (beach) and low-cost visitor accommodations (campground) at Ponto should factor in this Existing LCP required analysis, and a LCP-LUP for Ponto and Ponto Planning Area F.
In a February 11, 2020 City Council Staff Report City Staff stated:
“On March 14, 2017, the City Council approved the General Plan Lawsuit Settlement Agreement (Agreement) between City of Carlsbad and North County Advocates (NCA). Section 4.3.15 of the Agreement requires the city to continue to consider and evaluate properties for potential acquisition of open space and use good faith efforts to acquire those properties.” ("atyof
Carlsbad
Cal l forn l a Sec, Level Rise Vulnerability Assessment Figure 5: CoSMoS Bluff Erosion Projections by 2100
(CoSMoS-COAST 2015)
Sea Level Rise and Carlsbad’s DLCP-LUPA’s projected/planned Loss of Open Space at Ponto Page 7 of 7
In 2020 NCA recommended the City acquire Ponto Planning Area F as Open Space. The status of City processing that recommendation is unclear. However the Lawsuit Settlement Agreement and NCA’s recommendation to the City should also be considered in the required Existing LCP analysis.
Summary:
Tragically Carlsbad’s’ Draft Local Coastal Program – Land Use Plan Amendment (DLCP-LUPA) is actually planning to both SIGNIFICATLY REDUCE Coastal Open Space acreage, and to eliminate ‘High-Priority Coastal Open Space Land Uses at Ponto due to SLR.
The Existing LCP requirements for Ponto Planning Area F to analyze the deficit of Coastal Open Space Land Use should factor in the currently planned LOSS of both Coastal Open Space acreage and Coastal Open Space Land Uses at Ponto due to SLR. As a long-range Coastal Land Use Plan this required LCP analysis needs to also consider the concurrent future increases in both population and visitor demand for those LOST Coastal Open Space acres and Coastal Open Space Land Uses.
It is very troubling that demand for these CA Coastal Act ‘High-Priority’ Coastal Open Space Land Uses is increasing at the same time the current (near/at capacity) supply of these CA Coastal Act ‘High-Priority’ Coastal Open Space Land Uses is significantly decreasing due to SLR. Instead of planning for long-term sustainability of these CA Coastal Act ‘High-Priority’ Coastal Open Space Land Uses for future generations there appears to be a plan to use SLR and inappropriate (lower-priority residential) Coastal Land Use planning to forever remove those CA Coastal Act ‘High-Priority’ Coastal Open Space Land Uses from Ponto. CA Coastal Act Policies to address these issues should be thoroughly considered.
2021-2 proposed Draft Local Coastal Program – Land Use Plan Amendment (DLCP-LUPA) will likely result in City and CA Coastal Commission making updates to the 2015 General Plan, based on the existing Ponto Planning Area F LCP – LUP Policy requirements, Ponto Open Space issues, high-priority Coastal Land Use needs, and SLR issues not addressed in the 2015 General Plan.
August 31, 2017
To:
Carlsbad City Council [email protected]
Carlsbad Parks & Recreation Commission at [email protected] Carlsbad Planning Commission at [email protected]
Kevin Crawford, City Manager at [email protected]
Chris Hazeltine, Parks & Recreation, City of Carlsbad [email protected] Don Neu, Planning, City of Carlsbad [email protected]
Subject: City Park Standard in Southwest and South Carlsbad
Dear Carlsbad City Council:
The San Pacifico Community Association (SPCA) represents over 450 homes (around 1,000 Citizens) in the Southwest Quadrant/Park District of Carlsbad, and is the primary component and stakeholder of the Poinsettia Shores Planned Community (Poinsettia Shores Master Plan and Local Coastal Program). SPCA supported the residents in creating the Ponto Beachfront Development Review Committee (PBDRC) to:
Provide information to all San Pacifico residents (and surrounding neighborhoods) on the developments. (See www.PontoLocals.com)
Obtain and consolidate constructive feedback from the residents. Give this feedback to the residents, developers and City so that we can have productive/timely input into the projects and their designs.
Act as a strong, unified voice and with the support of our residents in upcoming Planning, Council and Coastal Commission meetings.
Since PBDRC has been formed there has been a growing participation and concurrence from other Carlsbad areas and groups on the consensus PBDRC has consolidated.
PBDRC and the SPCA are pleased that the City has taken action to fix a timeline defect in the Growth Management Program related to meeting a City Park standard. However there is another truly once in a lifetime opportunity to improve how the City Park standard is proposed to be met in Ponto and coastal South Carlsbad that we would like to request of the City Council. This opportunity stems from the fact that Ponto is the only vacant coastal land in South Carlsbad and is currently being evaluated for low- priority housing and other types of development. Should it be developed in this way, there will never be another opportunity to have a meaningful park in coastal Southwest Carlsbad west of Interstate 5. The request is to work with Pontolocals to provide a comprehensive and open process for citizens of the City [primarily Southwest and Southeast Carlsbad Citizens] to discuss and define possible better approaches to implement a coastal park in Southwest that can serve all of South Carlsbad. We recently had a community meeting attended by approximately 200 people and this letter reflects some of the near unanimous (90%+) concerns from that meeting. We believe these concerns are also likely to be reflective of many others living in South Carlsbad, and also in North Carlsbad.
The City Park Standard is “3.0 acres of Community Park or Special Use Area per 1,000 population within the Park District”. So for every 1,000 Citizens in a Park District, such as the coastal Southwest Quadrant Park District, there is to be 3 acres of City Park to meet the standard. The rational for such a location specific standard is that parks should be distributed so as to be reasonably accessible by all citizens. It is also important to have reasonable and safe park access via walking and biking, not just by motor vehicles. The staff report on correcting the timeline defect in the Park Standard stated that correcting the timeline to correct the park quadrant deficits is “… specifically relevant to the southwest and southeast quadrants. As stated in the report a need for more park acreage in those two quadrants was identified four years ago (during FY 2012-13).” A 6.6 acre park deficit within the Southwest quadrant was identified in the Growth Management Monitoring Report for FY 2014-15. However the report indicates that “Based on the Fiscal Year 2015-16 Capital Improvement Program list of projects, Veteran’s Memorial Park (91.5 acres, with 22.9 acres applied to each quadrant) is proposed to be constructed prior to buildout.” Under this proposal the future Veteran’s Park, that is located in the Northwest Park District and located many miles away from the coastal Southwest and Southeast Quadrants and Park Districts, would be used meet the population and citizen demand for Parks for citizens within the coastal Southwest and Southeast Quadrant’
s Park Districts. We know there is an outstanding opportunity for the City to do a great thing for the community and to add tremendous value to the quality of life by augmenting, enhancing, and/or adjusting planned park supply to better serve citizens and the City; and be more consistent with the General Plan and core values of the Growth Management Plan.
The fundamental intent of creating four Park Districts (one for each quadrant) and managing and matching demand and supply of City Parks into smaller geographical areas (quadrant park districts) is to make the supply of City Parks reasonably accessible to their demand and more equitably distributed for citizens. Equitable distribution of City Park facilities is the right thing to do and has many citizen and city benefits:
Children and elderly can more easily walk and bike to City Parks when they are close by and within a safe walking and bicycling distance with properly designed access pathways; Park supply created so far away from park demand creates the need to drive in a car to access the park, thus increasing vehicle miles traveled (VMT). Depending on locations this also limits park access for citizens without cars or unable to drive; When city parks are accessible to their demand by walking/bicycling then less city park land is need to park cars. Citizens get more actual useable park space for each acre of park land; When city parks are close to their demand busy families can quickly get to them after their workday which allows more park time for families during busy weekends; Nearby city parks create a stronger sense of stewardship for the “neighborhoods’” park and city parks in general. Citizens watch out and care for their nearby park; Nearby city parks that are equitably distributed and based on surrounding neighborhood demand serve to strengthen neighborhood quality and property values by providing park amenities close by. It is both a good neighborhood and economic development strategy to assure park demand and supply are locationally matched; and Fundamentally it is the right thing to do to place park demand and supply in close proximity to each other and promote and equitable distribution public facility demand and supply.
In coastal Southwest Carlsbad and South Carlsbad we have some glaring gaps in demand and supply of city parks. For instance:
The Carlsbad General Plan Open Space, Conservation and Recreation Element, Figure 4-3 Parks: Shows no existing or planned coastal parks or special use areas west of Interstate 5 for all of South Carlsbad. In North Carlsbad there are 10, parks and special use areas west of Interstate 5 and on or close to the beach (9 of these are existing parks and 1 is a future park). This seems a clear and inherently unfair distribution of coastal park facilities. This unfair distribution severely reduces critical access to coastal park open space near the beach for South Carlsbad Citizens (half the City and over 26,000 homes, and over 64,000 citizens).
This unserved demand for city park space in coastal South Carlsbad is evidenced by the dangerous use of the Carlsbad Boulevard [old highway 101] road shoulder and bike lanes and campground road for recreational purposes, parking demand and the frequent unauthorized recreational use of Ponto vacant land. People are using whatever land they can for needed recreational use. South Carlsbad Citizens in Aviara, La Costa, Rancho Carrillo, Bressi Ranch, La Costa Valley and all the other South Carlsbad inland neighborhoods have no coastal South Carlsbad City Beach Park areas to access the coast. Their only option is to drive significant distances (with increase VMT and greenhouse gas emissions] crosstown to access city beach parks in the North, or travel to Encinitas. This forces increased VMT and greenhouse gas emissions which is counter to both State and General Plan goals. Citizens in South Carlsbad only have a State Beach pay parking lot and a retreating primarily steep cobble beach as their “local” beach.
The non-beach portion of the South Carlsbad State Beach campground is a road and lodging facility for primarily out-of-town visitors that are near this beach. It is not a city park. The Campground is not designed to serve the park needs of Carlsbad citizens, but is a great place primarily for visitors to affordably pay to spend nights camping near the beach. The lack of any park facilities at the campground is evidenced by the frequent use of the campground driveway (a significant area of the campground) by children and adults as a play area.
There is an added benefit in that adding a coastal South Carlsbad Ponto Beach Park would help alleviate growing overcrowding, and increased traffic and parking congestion at North Carlsbad’s coastal parks.
Citizens west of Interstate 5 in South Carlsbad have very limited access to a city park. Depending on the neighborhood one lives in, access our nearest park [Poinsettia Park] is between a 2 to 4 mile trip.
Residents must cross Interstate 5 using one of only two crossings in the space of over 3 miles. These crossings are on major multi-lane, higher speed roadways (Poinsettia Lane or Palomar Airport Road).
The route is not the most safe or direct, and it forces one to drive in a vehicle to access a park which increases VMT. Park access for children, the elderly, and those walking dogs west of Interstate 5 in South Carlsbad is severely restricted or effectively eliminated.
Coastal Southwest and all of South Carlsbad have not met their quadrant’s Park area standard since 2012 (per the City’s Growth Management Program). A specific comprehensive and open discussion with the Southwest and all if South Carlsbad citizens on how that deficient should be resolved should occur.
The current City solution to meet local park needs of coastal Southwest and South Carlsbad with a paper allocation of park acreage in the Northwest part of the City that is many miles away does not seem right.
It seems inconsistent with the core values and Vision of our City.
From Carlsbad General Plan Community Vision:
“…the Carlsbad Community Vision, which is the foundation for this plan.” This is the foundation for the General Plan.
“…In the future, … social connections will be enhanced through … more public gathering places, family- friendly activities, and open spaces within walking distance of people’s homes …”
“The community is proud of the exceptional amount of open space in the city, and envisions a future of continued City commitment to open space protection and strategic acquisitions to further the city’s open space system.”
“Parks, Fields, and Facilities for All Ages: The network of parks and recreation facilities will be improved to meet the community’s active lifestyle needs. Such improvements may include the strategic addition of more parks, … New facilities will be located to maximize use and access by all neighborhoods, tailored to the needs of local populations, and designed with all ages in mind.”
“Beach Uses and Improvements: The beach is an important outdoor recreational resource, and protecting and enhancing access to the beach and the quality of the beach experience is a top community priority.”
“ … Access to the beach and the quality of the beach experience will be improved through new compatible and supportive uses on or in close proximity to the beach, which may include … a park …”
“Tailored Tourism Strategy: Tourism is an important component of the city’s economy today, and it remains an attractive economic sector for the future since it emphasizes the very resources that make the city attractive to existing residents—the ocean and beach …”
“Easy and convenient pedestrian connections will be available from every neighborhood to help children get safely to schools and parks.”
From General Plan Land Use Element:
“Beach Access and Activity: …the community expressed an overwhelming preference for an active waterfront development strategy, which provides opportunities for activities and uses to be more integrated with the ocean. … Access to the beach will be enhanced through … open space, parking, and amenities …”
General Plan Land Use Policy: “2-G.20 Develop an active ocean waterfront, with new growth accommodated west of Interstate 5, to enable residents and visitors to enjoy more opportunities for … recreating along the coastline. Develop public gathering places and recreational opportunities along the coastal corridor.”
The City’s Park and Recreation Master Plan includes many areas of direction that strongly support a coastal park west of interstate 5 in South Carlsbad. Many of the most important park facilities and program needs identified in the City’s Park and Recreation Master Plan could be most efficiently addressed with a coastal park in the Ponto area. There are also significant and unique opportunities to create both public/private and public/public partnerships that would not only help reduce City recreation costs but also expand and create unique and special recreational program opportunities currently identified in the City’s Park and Recreation Master Plan.
A Ponto city coastal park also implements a major General Plan policy which calls for an active waterfront and creates solutions to long standing Local Coastal Program policy and State Parks Campground issues. There are very unique and special land use compatibility opportunities and synergy from a coastal city park in south Carlsbad and Ponto area that are inline and implement high priorities identified in the City’s Park and Recreation Master Plan.
In summary, Carlsbad has a once in a generation opportunity to create very special coastal South Carlsbad Ponto Beach Park in South Carlsbad. This opportunity will be true to our Carlsbad Community Vision and General Plan and the heart and soul of our Growth Management Plan’s standard of matching park demand with park supply within a particular park district. We believe this request benefits not only coastal Southwest Carlsbad and South Carlsbad but all of Carlsbad and is more consistent with the City General Plan, Growth Management Program, and Parks Master Plan and will result in a better, more valued and more sustainable City.
We are a key Stakeholder in Ponto and the Poinsettia Shores Maser Plan and Local Coastal Program. We have been hearing similar concerns from other Carlsbad citizens about coastal beach park access and request that the City Council seize this opportunity to work with us to establish a comprehensive and open community discussion about the strategic acquisition of a coastal South Carlsbad Ponto Beach Park for South Carlsbad citizens and businesses. We also request before a solution to the 2012 Southwest quadrant park standard deficit is created we have an open citizen discussion with the Citizens of coastal Southwest Carlsbad on how that solution can better address the park demand created in the Southwest Park District with a better park supply created within that District. Like our City Park Standard says: “3.0 acres of Community Park or Special Use Area per 1,000 population within the Park District”. We request that a coastal City Park West of Interstate 5 be developed in South Carlsbad to be fair and equitable and to meet the needs of South Carlsbad for a coastal City Park to serve all the Citizens of South Carlsbad. This can take advantage of special land use synergies to help promote public/private collaboration, create added property and transit occupancy tax revenues for the City by creating a valuable and synergistic amenity [where none now exists] for over half the City and over 26,000 homes, along with providing support to our City’s visitor serving businesses and activities. It is the right and smart thing to do.
The San Pacifico Community Association and PBDRC as key Stakeholders in Ponto wish to be a key participant any proposed City or CCC actions regarding these subjects, and would like to meet with you to see how we can discuss and advance this for the benefit of South Carlsbad Citizens. As we are citizen volunteers we sincerely appreciate advance notification to allow for preparation and coordination with our work lives and to communicate back to our members and other South Carlsbad Citizens. We wish to be notified in advance of any proposed actions related to the issues in thus letter. The San Pacifico Community Association contact information is:
San Pacifico Community Association and PBDRC
c/o Walters Management, Lee Leibenson
9665 Chesapeake Drive, Suite 300
San Diego, CA 92123
[email protected]
The Ponto Beachfront Development Review Committee conducted the research cited in this letter.
Along with general communications, please contact the following if you have technical questions regarding this letter. Key Committee contact information is:
[email protected]
[email protected];
[email protected]
Thank you for your consideration.
San Pacifico Community Association Board of Directors:
Mr. Jim Nardi [email protected]
Mr. Bill Van Cleve [email protected]
Mr. Adriaan van Zyl [email protected]
Mr. Tony Ruffolo [email protected]
Mr. Chas Wick [email protected]
cc:
Board of Directors
California Coastal Commission at [email protected] and [email protected]
n LJ
0 0
0 0
0 17
u
n , I
LJ
CJ
n
u
n , I
u
,'l
LJ
7 u
J
l '7
~
I ; '7
u
ERA-
Economics Research Associates
CARLSBAD BOULEVARD
REALIGNMENT STUDY
PHASE II: PRELIMINARY
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
Submitted to:
The City of Carlsbad
Prepared by:
Economics Research Associates
URS Corporation
Wallace, Roberts & Todd
October 4, 2001
ERA Project No. 14158
964 5th AvenuP- SuitP- 714
San Diego. CJ\. 92101 ERA is affiliated with Drivers Jonas 619 544 1402 FAX 619 ~,44.1404 www eras! com/eras!
Los Angeles San F.-ancisco San Diego
Chicago Dallas Washington DC London
0 0
0 G
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 Econo m ics Research A~soc ia tes
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Introduction ......................... ............................ .............................................. ................................. l II. Development Scenarios ...................................................... .................... ....... ................... .............. 2 III. Land and Fiscal Value Estimates .............................................................. ................. ........... ......... 7 IV. Other Potential Sources for Funding Realignment Costs ........................................... ............. .. ... 11 Appendix ................... ........ ........... ................. ............... ...................... .................. .................. ................... 15 0 D
D
D
0 0
D
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
D
D
0 D
■ #i:f+t
Economics Research Associates
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
Table 1: Development Program Scenarios - Alternative 1 ........................................................................ 3 Table 2: Development Program Scenarios - Alternative 2 ............................................................................... 4 Table 3: Development Program Scenarios -Alternative 3 ............................................................................... 5 Table 4: Development Program Scenarios - Alternative 4 ............................................................................... 6 Table 5: Preliminary Revenue/Cost Comparison .............................................................................................. 8 D
D
0 D
0 D
D
0 D
0 D
0 0
0 0
D
D
0 0
GENERAL LIMITING CONDITIONS
Every reasonable effort has been made to ensure that the data contained in this study reflect the most accurate and timely information possible, and they are believed to be reliable. This study is based on estimates, assumptions and other information reviewed and evaluated by Economics Research Associates from its consultations with the client and the client's representatives and within its general knowledge of the industry. No responsibility is assumed for inaccuracies in reporting by the client, the client's agent and representatives or any other data source used in preparing or presenting this study.
This report is based on information that was current as of October 2001 or as noted in the report, and Economics Research Associates has not undertaken any update of its research effort since such date.
No warranty or representation is made by Economics Research Associates that any of the projected values or results contained in this study will actually be achieved.
Possession of this study does not carry with it the right of publication thereof or to use the name of "Economics Research Associates" in any manner without first obtaining the prior written consent of Economics Research Associates. No abstracting, excerpting or summarization of this study may be made without first obtaining the prior written consent of Economics Research Associates. This report is not to be used in conjunction with any public or private offering of securities or other similar purpose where it may be relied upon to any degree by any person other than the client without first obtaining the prior written consent of Economics Research Associates. This study may not be used for purposes other than that for which it is prepared or for which prior written consent has first been obtained from Economics Research Associates.
This study is qualified in its entirety by, and should be considered in light of, these limitations, conditions and considerations.
D
D
D
0 D
0 D
D
0 0
D
0 D
D
0 0
0 0
0 ■ l;M
Economics Resear-ch Associates
I. INTRODUCTION
The Carlsbad Boulevard Realignment Study is an analysis of alternative scenarios for realigning Carlsbad Boulevard away from the coast bluff edge and, in the process, creating opportunities for commercial, recreation, and open space uses. One of the study's objectives is to explore ways to generate revenue from useable public land created, including potential land sale or lease opportunities, and using this revenue to help offset the cost of realigning the road.
This Phase II report is a preliminary evaluation of each scenario's financial implications. The Phase I report, presented in April 1999, evaluated the market context in which development may take place. Some of the key rent and market assumptions presented in this report are based on the 1999 research, adjusted for inflation. A market analysis update has not taken place since 1999. The values presented here are preliminary estimates for planning purposes only, and should not be interpreted as valuations or appraisals since they are based on conceptual development programs, gross preliminary development cost factors, and two-year old market research. Valuations or appraisals will require greater due diligence regarding current market conditions, more specific development and site planning programs, and more detailed cost estimates.
PROJECT No. 141 58 INTRODUCTION 1
----------------------·-----
D
0 0
0 0
0 D
D
0 0
D
0 0
0 0
D
D
0 0
■ :j;f4
Economics Research Associates
II. DEVELOPMENT SCENARIOS
URS Corporation and the City of Carlsbad have identified four alternative land use scenarios for a realigned Carlsbad Boulevard. The proposed realignment creates 4-6 new surplus land areas resulting 5-7 potential parcels (see the Carlsbad Boulevard Realignment Study - Phase I and Phase II for more details regarding these alignments and surplus land areas). The consultant team prepared hypothetical development programs for each alternative. These hypothetical development programs are not recommendations; rather, they were devised to test the potential financial impact of the following alternative approaches towards reuse of the surplus land that is created with the road realignment. They were also designed to serve as a starting point for discussion of preferred uses and to allow the decision-makers to select and combine the elements from each alternative that they find most desirable. Finally, these scenarios serve as starting points for discussions with State Parks, which is critical for the pivotal Manzano parcel.
• Alternative 1 tests the financial impacts of a parks and open space scheme. It assumes that no major commercial development occurs and that the surplus parcels are used for parking, community facilities, parks, open space, and camping (concessionaire), as shown in Table 1. • Alternative 2 tests the financial impacts of a predominately parks and open space scheme, with limited commercial development. It assumes that a time-share and executive meeting hotel is built on a small portion of Surplus Area 1, and that the rest of Surplus Area 1 and all of the other parcels are used for parking, community facilities, parks, or open space, as shown in Table 2. • Alternative 3, as shown in Table 3, tests the financial impacts of a significant commercial development scheme. It assumes significant commercial development on almost half of Surplus Areas 1 (specialty retail, restaurants, and office) and 3 (hotel), and all of Surplus Areas 2 (time-share), 6A (time-share), and 6B (office), as shown in Table 3. More than half of Surplus Area 1 is used as park space and more than half of Surplus Area 3 remains open space. Parcels 4 and 5 provide parking and open space. • Alternative 4 tests the financial impacts of a significant commercial development scheme for a majority of Surplus Area 1 (specialty retail, restaurants, time-share, and executive meeting hotel), with a neighborhood park on the remaining portion of Surplus Area 1, as shown in Table 4. Parcels 2, 3, and 6A remain open space, and 4, 5, and 6B contain public parking and open space.
PROJECT No. 14158 DEVELOPMENT SCENARIOS 2
c::J C:J CJ L.J e_:J c::J
Table 1: DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM SCENARIOS - Alternative 1 - Parks and Open Space Surplus Area:
Units 1
Acreage 20.8
Developable Commercial
Campground
Public parking
Community facility
Active parks
Open space
Commercial Uses
Commercial-Retail
Commercial-Restaurants
Office
Time Share
Full Service Hotel
Executive Meeting Hotel
Campground
Primitive sites
RV sites
Common facilities
Public Parking
Free
Community Facility
Visitor Center
Restrooms
Active Park Facilities
Active Parks
Open Space Facilities
Open Space
s.f
s.f.
s.f.
Rooms
Rooms
Rooms
Sites
Sites
Spaces
s.f.
Number
acres
acres
-
-
1.0 0.8
4.0 15.0
140
2,500
1 4.0
15.0 2
Source: URS; Wallace, Roberts & Todd; and Economics Research Associates
5.1 -
-
0.6 0.1
-
4.4 50
4.4 C___J
3 4
10.1 -
-
-
-
-
10.1 10.1
13.7 -
2.8 1.5
0.1 -
9.3 45
50 3,000
200
3,000
9.3 C__J
5 L_] C_J C__J C_J
6A 6B
2.3 0.5 2.0
- - -
- - -
0.9 - 0.6
- - -
- - -
1.4 0.5 1.4
135 90
1.4 0.5 1.4
[__] L-=i [__] e_-_J C__J C__J
Table 2: DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM SCENARIOS • Alternative 2
Surplus Area:,
Units 1
Acreage 20.8
Oevelopable Commercial
Campground
Public parking
Community facility
Active parks
Open space
Commercial Uses
Commercial-Retail
Commercial-Restaurants
Office
Time Share
Full Service Hotel
Executive Meeting Hotel
Campground
Primitive sites
RV sites
Common facilities
Public Parking
Free
Community Facility
Visitor Center
Restrooms
Active Park Facilities
Active Parks
Open Space Facilities
Open Space
s.f
s.f.
s.f.
Rooms
Rooms
Rooms
Sites
Sites
Spaces
s.f.
Number
acres
acres
5.0 -
-
-
-
15.8 100
150
15.8 [__]
2 Source: URS; Wallace, Roberts & Todd; and Economics Research Associates c:::J
5.1 -
-
2.6 -
1.6 0.9
150
1.6 0.9
CJ
3 4
10 1
-
-
6.9 -
1.6 1.6
870
3 1,6
1.6 C_J
5 13.7
-
-
3.2 0.1
-
10.4 520
2 10.4
[_J
23 -
-
1.2 0.4
0.5 0.2
176
19,600
1 0.5
0.2 c_J C_J C___J C.._] e_:J
6A 68
0.5 20
-
-
0.1 0.6
-
- 1.4
0.4 -
10 90
1.4 0.4
CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ c:::J CJ
Table 3: DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM SCENARIOS - Alternative 3
Acreage*
Developable Commercial
Campground
Public parking
Community facility
Active parks
Open space
Commercial Uses
Commercial-Retail
Commercial-Restaurants
Office
Time Share
Full Service Hotel
Executive Meeting Hotel
Campground
Primitive sites
RV sites
Common facilities
Public Parking
Free
Community Facility
Visitor Center
Restrooms
Active Park Facilities
Active Parks
Open Space Facilities
Open Space
Surplus Area:
Units 1
s.f
s.f.
s.f.
Rooms
Rooms
Rooms
Sites
Sites
Spaces
s.f.
Number
acres
acres
20.8 10.0
10.8 40,000
40,000
80,000
10.8 *Acreages may not equal total due to rounding
C:J
2 5.1
5.1 150
Source: URS; Wallace, Roberts & Todd; and Economics Research Associates CJ CJ C:J c::_J CJ
3 4 5 6A 68
10.1 0.5 2.0
4.3 0.5 2.0
5.8 15,000
30 300
5.8 CJ CJ CJ CJ
Table 4: DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM SCENARIOS - Alternative 4
Acreage*
Developable Commercial
Campground
Public parking
Community facility
Active parks
Open space
Commercial Uses
Commercial-Retail
Commercial-Restaurants
Office
Time Share
Full Service Hotel
Executive Meeting Hotel
Campground
Primitive sites
RV sites
Common facilities
Public Parking
Free
Community Facility
Visitor Center
Restrooms
Active Park Facilities
Active Parks
Open Space Facilities
Open Space
Surplus Area:
Units 1
s.f
s.f.
s.f.
Rooms
Rooms
Rooms
Sites
Sites
Spaces
s.f.
Number
acres
acres
20.8 15.0
5.8 45,000
45,000
150
150
5.8 *Acreages may not equal total due to rounding
Source: URS; Wallace, Roberts & Todd; and Economics Research Associates CJ CJ ~ CJ C:::J CJ CJ CJ CJ
2 3 4 5 6A 68
0 D
D
0 D
D
D
D
0 D
D
D
D
D
D
0 D
D
0 ■ =l;f+t
Economics Research Associates
Ill. LAND AND FISCAL VALUE ESTIMATES
ERA estimated the approximate residual land value and the capitalized value of the estimated fiscal revenue associated with each of the alternative alignments and development scenarios. The estimates are very preliminary since they are based on hypothetical development programs without architectural designs, rent assumptions based on 1999 research (updated to 2001 values), preliminary site capacity and site planning analysis, and gross development cost estimates for buildings and site development. The detailed analyses for each alternative are presented in Appendix A. These estimates, which are not appraisals, will need to be revised as development programs become more specific, and they do not form the basis for a financial offering, bond, or prospectus without additional planning, engineering, cost estimating, and due diligence.
The residual land value estimates translate into the potential revenue generated from commercial land sales, or the capitalized values of leases, of surplus land areas created by the road realignment. These estimates are preliminary approximations of what a developer might be willing to pay for the land in order to obtain a reasonable rate of return on total capital (debt and equity capital). In order to be conservative, no real ' appreciation was assumed; in other words, rents only rise with inflation. Some developers may speculate that rents will rise faster than inflation, which would result in higher values than estimated in this report. The fiscal revenue translates into the capitalized value of the potential fiscal resources to the City and Redevelopment Agency that could help finance some of the Carlsbad Boulevard realignment costs.
The total revenue from commercial land sales (or leases) and the capitalized value of fiscal revenue was compared to URS Corporation's preliminary estimate of road realignment costs ($18.8 million), and Wallace, Roberts, and Todd's preliminary estimates of possible public parking, parks, open space, and community facility costs ($8.5-12.1 million). While road realignment costs are required to produce the surplus parcels, costs to develop the open space are flexible. The estimates provided assume maximum improvements to the open space.
As shown in Table 5, Alternative 1, the least commercial scenario, generates very limited revenue, only $1.1 million in commercial land value, and over $0.2 million in the capitalized value of fiscal revenue, for a total of almost $1.3 million. Other sources would have to fund over $17.5 million in road construction costs, and $9.0 million in public facility, parks, and open space costs, or the amount of improvements would have to be reduced.
PROJECT No. 141 SB LAND AND FISCAL VALUE ESTIMATES 7
c:::=J CJ c~ CJ CJ
Table 5: PRELIMINARY REVENUE/COST COMPARISON (Year 2001 Dollars) Alternatives
1 2 3 4
Revenues From Commercial Land Sales $ 1,131,000 $ 9,219,000 $ 28,155,000 $ 19,465,000 Capitalized Value of Fiscal Revenues to City & RDA $ 217,000 $ 10,849,000 $ 24,743,000 $ 16,429,000 Total Potential Revenues $ 1,348,000 $ 20,068,000 $ 52,898,000 $ 35,894,000 Less: Road Construction Costs $ 18,800,000 $ 18,800,000 $ 18,800,000 $ 18,800,000 Net Revenues <Deficit> After Road Construction Costs $ (17,452,000) $ 1,268,000 $ 34,098,000 $ 17,094,000 Less: Public Parking, Parks, Open Space, and Facilities $ 8,999,580 $ 12,062,589 $ 8,496,734 $ 9,358,925 Net Revenues <Deficit> After Public Costs $ (26,451,580) $ (10,794,589) $ 25,601,266 $ 7,735,075 Source: Economics Research Associates; URS; Wallace, Roberts & Todd □
D
D
□
D
D
D
D
0 D
D
D
D
D
Economics Research Associates
Alternative 2 generates over $9.2 million in commercial land value, and $10.8 million in fiscal revenue, for a total of $20.1 million. This amount is enough to cover the $18.8 million in road realignment costs, but not enough to cover the estimated $12.1 million in potential public facility, parks, and open space costs. Other sources would have to fund approximately $ I 0.8 million in public facility, parks, and open space costs, or the amount or type of improvements would have to be reduced.
Alternative 3, the most commercial scenario, generates an estimated $28.2 million in revenues from commercial land value, and $24.7 million in capitalized fiscal revenue, for a total of $52.9 million. This amount is substantially more than enough to cover the $18.8 million in road realignment costs, and $8.5 million in public facility, parks, and open space costs.
Alternative 4 generates an estimated $19.5 million in commercial land value, and $16.4 million in capitalized fiscal revenue, for a total of $35.9 million, which is more than enough to cover the $18.8 million in road realignment costs, and $9.4 million in public facility, parks, and open space costs.
QUALi FiCA TIO NS
While it appears that alternatives 3 and 4 generate enough revenue to cover development costs, the findings at this preliminary planning stage of analysis are qualified, as follows:
• The cost estimates are based on gross cost factors and need to be refined as project design becomes more specific.
• The cost estimates do not include any extraordinary off-site costs, such as for environmental or o traffic mitigation.
D
D
D
D
• Some of the parcels identified for potential development, particularly those west of the alignment, may be vulnerable to long term erosion problems; therefore, their stability needs to be verified.
PROJECT No. 141 SB LAND AND FISCAL VALUE ESTIMATES 9
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
0 D
D
D
D
0 D
•1;141
Economics Resear-ch Associates
• A significant share of value and fiscal revenue in scenarios 2, 3, and 4 is attributable to hotels, which in 1999 demonstrated only average performance, especially among moderately priced hotels.
Also, a new hotel has been developed since 1999. While the parcels identified for potential hotel development are competitive because of the views they offer, hotel development and financing are relatively risky.
• WRT has determined that the hypothetical development programs can fit on the parcels, and URS Corporation has initially determined that the circulation system can accommodate the development.
However, there could be difficult site planning issues with some of the parcels that would limit their development potential to less than what is assumed in this analysis. • The development cost estimates for the commercial development scenarios, for the most part, do not assume structured parking. If structured parking is required, development costs could be greater which would diminish residual land values unless higher rents are achievable. • Most of the value is generated on Surplus Area 1, which is owned by the State of California. The City or Redevelopment Agency would not realize the value of Surplus Area I unless the State trades the parcel to the City or Agency for other considerations. Therefore, the City or Agency may not be able to apply proceeds from the value of Surplus Area I to road realignment and public facility costs. Nevertheless, under Alternative 3, the capitalized value of the fiscal revenue alone might be sufficient to cover road construction costs and a portion of public facility costs. The capitalized value of fiscal revenue under Alternative 4 comes close to covering road construction costs, but is not sufficient to cover other public facility costs.
• Competitive market conditions could change which would affect the market potential of the development programs assumed in the scenarios analyzed in this report. The estimated values are based on the hypothetical development programs for each parcel. If development programs change, the values will change.
PROJECT No. 1415B LAND AND FISCAL VALUE ESTIMATES 10
D
D
D
D
D
0 D
0 D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
D
•1#1+1
Economics Research Associates
IV. OTHER POTENTIAL SOURCES FOR FUNDING REALIGNMENT
COSTS
The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) and State of California Transportation Department (CalTrans) are the traditional sources of funds for capital improvements to highways. For example, the Federal government offers approximately 70 different transportation-funding programs. The majority of these funds are made available for disbursement to regional entities such as SANDAG, while a small portion is made available directly to municipalities.
FUNDS AVAILABLE DIRECTLY TO MUNICIPALITIES
The CalTrans Local Assistance Program (LAP) is responsible for helping municipalities located in CalTrans District 11 identify which Federal and State funding programs for which they are eligible and guiding them through the application process. Each program is specifically tailored for a given need, and has very strict eligibility requirements. One such specialized program funds "Intelligent Transportation Systems". Funds are available to projects that integrate new technology (computer-related) with the road/highway project to improve traffic flow. Because this program is new, eligibility requirements are not yet well defined.
There is no program specifically for road or highway realignment. Moreover, it is estimated that for every 10 applicants to each of the programs above, only the most urgent project is funded, leaving 90 percent of the applications unsuccessful. Given the level of competition for funds, if the City of Carlsbad finds that portions of the road may fall into one or more of the eligible categories, the application should present as compelling a case as possible. In any case, once a specific construction plan has been determined, a representative from the City of Carlsbad should meet with a representative from the Local Assistance Program to discuss the program in detail and determine whether or not portions of the project are eligible for Federal or State aid.
Finally, another option is direct funding from special state legislative action.
REGIONAL FUNDS
The San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) administers the apportionment of funds from the larger, more general State and Federal transportation funding programs. The most likely source of funding for a project such as the realignment of Carlsbad Boulevard is the Regional Arterial Projects section of the Surface Transportation Projects.
PROJECT No. 14158 OTHER POTENTIAL SOURCES FOR FUNDING REALIGNMENT COSTS 11 0
D
0 Economics Research Associates
For a project to receive an apportionment from SANDAG, it must be included in the Regional Transportation Improvement Plan (RTIP). The City of Carlsbad is an active participant on the CTEC committee, the body that periodically updates the RTIP. However, it is important to note that the current RTIP (2000-2004) provides only $153 million towards projects estimated to cost nearly $392 million. Also, the current RTIP specifically 0 states that "local governments will obtain private developer financing for those on- and off-site roadway and transit improvement necessary to accommodate the increased travel generated by private development." D
D
D
□
0 0
0 D
0 0
D
D
0 0
0 The major source of Federal transportation funds administered by SAND AG is the Transportation Equity Act for the 21 st Century (TEA-21). In addition to highway and surface road construction and improvements, TEA- 21 is a source of funds for driver safety initiatives, transit programs, rail projects, and transportation research.
TEA-21 was established in 1998 and funded through 2003, thus funding levels beyond that time are unknown.
The Surface Transportation Program (STP) is the section of TEA-21 relevant to the realignment of Carlsbad Boulevard. One STP program, Transportation Enhancement Activities Program, funds highway enhancement activities over and above mitigation, standard landscaping and other permit requirements for a normal transportation project. Project eligibility categories under the Transportation Enhancement Program which may be applicable to the realignment of Carlsbad Boulevard are: I) Scenic or historic highway programs; 2) Landscaping and other scenic beautification; 3) Environmental mitigation to address water pollution due to highway runoff.
Currently, all TEA-21 funds, including STP, have been assigned to projects (detailed in SANDAG's 2000 Regional Transportation Improvement Plan); however, SANDAG continues to pursue additional discretionary funding available through TEA-21 on an annual basis.
In 1987, San Diego voters passed Proposition A, which authorized a one-half percent sales tax increase dedicated for transportation improvements. The first $1 million in annual TransNet revenue is set aside for bicycle-related projects and the remainder is divided equally between highway, public transit and local street and road projects. Highway projects are approved for funding by SANDAG, Ca!Trans, the San Diego Metropolitan Transit Development Board, and the North San Diego County Transit Development Board. Local street and road projects are approved for funding by the city councils of the 18 cities and the County Board of Supervisors. The Carlsbad Boulevard Realignment project is a potential candidate project. TransNet funds have been programmed through 2004, and the measure will expire in 2008.
PROJECT No. 14158 OTHER POTENTIAL SOURCES FOR FUNDING REALIGNMENT COSTS 12 0
D
0 0
D
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
D
0 D
D
■ l;t+i
Economics Research Associates
LOCAL SOURCES
Local sources include developer financed road improvements, transportation impact fees, tax increment financing in redevelopment project areas, infrastructure financing districts, assessment districts, Community Facilities Districts, General Obligation Bonds, and the General Fund.
To the extent that the realignment also increases road capacity that is required to mitigate the impacts of new development, developer financed road improvements or impact fees may apply. If the road realignment simply moves the road without enhancing capacity for future local developments, however, the nexus may not be strong enough for developer funding or impact fees to apply. Alternatively, the City may negotiate voluntary contributions to road realignment costs through development agreements on larger land development projects in the vicinity of Carlsbad Boulevard that require City discretionary approval.
Since the proposed Carlsbad Boulevard Realignment project is within a newly adopted redevelopment project area, the City's Redevelopment Agency may use tax increment to finance some of the realignment costs. Tax increment financing does not result in higher tax rates; rather, the incremental gain in property tax revenues is directed toward certain improvements within a redevelopment project area. To the extent that the realignment creates parcels that are commercially developed, the realignment project will be directly responsible for the tax increment generated by those commercial developments. Because tax increment will not be generated until the parcels are developed with commercial uses, there may be a cash flow financing issue to overcome to fund the realignment costs that will occur in advance of tax increment.
Another type of property tax increment financing is the Infrastructure Financing District (IFD). It also is based on the incremental gain in property taxes rather than an increase in tax rates. The City of Carlsbad was one of the first jurisdictions in California to form an IFD. Unlike tax increment in redevelopment project areas, an IFDs do not have to be located in redevelopment project areas and, therefore, do not have to address blight or meet the "predominately urbanized" test of redevelopment law. The public facility that is financed must serve the community at large. However, unlike a redevelopment project area that can be formed by Council action, an IFD must be approved by two-thirds of th
1 e voters if 12 or more registered voters reside in the district.
Otherwise, two-thirds of the property owners within the district must vote to approve the district. The affected taxing agencies must also approve the district and tax increment sharing must be negotiated.
PROJECT No. 14 1 S 8 OTHER POTENTIAL SOURCES FOR FUNDING REALIGNMENT COSTS 13 G
0 0
C
D
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 D
0 0
•id
Econom ics: A:~ se.e rch As:s.odate-s
Properties that benefit from the realignment may be assessed for a portion of the cost through a benefit assessment district, such as the Municipal Improvement Act of 1913. The assessments may be pledged to support debt service on bonds, issued under the Improvement Bond Act of I 915. The formation process must establish the scope of improvements, identify the benefiting parcels, and detennine an equitable allocation of costs. Property owners vote for or against formation of an assessment district at a public hearing . Some of the benefiting properties that are owned by the State may not be assessed .
A Community Facilities District, commonJy known as a Mello-Roos district, is a special tax that can be based on a formula that has a less strict benefit allocation. However, a Community Facilities District requires two thirds voter approval of voters residing within tbe district. If there are fewer than twelve registered voters in the district, the qualified electors are defined as owners of land within the district, with each owner allowed one vote per acre.
General Obligation Bonds, backed by the full faith and credit of the City, are the most secure and lowest cost form of debt financing. However, it would require two-thirds voter approval among Carlsbad's electorate, which may be difficult for the Carlsbad Boulevard Realignment project unless it is perceived as a project that has citywide benefits.
Finally, the General Fund may be used to fund a portion of road improvements through the Capital Improvement Plan, either as direct allocations, or as annual lease payments on Certificates of Participation . Fiscal revenue from development on surplus parcels could help augment the G~neral Fund, especially if a hotel or specialty retail is developed, to enable the City to use General Fund monies for some of the road realignment and other public facility costs.
(QNCLUSIQN
Both the SANDAG representative and the Ca]Trans Local Assistance Program representative noted that most road or highway realignments are done to faciJitate development. ~olicymakers are aware of this and generally design funding programs in a way that encourages the private sector to pay for as much of the project costs as possible. Programs are also designed to encourage municipalities to utilize funds from their share of the gas tax, TransNet, and even the General Fund and Community Development Block Grants before turning to State and Federal funds. Finally, due to the limited funds available, all funding sources give priority to projects of a regional significance over those of local importance.
PROJECT No. 14 1 SB OTHER POTENTIAL SOURCES FOR FUNDING REALIGNNl~NT COSTS 14 0
0 0
n u
0 0
D
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
D
0 0
0 •=lt+t
Economics Research Associates
APPENDIX
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1.A.1 Carlsbad Boulevard Realignment - Alternative 1, Land Use Scenario A; Proforma Cash Flow - Preliminary Residual Land Value
Table 1.A.2 Carlsbad Boulevard Realignment - Alternative 1, Land Use Scenario A; Fiscal Revenues Table 1.A.3, 4, 5 Carlsbad Boulevard Realignment - Alternative 1, Parcel 4, Land Use Scenario A; RV Operating Statement
Table 2.A. l Carlsbad Boulevard Realignment - Alternative 2, Land Use Scenario A; Proforma Cash Flow - Preliminary Residual Land Value
Table 2.A.2 Carlsbad Boulevard Realignment - Alternative 2, Parcel 1, Land Use Scenario A; Fiscal Revenues Table 2.A.3, 4, 5 Carlsbad Boulevard Realignment - Alternative 2, Parcel 1, Land Use Scenario A; Executive Meeting Hotel Operating Statement
Table 2.A.6 Carlsbad Boulevard Realignment-'--Alternative 2, Parcel 1, Land Use Scenario A; Time Share Table 3.A. l Carlsbad Boulevard Realignment - Alternative 3, Land Use Scenario A; Proforma Cash Flow - Preliminary Residual Land Value
Table 3.A.2 Carlsbad Boulevard Realignment-Alternative 3, Land Use Scenario A; Fiscal Revenues Table 3.A.3, 4 Carlsbad Boulevard Realignment - Alternative 3, Parcel 1, Land Use Scenario A; Retail/Commercial Operating Statement
Table 3.A.5, 6 Carlsbad Boulevard Realignment - Alternative 3, Parcel 1, Land Use Scenario A; Office Operating Statement
Table 3.A.7 Carlsbad Boulevard Realignment -Alternative 3, Parcel 2, Land Use Scenario A; Time Share Table 3.A.8, 9, IO Carlsbad Boulevard Realignment - Alternative 3, Parcel 3, Land Use Scenario A; Full Service Hotel
PROJECT No. 141 SB APPENDIX 1S
0 0
0 0
D
0 0
0 0
0 0
o·
0 0
0 D
0 0
D
E.co nom,cs Re 5,ea rch A 1,sociat 4e-s
Table 3 .A.11 Carlsbad Boulevard Realignment - Alternative 3, Parcel 6A, Land Use Scenario A; Time Share Table 3.A.12, 13 Carlsbad Boulevard Realignment - Alternative 3, Parcel 6B, Land Use Scenario A; Office Operating Statement
Table 4.A.1 Carlsbad Boulevard Realignment - Alternative 3, Parcel 6B, Land Use Scenario A; Profonna Cash Flow - Prelirnim1ry Residual Land Value
Table 4.A.2 Carlsbad Boulevard Realignment - Alternative 4, Parcel 1, Land Use Scenario A; Fiscal Revenues Table 4.A.3 , 4, 5 Carlsbad Boulevard Realignment - Alternative 4, Parcel 1, Land Use Scenario A; Executive Meeting Hotel Operating Statement
Table 4.A.6, 7 Carlsbad Boulevard Realignment - Alternative 4, Parcel I, Land Use Scenario A; Retail/Commercial Operating Statement
Table 4.A.8 Carlsbad Boulevard Realignment - Alternative 4, Parcel 1, Land Use Scenario A; Time Share PROJECT No. 1415B APPENDIX 16
CJ CJ CJ; CJ CJ,
Tahlc I./\. I
CARLSBAD BOULEVARD REALIGNMENT-Alternative I, Land Use Scenario A
PROFORMA CASH FLOW- PRELIMINARY RESIDUAL LAND VALUE
(l!EFORE TAXES & FINANCING)
2003 2004
Yr. 2001 l'.lltl YellL2
ln0ation Factor 3% Value 1.06 1.09
SOURCES AND USES OF FUNDS
Net Sources of Funds By 1,apd Jfse
RV - Concessionaire (0.79)
Sub-total $ $ (0.79) $
Net Cash Flow After Developer Costs Is Is (0.8!1 s
Net ereseut ~slue After De~eloper Casis
2005
fiar..l
1.13 (0.82)
(0.82) $
(0.8!1 s
Net Present Value @ 14.0% 51.20 million, Yr. 2003 dollars Source: Economics Research Associates
2006 2007 2008
Yllc..A }'.w:_,5 l'.l!llIJi
1.16 1.19 1.23
0.37 0.38 0.42
0.37 $ 0.38 $ 0.42 $
o.4 Is 0.41 s o.4 Is
CJ CJ CJ CJ
02-Oct-01
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
l:'.w:.1 l'.ear.8 fia.c.2 l'.w:.lJl Yw:..11 1'.llL.12 fur..13 l'.w:..14 l'.w:.15
1.27 1.30 1.34 1.38 1.43 1.47 1.51 1.56 1.60 I
0.43 0.44 0.46 0.47 0.49 0.50 0.52 0.53 5.40
0.43 $ 0.44 $ 0.46 $ 0.47 $ 0.49 $ 0.50 $ 0.52 $ 0.53 $ 5.40 o.4 Is 0,41 s o.5 Is o.5 Is o.51 s o.51 s o.5 Is o.51 s 5.4 I CJ CJ
Tahle I .A.2
CARLSBAD BOULEVARD REALICNMENT - Alternative I. Land 11,e Scenario A FISCAL RE\'FNUES
2003
tiJI.Li
lunation Factor 1"' . '" 1.01,
PROPERTY TAXFS
LaruL11HS
RV
City's Share 4.75% of Property Taxes $
RDA 's Non-housing Shan· h0.00"1~ of Property Taxes $
TRANSi ENT OCCUPANCY TAXES
Full Service Hotel $
Transient Occupancy Tax (ti) 10.00'% of Room Revenue $
Gross Fiscal Operating Income From TOT & Tl $
SALES TAX REVENUE
f<ood & Beverngc & 50% of Other Hotel Revenues $
Total Sales Tax Rn:enue
TOTAL FISCAL REVE:'IIJ[
Property Tax Revenue $
Transient Occupancy Tax Revenue $
Sales Tax Revenue
Total fiscal Revenue $
S_ou.n:i:uf.Fu.nds
FISCAL RE\'ENUE $
Reversion ~l? 7'){)
Total Sources of Funds
NET CASH FLOW Is
2004
Yl=_l
I.Ci'J
$
$
$ $
$ $
$ $
$ $
$ $
$ $
$ $
$ $
$ $
$ $
$ $
$ $
Is Is
Nel Present Value@ 10% $0.23 million Yr. 2003 dollar.;
Source: Economics Research Associates
2005 2006 2007
.LCJIL1 llJILl llaL5
1.11 I If, I 19
0(13 $
$ $ Cl 00 $
$ $ 0.0:' $
$ $ $
$ $ $
$ $ 0.02 $
$ 0.00 $ ().()() $
$ 000 $ o.rx1 $
$ $ 002
$ $
$ 000 $ 0.00 $
s 000 s 0.02
$ 000 $ 0.02 s
$ $ $
$ 0 00 0 02 $
Is o.oo I s 0.02 I s
CJ D
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 201] 2014 2015 2016 2017
llJILii YCB.L1 Yutr_S 1'1:ar~ Yrntlll Ycar_ll Ycatll Y!:arJJ Ycar-1A futl5
1.2_~ J.'1-:' uo 1.34 138 143 147 UI 1.56 1.60 I
Expressed In .'llillions ofl}S Dollars
0.03 $ 003 $ 0.04 $ 004 $ 0.()4 $ 0.(>4 $ 0.()4 $ 0.(>4 $ 0 ()4 $ 0.()4 0 00 s 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 000 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 000 $ 000 00:' 002 $ 0.02 $ 0.02 $ 0.02 $ 0.02 $ 0.02 $ 0.02 $ 0.02 $ 0.02 Etpres.m:l In lllillion., of IJS l>ollan
s $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
0.02 $ o.oi $ 0.02 $ 0.62 $ 0.62 $ 0.62 $ 0.02 $ 0.03 $ 0.03 $ 0.03 000 $ 0.00 $ 0 00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ O.OG $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 0 00 s o no $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 000 $ 000 002 $ 0.02 $ 0 02 $ 0.02 $ 0.02 $ 0.02 $ 0.02 $ 0.03 $ oo.i $ 0.0.1 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $
000 0.00 $ 000 $ 0.00 $ 000 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00
0.0J $ 0.03 s 0.03 5 0.03 $ 0.()3 $ 0.03 $ (1.()3 $ 0.03 $ 003 $ O.OJ llOJ 0 OJ $ 003 $ ().()3 $ 0.03 $ 0.03 $ 0.()3 $ 0.0.1 $ 0.0.1 $ 0.03 $ s $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 0.47
0.03 s 003 s 0.03 $ 0.03 $ 0.03 $ 0.0.1 $ 0.0.1 $ 0.03 $ 0.()3 $ 0 50
0.011s 0.0.1 I s 0.0.1 1 $ o.o3 1 s 0.03 ! $ om I$ o.o3 Is o.o3 1 s o.o3 Is o.5o I CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ C_J CJ CJ CJ
'I ahk I A.)
CAHLSHAIJ ROULEVAHI> REALICNMENT- Alternalive I, Parcel 4, Land Use Scenario A RV ('om.:c..;!-.ionairc Opt•rating Stalcmcnt
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 201 l 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Yr. 2001 Value Yl:ru:J. Ynr__2 fiat:_J Yt:w:A Yea.c_5 Yl:arJi Year.1 firu:J! YilL2 YilLlJl Yi:aul Yl:ru:J.2 Yi:ar__U Yl:aLl4 Ycar__l5 A»llrupli<l1lS
Innation Factor )% 1.06 1.09 1.11 I.I(, 1.19 1.21 1.27 I.JO 1.14 1.18 1.4) 147 1.)1 l."i(, 1.60 Real Escalation 0% 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 I 00 1.00 1.00 1.00 I 00 I 00 I.Oil 1.00 I.Oil 1.00 :\urnhcr ofll\" ,,,an·, 50 () () 0 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 51) Total Potential Numher of nights I X.250 I 8,250 18,250 18,250 I 8,250 I 8,250 18,250 18,250 I X,250 18,250 I 8,2511 I 8,250 Average Annual Occupancy Rate 0 ()'}~) 0.0% 00% 55.0% 60.CY% 65.0% 65 0% 65 0% 65.0% 65.0%. 65.0%1 65 0% 650% 650% 65.0% Avg. Daily RV Rate /I $ 40 42 44 45 46 48 49 51 52 54 55 57 59 61 62 64 :\11111hn of 1'1·i111itin· S1lar<.·, 45 () () () 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 50 Total Potential Numher of nights 18,250 I X,250 I 8,250 I 8,250 1 X,250 I 8,250 I 8,250 I 8,250 I 8,250 I 8,250 IX,250 18,250 Average Annual Occupancy Rate 0.0% ().()% 0.0% 50.0'}1, 55.0'Yo 55.0% 55.0% 55.0~;. 55.0% 55.0% 55.0% 550% 55.0 1}(1 55.0% 55.0% Avg. Daily RV Rate /1 $ 20 21 22 2J 21 24 25 25 26 27 28 29 29 )() 3 I )2 !!pcra~.Rnl:n.u.es Expressed in Millions of US Dollan Expr-csscd in Million!') of US Dollurs Space Rental Revenues $ $ $ $ 0.68 $ 0.76 $ 0.8) $ 0.86 $ 0.88 $ 0.91 $ 0.9) $ 0.96 $ 0.99 $ 1.02 $ 1.05 $ I.OX As% of Room Revenues
Food & Reveragc 20% 0.14 0.15 0.17 0.17 0.18 0.18 0.19 0.19 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.22 Other Revenues JO%i 0.20 0.23 0.25 0.26 0.26 0.27 0.28 0.29 0.30 0.31 0.12 0.13 Subtotal (Non-Room Revenues) 50% $ $ $ $ 0.34 $ 0.38 $ 0.42 $ 0.43 $ 0.44 $ 0.45 $ 0.47 $ 0.48 $ 0.50 $ 0.51 $ 0.53 0.54 (iross Revenues $ $ $ $ 1.02 $ 1.14 $ 1.25 $ 1.28 $ 1.32 $ 1.36 $ 1.40 $ 1.44 $ 1.49 $ 1.5) $ 1.58 $ 1.63 llipartmentaLCosts & Expenses As% of Departmental Revenues Spaces 2SC% 0.17 0.19 0.21 0.21 0.22 023 0.23 0.24 0.25 0.26 026 0.27 Food & Ueverage 75% 0.10 0.11 0.12 0.13 0.13 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.16 Other Departments 50% 0.10 0.11 0.12 0.13 013 0.14 0.14 0.14 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.16 1 otal Departmental Expenses(% of Gross Revenues) 37% $ $ $ $ 0.37 $ 0.42 $ 0.46 $ 0.47 $ 0.48 $ 0.50 $ 0.51 $ 0.53 $ 0.55 $ 0.56 $ 0.58 $ 0.60 Gross Operating Rettllucs 63% $ $ $ $ 0.64 $ 0.72 $ 0.79 $ 0.81 $ 0.84 $ 0.86 $ 0.89 $ 0.91 $ 0.94 $ 0.97 $ l.(XJ $ 1.03 Notes:
/I Rate, aller discounts, per occupied room.
Source· Economics Research Associates
CJ CJ CJ CJ c:J CJ CJ CJ CJ C_J CJ 0 CJ CJ
Tahlc I .A.4
CARLSBAD BOULEVARD REALIGNMENT-Alternative I, Parcel 4, Land Use Scenario A RV Operating Statement
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 20IO 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Yr. 2001 Value Y.tn..l Yew:..2. Yi:aLl Yl:lu:.A TuLc..S fillr...6 fillL1 filltJI Yl:a.r..2 Year...l.ll fuLll Tolill YnLl.l Tou:..ll Yw:..l.S Expressed in Millions of US Dollars Expressed in Millions of US Dollars Gross Operating Revenues 0.79 0.81 0.84 0.86 0.89 0.91 0.94 0.97 1.00 1.03 Undistributed Operating Expenses
As % of Revenue
Administrative & General 5.0% $ $ $ $ 0.05 $ 0.06 $ 0.06 $ 0.06 $ 0,07 $ 0.07 $ 0,07 $ 0.07 $ 0,07 $ 0.08 $ 0.08 $ 0.08 Management Fee 2.0% 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.D3 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 Sales & Marketing 5.0% 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.08 Energy Costs 6.0% 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.08 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.09 0.10 Repairs & Maintenance 4.0% 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.07 Total 22.0% $ $ $ $ 0.22 $ 0.25 $ 0.27 $ 0.28 $ 0.29 $ 0.30 $ 0.31 $ 0.32 $ 0.33 $ 0.34 $ 0.35 $ 0.36 Gross Operating Profit 41.3% $ $ $ $ 0.42 $ 0.47 $ 0.51 $ 0.53 $ 0.55 $ 0.56 $ 0.58 $ 0.60 $ 0.61 $ 0.63 $ 0.65 $ 0.67 Ei1ed Expenses & Capital Costs
Property Taxes (based on I% of prior year capitalized value) fomiula 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.04 Incentive Fee 2.0% 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.D3 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 Insurance 1.0% 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.G! 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.02 0.02 Capital Reserve 2.0% 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.D3 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 0.03 Total 5.0% 0.05 0.09 0.10 0.10 $ 0.10 $ 0.10 $ 0.11 $ 0.11 $ 0.11 $ 0.12 $ 0.12 $ 0.12 NET OPERA TING INCOME (ex. depr., interest & tax) 0.37 0.38 0.42 0.43 0.44 0.46 0.47 0.49 0.50 0.52 0.53 0.55 Source: Economics Research Associates
CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ
Table I.A,5
CARLSBAD IIOIJLEV ARD REALH;NMENT- Alternath'e I, Parcel 4, Land lJse S,·enario A (BEFORE TAXES & FINANCIN(;)
RV Oper-ating Statement
2001
Yr, 2001 Value Yeiu:-1
Soun:"'---!l(EuruL\
Net Opel"ating Income
Reversion (d! 11.0(%
Less Cost of Sales (c_{J 3.0%1
Net Sales Proceeds
Total Sources of Funds
lkITlopmmt!:osts
Inflation Assumptions 1.06
Number of Spaces 95
Development Costs - Annual% 0%
Development Costs per space /I $ I 5,2h3
Total Development Costs $
NET CASH FLOW (before financing & taxes)
Cumulative Cash Flow
$
CJ CJ
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007
YeaLZ YfiJ:_J l'car:_A l'.J:=5 Y=:Ji YeM_1
Expressed in Millions of US llollars
0,37 0,38 0A2 0A3
0,37 0,38 0A2 0A3
109 113 116 119 1,23 127
48 48
50'¼, 50% 0% 0% 0% 0 0'¼,
0,79 (),82
0,79 $ 0,82 $ $ $ $
0.79 0.82 0,]7 O.JR 0.42 0.4]
0,79 L61 1.24 0.86 0.44 0.01
Net Present Value (iiJ 14,()% Sl.20 million 2003 dollars Notes-
/I New development costs include direct costs, off-site & on-site costs, indirect costs, and developer profit. /2 Included in ckvclopment cost per space
Source· Economi<:s Research Associates
CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 201) 2014 2015
Yeru:JI YilL2 Yt!llL1JI Yelu:-11 YilLll Yeor._13 YellJ:_J_4 Yeiu:-15 Expressed in Millions of US llollar-s
$ 0,44 $ 0A6 $ 0A7 $ 0A9 $ 0,50 $ 0 52 $ 0,53 $ 0,55
5,00
0, 15
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ 4,85
$ 0A4 $ 0A6 0A7 $ 0,49 $ 0,50 $ 0,52 $ 0 53 $ 5A0
130 I ,34 138 IAJ 147 I." I ')h u,o I
0,0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0°1;1 0,0% 0.0% O.W1/~ (),()%
$ $ $ $ $ $ $
0,44 0,46 0.47 0.49 0.50 0.52 0.5] 5.40
0.44 0,90 U7 L85 2.]6 2.87 ],41 8.80
C:J CJ CJ CJ
Tahlc 2.A.I
CARLSBAD IIOULEVARD REAU<;NMENT- Alternative 2, I.and Use Scenario A PHOFORMA CASH FLOW - PRELIMINARY RESIDUAi. I.AND V,\LUE (BEFORE TAXES & FINANCING)
2003 2004 2005
Yr. 2001 ~ Y.faL.2 YJ:a.c...l
lnnation Factor 3% Value 1.06 1.09 1.13
SOURCES AND USES OF FUNDS
Net Sources of..Eund5...Hy_LandJ1fil!
Executive Mtg. Hotel Net Cash Flow (I 1.06) (11.40)
Time Share (11.54)
Sub-total $ $ (I 1.06) $ (22.93) $
Net Cash Flow After Developer Costs Is Is (I I.I)! $ (22.9)1 $ J:llet.1'.rcscnt ~aluc After Dcnloper_Costs
Net Present Value (ii) 14.0% $9.78 million US dollars
Source: Economics Research Associates
2006 2007 2008
YJ:ru:.A YJ:ar..5 l'.cJu:Ji
1.16 1.19 1.23
2.82 2.84 2.93
9.24 (2 72) 9.81
12.06 $ 0.12 $ 12.74 $
12.l Is 0.1 Is 12.1 I$
CJ
02-Oct-01
2009 20IO 201 I 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Ycru:..1 Y.eru:.11 Y.eru:..2 Yi:aLlJI .Y.ear.ll YJ:111:..U Ycar-13 Yeru:J.4 Ycur...15
1.27 1.30 1.34 1.38 1.43 1.47 1.51 1.5(, 1.1,0 I
3.02 3.11 3.21 3.31 3.41 3.52 3.63 3.74 41.24
IO.IO 10.40 1.07
13.12 $ 13.52 $ 4.28 $ 3.31 $ 3.41 $ 3.52 $ 3.63 $ 3.74 $ 41.24
13.l Is o.s I s 431$ 3.31 $ 3.4 Is 3.5 Is 3.61 $ 3.71 $ 41.21 CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ C:::J CJ CJ CJ CJ Table 2.A.2
CARLSBAD BOULEVARD REALIGNMENT- Alternative 2, Parcel I, Land Use Scenario A
FISCAL REVENUES
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 ~ Yflll:..1 Tou:..3. hau fillL5 l'.eal:..{i fiB.r..1 ~ l:'ead filu:J.Jl ~ ~ Yl:Ju.l.l Year...li fiarJ.5 Inflation Factor 3% 1.06 1.09 1.13 1.16 1.19 1.23 1.27 1.30 1.34 1.38 1.43 1.47 1.51 1.56 1.60 I PROPERTY TAXES Expressed In Millions or US Dollars
Larul....l.rn:s
Executive Mtg. Hotel $ $ $ $ $ 0.28 $ 0.29 $ 0.29 $ 0.30 $ 0.30 $ 0.31 $ 0.32 $ 0.32 $ 0.33 $ 0.34 $ 0.34 Time Share $ $ $ $ $ 0.11 $ 0.22 $ 0.34 $ 0.46 $ 0.59 $ 0.62 $ 0.63 $ 0.64 $ 0.65 $ 0.67 $ 0.68 Total Property Tax Increment $ $ $ $ $ 0.39 $ 0.51 $ 0.63 $ 0.76 $ 0.90 $ 0.93 $ 0.95 $ 0.96 $ 0.98 $ 1.00 $ 1.02 City's Share 4.75% of Property Taxes $ $ $ $ $ 0.02 $ 0,02 $ 0.03 $ 0,04 $ 0.04 $ 0.04 $ 0.04 $ 0.05 $ 0.05 $ 0.05 $ 0.05 RDA's Non-housing Share 60.00% of Property Taxes $ $ $ $ $ 0.23 $ 0.30 $ 0.38 $ 0.46 $ 0.54 $ 0.56 $ 0.57 $ 0.58 $ 0.59 $ 0.60 $ 0.61 Expressed In Millions or US Dollars
TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAXES
Executive Mtg. Hotel $ $ $ $ 5.57 $ 6.18 $ 6.36 $ 6.55 $ 6.75 $ 6.95 $ 7.16 $ 7.38 $ 7.60 $ 7.83 $ 8.06 $ 8.30 Transient Occupancy Tax@ 10.00% or Room Revenue $ $ $ $ 0.56 $ 0.62 $ 0.64 $ 0.66 $ 0.68 $ 0.70 $ 0.72 $ 0.74 $ 0.76 $ 0.78 $ 0.81 $ 0.83 Gross Fiscal Operating Income From TOT & Tl s s $ s 0.56 s 0.87 s 0.96 s 1.06 $ 1.17 s 1.28 s 1.32 $ 1.35 s 1.38 s 1.42 s 1.46 s 1.49
SALES TAX REVENUE
Food & Beverage & 50% of Other Hotel Revenues $ $ $ $ 0.03 $ 0,03 $ 0.03 $ 0.03 $ 0.04 $ 0.04 $ 0.04 $ 0.04 $ 0.04 $ 0.04 $ 0.04 $ 0.04 Total Sales Tax Revenue $ $ $ $ 0.03 $ 0.03 $ 0.03 $ 0.03 $ 0.04 $ 0.04 $ 0.04 $ 0.04 $ 0.04 $ 0.04 $ 0.04 $ 0.04
TOTAL FISCAL REVENUE
Property Tax Revenue $ $ $ $ $ 0.25 $ 0.33 $ 0.41 $ 0.49 $ 0.58 $ 0.60 $ 0.61 $ 0.62 $ 0.64 $ 0.65 $ 0.66 Transient Occupancy Tax Revenue $ $ $ $ 0.56 $ 0.62 $ 0.64 $ 0.66 $ 0.68 $ 0.70 $ 0.72 $ 0.74 $ 0.76 $ 0.78 $ 0.81 $ 0.83 Sales Tax Revenue $ $ $ $ 0.03 $ 0.03 $ 0.03 $ 0.03 $ 0.04 $ 0.04 $ 0.04 $ 0.04 $ 0.04 $ 0.04 $ 0.04 $ 0.04 Total Fiscal Revenue $ $ $ $ 0.59 $ 0.90 $ 1.00 $ 1.10 $ 1.20 $ 1.31 $ 1.35 $ 1.39 $ 1.42 $ 1.46 $ 1.50 $ 1.54 SOll[CC5 o[ Euods
FISCAL OPERA TING INCOME $ $ $ $ 0.59 $ 0,90 $ 1.00 $ I.IO $ 1.20 $ 1.31 $ 1.35 $ 1.39 $ 1.42 $ 1.46 $ 1.50 $ 1.54 Reversion@ 7% $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 23.64
Total Sources of Funds $ $ $ $ 0.59 $ 0.90 $ 1.00 $ 1.10 $ 1.20 $ 1.31 $ 1.35 $ 1.39 $ 1.42 $ 1.46 $ 1.50 $ 25.18 NET CASH FLOW Is Is Is Is 0.59 Is o.9o Is 1.00 Is t.10 Is 1.20 I s 1.31 I s 1.3s I s 1.391 s 1.42 I s t.46 I s I.SO I s 25.18 I Net Present Value @ 10% SI I.SI million 2003 dollars
Source: Economics Research Associates
CJ CJ CJ c=J CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ
Table 2.A.3
CARLSBAD BOULEVARD REALIGNMENT- Alternative 2, Parcel 1, Land Use Scenario A Executive Meeting Hotel Operating Statement
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Yr. 2001 Value Ylli:..l l'.eaL2 Tou:.J fiau .Year..S Yea.c..6 fia.1:2 fiarJI l.'ur..2 l'.earJ.ll Yw:..11 Yf.lu:.ll Yw:..1.1 Yw:..14 Yilr..lS Assumptions
Inflation Factor 3% 1.06 1.09 1.13 l.16 1.19 1.23 1.27 1.30 1.34 1.38 1.43 1.47 1.51 1.56 1.60 Real Escalation 0% 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 llottl - E'-cC Cnnf. Ctr. :'\'umhcr of Room1i 150 0 0 0 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 Total Potential Number of Room nights 54. 750 54,750 54,750 54,750 54,750 54,750 54,750 54,750 54,750 54,750 54,750 54.750 Average Annual Occupancy Rate 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 65.0% 70.0% 70.0% 70.0% 70.0% 70.0% 70.0% 70.0% 70.0% 70.0% 70.0% 70.0% Avg. Daily Rm. Rate Hotel 2 / I $ 135 143 148 152 157 161 166 171 176 181 187 192 198 204 210 217 Operating Revenues Expressed in Millions of US Dollan Expressed in Millions of US Dollars Room Revenues $ $ $ $ 5.57 $ 6.18 $ 6.36 $ 6.55 $ 6.75 $ 6.95 $ 7.16 $ 7.38 $ 7.60 $ 7.83 $ 8.06 $ 8.30 As % of Room Revenues
Food & Beverage 45% 2.51 2. 78 2.86 2.95 3.04 3.13 3.22 3.32 3.42 3.52 3.63 3.74 Other Revenues 15% 0.84 0.93 0.95 0.98 1.01 1.04 1.07 I.I I 1.14 1.17 1.21 1.25 Subtotal (Non-Room Revenues) 60% $ $ $ $ 3.34 $ 3.71 $ 3.82 $ 3.93 $ 4.05 $ 4.17 $ 4.30 $ 4.43 $ 4.56 $ 4.70 4.84 $ 4.98 Gross Revenues $ $ $ $ 8.91 $ 9.88 $ 10.18 $ 10.49 $ I0.80 $ 11.13 $ 11.46 $ 11.80 $ 12.16 $ 12.52 $ 12.90 $ 13.28 Departmental Costs & Expeoses As% of Departmental Revenues Rooms 25% 1.39 1.54 1.59 1.64 1.69 1.74 1.79 1.84 1.90 1.96 2.02 2.08 Food & Beverage 75% 1.88 2.09 2.15 2.21 2.28 2.35 2.42 2.49 2.56 2.64 2.72 2.80 Other Departments 50% 0.42 0.46 0.48 0.49 0.51 0.52 0.54 0.55 0.57 0.59 0.60 0.62 Total Departmental Expenses(% of Gross Revenues) 41% $ $ $ $ 3.69 $ 4.09 $ 4.22 $ 4.34 $ 4.47 $ 4.61 $ 4.74 $ 4.89 $ 5.03 $ 5.18 $ 5.34 $ 5.50 Gross Operating Revenues 59% $ $ $ $ 5.22 $ 5.79 $ 5.97 $ 6.14 $ 6.33 $ 6.52 $ 6.71 $ 6.92 $ 7.12 $ 7.34 $ 7.56 $ 7.78 Notes:
/I Rate. afier discounts, per occupied room.
Source: Economics Research Associates
CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ c:J CJ CJ
Table 2.A.4
CARLSBAD BOULEVARD REALIGNMENT - Alternative 2, Parcell, Land Use Scenario A Executh-·e Meeting Hotel Operating Statement
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Yr. 2001 Value Yw:..1 YilL2 YllLl Ytau Tuu:...5 l'.ur..6 YuL1 fill..11 Yw:..2 .Yllr..lll Tou:.J.l Year...ll fill..lJ Yw:.li .l'w:..15 Expressed in Millions of US Dollars Expressed in Millions of US Dollars Gross Operating Revenues 5.97 6.14 6.33 6.52 6.71 6.92 7.12 7.34 7.56 7.78 lludistcibuted Operating Expenses
As % of Revenue
Administrative & General 5.0% $ $ $ $ 0.45 $ 0.49 $ 0.51 $ 0.52 $ 0.54 $ 0.56 $ 0.57 $ 0.59 $ 0.61 $ 0.63 $ 0.64 $ 0.66 Management Fee 2.0% 0.18 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.22 0.22 0.23 0.24 0.24 0.25 0.26 0.27 Sales & Marketing 5.0% 0.45 0.49 0.51 0.52 0.54 0.56 0.57 0.59 0.61 0.63 0.64 0.66 Energy Costs 6.0% 0.53 0.59 0.61 0.63 0.65 0.67 0.69 0.71 0.73 0.75 0.77 0.80 Repairs & Maintenance 4.0% 0.36 0.40 0.41 0.42 0.43 0.45 0.46 0.47 0.49 0.50 0.52 0.53 Total 22.0% $ $ $ $ 1.96 $ 2.17 $ 2.24 $ 2.31 $ 2.38 $ 2.45 $ 2.52 $ 2.60 $ 2.67 $ 2.75 2.84 $ 2.92 Gross Operating Profit 36.6% $ $ $ $ 3.26 $ 3.62 $ 3.73 $ 3.84 $ 3.95 $ 4.07 $ 4.19 $ 4.32 $ 4.45 $ 4.58 4.72 $ 4.86 Eiled Expenses & Capital Costs
Property Taxes fommla 0.28 0.29 0.29 0.30 0.30 0.31 0.32 0.32 0.33 0.34 0.34 Incentive Fee 2.0% 0.18 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.22 0.22 0.23 0.24 0.24 0.25 0.26 0.27 Insurance 1.0% 0.09 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.13 0.13 0.13 Capital Reserve 2.0% 0.18 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.22 0.22 0.23 0.?4 0.24 0.25 0.26 0.27 Total 5.0% 0.45 0.78 0.80 0.82 $ 0.84 $ 0.86 $ 0.88 $ 0.91 $ 0.93 $ 0.96 $ 0.98 $ 1.01 NET OPERA TING INCOME (ex. depr., interest & tax) 2.82 2.84 2.93 3.02 3.11 3.21 3.31 3.41 3.52 3.63 3.74 3.85 Source: Economics Research Associates
c:J CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ c=i
Table 2.A.5
CARLSBAD BOULEVARD REALIGNMENT- Alternative 2, Parcel I, Land Use Scenario A (BEFORE TAXES & FINANCING)
Hotel Operating Statement
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Yr. 2001 Value Ynr.J. fia.t..2 Yn.L1 Yw:..4 Yl:llL5 .Yuui Yw:.1 Sources of Funds Expressed in Millions of US Dollars
Net Operating Income 2.82 2.84 2.93 3.02
Reversion@ 10.0%
Less Cost of Sales @ 3.0%
Net Sales Proceeds
Total Sources of Funds 2.82 2.84 2.93 3.02
Development Costs
Inflation Assumptions 1.06 1.09 1.13 1.16 1.19 1.23 1.27 Number of Rooms 150 75 75
DeveJopment Costs - Annual % 0% 50% 50% 0% 0% 0% 0.0%
Development Costs per room - Hotel /I $ 135,000 I 1.06 11.40 Total Development Costs $ $ I 1.06 $ 11.40 $ $ $ $
NET CASH FLOW (before financing & taxes) 11.06 11.40 2.82 2.93 3.02 Cumulative Cash Flow 11.06 22.46 19.64 13.87 10.85
Net Present Value@ 14.0% S1.02 million 2003 dollars
Notes:
/I New development costs include direct costs, otT-site & on-site costs, indirect costs, and developer profit. /2 Included in development cost per room
Source: Economics Research Associates
CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
l'.ll.r..11 l:'.ilL2 Tou:..1Jl YnLll Yn.r..ll l'.nLlJ. YllLH Ynill Expre55ed in Millions of US Dollars
$ 3.11 $ 3.21 $ 3.31 $ 3.41 $ 3.52 $ 3.63 $ 3.74 $ 3.85
38.54 1.16
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ 37.38
$ 3.11 $ 3.21 $ 3.31 $ 3.41 $ 3.52 $ 3.63 $ 3.74 $ 41.24
1.30 1.34 1.38 1.43 1.47 1.51 1.56 1.60 I
0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
$ $ $ $ $ $ $
3.11 3.21 3.31 3.41 3.52 3.63 3.74 41.24
7.74 4.53 1.22 2.19 5.71 9.34 13.07 54.31
CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ C:::J CJ CJ CJ CJ
Table 2.A.6
CARLSBAD BOULEVARD REALIGNMENT - Alternative 2, Parcel 1, Land Use Scenario A Time Share
2003 2004 200S 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 201S 2016 2017 Yr. 2001 Value Yll.t..l Yl:ll..l Tou:..l Ye.au Yew:..5 .fia.t.1i Yca.r.1 YeacJI fia.t..2 Ye.a.r.111 l'.ll.t..11 Yl:ar...1.2 YllLll ~ Yn.r..l5 Assumptions
Inflation Factor 3% 1.06 1.09 1.13 1.16 1.19 1.23 1.27 1.30 1.34 1.38 1.43 1.47 1.51 1.56 1.60 Real Escalation 0% 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Time Sha.-c {Numhe,· of Hooms) 100 0 0 0 50 50 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 Total Number of Intervals Available 2,550 2,550 5,100 5,100 5,100 5,100 5,100 5,100 5,100 5,100 5,100 5,100 Total Number of Intervals Sold Per Year 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 100 Cumulative Intervals Sold 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 5,100 5,100 5,100 5,100 5,100 5,100 5,100 Interval Sales Price $ 18,500 s 19,627 $20,215 $20,822 $21,447 $22,090 $22,753 $23,435 $24,138 $24,862 $25,608 $26,377 $27,168 $27,983 $28,822 $ 29,687 Sales Revenues Expressed in Millions of US Dollan Expressed in Millions of US Dollan Annual Sales Volume $ $ $ $ 21.45 $ 22.09 $ 22.75 $ 23.44 $ 24.14 $ 2.49 $ $ $ $ $ $ Cumulative Sales Volume 21.45 43.54 66.29 89.72 I 13.86 116.35 116.35 116.35 116.35 116.35 116.35 I 16.35 Cost of Sales Per Room
Product Cost (excluding land cost) ii $ 205,000 I 1.54 12.24 Gross Profit Before Land Costs $ $ $(11.54) $ 21.45 $ 9.85 $ 22.75 $ 23.44 $ 24.14 $ 2.49 $ $ $ $ $ $ Cumulative Profit Before Land Costs (11.54) 9.91 19.76 42.51 65.95 90.09 92.57 92.57 92.57 92.57 92.57 92.57 92.57 Costs & Expenses/2 As% of Annual Gross Sales
Commissions 22.0% $ $ $ $ 4.72 $ 4.86 $ 5.01 $ 5.16 $ 5.31 $ 0.55 $ $ $ $ $ $ Marketing 22.0% 4.72 4.86 5.01 5.16 5.31 0.55
Sales Overhead 5.0% 1.07 1.10 1.14 1.17 1.21 0.12
Administration 7.0% 1.50 1.55 1.59 1.64 1.69 0.17
Acct./Legal/Counsulting 0.5% 0.11 0.11 0.11 0.12 0.12 0.01 Depreciation 0.3% 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.01
Other 0.1% 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.00
Total Cost & Expenses(% of Annual Gross Sales) 56.9% $ $ $ $ 12.20 $ 12.57 $ 12.95 $ 13.33 $ 13.73 $ 1.41 $ $ $ $ $ $ Net Development ecofit (I oss) $ $ $(11.54) $ 9.24 $ (2.72) $ 9.81 $ IO.IO $ 10.40 $ 1.07 $ $ $ $ $ Cumulative Cash Flow $ $ $(11.54) $ (2.29) $ (5.01) $ 4.80 $ 14.90 $ 25.30 $ 26.37 $ 26.37 $ 26.37 $ 26.37 $ 26.37 $ 26.37 $ 26.37 Net Present Value@ 15.0% $8.09 million 2003 dollars
Notes:
/I Development costs include allocated share of onsite/offsite costs. /2 Selling and marking expenses only. Operating expenses are covered 100% by annual fees.
Source: RCI Consulting, Inc.; and Economics Research Associates c:::::J CJ c:::=J CJ
Table J A. I
CARLSBAD BOULEVARD REALIGNMENT- Alternative 3, Land Use Scenario A PROFORMA CASII FLOW - PRELIMINARY RESIDIJAt LAND VAUJE
(BEFORE TAXES & FINANCING)
2003 2004 2005
Yr. 2001 Yl:lu:_l YellL2 Yeru:_J
lnnation Factor 3% Value 1.06 1.09 1.13
SOURCES AND IISES OF FIINDS
l'!J:LS1turces of Funds B)'Lan!Lllie
Commercial Retail Cash Flow (2.95) (3.04)
Office I (9.90)
Time Share (17.30)
Fu II Service Hotel (20.49) (2LI0)
Time Share 6A (6.92)
Office 6B (l.71)
Sub-total $ $ (23.44) $ (59.99) $
Net Cash Flow After Developer Costs is Is (23.4)1 s !60.0)1 s l'l'i:l1'!:_csent Yah1e After UcycJoper_Cllru;
Net !'resent Value (ti) 14.0% $29.87 million 2003 dollars 2006 2007 2008
YeaL4 Year_5 Yeiu:Ji
1.16 1.19 1.23
1.74 2.13 2.20
159 1.84 2.00
9.24 9.52 (9_10)
5.55 5.60 5-77
6.93 7.43
0.30 0-36 0.38
25.36 $ 26_89 $ 1.25 $
25.4 I $ 26.91 s i.2 I s
CJ L_ __ _J
02-Oct-01
2009 20!0 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
Year__] Yeru:J! YeaL2 Ye.aLlll Year_ll Yeiu:_ll Yeac___Ll Ycru:__l_4 Ye.aLl5
1.27 1.30 1.34 1.38 1.43 1.47 151 1.56 1.60 I
2.26 2.33 2.40 2.47 2.55 2.62 2.70 2.78 30.38
2.06 2_13 2.19 2-25 2-32 2.39 2.46 2.54 27.97
10.10 10.40 10-72 11 .04
5.95 6.14 6.33 6.52 6.72 6.93 7. 15 7.37 81.27
0-39 0.40 0.41 0.42 0.44 0.45 0.46 0.48 5.24
20.77 $ 21.39 $ 22.04 $ 22.71 $ 12.03 $ 12.40 $ 12.77 $ 13. 16 $ 144.86
20.81 s 21.4 I $ 22.0 I$ 22.11 s 12.0 Is 12.4 I s 12.81 $ 13.21 s 144.91
CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ
Table 3.A.2
CARLSBAD BOULEVARD REALIGNMENT - Alternative 3, Land Use Scenario A
FISCAL REVENUES
Inflation Factor
PROPERTY TAXES
Lan.ll.llsu
Commercial Retail
Office I
Time Share 2
Full-Service Hotel
Time Share 6A
Office 6B
Total Property Tax Increment
City's Share
RDA's Non-housing Share
4.75% of Property Taxes
60.00% of Propeny Taxes
TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAXES
Full Service Hotel
Transient Occupancy Tax @ 10.00% of Room Revenue
Gross Fiscal Operating Income From TOT & TI
SALES TAX REVENUE
Retail Commercial
Food & Beverage & 50% of Other Hotel Revenues
Total Sales Tax Revenue
TOTAL FISCAL REVENUE
Propeny Tax Revenue
Transient Occupancy Tax Revenue
Sales Tax Revenue
Total Fiscal Revenue
Sources of Funds
FISCAL REVENUE
Reversion@
Total Sources of Funds
NET CASH FLOW
3%
7%
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
s
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
Is
2003
~
1.06 $
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
s
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
Is
2004
l'.l:11.c..l
1.09 Net Present Value@ 10% $26.25 million 2003 dollars Source: Economics Research Associates
CJ
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
s
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
Is
2005
lnl:..3.
1.13 c=J CJ CJ c:::J c:::J CJ CJ c:::=i CJ
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
2006
~
1.16 2007
fiaJ:...5
1.19 2008
Yeau
1.23 2009
fill..1
1.27 2010
~
1.30 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
YllL2 fiatlll har...ll fiar...ll fiw:..ll
1.34 1.38 1.43 1.47 1.51
Expressed In Millions of US Dollars
$ 0.20 $ 0.21 $ 0.22 $ 0.22 $ 0.22 $ 0.23 $ 0.23 $ 0.24 $ 0.24 $ $ 0.18 $ 0.19 $ 0.20 $ 0.20 $ 0.21 $ 0.21 $ 0.22 $ 0.22 $ 0.23 $ $ 0.11 $ 0.22 $ 0.34 $ 0.46 $ 0.59 $ 0.73 $ 0.87 $ 0.89 $ 0.91 $ $ 0.55 $ 0.57 $ 0.58 $ 0.59 $ 0.60 $ 0.61 $ 0.62 $ 0.64 $ 0.65 $ $ 0.09 $ 0.09 $ 0.09 $ 0.09 $ 0.09 $ 0.10 $ 0.10 $ 0.10 $ 0.10 $ $ 0.04 $ 0.04 $ 0.04 $ 0.04 $ 0.04 $ 0.04 $ 0.04 $ 0.04 $ 0.04 $ $ 1.17 $ 1.32 $ 1.46 $ 1.60 $ 1.76 $ 1.92 $ 2.08 $ 2.12 $ 2.17 $ $ 0.06 $ 0.06 $ 0.07 $ 0.08 $ 0.08 $ 0.09 $ 0.10 $ 0.10 $ 0.10 $ $ 0.70 $ 0.79 $ 0.87 $ 0.96 $ 1.05 $ 1.15 $ 1.25 $ 1.27 $ 1.30 $ Expressed In Millions of US Dollars
2016
fuJ:..14
1.56 2017
Yw:..1.S
1.60 I
0.25 $ 0.25
0.23 $ 0.23
0.92 $ 0.94
0.66 $ 0.68
0.10 $ 0.11
0.04 $ 0.04
2.21 $ 2.25
0.10 $ 0.11
1.33 $ 1.35
$ 10.31 $ 11.44 $ 11.78 $ 12.14 $ 12.50 $ 12.88 $ 13.26 $ 13.66 $ 14.07 $ 14.49 $ 14.93 $ 15.38 $ 1.03 $ 1.14 $ 1.18 $ 1.21 $ 1.25 $ 1.29 $ 1.33 $ 1.37 $ 1.41 $ 1.45 $ 1.49 $ 1.54 S 1.03 S 1.90 S 2.03 S 2.16 S 2.29 S 2.42 S 2.57 S 2.71 S 2.78 S 2.85 S 2.92 S 3.00 $ 0.23 $ 0.28 $ 0.29 $ 0.30 $ 0.31 $ 0.32 $ 0.33 $ 0.34 $ 0.35 $ 0.36 $ $ 0.07 $ 0.08 $ 0.08 $ 0.08 $ 0.09 $ 0.09 $ 0.09 $ 0.10 $ 0.10 $ 0.10 $ $ 0.30 $ 0.36 $ 0.37 $ 0.39 $ 0.40 $ 0.41 $ 0.42 $ 0.43 $ 0.45 $ 0.46 $ $
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
1.03 $
0.30 $
1.34 $
0.76 $ 0.85 $
1.14 $ 1.18 $
0.36 $ 0.37 $
2.26 $ 2.40 $
0.94 $
1.21 $
0.39 $
2.54 $
1.34 $ 2.26 $ 2.40 $ 2.54 $
$ $ $ $
1.34 $ 2.26 $ 2.40 $ 2.54 $
1.04 $ 1.14 $
1.25 $ 1.29 $
0.40 $ 0.41 $
2.69 $ 2.83 $
2.69 $ 2.83 $
$ $
2.69 $ 2.83 $
1.24 $
1.33 $
0.42 $
2.99 $
2.99 $
$
2.99 $
1.35 $ 1.38 $
1.37 $ 1.41 $
0.43 $ 0.45 $
3.15 $ 3.23 $
3.15 $ 3.23 $
$ $
3.15 $ 3.23 $
1.40 $
1.45 $
0.46 $
3.31 $
3.31 $
$
3.31 $
0.37 $ 0.38
0.10 $ 0.11
0.47 $ 0.49
1.43 $
1.49 $
0.47 $
3.40 $
1.46 1.54
0.49 3.49
3.40 $ 3.49
$ 53.62
3.40 $ 57.11
I s 1.34 I s 2.26 I s 2.40 I s 2.54 I s 2.691 s 2.s3 I s 2.991 s 3.15 I s 3.n I s 3.31 I s 3.40 I s 51.11 I c::::J
CJ CJ CJ CJ
Table 3./\.3
CARLSBAD BOULEVARD REALIGNMENT- Alternative 3, Parcel I, Land Use Scenario A Retail/Commercial: Operatin~ Statement
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Yeru:_l Yl:aL2 Yl:aL.1 Yca.rA firu:_5 Yea.rJi Yt:ru:_1 Yt:ru:JI Year_2 Ycatlll Y£llLll YtlLll Yi:atlJ Yfir_l4 YeatlS Inflation Factor 3'1/o 1.06 1.09 1.13 1.16 1.19 1.23 1.27 130 1.34 138 143 1.47 151 1.56 1.60 Rental Escalation 0% 1.00 I 00 1.00 LOO LOO LOO 1.00 LOO LOO LOO LOO 1.00 LOO LOO I 00 Cumulative (iross Lcasablc Arca
( ·011u11t.'JTial Rd ail 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 Rest:1111·ants 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 40,000 Total 80,000 X0,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80.000 80,000 80,000 80,000 X0.000 Occupancy Rate
( 'ornrnercial H.t.'laiJ 0% o<% O(½, 80%, 95°/4) 95% 95% 95'1/o 95%, 95%i 95°/4, 95% 951% 95'½, 95 11/;) R(•\taurant.., 0°1~1 0%, orx. 80% 95'¼) 95'1/o 95°/4, 951¾, 95'};, 95'1/o 95¾, 95% 95'¾1 95%) 95o/c) Average NNN Base Rent Per s.f Per Yr/I US$
( '011111H'tTial Rl"tail $ 20.00 21.22 21.85 22.51 23.19 23.88 24.60 25.34 26.10 26.88 27.68 28.52 29.37 30.25 31 I 6 32 09 Rl·\taurant-; $ 30.00 31.83 32.78 33.77 34.78 35.82 36.90 38.00 39.14 40.32 4L53 42.77 44.06 45.38 4h.74 48.14 A vcrage (iross Sales Per Square Fool Per Y car US$
( ·011111H'tTial Rl"lail $ 250.00 265 273 281 290 299 307 317 326 336 346 356 367 378 389 401 Rl•o,;taurant-; $ 375.00 398 410 422 435 448 461 475 489 504 519 535 551 567 584 602 Expressed in Millions of US Dollars Expressed in Millions of US Dollars ilpmtiop Revenuc.s
Base Rent Revenue $ $ $ $ 1.85 $ 2.27 $ 2.34 $ 241 $ 248 $ 2.55 $ 2.63 $ 2.71 $ 2.79 $ 2.87 $ 2.96 $ 3.05 Gross RcYenues $ $ $ $ 1.85 $ 2.27 $ 2.34 $ 241 $ 248 $ 2.55 $ 2.63 $ 2.71 $ 2.79 $ 2.87 $ 2.96 $ 3.05 ilpcratinp E,pensc.s % of Rev.
/\<lministrativc & Cicncral 4.0 11/o $ $ $ $ 0.07 $ 0.09 $ 0.09 $ 0.10 $ 0.10 $ 0.10 $ 0.11 $ 0.11 $ 0.11 $ 0.11 $ 0 12 $ 0.12 Sales & Marketing 2.0%1 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 Total 6.0% $ $ $ $ 0.11 $ 0.14 $ 0.14 $ 0.14 $ 0.15 $ 0.15 $ 0.16 $ 0.16 $ 0.17 $ 0.17 $ (l.18 $ 0.18 NET OPERATING INCOME (ex. depr., interest & tax) $ $ $ $ 1.74 $ 2.13 $ 2.20 $ 2.26 $ 2.33 $ 2.40 $ 2.47 $ 2.55 $ 2.62 $ 2.70 $ 2.78 $ 2.87 Notes:
ii Triple-net rent where tenant pays for pro-rala share of common area charges, insurance, property taxes, and utilities in addition lo base rent. No rent for tenant improvements; tenants pay for improvements.
Source: Economics Research Associates
c:i CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ c:J
Table 3.A.4
CARLS BAO BOULEVARD REALIG NMENT· Alternati ve 3, Parcel I, Land Use Scena rio A Retail/Comm ercial : Opera ting Stat ement
Z003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 l.'.taLl YCll.l YtaL1 1'.llu. l:'.w:.5 l.'..w:.6 fill.1 Yw:JI. Yw:..!! Yw:..lJl Yw:..ll Y.caLll l'.t.atlJ fuill .lDt.15 Souccu o[ Eunds Expressed In MIiiions or US Oollan Expressed in Millions or US Dollars Net Operating Incom e $ $ s $ 1.74 s 2.13 $ 2.20 $ 2.26 $ 2.33 s 2.40 s 2.47 s 2.55 s 2.62 $ 2.70 $ 2.78 $ 2.87 Reversion@ 10.0% $28.66
Less Cost of Sales@ 4.0% $ 1.15
Net Sale Proceeds $ s s $ s $ $ $ $ $ $ $ s $ $27.5 1
Total Sources of Funds $ $ $ $ 1.74 s 2.13 $ 2.20 $ 2.26 s 2.3) $ 2.40 $ 2.47 $ 2.55 $ 2.62 $ 2.70 $ 2.78 $30.38 Ot:!!d11pm£DI C11s1S
Gross Leasable Area (s.f.) 80,000 40,000 40,000
Inflation Assumptions I 1.06 1.09 1.13 1.16 1.19 1.23 1.27 1.30 1.34 1.38 1.43 1.47 l.51 1.56 1.60 I CIHllllll'rcial Hcl:iil 0.0% 50.0% 50.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Rcsl:lltr3nls 0.0% 50.0% 50.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% New Development Costs/2 $ 135.00 per sf $ s 2.95 $ 3.04 $ $ s $ $ $ $ $ $ s s s Total Development Costs 2.95 3.04
NET CASH FLOW (befon nnanclng & taxes) 2.95 3.04 1.74 2.13 2.20 2.26 2.33 2.40 2.47 2.S5 2.62 2.70 2.78 30.38 CUM ULATIVE CASH FLOW 2.95 5.99 4.25 2.11 0.08 2.3S 4.68 7.08 9.55 12.10 14.72 17.42 20.20 50.58 Residual Land Value = Net Present Valu e@ 14.0% $8.28 million 2003 dollars Notes:
/ I New development costs. include direct costs, indirect costs, and developer profit.
Source: Economics Research Associates
C:J C:J
Table 3.A.5
CARLSBAD BOULEVARD REALIGN:\-IENT - Alternative 3, Parcel 1, Land Use Scenario A Office Operating Statement
Inflation Factor
Rental Escalation
()flier
rota! CL\
Average Annual Occupancy Rate
Occupied Space
Average NNN Rent Per s.f .. Per Year
New
Yr. 2001 Value
3%
0%
80,000
80,000
22.80 2003 2004
fiaLl lnr..2
1.06 1.09
1.00 1.00
0% 0%
$ 24.19 24.91
c:J
2005 2006
Yllr..J fiaU
1.13 1.16
1.00 1.00
80,000
80,000
0% 80%
64,000
25.66 $ 26.43
CJ CJ
2007 2008 2009
fia.t..S fiaL6 Yil1'...1
1.19 1.23 1.27
1.00 1.00 1.00
80.000 80,000 80,000
80,000 80,000 80,000
90% 95% 95%
72,000 76,000 76,000
$ 27.22 $ 28.04 $ 28.88
c::=i CJ C:J CJ c:J
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
fur_8 Ye.ar..2 fiar...lll Yn.rJ..l fiaLl2 Yea.t..ll fia.r...li Yea.c..15
1.30 1.34 1.38 1.43 1.47 1.51 1.56 1.60
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95%
76,000 76,000 76,000 76,000 76,000 76,000 76,000 76,000 $ 29.75 $ 30.64 $ 31.56 $ 32.51 $ 33.48 34.49 $ 35.52 $ 36.59 Expressed In MIiiions or US Dollen Expressed In Millions or US Dollars Gross Revenues
% of Rev.
4.0%
$ $ $ $ 1.69 $
0.07 1.96 $ 2.13 $ 2.20 $ 2.26 $
0.08 0.09 0.09 0.09
2.33 $ 2.40 $ 2.47 $ 2.54 $ 2.62 $ 2.70 2.78
0.09 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.10 0.11 0.11
Operating Expenses
Administrative & General
Sales & Marketing 2.0% ____________ --"=----"=----"'=----"'=----"'=--....:c=----"'=----"'=--..::.:=--..::.:=--..::.:=--="'--0.03 0.04 0.04 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.06 Total
NET OPERATING INCOME (ex. depr., Interest & tax)
Notes:
6.0% $
s
$
s s s
0.10 0.12 $ 0.13
1.59 s 1.84 s 2.00
$ 0.13 $ 0.14 $ 0.14 $ 0.14 0.15
s 2.06 s 2.13 s 2.19 s 2.25 s 2.32
/I Triple.net rent where tenant pays for pro-rata share of common area charges, insurance, property taxes, and utilities in addition to base rent. No rent for tenant improvements; tenants pay for improvements.
Source: Economics Research Associates
0.15 $ 0.16 0.16 0.17
s 2.39 s 2.46 s 2.54 s 2.61
c:=i
c:J CJ
I able J.A.6
L\RI.SIIAI> IIOIILEVARD REALIGNMENT Alternati'Vt' J, Parcel 1, Land U~e Scenario A (IIEIOIU: TAXES & FINANCING)
Offin• 011crating Statement
Sourccs..J1Llunds
Net Operating Income
Reversion@
Lc .... s Cost of Saks (a)
Net Sale Proceeds
Tfltal Sources of Funds
lkvtlopmenl..D>s.t,
lnnation Assumptions
Gross Lcasablc Arca
Development Co!-.1S Annual%
New Development Costs
Total Dnclopmcnt Costs
NET CASH FLO\\' (hefor-e financing & taxes)
ClJMIILATIVECASII FLOW
Residual Land Value= Net Pr-esent Value (a)
Notes:
/I
Yr. 2001 Value
100%
10°;,
New 80,000
New
$11000 11cr sf
14.0';;;)
New developmenl include direct cost<;, indirect costs, and developer profit.
Source· Economics Research Associates
2003
YcaLl
$
$
$
1.0<i
0%
$
$
S4.79
2004 zoos 2006 2007 2008
Yelll Yell.r...l Yl:ar_4 Yeru:..5 Yl:ru:.1J
Expressed in Millions of l IS Dolln.-s
$ $ $ 1.59 $ 1.84 $ 2.00
$ $ $ $ $
$ $ $ 1.59 1.84 $ 2.00
1.09 1.1.l 1.16 1.19 I 23
80,fl(X) 80,000 80,000
0% 100%, 0%
$ 9.90 $
$ 9.90 $ $
9,90 1,59 l,84 2.00
9,90 8,31 6.47 4,47
million 2003 dollars
CJ CJ c=i
2009 2010 ZOii 2012 zon 2014 2015 2016 2017
Y"1lf..1 Yl:arJ! Yl:a.t:..2 Y.ear 10 Year 11 Yelll:..ll Year_U YcaLl4 Year 15 Expressed in Millions of l/S Dollars
$ 2.06 $ 2.13 $ 2.19 $ 2 25 $ 2 . .12 $ 2 . .19 $ 2.46 $ 2 54 2.61
26.14 0.78
$ $ $ $ $ $ $ 25 . .15
$ 2.06 2.1.l 2. 19 2.25 $ 2.32 2 . .19 $ 2.46 2.54 27.97
1.27 1..10 I 34 1 . .18 I 43 1.47 I 5 I I 56 I 60
80,000 80,000 80,000 80.000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 80,000 $ $
$ $ $ $ $
2.06 2.13 2,19 2.25 2.32 2.39 2.46 2.54 27.97
2.41 0.28 1,91 4.16 6.49 H.HH 11.34 IJ.HH 41,85
c:J CJ c:J CJ CJ c::J CJ CJ CJ
Table 3.A.7
CARLSBAD BOULEVARD REALIGNMENT- Alternative 3, Parcel 2, Land Use Scenario A Time Share
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Yr. 2001 Value fiatl Ytll.l Yea.t..J Yl:lltl fill..5 .Yca.c.Ji fiar.1 fiarJI Ytar..2 Yea.c.111 Xear..ll ~ .Year...ll fiatlA fia.cJ.5 Assumptions
Inflation Factor 3% 1.06 1.09 1.13 1.16 1.19 1.23 1.27 1.30 1.34 1.38 1.43 1.47 1.51 1.56 1.60 Real Escalation 0% 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 l\umhcr of Hoom!-i 150 0 0 0 75 75 75 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 Total Number of Intervals Available 3,825 3,825 3,825 7,650 7,650 7,650 7.650 7,650 7,650 7,650 7,650 7,650 Total Number of Intervals Sold Per Year 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 Cumulative Intervals Sold 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 650 650 650 650 650 Interval Sales Price $ 18,500 $ 19,627 $20,215 $20,822 $21,447 $22,090 $22,753 $23,435 $24,138 $24,862 $25,608 $26,377 $27,168 $27,983 $28,822 $ 29.687 Sales Revenues Expressed in Millions of US Dollars Expressed in Millions of US Dollars Annual Sales Volume $ $ $ $ 21.45 $ 22.09 $ 22. 75 $ 23.44 $ 24.14 $ 24.86 $ 25.61 $ $ $ $ $ Cumulative Sales Volume 21.45 43.54 66.29 89.72 113.86 138.73 164.33 164.33 164.33 164.33 164.33 164.33 Cost of Sales Per Room
Product Cost (excluding land cost) /I $ 205,000 17.30 18.91 Gross Profit Before Land Costs $ $ $ (17.30) $ 21.45 $ 22.09 $ 3.84 $ 23.44 $ 24.14 $ 24.86 $ 25.61 $ $ $ $ $ Cumulative Profit Before Land Costs (17.30) 4.14 26.23 30.08 53.51 77.65 102.51 128.12 128.12 128.12 128.12 128.12 128.12 Costs & Expeuses/2 As % of Annual Gross Sales
Commissions 22.0% $ $ $ $ 4.72 $ 4.86 $ 5.01 $ 5.16 $ 5.31 $ 5.47 $ 5.63 $ $ $ $ $ Marketing 22.0% 4.72 4.86 5.01 5.16 5.31 5.47 5.63
Sales Overhead 5.0% 1.07 1.10 1.14 1.17 1.21 1.24 1.28
Administration 7.0% 1.50 1.55 1.59 1.64 1.69 1.74 1.79
Acct./Legal/Counsulting 0.5% 0.11 0.1 I 0.11 0.!2 0.!2 0.12 0.13 Depreciation 0.3% 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.08
Other 0.1% 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03
Total Cost & Expenses(% of Annual Gross Sales) 56.9% $ $ $ $ 12.20 $ 12.57 $ 12.95 $ 13.33 $ 13.73 $ 14.!5 $ 14.57 $ $ $ $ $ :!Set Development ftofit (l.oss) $ $ $ (17.30) $ 9.24 $ 9.52 $ (9.10) $ 10.10 $ 10.40 $ 10.72 $ I 1.04 $ $ $ $ $ Cumulative Cash Flow $ $ $ (17.30) $ (8.06) $ 1.46 $ (7.64) $ 2.46 $ !2.86 $ 23.58 $ 34.61 $ 34.61 $ 34.61 $ 34.6! $ 34.61 $ 34.61 Net Present Value@ 15.0% S7.68 million 2003 dollars
Notes:
/I Development costs include allocated share of onsite/oITsite costs. /2 Selling and marking expenses only. Operating expenses are covered 100% by annual fees.
Source: RCI Consulting, Inc.; and Economics Research Associates CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ c::::::::J CJ
Table 3.A.8
CA RLSBAD BOUt.£VA RD REALIGNl\1F: NT • Alternative 3. Parcel 3, t.a nd Us., Scrnor io A full Sen•i4;-e Hotel
2003
Yr. 200 1 Value Yw:.1
Assumptions
ln0ation Factor 3% 1.06
Real Escalation 0% 1.00
l'll'l! 1.5 (I lotd 2 • t-:xer. Conl'. Ctr.) Numhrr c.f H.ooms 300 0 Total Potentia l Number of Room nights
A vcrage Annua l Occupa ncy Rate 0.0%
Avg. Daily Rm. Rate Hotel 2 /1 s 125 133
Opualing .R.wmles
Room Revenues s
As~. of Room Revenues
Food & Beverage 55%
Other Re,·enues 30%
Subtotal (Non -Room Reve nues) 85% s
Gross Revenues s
lltpactmtDlll fa:sls & EIP:t:DW As¾ of Departmental Revenues Rooms 25%
food & Beverage 75%
Other Departments SO¾
Total Departmental Expense s(% of Gross Revenues) 44~'. s Gross OPtratiag Btvtnuts 56% s
No1es:
/I Rate. aficr discounts, per occupied room.
Source: Economic s Research Associates
s
s
s
s
s
CJ CJ CJ CJ
2004 200S 2006 200 7 2008 2009
fur.l ~ l'.llu. fia.c..5 fi&U }'.£ac.1
1.09 1.13 1.16 1.19 1.23 1.27
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
0 0 300 300 300 300
I0'),500 109.500 109,500 109,500
0.0% 0.0% 65.0% 70.0% 70 .0% 70.0"/4
137 141 145 149 154 158
E•presud la l\lillions or US Dollars
s s 10.31 $ 11.44 $ 11.78 s 12.14
S.67 6.29 6.48 6.68
3.09 3.43 3 .54 3.64
s 8.77 s 9 .72 $ 10.02 s 10.32
s s 19.08 s 21.16 S 21.80 $ 22.45
2.58 2,86 2.95 3.03
4,25 4 ,72 4 .86 5.01
1.55 1.72 1.77 1.82
s s 8.38 s 9.30 s 9 .57 s 9.86
s s 10.70 s 11.87 s 12.23 s 12.59
CJ c::::::J CJ CJ CJ
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
fuLI ~ 1'.u.rJ.tl fur.ll r.w:..u l'..w'..ll Ye.u.li l'.tu..15
1.30 1.34 1.38 1.43 1.47 1.51 1.56 1.60
1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
300 300 300 300 300 300 300 300
109.SOO 109,500 109.500 109,500 109,500 109.500 109,500 109.500
70.0"/4 70.0"/4 70.0% 70.0% 70.0% 70.0% 70.0% 70.0"/4
163 168 173 178 11\4 189 195 20 1
E•presud In MIIUons or US Dollars
s 12.50 s 12.88 s 13.26 s 13.66 s 14.07 s 14.49 $ 14.93 s 15.38
6.88 7.08 7.29 7.51 7.74 7.97 8.21 8.46
3.75 3.86 3.93 4 .10 4 .22 4.35 4.48 4 .61
s 10.63 s 10.94 s 11.27 s 11.61 $ 11.96 s 12.32 s 12.69 s 13.07 $ 23. 13 S 23.82 S 24.54 S 25.27 S 26.03 S 26.81 S 27.62 s 28.44
3. 13 3.22 3.32 3.42 3 .52 3.62 3.73 3.84
S. 16 5.31 S.47 5.63 5.80 S.98 6.16 6.34
1.88 1.93 1.99 2.05 2.11 2.17 2.24 2.31
s 10.16 s 10.46 s 10.78 s I 1.10 s 11.43 s 11.78 s 12.13 s 12.49 s 12.97 s 13.36 s 13.76 s 14. 17 s 14,60 $ 15.04 $ I S.49 s IS.95
D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D D
Table 3.A.9
CARLSBAD BOULEVARD REALIGNMENT. Alternati"e 3, Parcel 3, Land Use Scenario A Full Service Hotel
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Yr. 2001 Value Yttr.l filu:.2. lilLl Yll.rA Yea.r..5 Yn.t.1i fia.r.1 YeaI:..8 .Yell..2 YuL1ll Yttr.11 fin..ll Yl:ar.13. fiatl4 Ytar.15 Expressed in Millions of US Dollars Expressed in Millions of US Dollars Gross Operating Revenues 12.23 12.59 12.97 13.36 13.76 14.17 14.60 15.04 15.49 15.95 I I ndistributed Operating Expeoses
As% of Revenue
Administrative & General 5.0% $ $ $ $ 0.95 $ 1.06 $ 1.09 $ 1.12 $ 1.16 $ 1.19 $ 1.23 $ 1.26 $ 1.30 $ 1.34 $ 1.38 $ 1.42 Management Fee 2.0% 0.38 0.42 0.44 0.45 0.46 0.48 0.49 0.51 0.52 0.54 0.55 0.57 Sales & Marketing 5.0% 0.95 1.06 1.09 1.12 1.16 1.19 1.23 1.26 1.30 1.34 1.38 1.42 Energy Costs 6.0% 1.14 1.27 1.31 1.35 1.39 1.43 1.47 1.52 1.56 1.61 1.66 1.71 Repairs & Maintenance 4.0% 0.76 0.85 0.87 0.90 0.93 0.95 0.98 1.01 1.04 1.07 1.10 1.14 Total 22.0% $ $ $ $ 4.20 $ 4.66 $ 4.80 $ 4.94 $ 5.09 $ 5.24 $ 5.40 $ 5.56 $ 5.73 $ 5.90 6.08 $ 6.26 Gross Operating Profit 34.1% $ $ $ $ 6.50 $ 7.21 $ 7.43 $ 7.65 $ 7.88 $ 8.12 $ 8.36 $ 8.61 $ 8.87 $ 9.14 9.41 $ 9.69 Eixed Expenns & Capital Costs
Property Taxes (based on 1% of prior year capitalized value) fomrnla 0.55 0.57 0.58 0.59 0.60 0.61 0.62 0.64 0.65 0.66 0.68 Incentive Fee 2.0% 0.38 0.42 0.44 0.45 0.46 0.48 0.49 0.51 0.52 0.54 0.55 0.57 Insurance 1.0% 0.19 0.21 0.22 0.22 0.23 0.24 0.25 0.25 0.26 0.27 0.28 0.28 Capital Reserve 2.0% 0.38 0.42 0.44 0.45 0.46 0.48 0.49 0.51 0.52 0.54 0.55 0.57 Total 5.0% 0.95 1.61 1.66 1.70 $ 1.75 $ 1.79 $ 1.84 $ 1.89 $ 1.94 $ 1.99 2.04 $ 2.10 NET OPERATING INCOME (ex. depr., interest & tax) 5.55 5.60 5.77 5.95 6.14 6.33 6.52 6.72 6.93 7.15 7.37 7.60 Source: Economics Research Associates
CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ c:::J CJ CJ c:=J CJ CJ CJ CJ c.:::::J Table 3.A. 10
CARLSBAD BOULEVARD REALIGNI\IENT- Alternative 3, Parcel 3, Land Use Scenario A (BEFORE TAXES & FINANCING)
Full Seryice Hotel
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 20IO 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Yr. 2001 Value Tou:..l Year...2 fiar_J fiJl.c.A Yn.c..S fiaL6 Yn.r..1 filu:..ll Yn.r..2 Yili:..111 Year...ll fiar...ll Yll.r..1J Y.elLc._ti fuLl.S Sources of Funds Eipressed In Millions of US Dollars Eipressed in Millions of US Dollars Net Operating Income 5.55 5.60 5.77 5.95 $ 6.14 $ 6.33 $ 6.52 $ 6.72 $ 6.93 $ 7.15 $ 7.37 $ 7.60 Reversion@ 10.0% 75.95
Less Cost of Sales @ 3.0% 2.28
Net Sales Proceeds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 73.68
Total Sources of Funds 5.55 5.60 5.77 5.95 $ 6.14 $ 6.33 $ 6.52 $ 6.72 $ 6.93 $ 7.15 $ 7.37 $ 81.27 Development Costs
Inflation Assumptions 1.06 1.09 1.13 1.16 1.19 1.23 1.27 1.30 1.34 1.38 1.43 1.47 1.51 1.56 1.60 I Number of Rooms 300 150 150
Development Costs - Annual% 0% 50% 50% 0% 0% 0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Development Costs per room - Hotel /1 $ 125,000 20.49 21.10 Total Development Costs $ $ 20.49 $ 21.10 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ NET CASH FLOW (before financing & tues) 20.49 21.IO 5.55 5.60 5.77 5.95 6.14 6.33 6.52 6.72 6.93 7.15 7.37 81.27 Cumulative Cash Flow 20.49 41.59 36.04 30.44 24.67 18.72 12.58 6.25 0.27 6.99 13.93 21.07 28.44 109.71 Net Present Value @ 14.0% $3.94 million 2003 dollars
Notes:
/I New development costs include direct costs, ofT-site & on-site costs, indirect costs, and developer profit. /2 Included in development cost per room
Source: Economics Research Associates
CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ
Table 3.A.11
CARLSBAD BOULEVARD REALIGNI\IENT - Alternatiw 3, Parcel 6A, Land Use Scenario A Time Share
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Yr. 2001 Value Yilr....l Tou:.l fiaL1 Yl:a.cA ~ Yea.r...6 fillLl YurJI l'.il.c..2 Yuc..1il fiar.J..1 Yn.r..U Year_l.l YearJ.4 Year...1.5 Assumptions
Inflation Factor J% 1.06 1.09 1.13 1.16 I.I 9 1.23 1.27 1.30 1.34 1.38 1.43 1.47 1.51 1.56 1.60 Real Escalation 0% 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Time Share Room, 30 0 0 0 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 Total Number of Intervals Available 1.530 1.530 1,530 1,530 1,530 1,530 1,530 1.530 1,530 1,530 1,530 1,530 Total Number of Intervals Sold Per Year 750 780
Cumulative Intervals Sold 750 1,530 1,530 1,530 1,530 1,530 1,530 1,530 1,530 1,530 1,530 1,530 Interval Sales Price $ 18,500 s 19,627 $20.215 $20,822 $21,447 $22,090 $22,753 $23,435 $24, I 38 $24,862 $25,608 $26,377 $27,168 $27,983 $28,822 $ 29,687 Sales Revrm1es Expressed in Millions of US Dollan Expressed In Millions of US Dollars Annual Sales Volume $ $ $ $ 16.08 $ 17.23 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Cumulative Sales Volume 16.08 33.32 33.32 33.32 33.32 33.32 33.32 33.32 33.32 33.32 33.32 33.32 Cost of Sales Per Room
Product Cost (excluding land cost) /I $ 205,000 6.92
Gross Profit Before Land Costs $ $ $ (6.92) $ 16.08 $ 17.23 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Cumulative Profit Before Land Costs (6.92) 9.16 26.39 26.39 26.39 26.39 26.39 26.39 26.39 26.39 26.39 26.39 26.39 Costs & Expenses/2 As % of Annual Gross Sales
Commissions 22.0% $ $ $ $ 3.54 $ 3.79 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Marketing 22.0% 3.54 3.79
Sales Overhead 5.0% 0.80 0.86
Administration 7.0% 1.13 1.21
Acct./Legal/Counsu !ting 0.5% 0.08 0.09
Depreciation 0.3% 0.05 0.05
Other 0.1% 0.02 0.02
Total Cost & Expenses(% of Annual Gross Sales) 56.9% $ $ $ $ 9.15 $ 9.80 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Net Development erofit (l,oss) 43% $ $ $ (6.92) $ 6.93 $ 7.43 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ Cumulative Cash Flow $ $ $ (6.92) $ 0.01 $ 7.44 $ 7.44 $ 7.44 $ 7.44 $ 7.44 $ 7.44 $ 7.44 $ 7.44 $ 7.44 $ 7.44 $ 7.44 Net Present Value@ 15.0% $3.10 million 2003 dollars
Notes:
/I Development costs include allocated share of onsite/offsite costs. /2 Selling and marking expenses only. Operating expenses are covered l00% by annual fees.
Source: RCI Consulting, Inc.~ and Economics Research Associates
CJ CJ CJ
rabk 3.A.1.!
CARLSBAD 8O(/1.E\' ARD REAl.l(;~l\tENT ~ Alternative 3, Parcel 68, I.and ll'ie Scenario A ()ffi(t' OJwra.ting Stah.•ml'nl
lnfl;llion Factor
Rental Escalation
()!fin·
101111 ,;1 .\
A vcragc Annual Occupancy Rate
Occupied Space
A vcragc NNN Rent Pn <; f. Per Y r-ar
Gro'iS RrH·nucs
Opcr.atine_E..xpeu~
Admmi'itrat1ve & (icncral
Sales & Marketmg
Total
New
NET OrF.:RATING INCOME (ex. dtpr., lntere!!it & tu)
No1n:
Yr. 2()01 Value
J'%
0%
15,000
15,0ilO
22 80
% of Rev.
4.!)%
20%
()0%
2003 2004
l'.i:iu:_l Yl:aL.2
!06 1 09
1.00 I 00
0% 0"·~
I 2-419 $ :4.91
CJ CJ CJ
2005 2006 2007 2008 200'l
Ye.arJ Yl:.aL4 l'l:ac__5 Yl!llLli l:l:lu:_1
I 11 I II, I 19 I 73 l.?7
I 00 I 00 1.()0 I 00 I 00
15,000 15,000 l'i.000 1·5-000
15,0ilO 15.(XX) 15,000 15,000
0% 80%) 95% 95%, 95°1,,
12,000 14.150 14,250 ]'1,1)0
$ 25 (16 $ 2() 4.~ n n 28(14 $ 28 HH
Expre'i'ied In Millions or US Dollan
$ 0.)2 $ O.J9 $ 0 40 041
0.01 0 02 0 02 0.02
001 0.01 0.01 001
0 02 0.02 0 02 002
s $ 030 $ 0.36 s 0,38 $ 0.39
c=i CJ
20IO 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Y=J! l'.i:iu:-2 .Y.c.atlll Ye.ar_ll l'uLll YilrJ.J Y<ac_U 110 I 34 I J8 I -11 I 47 I 51 1.56
I 00 I 00 I 00 1 00 I()() !Oil I 00
15,000 15,000 15.000 I 'i.000 15,000 L),00.) 15.000
15,0ilO 15,000 15,fX)() 15,0ilO 15,000 15,000 15,000
95%, 95% 95% 9'i",;, 95':,;, 95"'<, 95%
14,250 14,150 14.250 14,250 14,250 14.2">0 1-1,150
29 75 J0.64 JI 56 \2 51 J] 48 $ J4 41) Vi 52
F.1pn•55ed in MIiiions or lJS Dollun
042 $ 0.44 $ 0 45 $ 0.46 $ 048 $ 0.49 $ 0 51
0.02 002 0.02 0.02 0 02 0 02 0 02
0,01 0.01 0.01 0_0] 0 01 0 01 001
O.OJ O.OJ 0OJ O.OJ 0.0J 0 O.~ 0.0J
$ 0.40 s 0.41 s 0.42 $ 0.44 0.45 $ 0.46 s 0.4H
/I Tnpk-net rent where tenant pays for prn-rata 'ihare of common area charge,;;, msurnnce, property taxes, and utiht1es m addition lo base rent No rent for tenant improvements; tcnant'i pay for improvements Source: Economics Research As'iociatt.:"s
Tahk J A 13
CARLSHAO HOUI.E\'AHD RF:AI.IGNMF.N I - Altnnuti"e 3, runt'! 6H, I.and lJs{' Scenu..-lo A (llEFORE TAXF:S .. t Fli\lANCIN(;)
Orrin· Opernling Statement
Suurccs oI. t:unds
Net Operating Income
Reversion (a"'!
I .css Cost of Sales (tj}
Net Sale rrocecds
Tolal Source~ of Funds
lkulopm<ll1D»ts
In nation Assumptions
(iross Lea.-.ahlc Arca
Development Costs Annual %
New Development Costs
Total Development Costs
NET CASH FLOW (before financing & ta.ies)
CUM ULA TIV[ CASH FLOW
Residual Land Value= Nel Present Value@
Notes:
/I
Yr 2001 Value
10 0''"
l0%
New 15,000
New
$ 101,44 per sf
14.0%
New development costs include direct coslS, indirect costs. and developer profit.
Source: Economics Research Associates
21H)J
l'.i:iu:_l
I 06
0'\,,
SI.OJ
2004 2005 2006 2tH)7 2008
Yrac__..2 l'l:uJ Yl:.aL4 l'l:ac__5 l'<aLli
E1prr~~ed In MIiiions or lJS Dollan
$ 0 JO $ 0 J6 s 0.)8
0.J0 036 0.J8
I 09 JU 1.16 1.19 I 2J
15.000 15,000 15,000
0% 100~;. 0%
1.71 1.71
1.71 0,30 036 0.38
1.71 1.41 1.05 0.67
million 2003 dollars
200'l 20IO 2011 20ll 2013 2014 2015 2016
l:l:lu:_1 Ycar-_8 Yl:lu:_2 .Y.c.atlll Y<JILil l'uLll YrarJJ Y<ac_U F.xpr{'ssed In MIiiions or lJS Dollen
0.39 0 40 041 0 42 0.44 s 045 $ 0.46 s 048
0.39 040 041 042 0 44 0 45 0.46 048
I 27 LJ0 l.J-1 I J8 1-4] I 47 1.51 I 56
1.\000 15.000 15,0(X) l<;,(XXJ 1).00() 15.000 15.000 ]<;,()()() 039 0.40 0.41 0.42 0,44 0.45 0.46 0.48
0.29 0.11 0.52 0,94 138 1.83 2.29 2.77
c::J CJ CJ CJ
2017
Ye..--15
lt.i)
I.Oil
15))()()
15,000
95%
14,2<;()
$ J6 YJ
0 52
0.02 0 01
0 OJ
s 0.49
2017
Ye..--15
0.49 4.90
0 15
4.7<;
5.24 IW
15.000
5.24 8.01
CJ CJ CJ c:=i CJ CJ CJ
Tahlc 4.A.1
CARLSBAD BOULEVARD REALIG'ii\lE'iT- Alternati\e 4, Parcell. Land U,e Scenario A PROFORMA CASI! FLOW - l'REL1'11NARY HESIIHIAL L \Nil VALUE (BEFORE TAXES & FINANCIN(;)
2003 2004 2005
Yr. 2001 illLl 1'J:Ju:..2 ll!lL.1
Inflation f'actor .30;0 Value 1.116 l()lJ I I 3
SOURCES AND USES OF FUNDS
NetSources or FundsJi)'.Llllld. U£e
Executive Mtg. llotcl Net Cash Flow (11.06) (11.40)
Commercial Retail Cash Flow (3 32) (3.42)
Time Share I 17 301
Suh-total s $ ( 14.38) $ (32 I 2) $
Net Cash Flow After Developer Costs Is is (14.4)1 $ (32.lJjS l"l'ct__1'nscntYaluc.Aftet Dcnlopct {'nsls
Ne( Presrn( Value (a? 14.0% $20.65 million 2003 do!!ars 2006 2007 2008
Yeru:___4 Yca.r_5 _lillI___Jj
1.16 lllJ 1.2.1
2.82 2 :q 2.93
1.96 2.40 2.-17
l),24 9 . .52 (lJ.111)
1-l 112 $ 14.76 $ i].711) $
14.o I s 14.8 I s (3.7)1 $
CJ CJ CJ
02-Oct-0I
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017
llllLl 1:_CJl..[___j! Year..2 YJ:ar.J.ll Ycar_ll Yl:arll Yc.auJ Year___14 Yl:ru:.15 I.-,-, - I I 30 1.34 I.JX 1.4] 1.47 151 1.56 1.60 I
3 U2 3.12 3.21 3.31 3.42 3.52 3.63 3.74 41.27
2 . .55 2.62 2.70 2.78 2.86 2.95 3.04 3.13 34.18
10 10 10.40 10.72 11.04 7.39
15.67 s 16.14 $ 16.63 $ 17. 13 $ 13.67 $ 6.47 $ 6.67 $ 6.87 $ 75.45
15.7 I s 16.1 is 16.61 $ 17.1 is 13.7 j $ 6.5 j $ 6.7 j $ 6.9 j $ 75.51 C_J
Table 4.A.c
CARI .SBAD BOliLEV ARD REALIGNMENT - Alfernalive 4, Parcel I, Land Use Scenario A
FISCAL REVENIIES
In nation Factor
PROPERTY TAXES
Land_iixs
Executive Mtg. 1 lotel
Commercial Retail
Time Share
Total Property Tax Increment
City's Share
RDA 's Non-housing Share
4.75% of Property Taxes
60.00'% (lf Property 1·axcs
TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAXES
Executive Mtg. 1 lotcl
Transient Occupancy Tax (ti) 10.00o/o of Room Revenue
C.-oss Fiscal Opc.-ating Income F.-om TOT & Tl
SALES TAX REVENUE
Retail Commercial
Food & Beverage & 50% of Other Hotel Revenues
Total Sales Tax Revenue
TOTAL FISCAL REVENUE
Property Tax Revenue
Transient Occupancy Tax Revenue
Sales Tax Revenue
Total Fiscal Revenue A vailablc for Fiscal Operating Costs ~f..Eund.s
FISCAL OPERATING INCOME
Rcvcr~ion (~}
Total Sources of Funds
NET CASH FLOW
Net Present Value@ 10%
Source: Economics Research Associates
3%
7'Yo
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
s
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
Is
2003
Ycru:..l
1.06 $
$
$
$
$
s
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
2004
1'£.ar..2
1.09 $17.43 million 2003 dollars
CJ
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
s
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
Is
2005
Y£ru:..J
I.I J
2006
Y£a.t..'I
1.16 CJ
2007
Y£a.t..5
1.19 2008
Yeadi
1.23 2009
Ycru:..1
1.27 2010
Yca.r:JI
1.30 CJ
2011 2012
Y£ru:..2 Y£ar...lJl
134 1.38
Expressed In Millions of US Dollars
2013 2014 2015
l'caLll Y.cru:..12 YcaLlJ.
1.43 1.47 1.51
2016
Y£a.t...l4
1.56 CJ
2017
Ycar_l.5
u,o I
$
$
$
$ 0.28 $ 0.28 $ 0.29 $ 0.30 $ 0.30 $ 0.J I $ 0.J I $ 0.32 $ 0.33 $ 0.33 $ 0.34 $
$ 0.23 $ 0.24 $ 0.24 $ 0.25 $
$ 0.11 $ 0.22 $ 0.34 $ 0.46 $
$ 0.62 $ 0.74 $ 0.87 $ 1.00 $
0.25 $
0.59 $
1.15 $
0.26 $
0.73 $
129 $
0.26 $
0.87 $
1.45 $
0.27 $
0.97 $
1.56 $
0.27 $
0.99 $
1.59 $
0.28 $
1.01 $
1.62 $
0.28 1.03
1.66 $
$
$ 0.03 $ 0.04 $ 0.04 $ 0.05 $ 0.05 $ 0.06 $ 0.07 $ 0.07 $ 0.08 $ 0.08 $ 0.08 $ 0.37 $ 0.44 $ 0.52 $ 0.60 $ 0.69 $ 0.78 $ 0.87 $ 0.94 $ 0.96 $ 0.97 $ 0.99 Expressed In Millions of US Dollars
$ 5.57 $ 6.18 $ 6.36 $
$ 0.56 $ 0.62 $ 0.64 $
6.55 $ 6.75 $ 6.95 $
0.66 $ 0.68 $ 0. 70 $
7.16 $ 7.38 $
0.72 $ 0.74 $
7.60 $
0.76 $
7.83 $
0.78 $
8.06 $
0.81 $
8.30 0 83
S 0.56 S 1.02 $ 1.12 S 1.22 $ 1.33 $ 1.44 S 1.55 $ 1.67 S 1.77 $ 1.81 $ 1.86 $ 1.90 $
$
0.26 $
0.03 $
0.32 $
0.03 $
0.33 $
0.03 $
0.34 $
0.()3 $
0.35 $
0.04 $
0.36 $
0.04 $
0.37 $
0.04 $
0.38 $
0.04 $
0.39 $
0.04 $
0.40 $
0.04 $
0.42 $
0.04 $
0.43 0.04
$ 0.29 $ 0.35 $ 0.36 $ 0.37 $ 0.38 $ 0.40 $ 0.4 I $ 0.42 $ 0.43 $ 0.45 $ 0.46 $ 0.47 $ $
$ 0.56 $
$ 0.29 $
$ 0.85 $
0.40 $
0.62 $
0.35 $
1.37 $
0.48 $
0.64 $
0.36 $
1.48 $
0.56 $
0.66 $
0.37 $
1.59 $
0.65 $
0.68 $
0.38 $
1.71 $
0.74 $
0 70 $
0.40 $
1.83 $
0.84 $
0.72 $
0.41 $
1.96 $
0.94 $ 1.01 $
0.74 $ 0.76 $
0.42 $ 0.43 $
2.09 $ 2.20 $
1.03 $
0.78 $
0.45 $
2.26 $
1.05 $
0.81 $
0.46 $
2.32 $
1.07 0.83
0.47 2.38
$ 0.85 $ 1.37 $ 1.48 $ 1.59 $ 1.71 $ 1.83 $ 1.96 $ 2.09 $ 2.20 $ 2.26 $ 2.32 $ 2.38 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 36.54
$ 0.85 $ 1.37 $ 1.48 $ 1.59 $ 1.71 $ 1.83 $ 1.96 $ 2.09 $ 2.20 $ 2.26 $ 2.32 $ 38.92 I s o.8s f s u1 I s 1.48 I s 1.s9 I s 1.11 I s 1.83 I s 1.96 I s 2.09 I s 2.20 I s 2.26 I s 2.32 I s 38.92 I CJ
C:J CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ
rabk ·I A 3
CAllLSIIAD IIOlJLEVAllll llEAI.ICNMENT- Alternative 4, Parcel I, Land Use Scenario A F:'\t•cutivr- i\lt>tting Hotel Opcratin~ Statl'n,ent
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Yr. 2001 Value Ycatl Yi:aL2 Yl:aL1 Yn.c_.1 YeaL5 Yl:ru:J, Yl!llc_1 l'.il.tJ! YeaL.2 Yl:iu:_lD YnLll Yl,aLll YCllLl.l ~ l'uLl5 Amunp1iruls
lnnatinn Factor 3% 1.06 1.0') I.I 1 1.16 I.I 9 I 23 1.27 1.10 1.34 U8 1.41 1.47 1.51 I .)(1 1.60 Real Escalation 0% I.IHI 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 100 1.00 llo!d lfo1n11:-. 150 0 0 0 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 rotal Potential Numhcr of Room nights 54.750 54.750 54.750 54.750 54.750 54.750 51.750 54.750 54.750 54.750 54.750 54.750 A vcrage Annual Occupancy Rate 0.0%1 00%, 0.0% 65 0% 700%, 70.0'!,, 70.0%1 70.0% 70.0% 70 ()<~t 70.0%, 70.0% 70.0%, 70.0% 70.0% Avg. Daily Rm. Rate llotcl 2 /I $ 135 143 148 152 157 161 166 171 176 I 81 187 192 198 204 210 217 Uiicratinr Revenues Expresst>d in Millions or US Dollars E1pr't>ssed in Millions or IJS Dollars Room Revenues $ $ $ $ 5.57 $ 6.18 $ 6.36 $ 6.55 $ 6.75 $ 6.95 $ 7.16 $ 7.38 $ 7.60 $ 7.83 $ 8.06 $ 8.30 A._% of Room Revenues
Food & Beverage 45% 2.51 2.78 2.86 2.95 3.04 3.13 3.22 3 32 3.42 3.52 3.63 3.74 Other Revenues 15% 0.84 0.93 0.95 0.98 1.01 1.04 1.07 I.I I 1.14 1.17 1.21 1.25 Subtotal (Non-Room Revenues) 60% $ $ $ $ 3.34 $ 3.71 $ 3.82 $ 3.93 $ 4.05 $ 4.17 $ 4 30 $ 4.43 $ 4.56 $ 4.70 $ 4.84 $ 4.98 Gross Revenues $ $ $ $ 8.91 $ 9.88 $ 10.18 $ 10.49 $ 10.80 $ I 1.13 $ 11.46 $ 11.80 $ 12.16 $ 12.52 $ 12.90 $ 13.28 JkpJI.C1mcnlal Cosls & Exp,·nses As % of Departmental Revenues Rooms 25% 1.39 1.54 1.59 1.64 1.69 1.74 1.79 1.84 1.90 1.9(, 2.02 2.08 Food & Beverage 75% 1.88 2.09 2.15 2.21 2.28 2.35 2.42 2.49 2.56 2.64 2 72 2.80 Other Dcpartmcnls 50% 0.42 0.46 0.48 0.49 0.51 0.52 0.54 0.55 0.57 0.59 0.60 0.62 rota I Departmental Expenses(% of Gross Revenue'-) 41% $ $ $ $ 3.69 $ 4.09 $ 4.22 $ 4.34 $ 4.47 $ 4.61 $ 4.74 $ 4.89 $ 5.03 $ 5.18 $ 5.34 $ 5.50 .Grn.s_s_Qpcrating Revenues 59% $ $ $ 5.22 $ 5.79 $ 5.97 $ 6.14 $ 6.33 $ 6.52 $ 6.71 $ 6.92 $ 7.12 $ 7.34 7.56 $ 7.78 Note'.·
/I Rate, after discounts, per occupied room.
Source: Economics Research Associates
c=J CJ C:::J CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ
I ahle 4.A.4
CARI.SHAil IIOIJLEV ARD REALIGNMENT. Alt('rnative 4, Pare('\ 1. Lund Use Sccnado A Excrulive l\lecting Hotel Operating Staten1<'nt
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Yr. 2001 Value Yfar_l Year-2 Year_J Yelltl Yi:ar..5 YellCJi Yeru:_1 Year:J! Y-""L2 YeruQ Yellc_ll Yca_c__ll YilL1J Yead4 Yeatl_S F.xpr-cssed in Millions of US Dollars E1p.-esscd in Millions of US Dollars GrossJ2p_crating RcrtnlLC> 5.97 6.14 6.33 6.52 6.71 6.92 7.12 7.34 7.56 7.78 U ndi>tribule~linl:~cs
As '~'o of Revenue
Admini'.trative & General 5.0% $ $ $ $ 0.45 $ 0.49 $ O 51 $ 0.52 $ 0.54 $ 0.56 $ 0.57 $ 0.59 $ 0.1,I $ 0.63 $ 0.64 $ 0.66 Management Fee 2.0% 0.18 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.22 0.22 0.23 0.24 0.24 0.25 0.26 0.27 Sale'> & Marketing 5.0% 0.45 0.49 0.51 0.52 0.54 0.56 0.57 0.59 0.61 0.63 0.M 0.66 Energy Costs 6.0% 0.53 0.59 0.61 0.63 0.65 0.67 0.69 0.71 0.73 0.75 0.77 0.80 Repair:-. & Mamtcnancc 40% 0.36 0.40 0.41 0.42 0.43 0.45 0.46 0.47 0.49 0.50 0.52 0.53 Total 220% $ $ $ $ 1.96 $ 2.17 $ 2.24 $ 2.31 $ 2.38 $ 2.45 $ 2.52 $ 2.60 $ 2.67 $ 2.75 $ 2.84 $ 2.92 Gruss OpcrlllingJ'rnfil 36.6% $ $ $ $ 3.26 $ 3.62 $ 3.73 $ 3.84 $ 3.95 $ 4.07 $ 4.19 $ 4.32 $ 4.45 $ 4.58 $ 4.72 $ 4.86 flxcd Exp_cnscs & Clll)i1ail:Dsts
Property I axes fornrnla 0.28 0.28 0.29 0.30 0.30 0.31 0.31 0.32 0.33 0.33 0.34 Incentive Fee 2.0% 0.18 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.22 0.22 0.23 0.24 0.24 0.25 0.26 0.27 Insurance 1.0% 0.09 O.IO 0.10 0.10 0.11 0. II 0.! I 0.12 0.12 0.13 0.13 0.13 Capital Rc:-.ervc 2.0% 0.18 0.20 0.20 0.21 0.22 022 0.23 0.24 0.24 0.25 026 0.27 I otal 5.0% 0.45 0.78 0.79 0.81 $ 0.84 $ 0.86 $ 0.88 $ 0.90 $ 0.93 $ 0.95 $ 0.98 1.00 NET OPERA TING INCOME (ex. depc., interest & tax) 2.82 2.84 2.93 3.02 3.12 3.21 3.31 3.42 3.52 3.63 3.74 3.86 Source· Economics Research Associates
CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ C.:=J
Table 4.A.5
CARLSBAD BOULEVARD REALIGNMENT- Alternath·e 4, Parcel I, Land Use Scenario A (BEFORE TAXES & FINANCING)
Hotel Operating Statement
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Yr. 2001 Value Tou:..l fiw:.l filu:.l fill.A fill...5 Yelu:...6 Yilr.1 Yw:...8 fillL2 l:'.w:.lJI Year..ll futl2 Toi.t..lJ hlu:.H TolLlS Sources of Funds Expressed in Millions or US Dollars Expressed in Millions or US Dollars Net Operating Income 2.82 2.84 2.93 3.02 $ 3.12 $ 3.21 $ 3.31 $ 3.42 $ 3.52 $ 3.63 $ 3.74 $ 3.86 Reversion@ 10.0% 38.57
Less Cost of Sales @ 3.0% 1.16
Net Sales Proceeds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ 37.42
Total Sources of Funds 2.82 2.84 2.93 3.02 $ 3.12 $ 3.21 $ 3.31 $ 3.42 $ 3.52 $ 3.63 $ 3.74 $ 41.27 Development Costs
Inflation Assumptions 1.06 1.09 1.13 1.16 1.19 1.23 J.27 1.30 1.34 1.38 1.43 1.47 1.51 1.56 1.60 I Number of Rooms 150 75 75
Development Costs - Annual % 0% 50% 50% 0% 0% 0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Development Costs per room - Hotel / I $ 135,000 I 1.06 11.40 Total Development Costs $ $ I 1.06 $ 11.40 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ NET CASH FLOW (before financing & taxes) 11.06 11.40 2.82 2.84 2.93 3,02 3.12 3.21 3.31 3.42 3.52 3.63 3.74 41.27 Cumulative Cash Flow 11.06 22.46 19.64 16.80 13.87 I0,85 7.73 4.52 1.20 2.21 5.73 9.36 13.10 54.38 Net Present Value@ 14.0% Sl.04 million 2003 dollars
Notes:
/I New development costs include direct costs, off-site & on-site costs. indirect costs, and developer profit.
Source: Economics Research Associates
CJ C:::J CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ c::J CJ
Table 4.A.6
CARLSBAD BOULEVARD REALIGNMENT-Alternative 4, Parcel I, Land Use Scenario A Retail/Commercial: Operating Statement
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Tolr..l Yfll.r..l Yfflt:_J fill.c...4 Yt:a.c..5 YtaJ:.11 Yea.c.1 Yfa.r..11 Y.ea.c..2 fiaLlll Yllr..l1 Yl:atl2. Year..13. Yl:ar...14 Ye.a.t..15 Inflation Factor 3% 1.06 1.09 1.13 1.16 1.19 1.23 1.27 1.30 1.34 1.38 1.43 1.47 1.51 1.56 1.60 Rental Escalation 0% 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Cumulative Gross Leasable Area
Commercial lktail 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45.000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 Restaurants 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 45,000 Total 90,000 90,000 90,000 90,000 90,000 90,000 90,000 90,000 90,000 90,000 90,000 90,000 90,000 Occupancy Rate
Commercial Retail 0% 0% 0% 80% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% lkstaurants 0% 0% 0% 80% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% Average NNN Base Rent Per s.f. Per Yr/I US$
Commercial Retail $ 20.00 21.22 21.85 22.51 23.19 23.88 24.60 25.34 26.10 26.88 27.68 28.52 29.37 30.25 31.16 32.09 Rcstaurnnts $ 30.00 31.83 32.78 33.77 34.78 35.82 36.90 38.00 39.14 40.32 41.53 42.77 44.06 45.38 46.74 48.14 Average Gross Sales Per Square Foot Per Year US$
C'ommcrcial Retail $ 250.00 265 273 281 290 299 307 317 326 336 346 356 367 378 389 401 Restaurants $ 375.00 398 4IO 422 435 448 461 475 489 504 519 535 551 567 584 602 Expressed in Millions of US Dollars Expressed in Millions of US Dollars Operating Revenues
Base Rent Revenue $ $ $ $ 2.09 $ 2.55 $ 2.63 $ 2.71 $ 2.79 $ 2.87 $ 2.96 $ 3.05 $ 3.14 $ 3.23 $ 3.33 $ 3.43 Gross Revenues $ $ $ $ 2.09 $ 2.55 $ 2.63 $ 2.71 $ 2.79 $ 2.87 $ 2.96 $ 3.05 $ 3.14 $ 3.23 $ 3.33 $ 3.43 Operating Expenses %of Rev.
Administrative & General 4.0% $ $ $ $ 0.08 $ 0.IO $ 0.11 $ 0.11 $ 0.11 $ 0.11 $ 0.12 $ 0.12 $ 0.13 $ 0.13 $ 0.13 $ 0.14 Sales & Marketing 2.0% 0.04 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.07 0.07 Total 6.0% $ $ $ $ 0.13 $ 0.15 $ 0.16 $ 0.16 $ 0.17 $ 0.17 $ 0.18 $ 0.18 $ 0.19 $ 0.19 $ 0.20 $ 0.21 NET OPERATING INCOME (ex. depr., interest & tax) $ $ $ $ 1.96 $ 2.40 $ 2.47 $ 2.55 $ 2.62 $ 2.70 $ 2.78 $ 2.86 $ 2.95 $ 3.04 $ 3.13 $ 3.22 Notes:
/ I Triple-net rent where tenant pays for pro-rata share of common area charges, insurance, property taxes, and utilities in addition to base rent. No rent for tenant improvements; tenants pay for improvements.
Source: Economics Research Associates
c=J CJ c:::J CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ c:::J CJ
Table 4.A.7
CARLSBAD BOULEVARD REALIGNMENT - Alternative 4, Parcel I, Land Use Scenario A Retail/Commercial: Operating Statement
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 1'.l:lu:...l YJ:ar..l fia.c..J. l'w:A ~ fia.c..6 ~ .Tou:..B fiar...2 Yi:ar..lll YHtl1 Yllr..ll l'l:lu:..lJ. 1'.w:...M Yw:..15 Snurces n( Euods Expressed in Millions of US Dollars Expressed in Millions of US Dollars Net Operating Income $ $ $ $ 1.96 $ 2.40 $ 2.47 $ 2.55 $ 2.62 $ 2.70 $ 2.78 $ 2.86 $ 2.95 $ 3.04 $ 3.13 $ 3.22 Reversion@ 10.0% $32.24
Less Cost of Sales@ 4.0% $ 1.29
Net Sale Proceeds $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - $30.95
Total Sources of Funds $ $ $ $ 1.96 $ 2.40 $ 2.47 $ 2.55 $ 2.62 $ 2.70 $ 2.78 $ 2.86 $ 2.95 $ 3.04 $ 3.13 $34.18 lk1•i:ln12meot Cnsts
Gross Leasahle Area (s.f.) 90,000 45,000 45,000
Inflation Assumptions I 1.06 1.09 1.13 1.16 1.19 1.23 1.27 1.30 1.34 1.38 1.43 1.47 1.51 1.56 1.60 I Commercial Retail 0.0% 50.0% 50.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% Restaurants 0.0% 50.0% 50.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% New Development Costs/2 $ 135.00 per sf $ $ 3.32 $ 3.42 $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ $ - $ Total Development Costs 3.32 3.42
NET CASH FLOW (before financing & taxes) 3.32 2.40 2.47 2.55 2.62 2.70 2.78 2.86 2.95 3.04 3.13 34.18 CUMULATIVE CASH FLOW (3.32 2.38) 0.09 2.64 5.26 7.96 10.74 13.61 16.56 19.60 22.73 56.90 Residual Land Value= Net Present Value@ l4.0% $9.32 million 2003 dollars Notes:
II New development costs, include direct costs, indirect costs, and developer profit.
Source: Economics Research Associates
CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ c:=J CJ CJ C=:}
Table 4.A R
CARLSBAD BOllLEVARD REALIGN~lENT - Alternative 4, Pated 1. Land Use Scenario A Timl' Share
2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 Yr. 2001 Value Yl:aLl Yeru:_2 Ycar-3 YJ:arA Yl!aL5 Y£aL6 YilL1 l'l:aJ:J! YclU:'l Yt:aLlJI YJ!JlLll YellLll Y£BL1J Yi:arJ4 Ycar_lS Assumptillns
Inflation Factor 3% I 0/, I 09 I_I_] I II, 1.19 1.23 1.27 I._]() I 34 1.18 IA1 1.47 1.51 1.56 1_(,() Real Escalation 0% I_()() 1.00 1.00 1.00 LOO 1.00 I_()() I 00 I 00 I_()() I_()() LOO I_()() 1.00 I 00 I i111t· ~li:in· (.'\'11111lw1· of Hoom'-,) 150 0 () () 75 75 75 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 150 Total Number of Intervals Available _l,825 3,825 _l,825 7,650 7,!>50 7,651) 7,651) 7,650 7,651) 7,(,50 7,(,50 7,(,50 Total Number of Intervals Sold Per Y car 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 1,000 650 Cumulative Intervals Sold 1,000 2,000 _l,000 4,000 5,000 6,000 7,000 7,650 7,(,50 7,650 7,650 7,(,50 Interval Sales Price $ 18,500 s 19,627 $20,215 $20,822 $21,447 $22,0'10 $22,753 $23,435 $24,138 $24,862 $25,608 $26,377 $27,168 $27,'183 $28,822 $ 29,1,87 Saks_Rcrenues Expressed in Millions or US Dollars Exprt"sscd in Millions or US Dollars Annual Sales Volume $ $ $ $ 21.45 $ 22.(l'I $ 22.75 $ 23.44 $ 24.14 $ 24.86 $ 25.1,1 $ 17.14 $ $ $ $ Cumulative Sales Volun1e 21.45 43.54 66.29 8'1.72 113.86 138.73 164.33 181.48 181.48 181.48 181.48 181.48 Cnst_of.5aks Per Room
Product Cost (excluding land cost) /I $ 205,000 17.30 18.91 (iross Profit Ucfore ( ,and Costs $ $ $(17.30) $ 21.45 $ 2209 $ 3.84 $ 23.44 $ 24.14 $ 24.86 $ 25.61 $ 17.14 $ $ $ $ Cumulative Profit Before Land Costs ( 17.30) 4,14 26.23 30.08 53.51 77.65 102.51 128.12 145.26 145.26 145.26 145.26 145.26 Cuili..&_fupcnses/2 As% of Annual (iross Sales
(_ 'ommissions 22.0% $ $ $ $ 4.72 $ 4.86 $ 5.01 $ 5.16 $ 5.31 $ 5.47 $ 5.63 $ 3.77 $ $ $ $ Marketing 220% 4.72 4.86 5.01 5.16 5.31 5.47 5.63 3.77
Sales Overhead 5.0% 1.07 1.10 1.14 1.17 1.21 1.24 1.28 0.86 Administration 7.0% 1.50 1.55 1.59 1.64 1.6'1 1.74 1.79 1.20 Acct./Lcgal/(_ 'ounsulting 0.5% (LI I 0.11 0. II 0.12 0.12 0.12 0.13 0.09 Dcp1cciation 0.3% 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.07 0.08 005 Other 0 1'1/,, 0.02 0.02 ().()2 0.02 0.02 0.02 0.03 0.02 Total Cost & Expenses (0/4, of Annual (Jross Sales) 56.9% $ $ $ $ 12.20 $ 12.57 $ 12,95 $ 13.33 $ 13.73 $ 14.15 $ 14.57 $ 9.76 $ $ $ $ Nellkrrllljllllenll'rufiULn») 43% $ $ $ (17,30) $ 9.24 $ 9.52 $ (9.10) $ 10.10 $ l0.40 $ 10.72 $ I 1.04 $ 7.3'1 $ $ $ $ Cumulative Cash 1:Jow $ $ $(17.30) $ (8.06) $ 1.46 $ (7.64) $ 2.46 $ 12.86 $ 23.58 $ 34.61 $ 42.00 $ 42.00 $ 42.00 $ 42.00 $ 42.00 Net Present Value (u) 15.0% $9.27 million 2003 dollars
Notes:
/1 Development costs include allocated share ofonsitc/oITsitc costs. /2 Selling and marking C.'l(:pcnscs only. Operaling expenses arc covered !00% hy annual fees.
Source: RCI Consulting, Inc.; and Economics Research Associates Encina Wastewater supporting documents
Flood control apron
maintenance and
flow constriants
Seapointe Resort
I
-- re• ,. L
- --
- ---
. s.ot, r [Sl,fl"
o_ '/. ,1~2 4;,4 • f'G. '431 lOT 2
• I C
·.·. Jf
i"o
SAN DJEGO NoRrHSFM RA u AY
CAR_8BAD BOULEVARD
;'/ 2trol 'l1 Ill JC.DD'
'PEN$Pi. · 0£1!0 'STl/'lmtJ f,f i!: . iJK-#i:Pn-Pl92i8Jl Rt'C. Afl!'f, fl, t,p· • a,. tor 1 2.4J AC
-- -
•
PLAN
tCM.C: ,. - 1od-(f
Figure 1 - Encin
Approximate La O~all ocat1on
-20
. 4, C
... ~60 ..
!!:
" IJ - il,IJ
;
IJ .,.
II
w .. ,oo
,ANI EN'GINEER11 S iEV1E VIEW OF TH E OCE'A.!N OUTFALL
..J
:l
..JIJ ,c
Ila.
l .... ;;,
~
0 z Cl
"" z ill
• I~ J
_ 111 ·~ u <>~H - filo.·r Gilli
11,0,lli;!!s.i••~ WIili QlrOil !H r~d
Sao Lui V
OC'EAN OUTFALL
PA01FIL!E OF ENCINA -AIND 8 OCE:AN OUTFALL
5AN1 D1IIIEO O c,OUNTY. CA,L l'FORNIIA
G
I I
I J p,/W
11 I
t --
1- - ---
=f--•~OII~
£.<'Jc.f N,<!JC"
· IYITJQVJ7ru': 1
~r:;ne,.&/
LCCRT70N MPP
l,b/h,~#
I
i
1 -
"/l_f BUIL T"
f I
I
-0- 2!,. !iQr'
1-i sc.'L.E:1~
........ ~-~-~-----~
TFIJPORAFIY SHORIVC LOCA TIO/>/ rJFI LAS NCINA S
CREEK BRIOC£ REPLACEMEN T PROJECT £551 # I0- 105
P£R £AR T/-/ SU PORT YS iEMS DRAWING SI
\
\ DA TED JA1'/UARY 29, 2010
VP/ STA - 25_
POI
_.,..,,.,..-.,,,.,,,.•··l' ...... I'·
__ ......
-~
__ ••• ~-- --,.,~=c~---=cc'--',='-'c'c'
/ WfiUX f,YFIE:.S
SHORING MAY BE. E.XTE.N0£D AS RE.OUIRE.D
END OF SHORING TO OUTFALL
DISTANCE MA Y BE. LESS IF SHORING
IS [ XTEMDEO
APPROX SiEEl
CA SING LOCATION
T.!:LM.-:5
_.~.-,.-- CL OF PEJ?MANO/T OUTFAil EASEMEN T.
Pl</SHNR
ELEV: 14.59'
~·_,,..- · ESTA /SHED PER COORDINATES TAKEN
___ _..-- FROM AS BUILD ORAV-1NG
PLAN
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
APPROXIMATE: LOCATION O,• EXISTING MANHOLE, ro BE
FURTHER VERIFIED BY ADDITIONAL SU,'?\lf:Y
GRID N: 1.987253.1 l!l
CRID £: 62 J2 729- 1.J9
LEGEND
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
Figure 4
EWA Land Outfall
with New Bridge Shoring
LAND DESCRIPTION
A strip tide and submerged land 30 feet wide in the Gu f of Santa Catalina, Pacific Ocean, located south of Carlsbad, San Diego County, California, the centerline be ng described as follows:
BEGINNING at a point with California Coordinate System, of 1927, Zone 6, coordinates of N=346,791.84 feet, E=l,671,158.14 feet, which bears Sout 71 ° .01' 23'' West, 15550.61 feet from the NGS monument HPGN cA·11 07 (P D DXS29l); thence from said point of beginning the following two courses·
1. South 75° 11' 00" West 5491 95 feet,
2. South 72° 37' 35" West 2294.32 feet to the point of termination The sidelines of said stnp to be lengthened or shortened as to begin on the ordinary high water mark of said Pacific Ocean and to terminate at a line perpendicular to the terminus of sa·d centerline
Outfa 11 Protection
Project 2010
About the same
time as Encina
Creek Bridge
replacement
project
"~-.............. GRAPHC SCALE -~
o· 10· zo• JO' ,w' !JD' 80'
NOTE: CONlRACTOR SHALL SUBMIT 1-!IS Pl.A).! F'~ COONECTlNC TI,E HOPE O THE ACP UNE, AND FOR -n:!tNCHING AND BACKF'ILUNG 10 THE ENGINEER FOR APPROVAL PRIOR l'O BEGINNING HIS WORt<.
PLAN
OCENTERLINE DATA TABLE SCALE: 1 ": 20'
NO. ll.00 SEARING LENGTH BE:GIN STA. END STA.
1 S1 8"30' 1 :s·E 29.68' 104+00.00 10++29.68
2 S1 a·.30'13•E 84.77' 104+29.68 105+14.44
3 S18"27'ol•E 108.31'. 105+1<4.« 106+22.75
A, <::1R-C:R 1'1: "I" Q"7' f""I' 1'111:l~.,.,, ,~ ◄ f\..,...J..I\~ Cl!
1720 Midvale Drive
San Diego, CA, 92105
Phone: 619.972.7932
Phone: 619.972.8714
www.blackhawkenv.com
ENCINA WASTEWATER AUTHORITY FLOOD CONTROL
CHANNEL RIP RAP BED MAINTENANCE PROJECT
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENT
CITY OF CARLSBAD, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Prepared for:
Encina Wastewater Authority
1230 Columbia Street, Suite 440
6200 Avenida Encinas, Carlsbad, CA 92011
Contact: Doug Campbell, Director of Environmental Compliance Telephone: 760.268.8861
E-mail: [email protected]
Prepared by:
Blackhawk Environmental, Inc.
1720 Midvale Drive
San Diego, CA 92105
Contact: Ian Maunsell
Telephone: 206.920.3266
E-mail: [email protected]
December 1, 2020
f>lACKHAWK
E,nvironmental
Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
2 TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................................ 4
1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................. 6
1.1 PROJECT LOCATION ........................................................................................................................................ 6
1.2 BACKGROUND AND NEED ................................................................................................................................ 6
1.3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION ..................................................................................................................................... 7
2.0 METHODS ...................................................................................................................................................... 9
2.1 LITERATURE REVIEW .......................................................................................................................................... 9
2.2 SURVEY METHODS .......................................................................................................................................... 10
2.2.1 Vegetation Mapping ........................................................................................................................ 11
2.2.2 Biological Resource Survey ............................................................................................................... 11
2.2.3 Jurisdictional Delineation Survey and Report ................................................................................. 11
2.3 LIMITATIONS THAT MAY INFLUENCE RESULTS ...................................................................................................... 12
3.0 REGULATORY SETTING ................................................................................................................................ 13
3.1 STATE AND FEDERAL TAKE AUTHORIZATIONS FOR LISTED SPECIES ......................................................................... 13
3.2 FEDERAL ....................................................................................................................................................... 13
3.2.1 Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) ........................................................................................ 13
3.2.2 Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) ..................................................................................................... 14
3.2.3 Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act .......................................................................................... 14
3.2.4 Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act of 1980 ..................................................................................... 14
3.2.5 Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) ..................................................................................................... 14
3.3 STATE ............................................................................................................................................................ 15
3.3.1 State of California Endangered Species Act (CESA) .................................................................... 15
3.3.2 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) ................................................................................ 16
3.3.3 California Fish & Game Codes 3500 Series ..................................................................................... 18
3.3.4 Native Plant Protection Act .............................................................................................................. 20
3.4 LOCAL ......................................................................................................................................................... 20
3.4.1 City of Carlsbad Environmental Guidelines .................................................................................... 20
4.0 RESULTS ........................................................................................................................................................ 22
4.1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING ............................................................................................................................... 22
4.2 SOILS AND HYDROLOGIC FEATURES ................................................................................................................. 22
4.3 VEGETATION COMMUNITIES/LAND USE COVER TYPES ....................................................................................... 23
4.3.1 Coastal Freshwater Marsh (Holland Code 52410) ......................................................................... 23
4.3.2 Disturbed Coastal Scrub (Holland Code 32000) ............................................................................ 23
4.3.3 Non-vegetated Channel (Holland Code 64200) ........................................................................... 24
4.3.4 Southern Willow Scrub (Holland Code 63320) ................................................................................ 24
4.3.5 Urban/Developed (Holland Code 12000) ...................................................................................... 25
4.4 SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES ................................................................................................................................. 25
4.4.1 Special-Status Plant Species ............................................................................................................. 27
4.4.2 Special-Status Wildlife Species ......................................................................................................... 27
4.5 SPECIAL-STATUS VEGETATION COMMUNITIES .................................................................................................... 27
4.6 JURISDICTIONAL WATERS ................................................................................................................................ 47 Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
3 5.0 PROJECT IMPACTS - THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE, DIRECT/INDIRECT IMPACTS & TEMPORARY/ PERMANENT IMPACTS ...................................................................................................................................... 48
5.1 PROJECT IMPACTS ....................................................................................................................................... 48
5.1.1 Habitat Impacts ................................................................................................................................. 48
5.1.2 Construction-Related Impacts ......................................................................................................... 49
5.1.3 Operations and Maintenance-Related Impacts ........................................................................... 49
5.2 CEQA THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE .......................................................................................................... 50
5.2.1 CEQA Threshold Biology - 1 ............................................................................................................... 51
5.2.2 CEQA Threshold Biology - 2 ............................................................................................................... 52
5.2.3 CEQA Threshold Biology - 3 ............................................................................................................... 53
5.2.4 CEQA Threshold Biology - 4 ............................................................................................................... 54
5.2.5 CEQA Threshold Biology - 5 ............................................................................................................... 54
5.2.6 CEQA Threshold Biology - 6 ............................................................................................................... 55
6.0 MITIGATION PROGRAM ............................................................................................................................. 55
6.1 AVOIDANCE AND MINIMIZATION MEASURES FOR CONSTRUCTION IMPACTS ....................................................... 55
7.0 CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................................. 59
8.0 REFERENCES ................................................................................................................................................ 61
APPENDICES
A F
IGURES
B SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
C OBSERVED PLANT & WILDLIFE SPECIES LISTS
D JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION REPORT
Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Encina Wastewater Authority (EWA) Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project (Project) proposes to conduct annual maintenance and clearing activities within an approximately 7,000 square-foot area located at the western terminus of the existing flood control channel associated with the Encina Wastewater Pollution Control Facility (EWPCF), located at 6200 Avenida Encinas in the City of Carlsbad, California (Figure 1). The Project Area is located west of Interstate (I) 5 freeway and east of Carlsbad Highway 101. The Project Area is surrounded by mixed-use residential, industrial, retail, and urban/developed areas to the north, south and east. Naturally occurring habitat surrounding the Project Area includes coastal scrub, riparian scrub, and freshwater marsh, generally to the west of the Project.
The Encina Wastewater Authority Biological Resources Assessment (Rincon 2017) (2017 BRA) was previously prepared by Rincon Consultants, Inc. in January of 2017 for a similarly related Encina Wastewater Pollution Control Facility (EWPCF) channel maintenance project. The 2017 BRA identified potential project-related impacts and habitat types for proposed annual maintenance to restore as- designed flow capacity to the EWPCF flood control channel. Subsequently approved annual maintenance has included restoration (removal of debris, soil, vegetation) of all areas of the flood control channel from the eastern boundary of the EWPCF extending west to the concrete energy dissipation apron at the outflow end of the channel beneath the North County Transit District (NCTD) railroad tracks. Beyond the concrete energy dissipation apron, lies an approximately 7,000-square foot grouted rip rap bed. The grouted rip rap bed is not currently approved for maintenance and is the focus of the currently proposed Project (Figure 4).
This Biological Resource Assessment (BRA) evaluates the proposed annual maintenance of this 7,000 - square foot grouted rip rap bed located at the terminus of the existing EWPCF flood control channel apron. Currently, the grouted rip rap bed is impacted by years of sediment accumulation that now supports native riparian scrub habitat. While annual channel maintenance outlined in the 2017 BRA continues to support original flood control channel capacity, a recent 2019 storm event came very close to overflooding the channel and EWPCF. Therefore, the proposed Project is in alignment with the pervious project’s intent to preserve the original design flow conveyance capacity of the flood control channel and prevent potential flooding from large storm events that could disrupt the services provided by the EWPCF. Contrary to the 2017 BRA, the new Project and Survey Areas do support sensitive habitats, including various wetland habitat types associated with Encinas Creek within and adjacent to the proposed Project A rea that may be considered jurisdictional b y the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), the California Coastal Commission (CCC)/City, and/or California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). As such, this report has been prepared in concurrence with a formal jurisdictional assessment, conducted by Blackhawk Environmental on October 2, 2020. Results of this Jurisdictional Delineation are presented in the Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project Jurisdictional Delineation Report (Blackhawk Environmental 2020).
Primary access to the Project site is via Avenida Encinas, EWPCF internal roads, and an existing vehicle ramp within the EWPCF, as stated within the 2017 BRA. Project vehicles and equipment will use the existing ramp to travel down into the flood control channel and reach the Project site. Project implementation will require the use of existing dewatering, stockpile, and spreading areas within the EWPCF that are used for the management of solids (vegetation, debris, sediment) associated with the Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
5 annual flood control channel maintenance as described in the 2017 BRA and authorized under RWQCB Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification No. R9 -2017-0044. Project maintenance is proposed to be completed within a an approximately 14- day period initially and is proposed annually thereafter. Project timing is contingent on approvals and permit authorizations but is anticipated to occur initially during the 2021 dry season.
Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
6 1.0 INTRODUCTION
This Biological Resource Assessment (BRA) was prepared by Blackhawk Environmental, Inc. (Blackhawk) for EWA in accordance with the Habitat Management Plan (HMP) for Natural Communities in the City of Carlsbad (City of Carlsbad 2004) and its supporting documents/programs:
the City of Carlsbad (City) Guidelines for Biological Studies (City of Carlsbad 2008), and the City’s Local Coastal Program (LCP) Land Use Plan (City of Carlsbad 2014) . The HMP constitutes the City’s subarea plan within the Multiple Habitat Conservation Program Subregional Plan (MHCP) for north coastal San Diego County and meets the goals of California’s Natural Community Conservation Planning (NCCP) program. The studies detailed herein were conducted to identify the locations of sensitive natural resources, identify the potentials for occurrences (PFOs) of special -status plant and wildlife species, and to develop mitigation measures to offset potential direct, indirect and cumulative impacts to any such resources on and/or adjacent to the proposed Project alignment. Additionally, the BRA serves to illustrate the baseline conditions for which the determination of impacts and mitigation under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) should be analyzed during the environmental review process.
1.1 Project Location
The proposed Project is located within an approximately 7,000 square foot (sq. ft.) area at the western terminus of the existing flood control channel associated with the Encina Wastewater Pollution Control Facility (EWPCF), located at 6200 Avenida Encinas in the City of Carlsbad, California. The EWPCF is located approximately 0.25 miles east of the Pacific Ocean, within the north area of San Diego County (Figure 1). The studied area in this assessment includes the Project Area, which is described in detail below, and an additional 100-foot buffer (Survey Area)(Figure 4). Existing onsite and surrounding land uses include a variety of undeveloped natural vegetation communities and wetland types, as well as developed, mixed-use residential, industrial and retail areas. The Encinas Creek flood control channel, which is considered part of Encinas Creek, bisects the EWPCF and the Project Area.
1.2 Background and Need
EWA operates and maintains a sewer system as well as wastewater treatment facilities and the flood control channel that serve the Encinas Creek Watershed within North San Diego County. The EWA is a public agency that provides secondary wastewater treatment s ervices to approximately 380,000 residents in North San Diego County. As stated in the 2017 BRA, service to these residents has (in the past) been disrupted, due to heavy storm -induced flow events which overwhelm the flood control channel. Although the flood control channel was designed to handle heavy storm-induced flow events and runoff from Encinas Creek, lack of regular maintenance within the channel reduced the stormwater flow conveyance capacity of the channel. Under RWQCB Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification No. R9-2017-0044, EWA completed scheduled annual maintenance in 2018 and 2019 to remove accumulated sediment and debris from within the concrete -lined flood control channel. The east/west oriented flood control channel bisects the EWPCF into EWPCF North and EWPCF South and conveys runoff from the upstream Encinas Creek watershed (Carlsbad Hydrologic Unit, hydrologic area 904.40) and the EWPCF. The flood control channel terminates at an energy dissipation apron abutting a vegetated area west of the North County Transit District (NCTD) railroad tracks. The flood control channel is approximately 32 feet wide, 10 feet high, and 800 feet long (0.8 acre). Flow enters a triple box culvert downstream of the EWPCF site crossing under Avenida Encinas and the NCTD Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
7 train tracks. Each culvert measures approximately 8 feet tall by 10 feet wide, spanning a length of 320 feet. At the culvert’s exit, a concrete apron dissipates hydraulic energy and conveys the stormwater downstream into a natural stream channel before proceeding under Pacific Coast Highway into the Pacific Ocean . Annual maintenance within the channel, from EWA’s eastern property line and westward to the concrete energy dissipation apron at the outflow end of the channel beneat h the NCTD railroad tracks , is currently permitted by RWQCB Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification No. R9-2017-0044. Despite annual maintenance of EWA’s 0.8 -acre concrete-lined flood control channel, intense storm events in 2019 continued to cause significant flooding and risk overwhelming the channel capacity. This is due to approximately 3 -4 feet of build- up (composed of debris, sediment, and vegetation) above the grouted rip rap bed, west of the concrete energy dissipation apron at the outflow end of the channel. This build -up at the outflow end of the channel acts like a dam. During large storm events, this “dam” impedes the historical outflow path for stormwater and runoff from Encinas Creek to the Pacific Ocean. Potential flooding of the EWPCF during future storm events remains a serious risk without regular maintenance of the grouted rip rap bed.
Flooding events compromise and/or disrupt wastewater treatment services by flooding roadways, process tanks, building, and other critical facilities within the EWPCF. Additionally, prolonged disruption of services at the EWPCF would affect the 380,000 residents it serves and could impact water quality entering the Pacific Ocean if partially treated effluent must be discharged.
1.3 Project Description
The purpose of the proposed Project is to restore the original (as-designed) flow conveyance capacity, at the outflow end of the EWPCF flood control channel, through scheduled annual maintenance, consisting primarily of the removal of accumulated debris, sediment, and vegetation above the grouted rip rap bed. It is anticipated that approximately 900 cubic yards (CY) of total solids volume will be removed from above the grouted rip rap bed of approximately 7,000 square feet, located west of the concrete energy dissipation apron and concrete -lined flood control channel. All maintenance work will be completed within the concrete lined and rip rap portions of the channel, culvert, and energy dissipation structure; no new construction of perm anent structures or modification of existing structures is proposed as part of th e proposed P roject. Project maintenance is proposed to be completed within a an approximately 14 -day period initially and is proposed annually thereafter.
Project timing is contingent on approvals and permit authorizations but is anticipated to occur initially during the 2021 dry season.
The majority of the Project footprint occurs at the outflow end of the EWPCF flood control channel. The Project is proposed to occur concurrently with the existing annual maintenance conducted within the concrete lined channel within the EWPCF facility and would utilize existing access, stockpile locations and spreading areas. Use of these previously authorized areas would entail construction vehicles and equipment accessing the main flood control channel from within the EWPCF using the existing vehicle access ramp. Other areas associated with the Project include a temporary dewatering area, a temporary stockpile location and a sediment spreading area. Dewatering activities, for settling of sand, silt and organic materials, will be completed within a temporarily bermed area within the flood control channel. Dry weather flows may also be diverted through one of three box culverts using tem porary sandbag barriers. During rain events , all equipment will be removed from channel , and work will be suspended if necessary. Large debris and trash will be properly disposed of off-site, and the remaining sediment (soil/organic material) will be transported from the flood control channel to the EWPCF South Parcel sediment spreading area via EWPCF internal roads and Avenida Encinas. EWA will implement Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
8 standard construction Best Management Practices ( BMPs), such as straw wattles and silt fences , as needed at the South Parcel to prevent sediment from leaving the site and entering the Avenida Encinas public right-of-way. Hydraulic mulch (e.g., bonded fiber matrix) will be applied as needed on top of the placed sediment to prevent erosion and promote vegetat ive covering that will provide permanent erosion protection once established.
Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
9 2.0 METHODS
Methods described below focused on determination of potential for occurrence of special-status plant and wildlife species. Species are considered to be special-status, and are therefore subject to analysis in this section, if they meet one or more of the following criteria:
● Plant and animal species listed as endangered (FE), threatened (FT), or candidates (FPE or FPT) for listing under the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA); ● Plant and animal species listed as endangered (SE), threatened (ST), or candidates (SPE or SPT) for listing under the California Endangered Species Act (CESA); ● Animals designated as Fully Protected Species (FP), as defined in California Fish and Game Code Sections 3511, 4700, 5050, and 5515;
● Animal species designated as Species of Special Concern (SSC) by the CDFW; ● Bat species designated as High Priority (H) by the Western Bat Working Group; ● Plants that are state listed as Rare
1; or
● Plant species ranked by the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) as having a California Rare Plant Rank (CRPR) of 1 or 2.2
Sensitive natural communities are communities that have a limited distribution and are often vulnerable to the environmental effects of projects. CDFW identifies sensitive communities and keeps records of their occurrences in CNDDB. These communities may or may not contain special-status species or their habitats. In addition, vegetation communities that are considered to be of high importance for MHCP species are combined by the MHCP and the City’s HMP into habitat groups for purposes of assigning mitigation ratios. For purposes of this assessment, sensitive natural communities are considered to be any of the following:
● Vegetation communities listed in the CNDDB;
● Communities listed in the Natural Communities List with a rarity rank of S1 (critically imperiled), S2 (imperiled), or S3 (vulnerable).
2.1 Literature Review
Prior to conducting the biological surveys, California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) and United States Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS) species occurrence records searches were conducted within 5 miles of the Project Area to assess the Project Area for its potential to contain State and/or fede rally listed threatened, endangered and/or otherwise special -status plant and animal species, as well as endemic species and species provided take coverage under the City’s HMP (CDFW CNDDB, accessed October 2020) (Figures 2 and 3). Along with the City’s HMP guidelines, the City’s Local Coastal Program (LCP) Land Use Plan (City of Carlsbad 2008), and the City’s Guidelines for Biological Studies (City of Carlsbad 2008) were reviewed to ensure compliance with the City’s requirements for protection of Environmentally Sensitive Habitat Areas (ESHAs), planning areas, and other sensitive biological resources. Additionally, information from the 2017 BRA (Rincon Consultants, Inc., 2017) , a similarly related EWA channel maintenance project, was reviewed. Soil type data from the Natural Resources
1 Plants that were previously state listed as “Rare” have been re-designated as state threatened. 2 Under the CEQA review process, only CRPR 1 and 2 species are considered, as these are the only CNPS species that meet CEQA’s definition of “rare” or “endangered.” Impacts to List 3 and 4 species do not meet CEQA’s definition of “rare” or “endangered.” Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
10 Conservation Service (NRCS) were also reviewed to assist with identifying suitable habitat for s pecial- status species potentially present. The results of the literature review were used to focus biological survey efforts for any special- status species perceived to have some potential to occur on and/or adjacent to the Project Area.
Following the habitat assessment, potentials for special-status species to occur were evaluated based on proximity, connectivity, rec ency and abundance of known occurrences, availability of suitable habitats, historic distributions of the species, and existing site conditions. Potentials for occurrence were generally evaluated based on the following criteria:
● Present – The species was observed within the Project area during the survey effort. ● High Potential – Historic, database, and/or inventory records indicate that the species has been known to occur within the vicinity of the Project (1- 3 miles), and suitable habitat occurs onsite.
The species has a high probability of being found on the site. ● Moderate Potential – Historic, database, and/or inventory records indicate that the species has been known to occur within the vicinity of the Project, but low quality suitab le habitat occurs onsite, or; no records occur within the vicinity of the Project, but the Project occurs within the historic range of the species, and moderate to high quality habitat occurs onsite. The species has a moderate probability of being found on the site.
● Low Potential – Historic, database, and/or inventory records indicate that the species has not been known to occupy the immediate vicinity of the Project, and low quality habitat for the species exists onsite, or; records occur within the vicin ity of the Project, but the majority of the habitat on and adjacent to the site is unsuitable or of very poor quality. The species is not likely to be found on the site.
● Presumed Absent – The species is restricted to habitats not occurring within the Project site or is considered extirpated from the Project area.
2.2 Survey Methods
The biological resource survey was conducted on October 2, 2020 by Blackhawk biologists Kris Alberts, Lorena Bernal and Desiree Johnson. All biological surveys were performed according to the latest protocols and North County MHCP guidelines for biological surveys and reporting, specifically the City’s HMP and they City’s Guidelines for Biological Studies. The survey occurred from 0930 to 1125, under favorable weather conditions of 78°F to 89°F, 0 -2 mph winds, no precipitation and 0 -percent cloud cover. The biologists conducted the survey on foot; however, portions of the Survey Area that were inaccessible (e.g., steep slopes, dense vegetation, areas submerged with wate r) were visually inspected with binoculars (10 x 40).
Several tasks were accomplished during the biological survey. Onsite and adjacent areas were characterized for their existing conditions and current land uses. In order to inform the analysis of indirect impacts and proposed off-site uses, the survey included all proposed Project parcels as well as an additional 100 feet surrounding the Project (Survey Area). The onsite vegetation communities were identified by dominant species present and mapped directly onto high -resolution aerial imagery for Geographic Information System (GIS) extrapolation ( Figure 4). Potentials for occurrence (PFO) of Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
11 special-status plant and animal species resulting from the literature review were assessed in relation to the existing conditions of the Project site. Representative photographs were collected to document current conditions of the parcels as well as the general surroundings (Appendix B). All plant species observed within the Project Site, plus all wildlife observed by sight, sign and/or sound within the vicinity of the Project site, were cataloged in the field notes of the biologists to compile species lists (Appendix C). The Project site and its immediately adjacent area were assessed for the presence/a bsence of potentially jurisdictional waters of the USACE, RWQCB, CCC, CDFW and/or City of Carlsbad Resource Protection Ordinance defined wetlands, including vernal pools.
2.2.1 Vegetation Mapping
On October 2, 2020 vegetation mapping was conducted to map all vegetation communities within the Survey Area (Figure 4). Vegetation mapping was conducted by Blackhawk biologists Kris Alberts, Lorena Bernal and Desiree Johnson. Prior to conducting the biological survey, Blackhawk reviewed the City’s HMP, the City’s Guidelines for Biological Studies and the vegetation community classifications according to Holland (1986) and Oberbauer (2008) to determine those resources that were applicable for use during the mapping effort.
Vegetation community mapping was completed according to the City’s HMP and Guidelines for Biological Studies. Under the City’s HMP, vegetation communities are grouped into six specific Habitat Groups and Types (A-F) for the purposes of mitigation ratios for project -related impacts. Additionally, the City’s HMP describes sensitive habitats which may have special requirements if a project is adjacent to a Hardline Area or within the Coastal Zone. According to the City’s HMP, the Project and Survey Area are within the City’s Coastal Zone. The California Coastal Commission has jurisdiction over lands within the Coastal Zone. As such, specific conservation standards apply to all projects within this area. These standards, as they apply to the Project, are described below under Section 5.0 Project Impacts. Vegetation community classifications and boundaries were made directly into the geographic information system (GIS) mapping application, “Collector for ArcGIS”. GIS software (i.e., ArcGIS) was used to calculate acreages and areas of the features within the Survey Area. Biological field notes were prepared to document the dominant and subdominant plant species within the various communities. Plants were identified by visual observation , and nomenclature for common native plants follow ed Hickman (1993) as updated by the Jepson Online interchange (Jepson Flora Project 2016). Nomenclature for ornamental plants followed Brenzel (2001).
2.2.2 Biological Resource Survey
Blackhawk biologists Kris Alberts, Lorena Bernal and Desiree Johnson conducted a biological resource survey on October 2, 2020, between the hours of 0930 and 1130. Air temperatures ranged from 78 degrees Fahrenheit (F) to 89 degrees F. Wind speed during the survey ranged from 0 -2 mph.
Additionally, no precipitation or cloud cover was observed during the survey. Focused surveys were not conducted for special -status wildlife species; however, wildlife species observed or detected during field surveys by sight, calls, tracks, scat, or other signs were recorded in the field notes of the biologists. Binoculars were used when necessary to assist with wildlife species identification.
Potentials for occurrence (PFO) of special-status plant and wildlife species resulting from the literature review were assessed in relation to the existing conditions of the Project and Survey Area. The ability to identify wildlife species was limited by seasonal and temporal factors. Nocturnal animals were not Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
12 observed directly, as the survey was performed during the day. In addition, seasonally migratory species that may be present within the area only at specified periods outside survey timing may not have been detected. Latin and common names of wildlife species followed the American Ornithologists’ Union (2018) and Unitt (2004) for birds; Crother (2012) for amphibians and reptiles; and North American Butterfly Association (NABA) (2001) or SDNHM (2002) for butterflies.
2.2.3 Jurisdictional Delineation Survey and Report
A formal jurisdictional delineation of waters and wetlands was conducted by Blackhawk wetland specialist Kris Alberts on October 2, 2020. The delineation effort followed guidelines set forth by USACE (1987, 2008) and was performed to gather field data at potentially jurisdictional Waters of the U.S. and Waters of the State within the proposed Project Area . Methodology and results of this jurisdictional delineation are presented in the Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project Jurisdictional Delineation Report (JDR), Carlsbad, County of San Diego, California (Blackhawk 2020) as Appendix D.
2.3 Limitations That May Influence Results
The vegetation mapping, jurisdictional delineation and wildlife surveys were conducted during the day and during months of the year when most blooming annuals and perennials were not evident or identifiable. Focused surveys for wildlife and plants were not conducted.
In addition, these surveys were conducted during the daytime, which usually results in few observations of mammals, many of which may be active at night. In addition, many species of reptiles and amphibians are nocturnal or cryptic in their habits and are difficult to observe using standard survey methods. Therefore, conservative estimates regarding the PFOs of certain special-status plant and wildlife species have been considered with appropriate mitigation measures proposed herein.
Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
13 3.0 REGULATORY SETTING
This section is divided into sub-sections that include Federal, State and Local regulations that apply to the Project as proposed.
3.1 State and Federal Take Authorizations for Listed Species
Federal or state authorizations of impacts to or incidental take of a listed species by a private individual or other private entity would be granted in one of the following ways:
• Section 7 of the FESA stipulates that any federal action that may affect a species listed as threatened or endangered requires a formal consultation with USFWS to ensure that the action is not likely to jeopardize the continued existence of the listed species or result in destruction or adverse modification of designated critical habitat. 16 U.S.C. 1536(a)(2).
• In 1982, the FESA was amended to give private landowners the ability to develop Habitat Conservation Plans (HCP) pursuant to Section 10(a) of the FESA. Upon development of an HCP, the USFWS can issue incidental take permits for listed species where the HCP specifies at minimum, the following: (1) the level of impact that will result from the taking, (2) steps that will minimize and mitigate the impacts, (3) funding necessary to implement the plan, (4) alternative actions to the taking considered by the applicant and the reasons why such alternatives were not chosen, and (5) such other measures that the Secretary of the Interior may require as being necessary or appropriate for the plan.
• Sections 2090-2097 of the California Endangered Species Act (CESA) require that the state lead agency consult with CDFW on projects with potential impacts on state-listed species. These provisions also require CDFW to coordinate consultations with USFWS for actions involving federally listed as well as state- listed species. In certain circumstances, Section 2080.1 of the California Fish and Game Code allows CDFW to adopt the federal incidental take statement or the 10(a) permit as its own based on its findings that the federal permit adequately protects the species under state law.
3.2 Federal
3.2.1 Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA)
The Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 (FESA) defines an endangered species as “any species that is in danger of extinction throughout all or a significant portion of its range.” A threatened species is defined as “any species that is likely to become an endangered species within the foreseeable future throughout all or a significant portion of its range.” Under provisions of Section 9(a)(1)(B) of the FESA it is unlawful to “take” any listed species. “Take” is defined in Section 3(18) of FESA: “...haras s, harm, pursue, hunt, shoot, wound, kill, trap, capture, or collect, or to attempt to engage in any such conduct.” Further, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), through regulation, has interpreted the terms “harm” and “harass” to include certain types of habitat modification that result in injury to, or death of species as forms of “take.” These interpretations, however, are generally considered and applied on a case -by-case basis and often vary from species to species. In a case where a pr operty owner seeks permission from a Federal agency for an action that could affect a Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
14 federally listed plant and animal species, the property owner and agency are required to consult with USFWS. Section 9(a)(2)(b) of the FESA addresses the protections afforded to listed plants.
Federally-Designated Special-Status Species
All references to federally protected species in this Report (whether listed, proposed for listing, or candidate) include the most current published status or candidate category to which each species has been assigned by USFWS. Additionally, the USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern 2008 report was published to identify the migratory and non -migratory bird species (beyond those already federally listed) that represent the highest conservation priorities for USFWS.
For this report, the following acronyms are used for federal special-status species:
• FE: Federally listed as Endangered
• FT: Federally listed as Threatened
• FPE: Federally proposed for listing as Endangered • FPT: Federally proposed for listing as Threatened • FC: Federal Candidate species (Former Category 1 candidates) • BCC: USFWS Birds of Conservation Concern
3.2.2 Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA)
The Migratory Bird Treaty Act ( PL 65-186, as amended; 16 USC §§ 703 et seq.) protects most birds, whether or not they migrate. Birds, their nests, eggs, parts, or products may not be killed or possessed.
Game birds are listed and protected except where specific seasons, bag limits, and other features govern their hunting. Exceptions are made for some agricultural pests, which require a USFWS permit (yellow-headed, red -winged, bi- colored, tri -colored, Rusty and Brewer’s Blackbirds, cowbirds, all grackles, crows and magpies). Some other birds that injure crops in California may be taken under the authority of the County Agricultural Commissioner (meadowlarks, horned larks, golden -crowned sparrows, white- and other crowned sparrows, goldfinches, house finches, acorn woodpeckers, Lewis’ woodpeckers and flickers). Permits may be granted for various non -commercial activities involving migratory birds and some commercial activities involving captive-bred migratory birds.
3.2.3 Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act
The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (PL 95-616; 16 USC §§ 668 et seq .) provides for protection of the bald and golden eagles by prohibiting taking, possession, and commerce in the birds.
3.2.4 Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act of 1980
The Fish and Wildlife Conservation Act of 1980 ( PL 96 -366; 16 USC §§2901 et seq.) provides for conservation, protection, restoration and propagation of certain species, including migratory birds threatened with extinction.
3.2.5 Federal Clean Water Act (CWA)
The Clean Water Act (CWA) regulates the discharge of pollutants to waters of the United States to protect water quality and the beneficial uses of these waters. Through a permit application process, Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
15 CWA Section 404 regulates dredge and fill discharges to waters of the United States.
Vernal Pools
Vernal pools are considered “problem areas” because vegetation or hydric soils may be lacking due to seasonal filling by rainfall and eventual drying. As described in the Arid Supplement, “the species composition of some wetland plant communities in the Ar id West can change in response to seasonal weather patterns and long-term climatic fluctuations. Wetland types that are influenced by these shifts include vernal pools, playa edges, seeps and springs. Lack of hydrophytic vegetation during dry periods should not immediately eliminate a site from further consideration as a wetland.” In addition, since they support seasonally ponded soils, when soil investigations are performed within vernal pools, they may lack hydric soil indicators. The USACE includes problem soils as “seasonally ponded, depressional wetlands (that) occur in basins and valleys throughout the Arid West. Most are perched systems, with water ponding above a restrictive soil layer, such as a hardpan or clay layer, that is at or near the surface (e.g., in Vertisols). Some of these wetlands lack hydric soil indicators due to limited saturation depth, saline conditions or other factors.”
3.3 State
3.3.1 State of California Endangered Species Act (CESA)
California’s Endangered Species Act (CESA) defines an endangered species as “a native species or subspecies of a bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, reptile, or plant that is in danger of becoming extinct throughout all, or a significant portion, of its range due to one or more causes, including loss of habitat, change in habitat, overexploitation, predation, competition, or disease.” The State defines a threatened species as “a native species or subspecies of a bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, reptile, or plant that, although not presently threatened with extinction, is likely to become an Endangered species in the foreseeable future in the absence of the special protection and management efforts required by this chapter. Any animal determined by the commission as rare on or before January 1, 1985 is a threatened species.” Candidate species are defined as “a native species or subspecies of a bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, reptile, or plant that the commission has formally noticed as being under review by the department for addition to either the list of end angered species or the list of threatened species, or a species for which the commission has published a notice of proposed regulation to add the species to either list.” Candidate species may be afforded temporary protection as though they were already li sted as threatened or endangered at the discretion of the Fish and Game Commission. Unlike the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA), CESA does not list invertebrate species.
Article 3, Sections 2080 through 2085, of the CESA addresses the taking of threatened, endangered, or candidate species by stating “No person shall import into this state, export out of this state, or take, possess, purchase, or sell within this state, any species, or any part or product thereof, that the commission determines to be an endangered species or a threatened species, or attempt any of those acts, except as otherwise provided.” Under the CESA, “take” is defined as “hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill.” Exceptions authorized by the state to allow “take” require permits or memoranda of understanding and can be authorized for endangered species, threatened species, or candidate species for scient ific, educational, or management purposes and for take incidental to otherwise lawful activities. Sections 1901 and 1913 Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
16 of the California Fish and Game Code provide that notification is required prior to disturbance.
State-Designated Special-Status Species
Some mammals and birds are protected by the state as Fully Protected (FP) Mammals or Fully Protected Birds, as described in the California Fish and Game Code, Sections 4700 and 3511, respectively. California Species of Special Concern (SSC) are species designated as vulnerable to extinction due to declining population levels, limited ranges, and/or continuing threats. This list is primarily a working document for the CDFW’s California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) project. Informally listed taxa are not protected but warrant consideration in the preparation of biotic assessments. For some species, the CNDDB is only concerned with specific portions of the life history, such as roosts, rookeries, or nest sites.
For this report the following acronyms are used for State special-status species:
• SE: State-listed as Endangered
• ST: State-listed as Threatened
• SCE: State candidate for listing as Endangered • SCT: State candidate for listing as Threatened • FP: State Fully Protected
• SSC: Species of Special Concern
California Rare Plant Rank
The CNPS is a private plant conservation organization dedicated to the monitoring and protection of special-status species in California. The California Native Plant Society’s California Native Plant Society’s Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants of California separates plants of interest into five categories. CNPS has compiled an inventory comprised of the information focusing on geographic distribution and qualitative characterization of Rare, Threatened, or Endangered vascular plant species of California. The list serves as the candidate list for listing as threatened and endangered by CDFW.
3.3.2 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
Shortly after the United States federal government passed the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) was passed in 1970 to institute a statewide policy of environment al protection. CEQA does not directly regulate land uses, but instead requires state and local agencies within California to follow a protocol of analysis and public disclosure of environmental impacts of proposed projects and adopt all feasible measures t o mitigate those impacts. CEQA makes environmental protection a mandatory part of every California state and local agency's decision-making process.
CEQA Thresholds of Significance
Environmental impacts relative to biological resources are assessed using impact significance threshold criteria, which reflect the policy statement contained in CEQA, Section 21001(c) of the California Public Resources Code. Accordingly, the State Legislature has established it to be the policy of the State of California to:
“Prevent the elimination of fish or wildlife species due to man’s activities, ensure that fish Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
17 and wildlife populations do not drop below self -perpetuating levels, and preserve for future generations representations of all plant and animal communities...”
Determining whether a project may have a significant effect, or impact, plays a critical role in the CEQA process. According to CEQA, Section 15064.7 (Thresholds of Significance), each public agency is encouraged to develop and adop t (by ordinance, resolution, rule, or regulation) thresholds of significance that the agency uses in the determination of the significance of environmental effects. A threshold of significance is an identifiable quantitative, qualitative or performance lev el of a particular environmental effect, non -compliance with which means the effect will normally be determined to be significant by the agency and compliance with which means the effect normally will be determined to be less than significant.
In the devel opment of thresholds of significance for impacts to biological resources CEQA provides guidance primarily in Section 15065, Mandatory Findings of Significance, and the CEQA Guidelines, Attachment G, Environmental Checklist Form. Section 15065(a) states that a project may have a significant effect where:
“The project has the potential to: substantially 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 sel f-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or wildlife community, substantially reduce the number or restrict the range of an endangered, rare, or threatened species, ...”
Therefore, for the purpose of this analysis, impacts to biological resource s are considered potentially significant (before considering offsetting mitigation measures) if one or more of the following criteria discussed below would result from implementation of the proposed Project.
Criteria for Determining Significance Pursuant to CEQA
Attachment G of the 1998 State CEQA guidelines indicate that a project may be deemed to have a significant effect on the environment if the project is likely to:
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 Wildlife 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, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife 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.
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species, or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites.
Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
18 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 approv ed local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan.
CEQA Guidelines Section 15380
The CEQA requires evaluation of a project’s impacts on biological resources and provides guidelines and thresholds for use by lead agencies for evaluating the significance of proposed impacts. Sections 5.1.1 and 5.2.2 below set forth these thresholds and g uidelines. Furthermore, pursuant to the CEQA Guidelines Section 15380, CEQA provides protection for non-listed species that could potentially meet the criteria for state listing. For plants, CDFW assigns California Rare Plant Ranks (CRPR) to species catego rized as List 1A, 1B, or 2 of the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Inventory of Rare and Endangered Plants in California may meet the criteria for listing and should be considered under CEQA. CDFW also recommends protection of plants, which are regio nally important, such as locally rare species, disjunctive populations of more common plants, or plants on the CNPS Lists 3 or 4.
3.3.3 California Fish & Game Codes 3500 Series
California Fish & Game Codes 3500, 3503, 3503.5, 3505, 3511 and 3513 are State regulations that cover resident and non -resident game birds, protected bird nests, protected raptor nests, egrets, ospreys, Fully Protected bird species, and take considerations for Migratory Bird Treaty Act birds. • Code 3500: “(a) Resident game birds are as follows:
(1) Doves of the genus Streptopelia, including, but not limited to, spotted, ringed turtledoves, and Eurasian collared-doves.
(2) California quail and varieties thereof.
(3) Gambel’s or desert quail.
(4) Mountain quail and varieties thereof.
(5) Sooty or blue grouse and varieties thereof.
(6) Ruffed grouse.
(7) Sage hens or sage grouse.
(8) Hungarian partridges.
(9) Red-legged partridges including the chukar and other varieties. (10) Ring-necked pheasants and varieties thereof.
(11) Wild turkeys of the order Galliformes.
(b) Migratory game birds are as follows:
Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
19 (1) Ducks and geese.
(2) Coots and gallinules.
(3) Jacksnipe.
(4) Western mourning doves.
(5) White-winged doves.
(6) Band-tailed pigeons
(c) Reference in this code to “game birds” means both resident and migratory game birds.”
• Code 3503: “It is unlawful to take, possess, or needlessly destroy the nest or eggs of any bird, except as otherwise provided by this code or any regulation made pursuant thereto.” • Code 3503.5: “It is unlawful to take, possess, or destroy any birds in the orders Falconif ormes or Strigiformes (birds-of-prey) or to take, possess, or destroy the nest or eggs of any such bird except as otherwise provided by this code or any regulation adopted pursuant thereto.” • Code 3505: “It is unlawful to take, sell, or purchase any aigrette or egret, osprey, bird of paradise, goura, numidi, or any part of such a bird.”
• Code 3511: “(a) (1) Except as provided in Section 2081.7 or 2835, fully protected birds or parts thereof may not be taken or possessed at any time. No provision of this code or any other law shall be construed to authorize the issuance of permits or licenses to take any fully protected bird, and no permits or licenses heretofore issued shall have any force or effect for that purpose.
However, the department may authorize the taking of those species for necessary scientific research, including efforts to recover fully protected, threatened, or endangered species, and may authorize the live capture and relocation of those species pursuant to a permit for the protection of livestock. Prior to authorizing the take of any of those species, the department shall make an effort to notify all affected and interested parties to solicit information and comments on the proposed authorization. The notification shall be published in the California Regulatory Notice Register and be made available to each person who has notified the department, in writing, of his or her interest in fully protected species and who has provided an e-mail address, if available, or postal address to the department. Affected and interested parties shall have 30 days after notification is published in the California Regulatory Notice Register to provide any relevant information and comments on the proposed authorization. (2) As used in this subdivision, "scientific research" does not include any actions taken as part of specified mitigation for a project, as defined in Section 21065 of the Public Resources Code.
(3) Legally imported fully protected birds or parts thereof may be possessed under a permit issued by the department.
(b) The following are fully protected birds:
(1) American peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus anatum).
Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
20 (2) Brown pelican (Pelican occidentalis).
(3) California black rail (Laterallus jamaicensis coturniculus). (4) California Ridgway’s rail (Rallus longirostris obsoletus). (5) California condor (Gymnogyps californianus).
(6) California least tern (Sterna albifrons browni).
(7) Golden eagle (Aquila chrysaetos).
(8) Greater sandhill crane (Grus Canadensis tabida).
(9) Light-footed Ridgway’s rail (Rallus longirostris levipes). (10) Southern bald eagle (Haliaeetus leucocephalus leucocephalus). (11) Trumpeter swan (Cygnus buccinator).
(12) White-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus).
(13) Yuma Ridgway’s rail (Rallus longirostris yumanensis).
• Code 3513: “It is unlawful to take or possess any migratory nongame bird as designated in the Migratory Bird Treaty Act or any part of such migratory nongame bird except as provided by rules and regulations adopted by the Secretary of the Interior under provisions of the Migratory Treaty Act.”
3.3.4 Native Plant Protection Act
The Native Plant Protection Act (NPPA) was enacted in 1977 and allows the California Fish and Game Commission to designate plants as rare or endangered. There are 64 species, subspecies, and varieties of plants that are protected as rare under the NPPA. The NPPA prohibits take of endangered or rare native plants, but includes some exceptions for agricultural and nursery operations, emergencies, and/or with proper notification to the CDFW for vegetation removal from canals, roads, and other sites, changes in land use, and in certain other situations.
3.4 Local
3.4.1 City of Carlsbad Environmental Guidelines
The primary environmental guidance document, for projects or actions occurring within the City, is the City’s Habitat Management Plan (HMP). The HMP was developed by the City, in cooperation with federal and state wildlife agencies, to preserve and protect sensitive biological resources within the City while allowing for continued economic development. The overall goal of the HMP is to contribute to regional biodiversity and the viability of rare, unique or sensitive biological resources throughout the City of Carlsbad and the larger region while allowing public and private development to occur consistent with the Carlsbad General Plan and Growth Management Plan. The HMP constitutes the City’s subarea plan within the Multiple Habitat Conservation Program Sub regional Plan (MHCP) for north coastal San Diego County and meets the goals of California’s Natural Community Conservation Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
21 Planning program (NCCP). The City’s Guidelines for Biological Studies, were developed to support the HMP and provide guidance related to compliance with HMP regulations. A separate but related environmental guidance document is the City’s Local Coastal Program (LCP) Land Use Plan.
To meet the requirements of the California Coastal Act, the City has provided the LCP Land Use Plan, adopted by the California Coastal Commission (CCC) in 1980 (and amended in 1984 and 1985). The purpose of the LCP Land Use Plan is to ensure that development within the City’s Coastal Zone protects and enhances coastal resources and is consist with the California Coastal Act. The City’s LCP Land Use Plan provides policies that guide the City in protection of natural coastal resources found in the City’s Coastal Zone, which include environmentally sensitive habitat areas (ESHAs) and marine and coastal water quality. ESHAs as defined by the City’s HMP and Land Use Plan may differ from HMP described sensitive habitats and Habitat Groups, however, are covered and mitigated for under both plans.
Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
22 4.0 RESULTS
4.1 Environmental Setting
The Project site is located at the western terminus of the EWPCF flood control channel; immediately west of the NCTD railroad tracks. The Project site encompasses an area of approximately 7,000 square- feet, above which an existing grouted rip rap bed lies. Areas surrounding the Project to the north and south and east include mixed-use residential, industrial and retail land uses. Existing land use to the west of the Project are naturally occurring habitat, including riparian scrub, freshwater marsh, brackish tidal flats, existing overhead transmission line, roadways and open coastline. The HMP describes Facilities Management Zones (LFMZs), useful for conservation planning purposes, the Project site lies within LFMZ #3. According to figures within the HMP, the Project site is not located on private- , City-, or State of California-owned conservation lands, nor existing hardline conservation area (HCA). One nearby HCA exists along Encinas Creek, east of Interstate I-5 and south of Palomar Airport Road; however, this HCA terminates east of the EWPCF, approximately 1,400 feet to the east of the Project Area (Figure 1). The Project Area does not fall within any HMP Core Focus Planning Area (FPA), such as core habitat, wildlife linkages, or special resource areas. The Project Area is considered to be within the Melo II section of the Coastal Zone as determined by the CCC and the LCP Land Use Plan (City of Carlsbad 2014) (Figure 1).
4.2 Soils and Hydrologic Features
One distinct soil series mapped by USDA (1973) occurs within the Project Area: Tidal flats (Tf) (Figure 5).
Tidal flats soil series is described as hydric according to USDA. Total acreage of this soil series within the Survey Area is 1.744.
Elevations within the Project Area generally drain towards the center of the Project Area, where the site is bisected by the concrete energy dissipation apron of the EWPCF flood control channel. The EWPCF flood control channel was historically a natural, non -channelized portion of Encinas Creek.
Although it is now channelized, the EWPCF flood control channel remains a functioning part of the Encinas Creek, connecting the upstream Encinas Creek watershed (Carlsbad Hydrologic Unit, hydrologic area 904.40) with its historical reach west of the EWPCF facility (Figure 6). Surface and storm water from the upstream Encinas Creek watershed, as well as outflow from the EWPCF, flow in a generally east-west direction through the concrete lined flood control channel and discharging into the Project Area, west of the NCTD railroad tracks. At the easternmost boundary of the Project Area, channel flow enters a triple box culvert. At the culvert’s exit, hydraulic energy is dissipated over a concrete apron and grouted rip rap bed. Above the western extent of the rip rap bed lies a relatively level and vegetated shelf. Upon meeting this shelf, surface and storm water continue to flow in a westerly direction through the Project Area, meeting the natural stream channel of Encinas Creek before proceeding under the Pacific Coast Highway and onto the Pa cific coastline, ultimately terminating in the Pacific Ocean.
Based on the presence of potentially jurisdictional wetland and non -wetland areas, a formal jurisdictional delineation effort was performed. The results of this effort are included in the JDR (Blackhawk 2020) as Appendix D.
Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
23 4.3 Vegetation Communities/Land Use Cover Types
A total of five vegetation communities/land use cover types were described and mapped within the Survey Area. Within the Project and Survey Area, two vegetation communities, Coastal Freshwater Marsh, and Southern Willow Scrub, are considered wetland and/or riparian habitats by the City and wetlands by the CCC within the Coastal Zone. Vegetation communities were described according to Holland (1986) and Oberbauer (2008); corresponding classification codes are provided in parentheses.
The vegetation communities/land use cover types, associated acreages and MSCP Tier levels are as follows:
• Coastal Freshwater Marsh (52410) (0.010 acre) (Group A) • Disturbed Coastal Scrub (32000) (0.130 acres) (Group D) • Non-vegetated Channel (64200) (0.082 acres) (Group A) • Southern Willow Scrub (63320) (1.144 acres) (Group A) • Urban/Developed (12000) (0.0378 acres) (Group F)
Temporary and permanent Project-related impacts to sensitive wetland and/or riparian habitats within the Coastal Zone would require compensatory mitigation at HMP-stipulated ratios based on the acreage of the impacts; impacts to other habitats and HMP Habitat Groups, although not considered sensitive, may support special-status species and therefore also require compensatory mitigation at HMP-stipulated rations or a mitigation fee based on acreage . Each vegetation community/land use cover type is described in the following sub-sections.
4.3.1 Coastal Freshwater Marsh (Holland Code 52410)
Coastal Freshwater Marsh is a vegetation community typically described as permanently flooded by fresh water rather than brackish, alkaline or variable (Oberbauer 2008) . These areas often form completely closed canopies dominated by perennial, emergent monocots up to 4 -5 meters tall (Oberbauer 2008). This plant community is occasionally found along coasts near river mouths. (Oberbauer 2008). Coastal Freshwater Marsh is considered a sensitive wetland habitat by the City and falls under Habitat Group A (freshwater marsh).
This community is restricted to approximately 0.010 acre located, in the far northwest corner of the Survey Area. This community is very densely vegetated, lacking species diversity, and dominated by nearly monotypic southern cattail (Typha domingensis).
4.3.2 Disturbed Coastal Scrub (Holland Code 32000)
Within the Survey Area, this vegetation community does not fit the descriptions of more specific Coastal Scrub community forms as described by Holland (1986) and Oberbauer (2008). Additionally, this vegetation community exhibits some signs of physical modification by human activity, including areas that appear to have been previously graded/filled, presence of trash or debris, and non- native vegetation, and is therefore best described as Disturbed Coastal Scrub. This plant community is typically described a s a soft chapparal community, as stems are “softer” when compared to those found on typical chaparral species. This vegetation community is typically found in shallow dry soils and lower elevations ranging from sea level to 1,800 feet. Dominant species of the Coastal Scrub vegetation community include coyote bush (Baccharis pilularis) and California buckwheat (Eriogonum Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
24 fasciculatum). This plant community is occasionally found along coasts near river mouths. (Oberbauer 2008). Disturbed Coastal Scrub is not considered a sensitive wetland/riparian or upland habitat by the City and falls under Habitat Group D (coastal California gnatcatcher-unoccupied coastal scrub).
Within the Survey Area, this community is restricted to approximately 0.130 acre located at the northeastern boundary of the Survey Area, east of the NCTD train tracks. The vegetation community is primarily dominated by the following native species: quailbush ( Atriplex lentiformis ), California buckwheat, and coyote bush, with occasional coastal goldenbush ( Isocoma menziesii ), and the following non-native species: short podded mustard (Hirschfeldia incana) and crown daisy (Glebionis coronaria). Vegetation density within this habitat type was variable, ranging from 25- percent to near 100-percent total ground cover in undisturbed areas. Some areas of disturbance included sparse paths through blocks of vegetation, animal- or man-made, that were nearly devoid of herbaceous species.
Additionally, some trash and debris were present throughout this community.
4.3.3 Non-vegetated Channel (Holland Code 64200)
Within the Project Area, this vegetation community extends from the concrete energy dissipation apron (outflow end of the EWPCF flood control channel) eastward over the non-vegetated portions of the grouted rip rap bed. Variable water lines typically inhibit vegetation growth on a relatively permanent basis; although some vegetation may exist, it is usually less than 10% cover (Oberbauer 2008). Such areas, despite the presence of artificial structures or prevalence of non -native species, may be considered sensitive if determined to be USACE, CDFW, RWQCB, CCC or City wetlands. Non- vegetated Channel is considered a habitat associated with wetlands by the City and falls under Habitat Group Type A (flood channel).
A total of 0.082 acre of Non-vegetated Channel occurs within the Survey Area. This community is largely un-vegetated and inundated by water; however, where vegetation is present (along the outer fringes), the dominant species include California bulrush (Schoenoplectus acutus) and rough cocklebur (Xanthium strumarium ). Additionally, anthropogenic disturbances, such as trash and debris , were present throughout this vegetation community.
4.3.4 Southern Willow Scrub (Holland Code 63320)
Southern willow scrub is a dense riparian community dominated by broad -leaved species such as willows (Salix spp.), often with scattered cottonwoods (Populus spp.) and sycamores (Platanus spp.).
This vegetation community is typically found near stream channels where alluvium deposits during flood flows. Repeated flooding of these areas is also typical of this community, which prevents development of cottonwood and sycamore trees from maturing to a forest community. The high density of the cover provided by trees and shrubs typically prevents substantial understory development within this vegetation community. Southern Willow Scrub is considered a sensitive riparian habitat by the City and falls under Habitat Group A (riparian scrub).
A majority of the Project and Survey Area is represented by this community, primarily located west of the NCTD train tracks. A total of 1.144 acres of Southern Willow Scrub occurs within the Project and Survey Areas. Overall riparian canopy within this habitat was dense and dominated by arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis) and mule fat (Baccharis salicifolia) with occasional large blue gum trees ( Eucalyptus globulus) and stands of pampas grass ( Cortaderia selloana). Where understory was present, the Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
25 vegetative cover ranged from light to moderate and was largely dominated by salt marsh fleabane (Pluchea odorata), rough cocklebur, horseweed (Erigeron canadensis) and bristly ox- tongue (Helminthotheca echioides) . Trash and debris were also scattered throughout this vegetation community.
4.3.5 Urban/Developed (Holland Code 12000)
Urban/Developed areas within the Survey and Project Area are nearly or entirely devoid of native vegetation and show significant evidence of intentional, human -caused conversion of previously existing natural habitats into development. Developed land is characterized by permanent or semi - permanent structures, pavement or hardscape, and landscaped areas that often require irrigation.
This vegetation community typically includes unvege tated or landscaped areas with a variety of ornamental (usually non -native) plants ( Oberbauer 2008 ). Urban/Developed land use type is not considered a sensitive wetland/riparian or upland habitat by the City and falls under Habitat Group F (disturbed lands).
Within the Survey and Project Area, this community totals 0.378 acres of overall coverage. Developed areas within the Survey and Project Area primarily include the NCTD train tracks and its graded and/or gravel shoulders. This community is largely devoid of vegetation ; however, sparsely vegetated areas within this community largely consist of non-native pampas grass and Russian thistle ( Salsola tragus) recruits along NCTD train track shoulders. Overall, vegetative cover ranges from light to moderate with a relatively open canopy outside of larger landscaped trees.
4.4 Special-Status Species
A total of 33 special-status plant species , 30 special-status wildlife species , and 6 special -status vegetation community occurrences were found within a five-mile radius of the Project Area through the CNDDB, and USFWS occurrence record review (Figures 2 and 3). These include the following:
Plants
• San Diego thorn-mint (Acanthomintha ilicifolia)
• Nuttall’s acmispon (Acmispon prostratus)
• California adolphia (Adolphia californica)
• Shaw’s agave (Agave shawii var. shawii)
• Del Mar manzanita (Arctostaphylos glandulosa ssp. crassifolia) • Coulter’s saltbush (Atriplex coulteri)
• South coast saltscale (Atriplex pacifica)
• Encinitas baccharis (Baccharis vanessae)
• San Diego goldenstar (Bloomeria clevelandii)
• Thread-leaved brodiaea (Brodiaea filifolia)
• Orcutt's brodiaea (Brodiaea orcuttii)
• Wart-stemmed ceanothus (Ceanothus verucossus)
• Orcutt's pincushion (Chaenactis glabriuscula var. orcuttia) • Summer holly (Comarostaphylis diversifolia ssp. diversifolia) • Del Mar mesa sand aster (Corethrogyne filaginifolia var. linifolia) • Wiggins’ cryptantha (Cryptantha wigginsii)
• Blochman's dudleya (Dudleya blochmaniae ssp. blochmaniae) Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
26 • Sticky dudleya (Dudleya viscida)
• Palmer's goldenbush (Ericameria palmeri palmeri)
• San Diego button celery (Eryngium aristulatum var. parishii) • Cliff spurge (Euphorbia misera)
• San Diego barrel cactus (Ferocactus viridescens)
• Orcutt’s hazardia (Harzardia orcuttii)
• Decumbent goldenbush (Isocoma menziesii var. decumbens) • San Diego marsh-elder (Iva hayesiana)
• Coulter’s goldfields (Lasthenia glabrata ssp. coulteri) • Sea dahlia (Leptosyne maritima)
• Little mousetail (Myosurus minimus ssp. apus)
• Spreading navarretia (Navarretia fossalis)
• Coast woolly-heads (Nemacaulis denudata var. denudate) • California Orcutt grass (Orcuttia californica)
• Nuttall’s scrub oak (Quercus dumosa)
• Estuary seablite (Suaeda esteroa)
Wildlife
• Crotch bumble bee (Bombus crotchii)
• Vernal pool fairy shrimp (Branchinecta lynchi)
• San Diego fairy shrimp (Branchinecta sandiegonensis)
• Riverside fairy shrimp (Streptocephalus wootoni)
• Tidewater goby (Eucyclogobius newberryi)
• Southern California legless lizard (Anniella stebbinsi) • California glossy snake (Arizona elegans occidentalis) • Orange-throated whiptail (Aspidoscelis hyperythra)
• Coast horned lizard (Phrynosoma blainvillii)
• Coast patch-nosed snake (Salvadora hexalepis virgultea) • Southern California rufous-crowned sparrow (Aimophila ruficeps canescens) • Coastal cactus wren (Campylorhynchus brunneicapillus sandiegensis) • Western snowy plover (Charadrius alexandrinus nivosus) • White-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus)
• Southwestern willow flycatcher (Empidonax traillii extimus) • Yellow-breasted chat (Icteria virens)
• Belding’s savannah sparrow (Passerculus sandwichensis beldingii) • White-faced ibis (Plegadis chihi)
• Coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica) • Light-footed Ridgway’s rail (Rallus longirostris levipes) • Yellow warbler (Setophaga petechia brewsteri)
• California least tern (Sternula antillarum browni)
• Least Bell’s vireo (Vireo bellii pusillus)
• Dulzura pocket mouse (Chaetodipus californicus femoralis) • Northwestern San Diego pocket mouse (Chaetodipus fallax fallax) • Mexican long-tongued bat (Choeronycteris mexicana)
• Western yellow bat (Lasiurus xanthinus)
• San Diego black-tailed jackrabbit (Lepus californicus bennettii) Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
27 • San Diego desert woodrat (Neotoma bryanti intermedia) • Pocketed free-tailed bat (Nyctinomops femorosaccus)
The results of the literature review were utilized during the biological resource survey conducted for this Project to ascertain presence/absence and potentials for occurrence (PFOs) of each species as it relates to Local, State, and Federal agencies and e xisting statutes and regulations . The habitat requirements, listing statuses and PFOs for each of these species are described below in Table 1.
4.4.1 Special-Status Plant Species
The CNDDB documents 33 special-status plant species within a five -mile radius of the Survey Area; however, none of these species were documented within the Project Area. One plant species was determined to have a low potential to occur within the Survey Area : estuary seablite. The remaining 32 plant species are presumed absent and are not discussed further in this report. Each of these species, along with their listing statuses, relative abundances, habitat associations and general locations within the Survey Area, are described in Table 3, below. No HMP-covered, narrow endemic, federal or state-listed, or CNPS-listed plant species were observed within the Survey Area.
4.4.2 Special-Status Wildlife Species
The CNDDB documents 30 special-status wildlife species within a five -mile radius of the Survey Area; one of these species were previously documented within the Project Area: least Bell’s Vireo. Among invertebrate species, the total includes one insect, and three crustacean species. Among vertebrate species, the total includes one fish, five reptilian, 13 avian and seven mammalian species. A total of 11 wildlife species were determined to have a low potential to occur within the Survey Area. A total of seven wildlife species were determined to have a moderate potential to occur within the Survey Area.
A total of two wildlife species were determined to have a high potential to occur within the Survey Area: yellow warbler and least Bell’s vireo. The remaining 10 wildlife species are presumed absent and are not discussed further in this report. Each of these species, along with their listing statuses, relative abundances, habitat associations and general locations within the Survey Area, are described in Table 3, below. No HMP-covered, narrow endemic, federal or state -listed wildlife species were observed within the Survey Area.
4.5 Special-Status Vegetation Communities
A total of six special-status vegetation community (natural communities) occurrences were found within a five-mile radius of the Project Area through the CNDDB review (Figure 3). These include the following:
Vegetation Communities
• Southern Coastal Salt Marsh
• Southern Maritime Chaparral
• Southern Riparian Forest
• Southern Riparian Scrub
• Southern Sycamore Alder Riparian Woodland
• Southern Willow Scrub
Encino Wastewater Aut/10rity Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Mo,ntenonce ProieCi - Biological Resource Assesrnent
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County . CA
Of the six special -status vege tation communities documented to occur within a five -mile radius of the Project, only one. was found within the Project and Survey Area, Southern Willow Scrub. A complete description of this vegetation community is provided above in Section 4.3.4. The CDFW ranks this vegetation community as S2, imperiled, in the State because of its rarity due to a very restricted range, very few populations, steep declines and/or other factors making it very vulnerable to extirpa tion from the State. Addit ionally, the City's HMP, and the City's Land Use Plan ident ify Southern Willow Scrub as a sensitive riparian habitat within the Coastal Zone.
In addition to the six special -status vegetation communities identified by the literature review, one additional vegetation community , Coastal Freshwater Marsh, is identified as sensitive wetland habitat within the Coastal Zone and covered under the City's HMP and Land Use Plan. This vegetation community was identified outside the Project Area but within the margins of the Survey Area. A complete description of this vegetation community is also provided above in section 4.3. l.
Table 1. Special-Status Species Potentials for Occurrence PLANTS
Species Name Listing Status Habitat Requirements 1, 2 Potential for Occurrence Annual herb. Chaparral, Presumed Absent.
coastal scrub, valley and Suitable habitat
Federal : FT foothill grassland, vernal components do not occur San Diego thorn-mint State: SE pools. Endemic to active within the Project Area.
Acanthomintha CRPR: l B. l vertisol clay soils of mesas Additionally, known ilicifolia City : List 2; and valleys. Usually on c lay occurrences are separated Narrow lenses within grassland or from the Project Area.
Endemic chap communities .
Blooms: Apr-Jun
Elevation : 30-3, 150 feet
Annua l herb . Coastal Presumed Absent.
strand, coastal sage scrub, Although known
coastal dunes. Occurs in occurrences exist within the
Nuttall's acmispon Federal : None wetlands in another region vicinity of the Project Area, Acmispon prostratus State: None but occurs almost always suitable habitat CRPR: l B.2 under natural conditions in components do not occur City : None California. Exhibits low within the Project and water tolerance. Survey Area.
Blooms: Mar-Jun
Elevation : 0-20 feet
28 Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
29 California adolphia
Adolphia californica
Federal: None
State: None
CRPR: 2B.1
City: None
Perennial deciduous shrub.
Chaparral, coastal sage
scrub, valley and foothill
grassland. From
sandy/gravelly to clay soils
within grassland, coastal
sage scrub, or chaparral;
various exposures.
Blooms: Dec-May
Elevation: 50- 985 feet
Presumed Absent.
Known occurrences exist
within the vicinity of the
Project Area. However,
marginally suitable habitat is
restricted to the small area
of Disturbed Coastal Scrub
habitat within the Survey
Area and geographically
separated from the Project
Area. Additionally, a
thorough survey was
completed within this area,
where this perennial species
would have been readily
detected if present.
Shaw’s agave
Agave shawii
var.shawii
Federal: None
State: None
CRPR: 2B.1
City: None
Perennial, succulent shrub
found along the coastal
strand in coastal sage
scrub habitats on bluffs,
hillsides and mesas.
Features a striking
inflorescence on a tall stalk
that grows from thick,
toothy leaves arranged in
attractive rosettes.
Blooms: Sep-Mar (May)
Elevation: <165 feet
Presumed Absent.
Known occurrences exist
within the vicinity of the
Project Area. However,
marginally suitable habitat is
restricted to the small area
of Disturbed Coastal Scrub
habitat within the Survey
Area and geographically
separated from the Project
Area. Additionally, a
thorough survey was
completed within this area,
where this perennial species
would have been readily
detected if present.
Del Mar manzanita
Arctostaphylos
glandulosa ssp.
crassifolia
Federal: FE
State: None
CRPR: 1B.1
City: List 3;
Narrow
Endemic
Perennial evergreen shrub.
Chaparral, closed-cone
coniferous forest. Sandy
coastal mesas and ocean
bluffs; in chaparral or Torrey
pine forest.
Blooms: Dec-Jun
Elevation: 0-1,200 feet
Presumed Absent.
Suitable vegetation
communities do not occur
within the Project Area.
Additionally, known
occurrences are separated
from the Project Area.
Coulter’s saltbush
Atriplex coulteri
Federal: None
State: None
CRPR: 1B.2
City: None
This perennial herb prefers
alkaline or clay soils. Found
in
coastal bluff scrub, coastal
dunes, coastal scrub,
Presumed Absent.
Marginally suitable habitat is
present however is restricted
to the small area of
Disturbed Coastal Scrub
Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
30 valley and
foothill grassland.
Blooms: Mar-Oct
Elevation: 0-2,800 feet
habitat within the Survey
Area and geographically
separated from the Project
Area. Additionally, known
occurrences are separated
from the Project Area.
South coast saltscale
Atriplex pacifica
Federal: None
State: None
CRPR: 1B.2
City: None
Annual herb. Coastal
scrub, coastal bluff scrub,
playas, chenopod scrub.
Alkali soils.
Blooms: Mar-Oct
Elevation: 3-1,640 feet
Presumed Absent.
Known occurrences exist
within the vicinity of the
Project Area. However,
marginally suitable habitat is
restricted to the small area
of Disturbed Coastal Scrub
habitat within the Survey
Area and geographically
separated from the Project
Area.
Encinitas baccharis
Baccharis vanessae
Federal: FT
State: SE
CRPR: 1B.1
City: List 3;
Narrow
Endemic
Perennial deciduous shrub
typically occurring on
steep slopes of sandstone
substrates in maritime
chaparral and cismontane
woodlands. On sandstone
soils in steep, open, rocky
areas with chaparral
associates. Encinitas
baccharis is known to
occur only in San Diego
County, California, and
may be extirpated entirely
from the Encinitas area.
Blooms: Aug-Nov
Elevation: 195-2360 feet
Presumed Absent.
Suitable habitat
components do not occur
within the Project and
Survey Area. Additionally,
known occurrences are
separated from the Project
Area.
San Diego goldenstar
Bloomeria
clevelandii
Federal: None
State: None
CRPR: 1B.1
City: Narrow
Endemic
Perennial bulbiferous herb
found in coastal scrub,
chaparral, vernal pools
and mesa grasslands in
association with
clay soils.
Blooms: Apr-May
Elevation: 165-3575 feet
Presumed Absent.
Marginally suitable habitat is
restricted to the small area
of Disturbed Coastal Scrub
habitat within the Survey
Area and geographically
separated from the Project
Area. Additionally, known
occurrences are separated
from the Project Area.
Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
31 Thread-leaved
brodiaea
Brodiaea filifolia
Federal: FT
State: SE
CRPR: 1B.1
City: Covered;
Narrow
Endemic
Perennial bulbiferous herb.
Often found in clay soils in
chaparral openings,
cismontane
woodland, coastal scrub,
playas, valley and foothill
grassland and vernal pool
communities.
Blooms: Mar-Jun
Elevation: 80-3,675 feet
Presumed Absent.
Marginally suitable habitat is
restricted to the small area
of Disturbed Coastal Scrub
habitat within the Survey
Area and geographically
separated from the Project
Area. Additionally, known
occurrences are separated
from the Project Area.
Orcutt's brodiaea
Brodiaea orcuttii
Federal: None
State: None
CRPR: 1B.1
City: Narrow
Endemic
Perennial bulbiferous herb
occurring in mesic clay soils
in native grasslands often
associating with vernal
pools. This plant is also
known to occur in closed-
on coniferous forests,
chaparral, cis-montane
woodland, meadows and
seeps, and along stream
courses at higher
elevations.
Blooms: May-Jul
Elevation: 98-5,551 feet
Presumed Absent.
Although known
occurrences exist within the
vicinity of the Survey Area,
suitable habitat
components do not occur
within the Project and
Survey Area.
Wart-stemmed
ceanothus
Ceanothus
verrucosus
Federal: None
State: None
CRPR: 2B.2
City: List 2
Perennial, medium-to
large-sized evergreen
shrub found in chaparral
habitats, often near the
coast, occasionally on
rocky slopes. Flowers
abundantly with small
white flowers.
Blooms: Jan-Apr
Elevation: 3-1245 feet
Presumed Absent.
Although known
occurrences exist within the
vicinity of the Project Area,
suitable habitat
components do not occur
within the Project and
Survey Area.
Orcutt's pincushion
Chaenactis
glabriuscula var.
orcuttia
Federal: None
State: None
CRPR: 1B.1
City:
Small, annual yellow-
flowering herb found on
coastal dunes and bluffs.
Blooms: (Jan) May-Jun
(Aug)
Elevation: 10- 330 feet
Presumed Absent.
Suitable habitat
components do not occur
within the Project and
Survey Area. Additionally,
known occurrences are
separated from the Project
Area.
Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
32 Summer holly
Comarostaphylis
diversifolia ssp.
diversifolia
Federal: None
State: None
CRPR: 1B.2
City: List 3
Perennial, medium-to
large-sized evergreen
shrub. Found in chaparral
habitats, often near the
coast. Features bright red
fruits and grayish twigs with
bark that shreds.
Blooms: (Apr) May-Jun (Jul)
Elevation: 100-2,590 feet
Presumed Absent.
Suitable habitat
components do not occur
within the Project and
Survey Area. Additionally,
known occurrences are
separated from the Project
Area.
Del Mar mesa sand
aster
Corethrogyne
filaginifolia var.
linifolia
Federal: None
State: None
CRPR: 1B.1
City: List 3;
Narrow
Endemic
Endemic perennial herb
found in coastal sage
scrub, coastal bluff scrub,
and maritime chaparral of
San Diego County. Foliage
and stems are typically
gray-green and puberulent
to hairy.
Blooms: Mar-Sep
Elevation: 0-490 feet
Presumed Absent.
Marginally suitable habitat is
restricted to the small area
of Disturbed Coastal Scrub
habitat within the Survey
Area and geographically
separated from the Project
Area. However, a thorough
survey was completed
within this area, where the
species would have been
readily detected if present.
Additionally, known
occurrences are separated
from the Project Area.
Wiggins’ cryptantha
Cryptantha wigginsii
Federal: None
State: None
CRPR: 1B.2
City: None
Annual, low-growing,
white-flowered herb that
occurs on clay soils in
coastal sage scrub
habitats.
Blooms: Feb-Jun
Elevation: 65-902 feet
Presumed Absent.
As this is an annual herb, this
species may not have been
detectable during the time
of the survey. However,
marginally suitable habitat is
restricted to the small area
of Disturbed Coastal Scrub
habitat within the Survey
Area and geographically
separated from the Project
Area. Additionally, known
occurrences are separated
from the Project Area.
Blochman's dudleya
Federal: None
State: None
Perennial herb. Coastal
scrub, coastal bluff scrub,
valley and foothill
grassland. Open, rocky
slopes; often in shallow
clays over serpentine or in
rocky areas with little soil.
Presumed Absent.
Marginally suitable habitat is
restricted to the small area
of Disturbed Coastal Scrub
habitat within the Survey
Area and geographically
separated from the Project
Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
33 Dudleya
blochmaniae ssp.
blochmaniae
CRPR: 1B.1
City: Narrow
Endemic
Blooms: Apr-Jun
Elevation: 15-1,475 feet
Area. However, a thorough
survey was completed
within this area, where the
species would have been
readily detected if present.
Additionally, known
occurrences are separated
from the Project Area.
Sticky dudleya
Dudleya viscida
Federal: None
State: None
CRPR: 1B.2
City: List 2
Perennial, low-growing
succulent found in
chaparral and coastal
sage scrub habitats, often
associated with bluffs and
rocky cliffs.
Blooms: May-Jun
Elevation: 20-2,169 feet
Presumed Absent.
Marginally suitable habitat is
restricted to the small area
of Disturbed Coastal Scrub
habitat within the Survey
Area and geographically
separated from the Project
Area. However, a thorough
survey was completed
within this area, where the
species would have been
readily detected if present.
Additionally, known
occurrences are separated
from the Project Area.
Palmer's goldenbush
Ericameria palmeri
palmeri
Federal: None
State: None
CRPR: 1B.1
City: None
A perennial evergreen
shrub species occurring in
mesic soils in chaparral
and coastal scrub habitats.
Also, occurring on granitic
soils, on steep hillsides.
Blooms: (Jul) Sep-Nov
Elevation: 65-2,460 feet
Presumed Absent.
Marginally suitable habitat is
restricted to the small area
of Disturbed Coastal Scrub
habitat within the Survey
Area and geographically
separated from the Project
Area. However, a thorough
survey was completed
within this area, where the
species would have been
readily detected if present.
Additionally, known
occurrences are separated
from the Project Area.
San Diego button
celery
Eryngium aristulatum
var. parishii
Federal: FE
State: SE
CRPR: 1B.1
City: List 3;
Narrow
Endemic
Annual/perennial herb.
Vernal pools, coastal scrub,
valley and foothill
grassland. San Diego mesa
hardpan and claypan
vernal pools and southern
interior basalt flow vernal
pools; usually surrounded
Presumed Absent.
Known occurrences exist
within the vicinity of the
Project Area. However, no
suitable habitat is present
within the Survey Area or
Project Area.
Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
34 by scrub.
Blooms: Apr-Jun
Elevation: 65-2,035 feet
Cliff spurge
Euphorbia misera
Federal: None
State: None
CRPR: 2B.2
City: Covered
Shrub that occurs in close
proximity to the coast
within bluff scrub, coastal
sage scrub, and maritime
succulent scrub
communities. Prefers
sandy/rocky soils.
Blooms: Dec-Aug
Elevation: 0-1,640 feet
Presumed Absent.
Known occurrences exist
within the vicinity of the
Survey Area. However,
marginally suitable habitat is
restricted to the small area
of Disturbed Coastal Scrub
habitat within the Survey
Area and geographically
separated from the Project
Area. Additionally, a
thorough survey was
completed within this area,
where this highly
conspicuous species would
have been readily
detected.
San Diego barrel
cactus
Ferocactus
viridescens
Federal: None
State: None
CRPR: 2B.1
City: List 2
Perennial stem succulent
found in coastal sage
scrub, valley and foothill
grassland, and chaparral,
habitats.
Blooms: May-Jun
Elevation: 9-1,590 feet
Presumed Absent.
Marginally suitable habitat is
restricted to the small area
of Disturbed Coastal Scrub
habitat within the Survey
Area and geographically
separated from the Project
Area. Additionally, a
thorough survey was
completed within this area,
where this highly
conspicuous species would
have been readily detected
if present. Lastly, known
occurrences are separated
from the Project Area.
Orcutt’s hazardia
Harzardia orcuttii
Federal: None
State: SE
CRPR: 1B.1
City: Covered;
Narrow
Endemic
Shrub occurring in
chaparral, coastal sage
scrub habitats. Low water
tolerance.
Blooms: Aug-Oct.
Elevation: 19-330 feet
Presumed Absent.
Marginally suitable habitat is
restricted to the small area
of Disturbed Coastal Scrub
habitat within the Survey
Area and geographically
separated from the Project
Area. However, a thorough
survey was completed
Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
35 within this area, where the
species would have been
readily detected if present.
Additionally, known
occurrences are separated
from the Project Area.
Decumbent
goldenbush
Isocoma menziesii
var. decumbens
Federal: None
State: None
CRPR: 1B.2
City: None
Perennial shrub. Sandy soils
in coastal scrub, chaparral,
landward side of dunes,
hillsides and arroyos.
Blooms: Jul-Nov
Elevation: 0-2,985 feet
Presumed Absent.
Marginally suitable habitat is
restricted to the small area
of Disturbed Coastal Scrub
habitat within the Survey
Area and geographically
separated from the Project
Area. However, a thorough
survey was completed
within this area, where the
species would have been
readily detected if present.
Additionally, known
occurrences are separated
from the Project Area.
San Diego marsh-
elder
Iva hayesiana
Federal: None
State: None
CRPR: 2B.2
City: List 3
Perennial herb. Found in
wetland flats including
marshes, swamps, playas,
and river washes.
Blooms Apr-Oct
Elevation: 30-1,640 feet
Presumed Absent.
Suitable habitat is present
within the Project Area.
Additionally, known
occurrences exist within
vicinity of the Project Area.
However, a complete and
thorough survey was
conducted within the
Project Area; in which this
highly conspicuous
perennial herb would have
been readily detected if
present.
Coulter’s goldfields
Lasthenia glabrata
ssp. coulteri
Federal: None
State: None
CRPR: 1B.1
City: None
Small, annual yellow-
flowering herb typically
occurs in alkali scrub, alkali
playas, vernal pool, alkali
grasslands, and coastal salt
marshes.
Blooms: Feb-Jun
Elevation: 3-4,000 feet
Presumed Absent.
As this is an annual herb, this
species may not have been
detectable during the time
of the survey. Suitable soils
are generally not present.
However, marginally
suitable habitat is restricted
to the small area of
Disturbed Coastal Scrub
habitat within the Survey
Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
36 Area and geographically
separated from the Project
Area. Additionally, known
occurrences are separated
from the Project Area.
Sea dahlia
Leptosyne maritima
Federal: None
State: None
CRPR: 2B.2
City: None
Perennial, yellow-flowering
herb found along the
coastal strand on sea bluffs
and dunes and in coastal
sage scrub habitats. Prefers
sand or sandstone soils.
Blooms: (Feb) Mar-May
(Jun)
Elevation: <430 feet
Presumed Absent.
Known occurrences exist
within the vicinity of the
Project Area. However,
marginally suitable habitat is
restricted to the small area
of Disturbed Coastal Scrub
habitat within the Survey
Area and geographically
separated from the Project
Area.
Little mousetail
Myosurus minimus
ssp. apus
Federal: None
State: None
CRPR: 3.1
City: List 3;
Narrow
Endemic
An annual herb usually
found in grasslands,
coastal sage scrub,
wetland-riparian, vernal
pools.
This subspecies has
taxonomic problems;
distinguishing between this
and M. sessilis is difficult.
Hybrid? Alkaline soils.
Blooms: Mar-Jun
Elevation: 65 – 2,100 feet
Presumed Absent.
Known occurrences exist
within the vicinity of the
Project Area. However,
marginally suitable habitat is
restricted to small portions of
the Survey Area that are
geographically separated
from the Project Area.
Spreading navarretia
Navarretia fossalis
Federal: FT
State: None
CRPR: 1B.1
City: List3;
Narrow
Endemic
Annual herb that occurs in
vernal pools and
depressions and ditches in
areas that once supported
vernal pools in saline and
alkaline soils. Typically
found in chenopod scrub,
marshes and swamps
(assorted shallow
freshwater), and playas.
Blooms: Apr-Jun
Elevation: 100-2180 feet
Presumed Absent.
Known occurrences exist
within the vicinity of the
Project Area. However,
marginally suitable habitat is
restricted to the small area
of Coastal Freshwater Marsh
habitat within the Survey
Area and geographically
separated from the Project
Area.
Encino Wastewater Autnority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Ma,ntenance ProjeCi - Biolog,col Resource Assesrnent
Citr· of Carlsbad, son Dieg,J county , CA
Annua l herb found on Presumed Absent.
coastal dunes and Suitable habitat
Coast woolly-heads Federal : None beaches. components do not occur Nemacaulis State: None within the Project and
denudata var. CRPR: l B.2 Blooms: Mar-Aug Survey Area. Additionally, denudata City : None Elevation: 0-330 feet known occurrences are separated from the Project
Area.
Annua l herb that occurs in Presumed Absent.
Federal : FE alka line soils and southern Suitable habitat California Orcutt State: SE basa ltic claypan, vernal components do not occur CRPR: l B. l pools. within the Project and grass City : List 3; Survey Area. Additionally, Orcuttia californica Narrow Blooms: Apr-Jun known occurrences are Endemic Elevation: 49-2165 feet separated from the Project Area.
Perennial, evergreen shrub Presumed Absent.
found in chaparral, coastal Marginally suitable habitat is sage scrub and sandstone restricted to the small area
habitats. Prefers sandy soils, of Disturbed Coastal Scrub sometimes on clay loam . habitat within the Survey
Federal : None Area and geographically
Nuttall 's scrub oak State: None Blooms: Feb-Mar (Aug) separated from the Project Quercus dumosa CRPR: l B.l Elevation : 49-4035 feet Area. However, a thorough City : Covered survey was completed
within this area, where the
species would have been
readily detected.
Additionally , known
occurrences are separated
from the Project Area.
Perennial herb. Coastal salt Low Potential.
marshes, swamps, bluffs, Marginally suitable habita t is margins of coasta l salt restricted to the small area
Federal : None marshes, in clay, silt and of Coasta l Freshwater Marsh Estuary seablite State : None sand substrates. habitat within the Survey Suaeda esteraa CRPR: l B.2 Area and separated from
City : None Blooms: May-Jun the Project Area.
Elevation: 0-15 feet Additionally, known
occurrences are separated
from the Project Area.
WILDLIFE
Species Name Listing Status Habitat Requirements 2 Potential for Occurrence
INVERTEBRATES
37 Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
38 Crotch bumble bee
Bombus crotchii
Federal: None
State: SCE
City: None
Occurs in southern
California in coastal areas,
inhabiting grassland and
scrub areas, requiring a
hotter and drier
environment than other
bumblebee species, and
tolerates a very narrow
range of climatic
conditions. Nesting is
underground, often in
abandoned rodent dens.
The overwintering habitat
of this bumblebee is not
well-known, but is generally
thought to be under leaf
litter or soft soil. This species
is non-migratory. Prefers
milkweed, but also uses
dustymaidens, lupines,
medics, phacelias,
and sages. It also feeds on
snapdragons,
clarkia plants, poppies,
and wild buckwheat
species. Characterized as
a dietary generalist.
Low Potential.
Although known
occurrences exist within the
vicinity of the Survey Area.
Marginally suitable habitat is
restricted to the small area
of Disturbed Coastal Scrub
habitat within the Survey
Area. Habitat components
within the majority of the
Project and Survey Area do
not provide seasonally
varied blooming periods
capable of supporting the
young queens in the early
phases of the colony's life
cycle.
Vernal pool fairy
shrimp
Branchinecta lynchi
Federal: FT
State: None
City: None
Endemic to the grasslands
of the Central Valley,
Central Coast mountains
and South Coast
mountains, in astatic rain-
filled pools. Inhabit small,
clear-water sandstone-
depression pools and
grassed swale, earth slump,
or basalt-flow depression
pools.
Presumed Absent.
Suitable habitat
components do not occur
within the Project and
Survey Area. Additionally,
known occurrences are
separated from the Survey
Area.
San Diego fairy
shrimp
Branchinecta
sandiegonensis
Federal: FE
State: None
City: List 3;
Narrow
Endemic
This species is associated
with vernal pools and other
seasonally ponded areas
that become inundated
during the rainy season,
typically November
through March. The
species lays eggs which
Presumed Absent.
Although known
occurrences exist within the
vicinity of the Survey Area,
suitable habitat
components do not occur
within the Project and
Survey Area.
Encino Wastewater Autnority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Mo,ntenance Prujeo - Biolog,col Resource Assesrnent
Citr· of Carlsbad, son Dieg,J county , CA
tolerate prolonged periods
of drought, hatching
during periods of
inundation, and
completing a life cycle
withf n 7 to 14 days from
hatch to maturi ty. Suitable
habitat for the species
includes short duration
cold-water pools with as
little as 2 inches of water
depth following rainfall and
may inc lude man-made
features such as road ruts.
Restricted to deep Presumed Absent.
seasonal vernal pools, Suitable habitat
vernal pool like ephemeral components do not occur
ponds, and stock ponds within the Project and
and other human modified Survey Area. Additionally,
depressions (TLMA 2004). known occurrences are
Riverside fairy shrimp prefer separated from the Survey warm -water poo ls that Area.
Federal: FE have low to moderate
Riverside fairy shrimp State: None dissolved solids, are less Streptocephalus City: List 3; predictable, and remained wootoni Narrow filled for extended periods
Endemic of time (Eriksen and Belk
1999). In Riverside County,
Riverside fairy shrimp have
been found in pools
formed over the follow ing
soils: Murrieta stony clay
loams, Las Posas series,
Wyman clay loam , and
Willows soils (U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service 200 l).
VERJEBRATES
Fish
Brackish water habitats Presumed Absent.
Tidewater goby Federal: FE along the California coast Suitable habitat Eucyclogobius State: None from the Agua Hedionda components do not occur Lagoon in San Diego within the Project and newberryi City: None County to the mouth of the Survey Area. Additionally, Smith River. Found in known occu rrences are
39 Encino Wastewater Autnority Flood Control Channel R,p Rap Bed Ma,ntenance Prujeo Biot,:,g,col Resource Assesrnent
::it~• of Carlsbad, son Dieg,J County , CA
shallow lagoo ns and lower separated from the Survey
stream reaches, they need Area.
fairly still but not stagnant
water & high oxygen levels.
Reptiles
Occurs in moist, loose soils Moderate Potential.
with some plant cover in Although known
coastal sand dunes , occurrences are separated
Southern California suburban gardens, from the Survey Area, legless lizard Federal : None chaparral, pine -oak suitable habitat is present Annie/la stebbinsi State: None; woodlands, stream within the Project and (formerly Annie/la CDFW-SSC terraces with sycamores, adjacent Survey Area . puichra pu/chra) City: None cottonwood s, or oaks, oak
woodlands, Joshua/juniper
woodland , mixed conifer
forest, desert scrub, sandy
washes , and alluvial fans.
This nocturnal species Moderate Potential.
inhabits a variety of Although known
California glossy Federal : None grassland, sage scrub, dry occurrences are separated wash and chaparral from the Survey Area, snake State: None; habitats from sea level to suitable habitat is present Arizona e/egans CDFW-SSC over 7,000 feet in within the Project and occidentalis City: None elevat ion. Tends to prefer adjacent Survey Area. sandy, loose soils. It remains
in its burrow by day.
Found in chaparral and Low Potential.
coast a l sage scrub with Suitable habitat is restricted coarse sandy soils and to the small area of
scattered brush. Disturbed Coastal Scrub
habitat within the Survey
Orange-throated Inhabits low-eleva tion Area and geographically whiptail Federal : None coastal scrub, chap arral , separated from the Project Aspidoscelis State: None and valley -foothill Area. Additionally, known hyperythra City: Covered hardwood habitats. Prefers occurrences are separated washes and other sandy from the Survey Area.
areas with patches of
brush and rocks. Perennial
plants are necessary for its
major food source -
termites.
40 Encino Wastewater Autnority Flood Control Channel R,p Rap Bed Ma,ntenance ProjeCi - Biot,:,g,col Resource Assesrnent
::it~• of Carlsbad, son Dieg,J County , CA
Occurs widely in sage Low Potential.
scrub, woodlands, Suitable habitat quali ty is
Coast horned lizard grasslands and chaparral low and restricted to the Phrynosoma bfainvillii Federal : None communi ties within small area of Disturbed microhab ita ts of loose Coastal Scrub habitat wifh in (formerly State: None; granitic soils and open the Survey Area. Phrynosoma CDFW-SSC areas for sunning and Additionally, known coronatum City: None foraging. This species is occurrences are separated blainvillei) commonly associated with from the Survey Area. the presence of native
harve ster ants.
Inhabits semi-arid brushy Low Potential .
areas and chaparral in Marg inally suitable habitat Is
canyons, rocky hillsides restricted to the small area
Coast patch-nosed Federal : None and plains. of Disturbed Coastal Scrub snake State: None; habitat within the Survey
Salvadora hexalepis CDFW-SSC Require small mammal Area and geographically virgultea City: None burrows for refuge and separated from the Project overwintering sites. Area. Addi tionally, known
occurrences are separated
from the Survey Area.
Birds
Found in coasta l lowlands Low Potential.
and foothills in sage scrub, Marg inally suitable habitat is open or burned chaparral, restricted ;to the small area Southern California and grassland with of Disturbed Coastal Scrub rufous-crowned Federal : None scattered shrubs. Typical habitat within the Survey sparrow State: None; habitat is fairly steep south - Area, and geographically Aimophila ruficep s CDFW-WL facing slopes with about separated from the Project City: Covered 50% cover of low shrubs. Area. Additfonally, known canescens Sage scrub on gentle occurrences are separated rolling hillsides is even more from the Survey Area.
favorable but now greatly
reduced and fraqmented.
Found in southern Presumed Absent.
California coastal sage Suitable habitat
Coastal cactus wren Federal : None succulent scrub. Wrens components for nesting do Campylorhynchus State: None; require tall opuntia cactus not occur within the Project brunneicapi/lus CDFW-SSC for nesting and roosting. and Survey Area. sandiegensis City: None Additionally, known
occurrences are separated
from the Survey Area.
41 Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
42 Western snowy
plover
Charadrius
alexandrinus nivosus
(nesting)
Federal: FT
State: None;
CDFW-SSC
City: Covered
Breeds above the high tide
line on coastal beaches,
sand splits, dune-backed
beaches sparsely
vegetated dunes, beaches
at creek and river mouths
and salt pans at lagoons
and estuaries.
Presumed Absent.
Suitable habitat
components do not occur
within the Project and
Survey Area. Additionally,
known occurrences are
separated from the Survey
Area.
White-tailed kite
Elanus leucurus
(formerly Elanus
caeruleus)
(nesting)
Federal: None
State: None;
CDFW-FP
City: None
Typically found in savanna,
open woodlands, marshes,
desert grassland, partially
cleared lands, and
cultivated fields. Kites
typically nest in the upper
third of trees that may be
10–160 feet tall. These can
be open-country trees
growing in isolation, or at
the edge of or within a
forest.
Moderate Potential.
Although known
occurrences are separated
from the Survey Area,
marginally suitable habitat
components for nesting
occur within the Project and
Survey Area. Additionally,
suitable foraging habitats
occur within and adjacent
to the Survey Area.
Southwestern willow
flycatcher
Empidonax traillii
extimus
(nesting)
Federal: FE
State: SE
City: Covered
Restricted to riparian
woodlands along streams
and rivers with mature,
dense stands of willows,
cottonwoods, or smaller
spring fed or boggy areas
with willows or alders, plus
adjacent open areas for
foraging.
Low Potential.
Suitable habitat
components are low for
nesting to occur within the
Project and Survey Area.
Additionally, known
occurrences are separated
from the Survey Area.
Yellow-breasted
chat
Icteria virens
(nesting)
Federal: None
State: None;
CDFW-SSC
City: Covered
This migratory species
utilizes riparian woodlands,
riparian scrub and tall,
dense vegetation
adjacent to riparian and
wetland systems for nesting
and foraging purposes.
Moderate Potential.
Although known
occurrences are separated
from the Survey Area,
marginally suitable habitat
components for nesting
occur within the Project and
Survey Area.
Belding’s savannah
sparrow
Passerculus
sandwichensis
beldingii
Federal: None
State: SE
City: Covered
This non-migratory
subspecies is narrowly
restricted to coastal
marshes dominated by
pickleweed.
Presumed Absent.
Suitable habitat quality is
not present within the
Survey Area or Project Area.
Additionally, known
occurrences are separated
from the Survey Area.
White-faced ibis
Plegadis chihi Federal: None Prefers marsh habitat but can frequently be
Moderate Potential.
Marginally suitable foraging
Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
43 (nesting colony) State: None;
CDFW-WL
City: Covered
observed foraging in
flooded agricultural fields.
Feeds on aquatic insects
and their larvae, as well as
those living in damp soil.
Eats many crayfish and
earthworms. Also eats
frogs, snails, small fish,
leeches and spiders.
habitat is present within the
Project and Survey Area.
Additionally, known
occurrences exist within the
vicinity of the Survey Area.
Suitable nesting habitat
however is restricted to the
small area of Coastal
Freshwater Marsh habitat
within the Survey Area.
Coastal California
gnatcatcher
Polioptila californica
californica
Federal: None
State: None;
CDFW-SSC
City: Covered
Resident species
occupying coastal sage
scrub, maritime scrub, and
coastal sage-chaparral
mixed scrub communities.
This species is strongly
associated with California
sagebrush (Artemisia
californica) and generally
occupies habitat with
openings in canopy cover
and moderate shrub
height.
Low Potential.
Although, known
occurrences exist within
vicinity of the Survey Area,
marginally suitable habitat is
restricted to the small area
of Disturbed Coastal Scrub
habitat within the Survey
Area that is geographically
separated from the Project
Area.
Light-footed
Ridgway’s rail
(formerly Light-
footed Clapper Rail)
Rallus longirostris
levipes
Federal: FE
State: SE;
CDFW-FP
City: Covered
Occurs in emergent
wetlands and brackish
wetland areas often
dominated by cattails,
bulrush and/or cordgrass.
Moderate Potential.
Although known
occurrences exist within
vicinity of the Survey Area,
suitable habitat is restricted
to the small area of Coastal
Freshwater Marsh habitat
within the Survey Area.
Suitable habitat does not
exist within the Project Area
or the majority of the Survey
Area.
Yellow warbler
Setophaga petechia
brewsteri
(formerly Dendroica
petechia brewsteri)
(nesting)
Federal: None
State: None;
CDFW-SSC
City: None
Breeds in shrubby thickets
and woods, particularly
along watercourses and in
wetlands.
High Potential.
Although known
occurrences are separated
from the Survey Area,
suitable habitat
components occur within a
majority of the Project and
Survey Area.
California least tern
Sternula antillarum
browni (formerly
Federal: FE
State: SE;
CDFW-FP
Nests on exposed sandy or
gravelly beaches and tidal
flats around bays of the
Presumed Absent.
Suitable habitat
components for foraging
Encino Wastewater Autnority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Ma,ntenance PrujeCi - Biolog,col Resource Assesrnent
City of Carlsbad, son DiegrJ County . CA
Sterno antillarum City: Covered Pacific Ocean, usually and nesting do not occur browni) among sparse vegetation. within the Project and May also nest on man- Survey Area. Additionally,
made substrates, such as known occurrences are
airport islands, that mimic separated from the Survey
natural qualities. Forages Area.
near shore in the ocean, as
well as bays and estuary
mouths.
Occu pies riparian habi.tats High Potential.
that typically feature Known occurrences exist
dense cover within 1-2 within the Project Area.
meters of the ground and Additionally, suitable
Federal : FE a dense, stratified canopy. habitat components occur least Bell's vireo State: SE It inhabits low, dense within a majority of the Vireo beflii pusil/us City: Covered riparian growth along Project and Survey Area. water or along dry parts of
intermittent streams.
Primarily associated with
willows and mule fat.
Summer resident.
Mammals
Found in foothills, Presumed Absent.
mountains, and a short Suitable habitat
distance into the desert components for foraging
Dulzura pocket Federal : None slopes. Prefers gravelly and nesting do not occur mouse State: None ; substrates with good sun within the Project and Chaetodipus CDFW-SSC exposure, usually in or near Survey Area. Additio nally, califomicus femoralis City: None chaparral, but also in known occu rrences are coastal sage scrub, oak separated from the Survey
woodland , or at the edges Area.
of arasslands .
Prefers loose, sandy, and low Poten1ial.
gravelly soils, or mixed Marginally suitable habitat is rocks, on moderate to restricted to the small area
steep rocky slopes with of Disturbed Coastal Scrub
nearby shrubs. Habitats habitat within the Survey
Northwestern San Federal : None include coastal scrub , Area and geographically Diego poc ket mouse State: None; chamise -redshank separated from the Project Chaetodipus fa/lax CDFW-SSC chaparral, mixed Area. Addit ionally, known fa/lax City: None chaparral, sagebrush, occurrences are separated desert wash, desert scrub, from the Survey Area ,
desert succulent shrub,
pinyon -juniper and annual
grassland. Known range
e~endsnorthtotheSan
44 Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
45 Bernardino and San
Gabriel mountains, east to
the San Jacinto Mountains,
and south into Baja
California.
Mexican long-
tongued bat
Choeronycteris
mexicana
Federal: None
State: None;
CDFW-SSC
City: None
This bat occurs in a variety
of habitats, including thorn
scrub, Palo Verde-saguaro
desert, semi-desert
grassland, oak woodland
and tropical deciduous
forests. In the southwestern
United States,
Choeronycteris is typically
observed in oak-conifer
woodlands and semi
desert grasslands. Primary
forages on nectar and
pollen of night blooming
flowers such as agaves
and cacti, or even
hummingbird feeders,
along with incidental
insects. Prefers to roost in
caves, mines, rock
crevices, underexposed
roots, and in buildings. In
San Diego, it has been
found only in man-made
structures.
Presumed absent.
Although known
occurrences exist within the
vicinity of the Survey Area,
suitable roosting and
foraging habitat is largely
absent from the Project and
Survey Area, and no nectar
sources are present.
Western yellow bat
Lasiurus xanthinus
Federal: None
State: None;
CDFW-SSC
City: None
Roosts are commonly in
palm trees and
occasionally in
cottonwood trees or
yuccas, often near surface
water in open grassy areas
or scrub habitat. Forages
over water and among
trees in coastal, foothill,
and desert riparian areas,
and in suburban
neighborhoods.
Moderate Potential.
Known occurrences exist
within the vicinity of the
Survey Area. Suitable
foraging habitat occurs
within the Project and
Survey Area. Suitable
roosting habitat is marginal
within the Project and
Survey Area; however,
suitable palm trees are
within flying distance of the
Survey Area.
San Diego black-
tailed jackrabbit
Lepus californicus
Federal: None
State: None;
CDFW-SSC
Found in a variety of
relatively open habitats
with mixtures of shrubs,
Low Potential.
Marginally suitable habitat is
restricted to the small area
Encino Wastewater Autnority Flood Control Channel R,p Rap Bed Ma,ntenani:.e PrujeCi - Biolog,col Resource Assesrnent
City of Carlsbad, son DiegrJ County . CA
bennettii City: None grasses and forbs, including of Disturbed Coastal Scrub sage scrub, grasslands, habitat within the Survey
chaparral, open oak Area and geographically
woodlands, and others. separated from the Project
Requires shrubs or small Area . Additionally, known
trees for shelter, nesting occurrences are separated
and thermal respite , and from the Survey Area .
open areas for forag ing.
Prefers mosaics of
grassland and shrubland.
Usually occurs around Low Poten1ial.
large boulder outcrops in Marginally suitable habitat is San Diego desert coasta l sage scrub and restricted to the small area woodrat Federal : None c haparral from sea level to of Disturbed Coastal Scrub Neotoma bryanti State: None; pinyon -juniper wood land habitat within the Survey intermedia CDFW-SSC (but not coniferous forest} Area and geographically (formerly Neotoma City: None at higher elevations, and separated from the Project lepida intermedia) desert scrub. Area . Addit ionally, known occurren ces are separated
from the Survey Area .
Colonial species that roosts Low Potential.
primarily in crevices in Suitable foraging habitat
steep rugged cliffs, high occurs within the Project
rocky outcrops and slopes; and Survey Area. Howeve r,
it is readily found in known occ urrences are
abandoned quarries. May separate from the Survey
also roost in buildings, Area . Addit ionally, suitable Pocketed free-tailed Federal : None caves, and under roof tiles. roosting habitat does not bat State: None; It has been found in a wide occur within the Project and Nyctinomop s CDFW-SSC variety of plant Survey Area.
femorosaccus City: None associa tions, inc luding
riparian, oak woodland,
coniferous forest, open
meadow and grassland,
and coastal and desert
scrublands , including over
scrubby ridges, reservoirs,
ponds, wetlands, and
artificia l liqhts.
Notes
1 Plant bloom period months in parentheses are extreme beginnings/endings known to occur on occasion, usually in very wet or dry yea,s. Months not in parentheses are the typical bloom poood. 20nlv habitat reauirements for the soecies ranae in California are listed here. 46 Encino Wastewater Aut/10rity flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Ma,ntenonce Proiecr Biolog1ca/ Resource Assesrnent
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County . CA
4.6 Jurisdictional Waters
The literature review and biological resource survey identified waters which likely fall under the jurisdiction of USACE, RWQCB, CCC and CDFW. A jurisdictional delineation was performed to determ ine if specific areas of the Project site meet either l) criteria to be considered a relatively permanen t water (RPW) or tributary of a traditional navigable waters (TNW) meeting significant nexus standards to fall under the jurisdiction of the USACE, RWQCB and/or C0FW as a non-wetland water and streambed, 2) meet the three -parameter criteria of a wetland to fall under the jurisdiction of the USACE, RWQCB and/or CDFW as wetland areas, or 3) exhibit habitat characterist ics of wetland or riparian area which meet CCC and/or City criteria for jurisdict ional wetland areas or CDFW criteria for riparian habitat adjacent to streambed areas. The jurisdictional delineat ion identif ied potentially jurisdictional areas occu rring within the Project and Survey Area that are summar ized in Table 2, below.
Comple te details are discussed in the JDR (Blackhawk 2020), included as Appendix D to this report.
Table 2. likely Jurisdictional Waters Within the Project Area Jurisdictional Waters Acres {Linear Feet)
Likely USACE Jurisdiction
Wetland Waters of the U.S. 0.104 (38)
Non-Wetland Waters of the U.S. 0.082 (52)
likely USACE Total Jurisdiction 0.186 (90)
Likely RWQCB Jurisdiction
Wetland Waters of the State 0.104 (38)
Non-Wetland Waters of the State 0.082 (52)
likely RWQCB Total Jurisdiction 0.186 (90)
Likely CDFW Jurisdiction
Riparian Only 0.104 (38)
Streambed (Bank-to-Bank) 0.082 (52)
likely CDFW Total Jurisdiction 0.186 (90)
Likely CCC/ City Jurisdiction
Palustrine Wetland 0.104 (38)
Riverine 0.082 (52)
Likely CCC/ City Total Jurisdiction 0.186 (90)
47 Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
48 5.0 PROJECT IMPACTS - THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE, DIRECT/INDIRECT IMPACTS & TEMPORARY/
PERMANENT IMPACTS
This section of the report includes a discussion of the potential direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts to onsite special-status biological resources that may result upon the construction and implementation of the Project. Direct impacts include those involving the loss, alteration, and/or disturbance of plant communities, and consequently, the flora and fauna of the affected area. Direct impacts also include the destruction of individual plants and/or wildlife. Direct impacts may adversely affect regional populations of certain species, or result in isolated populations, reducing genetic diversity and range- wide population stability; conversely, direct impacts may also have intended or unintended positive effects in some cases.
Indirect impacts include a variety of effects related to areas or habitats that are not directly removed by Project development, such as loss of foraging habitat, incr eased ambient noise, artificial light, introduced predators (e.g., domestic cats, dogs and other non -native animals), competition with exotic plants and animals, increased human presence and associated disturbances (e.g., trash, green waste, physical intru sion). Indirect impacts may include long and/or short -term daily activities associated with Project build-out, such as increased traffic, permanent barriers or fences, buildings, exotic seed-bearing ornamental plantings, irrigated landscapes and human presence, among others.
These types of impacts are known as edge effects and over time, may result in some encroachment on native plants by exotic plants, altered behavioral wildlife patterns, reduced wildlife diversity, and decreased wildlife abundance in habitats adjacent to a given project site. However, as is the case with direct impacts, indirect impacts may also have intended or unintended positive effects for certain species.
The potential for significant adverse effects, either directly or indirectly through habitat modification or conversion, on any special-status vegetation community, plant species or wildlife species, or that could occur as a result of the development of this Project is discussed within this section.
5.1 Project Impacts
This secti on provides definitions and discussion of the various Project -related impacts that are anticipated to occur.
5.1.1 Habitat Impacts
Construction of the proposed Project will result in permanent habitat loss and short-term disturbances associated with annual maintenance of the EWA flood control channel rip rap bed within the Project Area. Maintenance activities, including removal of debris, sediment and vegetation within the Project Area, account for the only permanent impacts of the Project. These include all areas proposed for ground disturbance, grubbing, clearing and dredging.
The Project would include permanent impacts associated with the existing footprint of the flood control channel rip rap area . This area is shown in Figure 4 as “Permanent Impact Area”. Temporary impact areas will include a dewatering/settling area (with sandbag barrier), temporary sediment stockpiling and spreading areas outside the Survey Area, but within the EWPCF and South Parcel, discussed in the 2017 BRA. For the purpose of impacts analysis, use of temporary impact areas described above are Encino Wastewater Aut/10rity Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Ma,ntenonce ProJeo Biolog1ca/ Resource Assesrnent
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County . CA
not considered new impacts, as they are curren tly authorized unde r RWQCB Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Cert ification No. R9-2017-0044; these areas are identified in Figures 2 and 3 of the 2017 BRA.
The estimated acreages of proposed impacts resulting from maintenance as described above are summarized in Tobie 3.
Table 3. Summary of Proposed Project Impacts to Vegetation Communities/land Use Types Vegetation Community /
Impact
Land Use Type Temporary Permanent
(Acres) (Acres)
Disturbed Coastal Scrub 0 0
Subtotals: HMP Habitat Group D 0 0
Urban /Devefoped 0 0.007
Non -vegetated Channel 0 0.046
Subtotals: HMP Habitat Group F 0 0
Coastal Freshwater Marsh 0 0
Southern Willow Scrub 0 0.104
TOTAL 0 0.157
5.1.2 Construction-Related Impacts
Short-term (Temporary) Construction-Related Direct Impacts Potential direct impacts to specia l-status biological resources, absent mitigation measures, which may occur as a result of construction of the proposed Project, include wildlife entrapment, killed or injured w ildlife, and unauthorized grading or vegetation removal. These activi ties have the potentia l to occur for any number of reasons, Including lack or absence of Project design staking, inadequate or unmaintained demarcation of proposed impacts areas , misinterpretation of Project designs, and human error in operating equipment. Dependent on construction methodology and sequencing, impacts resulting from wildlife entrapment may occur at any Project site where excavations remain open and un-sealed for extended periods. Wildlife injuries and mortalities have the potential to occur as a result of any of the previously discussed reasons but are also an inherent risk when working in proximity to undisturbed areas during activities such as initial vegetation clearing and ground disturbance.
Short-term (Temporary) Construction-Related Indirect Impacts Potential indirect impacts as a result of cons truction of the proposed Project include non-storm water discharges resulting from spills or leaks, attracting predators, restriction or impounding of flow within Encinas Creek, storm water discharges, dust, noise and lighting. 49 Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
50 5.1.3 Operations and Maintenance-Related Impacts
The proposed Project would include the initial restoration (removal of debris, soil, vegetation) and annual maintenance of the grouted rip rap bed at the western terminus of the EWPCF flood control channel. Once restored, the Project would include regular inspections and maintenance according to existing procedures and would generally consist of crew access to the Project by vehicle or on foot, using existing roads and infrastructure.
Long-term (Permanent) Direct Impacts
Direct impacts associated with the long-term development of the Project would be restricted to the permanent loss of habitat as a result of annual Project maintenance (clearance of debris, soil, vegetation). The Project proposes off-site mitigation to offset all proposed habitat loss; therefore, long- term direct impacts are not anticipated.
Long-term (Permanent) Indirect Impacts
Indirect impacts associated with the long-term development of the Project may include similar impacts to those resulting from initial restoration (removal of debris, soil, vegetation) of the grouted rip rap bed, such as non-storm water discharges resulting from spills or leaks, dust, noise and lighting, generated by maintenance activities. Furthermore, the site is host to invasive species such as pampas grass which, if transported off site, may result in long-term conversion or degradation of additional habitat areas.
Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
51 5.2 CEQA Thresholds of Significance
This section is divided into sub -sections that include direct and indirect impacts an alysis for each threshold under CEQA.
5.2.1 CEQA Threshold Biology - 1
Would the project 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 CDFW or USFWS?
The proposed Project has the potential for numerous direct and indirect impacts to special -status species, habitats and jurisdictional wetlands. The Project area was once a fully developed facility (grouted rip rap bed) devoid of vegetation. However, lack of regular maintenan ce has allowed for expansion of the surrounding native habitat into the Project Area . As such, the potential to support special-status species is considered moderate to high for nine special-status plant and animal species.
The potential to support all oth er potentially occurring special-status species is considered low or presumed absent from the Project. Focused surveys for special-status species were not performed, and potential for impacts is assumed based on extent and availability of habitat. These species may be subject to both temporary and permanent, direct and indirect impacts described in Sections 5.1.1,
5.1.2, and 5.1.3 above.
Of the 63 special-status wildlife and plant species evaluated, two wildlife species are expected to have a high potential to occur , and seven wildlife species are expected to have a moderate potential to occur. Of these nine wildlife species, the following five species are functionally covered under the HMP:
• least Bell’s vireo (high PFO; FE)
• white-tailed kite (moderate PFO; CDFW-FP)
• yellow-breasted chat (moderate PFO; SSC)
• white-faced ibis (moderate PFO; CDFW-WL)
• light-footed Ridgeway’s rail (moderate PFO; FE, SE, CDFW-FP)
Of the nine wildlife species , the following four are not functionally covered under the HMP:
• yellow warbler (high PFO; SSC)
• southern legless lizard (moderate PFO; SSC)
• California glossy snake (moderate PFO; SSC)
• western-yellow bat (moderate PFO; SSC)
Absent mitigation, Project-related impacts to these species, not functionally covered under the HMP, is potentially significant. However, due to moderate potential for occurrence for all species discussed, with the implementation of Avoidance and Minimization Measures (MM) proposed in Section 6 below and HMP mitigation which will contribute to the ongoing reserve assembly of the region, impacts are likely to be less than significant.
Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
52 Biology Impact 1 – Temporary Indirect Impacts to Special-Status Species and Migratory Birds Temporary indirect impacts to special-status species may occur as a result of increased noise, lighting, construction dust and loss of foraging habitat. Absent mitigation, Project -related impacts to these species is potentially significant. However, with the implementation of MM BIO-1, MM BIO-2, MM BIO- 5, MM BIO- 6, MM BIO- 8, MM BIO- 9, MM BIO- 10 and MM BIO- 11, impacts are likely to be less than significant.
Additional temporary indirect impacts to special -status species may result in sediment or other non - stormwater discharges to narrow wetland areas downstream of the Encinas Creek watershed. These wetlands have the potential to support special -status species. Absent mitigation, Project -related impacts to special -status species is potentially significant. However, with the implementation of MM BIO-3, MM BIO-7 and MM BIO-12, impacts are likely to be less than significant.
Biology Impact 2 – Temporary Direct Impacts to Special-Status Species and Migratory Birds Direct impacts to special-status species may occur as a result of direct impacts to individuals, including nests or roosts, which may occur during vegetation, soil and debris removal and dredging activities.
Absent mitigation, Project-related impacts to special -status species and migratory birds is potentially significant. However, with implementation of MM BIO-1, MM BIO -2, MM BIO -5, MM BIO -6, MM BIO -8, MM BIO-9, MM BIO-10 and MM BIO-11, impacts are likely to be less than significant.
Biology Impact 3 – Long-Term Indirect Impacts to Special-Status Species and Habitats Long-term indirect impacts to special-status species and habitats may also occur, including non-storm water discharges as a result of spills leaks, noise, light and dust created from annual maintenance activities. The Project shall implement all MMs described in Section 6 , to reduce the potential for adverse impacts to special-status species and surrounding habitats. As a result of the incorporation of construction BMPs and MMs described in Section 6, during operations and maintenance activities, impacts are likely to be less than significant.
The site supports the following invasive/exotic plant species as designated by the C ity’s HMP and/or the California Invasive Plant Council: pampas grass, stinkwort (Dittrichia graveolens), bristly ox-tongue (Helminthotheca echioides), Russian thistle (Salsola tragus), castor bean (Ricinus communis) and blue gum. Off-site transport of these species either by equipment or seed transport from within Encinas Creek to other areas may result in indirect impacts that contribute to habitat degradation. Absent mitigation, introduction of an invasive exotic plant species to a natural community is potentially significant.
However, with the implementation of Applicant Proposed Mitigation Measure MM BIO-4, impacts are likely to be less than significant.
5.2.2 CEQA Threshold Biology - 2
Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the CDFW or USFWS? Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
53 As described in Section 4.6 above and in Appendix D, the Project includes impacts to USACE, RWQCB, CCC/City, CDFW and City-jurisdictional wetlands and riparian areas that are considered wetlands within the Coastal Zone.
Biology Impact 4 - Indirect Impacts to Riparian and Wetland Communities The Project has the potential for both temporary and long -term indirect impacts to downstream riparian and wetland communities through sediment and non -stormwater discharges, as well as introduction of invasive species to natural communities. Absent mitigation, Project-related impacts to these sensitive natural communities is potentially significant. However, with the implementation MM BIO-1, MM BIO-3, MM BIO-4, MM BIO-5, MM BIO-6, MM BIO-7 and MM BIO-9, impacts are likely to be less than significant.
Biology Impact 5 – Direct Impacts to Riparian and Wetland Communities The proposed Project includes direct impacts to areas meeting City criteria as wetlands within the Coastal Zone. These areas are covered under the City’s HMP and Land Use Plan and thus require mitigation; the City recommends mitigation according to Tables 3, 4 and 6 of the City’s Guidelines for Biological Studies (City of Carlsbad, 2008) for an overall no net loss of wetlands. However, mitigation of proposed permanent impacts to City wetland s must also be performed at mitigation ratios as determined by state and federal agencies. T herefore, the Applicant will coordinate with local, state and federal agencies for appropriate mitigation for impacts to wetland and riparian habitats. Absent proposed mitigation , Project -related impacts to th is sensitive natural communit y is potentially significant. However, with the implementation of MM BIO-1, MM BIO-3, MM BIO-4, MM BIO-5, MM BIO- 6, MM BIO -7 and MM BIO -9, as well as any agency-required mitigation, impacts are likely to be less than significant.
5.2.3 CEQA Threshold Biology - 3
Would the project 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? The biological assessment and JDR identified jurisdictional areas likely subject to regulation by USACE, RWQCB and/or CDFW. Potential impacts to these areas include those discussed in Sections 6.1.1, 6.1.2, and 6.1.3 above. Direct impacts are summarized in Table 4. Furthermore, potentially significant permanent indirect impacts which may result from construction include degradation of waterways through the accidental discharge or oil, grease and chemicals. Absent mitigation , impacts to jurisdictional waters are potentially significant. However, with the implementation of MM BIO-1, MM BIO-3, MM BIO-4, MM BIO-5, MM BIO-6, MM BIO-7, MM BIO-9 and MM BIO-12, impacts are likely to be less than significant.
Encino Wastewater Aut/10rity Flood Control Channel R,p Rap Bed Ma,ntenance Projeo Biolog1ca/ Resource Assesrnent
Cit}• of Carlsbad, San Diego County . CA
Table 4. Summary of Proposed Project Impacts to Jurisdictional Resources Jurisdictional Waters
Impacts Acres (Linear Feet)
Temporary Permanent
Likely USACE Jurisdiction
Wetland Waters of the U.S. 0 0.104 (38]
Non-Wetland Waters of the U.S. 0 0.046 (20]
Likely USACE Total Jurisdiction 0 0.150 (58)
Likely RWQCB Jurisdiction
Wetland Waters of the State 0 0.104 (38)
Non-Wetland Waters of the State 0 0.046 (20]
Likely RWQCB Total Jurisdiction 0 0.150 (58)
Likely CDFW Jurisdiction
Riparian Only 0 0.104 (38}
Streambed (Bank-to-Bank) 0 0.046 (20]
Likely CDFW Total Jurisdiction 0 0.150 (58)
Likely CCC/ Citv Jurisdiction
Palustrine Wetland 0 0.104 (38}
Riverine (Non-veqetated Channel) 0 0.046 (20]
Likely CCC/City Total Jurisdiction 0 0.150 (58)
5.2.4 CEQA Threshold Biology - 4
Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors , or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
The proposed Project has the potential for short-term and direct and indirect impacts on wildlife movement which may be deterred from the Project due to increased noise, human activity and disturbances to habitat. Initial restora tion (removal of debris, soil, vegeta tion} of the grouted rip rap bed will occur over a longe r duration than subsequently proposed annual maintenance. Long-term direct and indirect impacts to wildlife movement would likely be similar to temporary impac ts, with the exception of the dura tion of maintenance activities. Initial restorat ion and subsequent main tenance of the grouted rip rap bed would result in a permanent loss of 0.104 acres of native habitat. However, in relation to the surrounding habitat, approximately 7.5 acres, the proposed Project would impact a small area of native wildlife corridor . Additionally, with the implementation of proposed C1ty, state and federa l mitigation for no net loss of wetland habitat , overall wildlife corridors and habitat are protected and enhanced . These short- and long -term impacts to wildlife movement are likely considered less than significant.
54 Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
55 5.2.5 CEQA Threshold Biology - 5
Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
The Project, as proposed, does not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, and no significant impacts are anticipated. However, it is important to note that the City’s HMP and Land Use Plan, in accordance with the California Coastal Commission, identify specific conservation standards that apply for development within the Coastal Zone. One such standard states that impacts to wetlands are not allowed except where stated in California Public Resources Code Section 30233. The proposed Project is in accordance with permissions stated within California Public Resources Code Section 30233 (California Public Resources Code, 2016); as there is “no feasible less environmentally damaging alternative” for restoring flow capacity at the outflow end of the EWPCF flood control channel. Furthermore, the EWA is a public agency providing se condary wastewater treatment services to approximately 380,000 residents in northern San Diego County, therefore meeting the limitations for allowable impacts to wetlands related to “incidental public service purposes”.
5.2.6 CEQA Threshold Biology - 6
Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted HCP, NCCP, or other approved local, regional, or state HCP?
The Project, as proposed, has been designed in accordance with the City ’s HMP for Natural Communities in the City of Carlsbad (2004) and its supporting documents/programs: t he City’s Guidelines for Biological Studies (City of Carlsbad 2008) and the City’s LCP Land Use Plan (City of Carlsbad 2014). The City’s HMP constitutes the City’s subarea plan within the MHCP for north coastal San Diego County and meets the goals of California’s NCCP.
6.0 MITIGATION PROGRAM
6.1 Avoidance and Minimization Measures for Construction Impacts
MM BIO-1: Delineation of Project Impact Areas
The boundaries of proposed Project impact areas will be clearly delineated with orange fencing (or similar material), which will be maintained until the completion of construction (maintenance) activities, to prevent the unauthorized impact of City Wetlands and/or sensitive habitats identified in this report or authorized by subsequent agency permits. All employees shall be instructed that their activities, vehicles, equipment and construction materials are restricted to the proposed Project footprint, designated staging areas and routes of travel.
MM BIO-2: Conduct Pre-Construction Nesting Bird Surveys
To the extent feasible, conduct vegetation removal and grubbing activities outside of the bird breeding season (February 15 – September 15). The USFWS will be notified at least seven days before clearing and grubbing begins. During this activity, a qualified biologist will walk the area ahead of Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
56 construction equipment to flush birds away from impact areas. The biologist will immediately report to USFWS the number and location of any federally listed birds disturbed by clearing and grubbing. No gnatcatchers will be injured or killed.
Other construction activities will also be avoided during the breeding season if feasible. If this cannot be avoided, the following measures will be taken:
• If California gnatcatchers have the potential to occur onsite, a qualified biologist will conduct a focused species gnatcatcher survey in appropriate habitat within and surrounding the project area.
The surveys will consist of three visits, one week apart; the last of these will be conducted no more than three days prior to construction.
• Surveys will also be conducted by a qualified biologist in approp riate habitat for nesting raptors and migratory birds (including, but not limited to the least Bell’s vireo and light-footed Ridgway’s rail) and within an additional 500-ft survey buffer within three days of construction.
• The USFWS will be notified immediately of any federally listed species that are located during pre- construction surveys.
• If nests of listed birds, migratory birds, raptors, or other sensitive species are located, they will be fenced with a protective buffer of at least 500 feet from active nests of listed species, and 300 feet from other sensitive bird species. All construction activity will be prohibited within this area.
MM BIO-3: Prepare and Implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
Prior to initial grading or ground disturbance, the Applicant will prepare and implement a SWPPP that will identify Best Management Practices (BMPs) to prevent to stormwater and non -stormwater discharges which may have an adverse effect on downstream water quality. BMPs should address sediment and hazardous materials control, dewatering or diversion structures, fueling and equipment management practices, and other factors deemed necessary by reviewing agencies. Erosion control measures shall be monitored on a regularly scheduled basis, particularly during times of heavy rainfall.
Corrective measures will be implemented in the event erosion control strategies are inadequate.
Sediment/erosion control measures will be continued at the project site until such time as the grouted rip rap bed has been restored.
MM BIO-4: Develop a Project Weed Management Plan
Prior to Project development, the Applicant wi ll develop a Project Weed Management Plan for approval by the City. The plan will identify areas of proposed impacts where invasive or noxious weeds are present and which activities would be subject to additional mitigation actions to prevent the spread of weeds from the site. The plan will detail best practices for the removal, treatment, and disposal of invasive weeds from the Project site during construction.
MM BIO-5: Conduct Environmental Awareness Training for all Project Personnel
A qualified biologist shall conduct a training session for all Project personnel prior to proposed activities.
At a minimum, the training shall include overall environmental awareness related to the Project and Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
57 include: a description of the special-status species and its habitats, the general provisions of the Endangered Species Act (Act) and the HMP, the need to adhere to the provisions of the Act and the HMP, the penalties associated with violating the provisions of the Act, the general measures that are being implemented to conserve the special-status species of conc ern as they relate to the Project, access routes, and Project site boundaries within which the Project activities must be accomplished.
MM BIO-6: Conduct Biological Construction Monitoring and Reporting
The qualified Project biologist shall review Project plans (e.g., all access routes and staging areas), and monitor construction activities, throughout the duration of the Project to ensure that all practicable measures are being employed to avoid incidental disturbance of habitat and any special -status species of concern outside the Project footprint. The Project biologist shall be present during ground - disturbing and vegetation-removal activities to avoid incidental disturbances to special-status species of concern , including bats and reptiles that may b e roosting or burrowed (respectively) within or adjacent to the Project footprint. Construction monitoring reports shall be completed and provided to the City summarizing how the Project is in compliance with applicable conditions. The Project biologist should be empowered to halt work activity if necessary and to confer with City staff to ensure the proper implementation of species and habitat protection measures. Any habitat destroyed that is not in the identified Project footprint shall be disclosed immediately to the City, USFWS and CDFW and shall be compensated at a minimum ratio of 5:1. If dead or injured listed species are located, initial notification must be made within three working days, in writing, to the USFWS Division of Law Enforcement in Torr ance, California and by telephone and in writing to the applicable jurisdiction, Carlsbad Field Office of the FWS and CDFW.
MM BIO-7: Avoid Construction During the Rainy/Wet Season
Construction adjacent to drainages should occur during periods of minimum flow (i.e., summer through the first significant rain of fall) to avoid excessive sedimentation and erosion and to avoid impacts to special-status species.
MM BIO-8: Avoid Attraction of Predators and Conduct Daily Housekeeping
To avoid attracting predators of the target species of concern, the Project site shall be kept as clean of debris as possible. All food related trash items shall be enclosed in sealed containers and regularly removed from the site(s) on a daily basis. Pets of Project personnel shall not be allowed on-site where they may come into contact with any listed species.
MM BIO-9: Control Fugitive Dust
Fugitive dust will be avoided and minimized through watering and other appropriate measures.
MM BIO-10: Avoid or Minimize Noise Impacts
Noise impacts are a concern around areas supporting breeding bird and bat habitat. To avoid or minimize noise impacts , limit construction activities during the breeding season (generally between February 15 and September 15) to those that will not produce significant noise impacts (i.e., noise levels greater than 60 dB Leq [decibels, equivalent sound level] at the edge of the habitat of concern).
Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
58 Preconstruction bird surveys at potential impact areas will be conducted for construction activities during the breeding season.
MM BIO-11: Avoid Night Construction Lighting Adjacent to Native Habitats
Lighting in or adjacent to native habitats will not be used, except where essential for roadway, facility use and safety. If nighttime construction lights are necessary, all lighting adjacent to natural habitat will be shielded and/or directed away from habitat.
MM BIO-12: Obtain Permit Authorization for Impacts Jurisdictional Waters Prior to impacting areas identified as jurisdictional waters, or potentially under the jurisdiction of the USACE, RWQCB and CDFW, the Applicant will prepare the following documents and/or obtain the following permit authorizations as identified in the JDR (Appendix D):
o Obtain Clean Water Act Section 404 permit issued by USACE for all proposed impacts to Waters of the U.S.
o Obtain Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act Section 401 permit issued by RWQCB for all proposed impacts to Waters of the State
o Obtain Lake and Streambed Alteration Section 1602 permit issued by CDFW for all proposed impacts to Streambeds
Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
59 7.0 CONCLUSION
Nine special-status wildlife species have been determined to have a moderate to high potential to exist within or adjacent to the Project Area, including least Bell’s Vireo. Additionally, one sensitive natural community was identified within and adjacent to the Project Area. Lastly, jurisdictional waters were identified within and adjacent to the Project Area as described in Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project Jurisdictional Delineation Report (JDR) (Blackhawk Environmental 2020), Appendix D. Absent mitigation, the proposed Project impacts would likely have an adverse effect on special-status plant and wildlife species, sensitive natural communities, and jurisdictional waters.
However, the anticipated direct impacts resulting from Project construction are expected to be less than significant when avoidance and minimization measures are employed and mitigation is implemented. To the maximum extent practicable, avoidance of impacts to City Wetlands and /or sensitive habitats, special-status species, and nesting birds/raptors will be achieved per the MBTA, FESA, CESA and HMP . Indirect effects to biological resources during and following construction are anticipated to be less than significant due to proposed mitigation. Significant impacts to wildlife corridors are not anticipated as a result of the proposed Project. Additionally, cumulative impacts are anticipated to be less than significant due to the limited extent of disturbance and proposed mitigation to address effects upon sensitive natural communities.
Proposed mitigation will include implementation of avoidance and minimization measures which include preparation and implementation of the following: a storm water pollution prevention program, weed management plan, and environmental awareness training for all Project personnel. Additionally, proper permit authorizations as identified in the JDR (Appendix D) will be obtained prior to impacts to jurisdictional waters. All areas of the Project are cover ed by the City of Carlsbad and therefore, the Project will mitigate for all construction -related and operations and maintenance-related impacts to wetland/riparian sensitive habitats that overlap with the construction footprint through offsite mitigation at a mitigation ratio determined by the City, state and federal agencies, for no net loss of sensitive habitats. In addition, biological monitoring is proposed so that natural resources will have increased protection during the construction process.
By adhering to the mitigation measures proposed herein, no direct or indirect adverse impacts would occur to the Project site or any threatened, endangered, or otherwise special-status plant or wildlife species. Additionally, no cumulative impacts are expecte d to occur. Every effort to avoid impacting HMP wetlands, sensitive habitats, special-status species, nesting birds and raptors will be implemented, including compliance with the Federal Migratory Bird Treaty Act and California Fish and Game Code Sections of the 3500 series.
Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
60 I hereby certify that the statements furnished above present the data and information required for this biological survey results report, and that the facts, statements, and information presented are true and correct to the best of my knowledge and belief.
Ian Maunsell
Senior Biologist
uw
Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
61 8.0 REFERENCES
Baldwin, B. G., D. H. Goldman, D. J. Keil, R. Patterson, T. J. Rosatti, and D. H. Wilken, editors 2012 The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California, Second Edition. University of California Press, Berkeley, California.
Blackhawk Environmental, Inc.
2020 Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project:
Jurisdictional Delineation Report. City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA.
Calflora
2020 Information on California plants for education, research and conservation. [web application]. Berkeley, California: The Calflora Database [a non -profit organization].
Available: http://www.calflora.org/. Accessed: October 2020.
California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG)
1994 Environmental Services Division (ESD). A Field Guide to Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreements, Sections 1600-1607, California Fish and Game Code.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW)
2008 CEQA Guidelines. Statutes and Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act as amended.
2009 Protocols for Surveying and Evaluating Impacts to Special Status Native Plant Populations and Natural Communities. Sacramento, CA: California Department of Fish and Game, November 24, 2009.
2014 California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). GIS Data, CNDDB Subscription.
2020 California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). RareFind Version 3.1.0. Database Query for the Del Mar and Del Mar OE W, California, USGS 7.5-minute quadrangles. Wildlife and Habitat Data Analysis Branch. Accessed September 2020.
California State Assembly
2018 California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, Sections 15000 – 15387.
Available from http://ccr.oal.ca.gov/
City of Carlsbad
2004 Habitat Management Plan for Natural Communities in the City of Carlsbad. December 1999, as amended. Final Approval, November 2004. Available at:
http://www.carlsbadca.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=27193. Accessed:
28 September 2020.
City of Carlsbad
2008 Guidelines for Biological Studies. Available at:
http://www.carlsbadca.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=24331. Accessed:
28 September 2020.
Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
62 City of Carlsbad
2014. City of Carlsbad Local Coastal Program 1996. Amended 2000, 2002, 2003, 2006, 2010, and 2014. Available at:
http://www.carlsbadca.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=24088. Accessed:
28 September 2020.
Cypher, E.A.
2002 General Rare Plant Survey Guidelines. California State University, Stanislaus. Endangered Species Recovery Program, Revised July 2002.
Google
2020 Google Earth. US Department of State Geographer. Data SIO, U.S. Navy, NGA, GEBCO. earth.google.com/.
Hickman, J.C. (Ed.).
1993 The Jepson Manual, Higher Plants of California. University of California Press, Berkeley and Los Angeles, California.
Holland, Robert F.
1986 Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California. State of California, the Resources Agency. Department of Fish and Game.
Jepson Flora Project (eds.)
2014 Jepson eFlora. http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/eflora/.
Lichvar, R.W., D.L. Banks, W.N. Kirchner, and N.C. Melvin 2016 The National Wetland Plant List: 2016 wetland ratings. Phytoneuron 2016-30: 1-17.
Published 28 April 2016. ISSN 2153 733X
San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG)
2003 Volume III MHCP Biological Monitoring and Management Plan for the Cities of Carlsbad, Encinitas, Escondido, Oceanside, San Marcos, Solana Beach, and Vista.
Prepared for: Multiple Habitat Conservation Program. Administered by: SANDAG. March 2003. Available at:
https://www.sandag.org/index.asp?projectid=97&fuseaction=projects.detail.
Accessed: October 2020
Oberbauer, T., Kelly, M. and J. Buegge
2008 Draft Vegetation Communities of San Diego County. Based on “Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California”. Holland.
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
2017 Biological Resources Assessment January 2017 Encina Wastewater Authority, City of Carlsbad, California.
San Diego County
Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
63 2012 San Diego County Code of Regulatory Ordinances Chapter 6 Resource Protection Ordinances. San Diego, California.
Sawyer, J.O., T. Keeler-Wolf, J.M. Evens
2009 A Manual of California Vegetation, Second Edition. California Native Plant Society.
Sacramento, California.
Sproul, F., T. Keeler-Wolf, P. Gordon-Reedy, J. Dunn, A. Klein, K. Harper 2011 Vegetation Classification Manual for Western San Diego County (VCMWSDC), First Edition. AECOM, California Department of Fish and Game, Vegetation Classification and Mapping Program, Conservation Biology Institute. February 2011.
United States
1972 Federal Water Pollution Control Act Amendments of 1972 (U.S.C. 1251 et seq.)
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
1987 Corps of Engineers Wetlands Delineation Manual. Environmental Laboratory U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Waterways Experiment Station, Wetlands Research Program Technical Report Y-87-1. Vicksburg, Mississippi.
2008 Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (Version 2.0), ed. J.S. Wakeley, R.W. Lichvar, and C.V. Noble. ERDC/EL TR-08-28.
Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center.
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) 2010 Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Official Soil Series Descriptions.
http://soils.usda.gov/technical/classification/osd/index.html Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Web Soil Survey. Available online at http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/.
Accessed [January 2019].
2018 Natural Resources Conservation Service. Wetland Indicator Status Plants Database. https://plants.usda.gov/wetinfo.html
United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)
1996 Guidelines for conducting and reporting botanical inventories for federally listed, proposed, and candidate plants. Sacramento, California.
1997 Coastal California Gnatcatcher ( Polioptila californica californica) Presence/Absence Survey Guidelines. US Fish & Wildlife Service Carlsbad Fish & Wildlife Office. Carlsbad, CA. February 28, 1997.
2016 U.S. FWS Threatened & Endangered Species Active Critical Habitat Report. https://ecos.fws.gov/ecp/report/table/critical-habitat.html
Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project – Biological Resource Assesment
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
64 2020 National Wetlands Inventory (NWI). https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/.
United States Geological Survey (USGS)
2011 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle map for Del Mar and Del Mar OE W, California.
ATTACHMENT A
Figures
5LACKHAWK
KERN COUNTY
LOS ANGELES
COUNTY
~
Project Site
~
Pacific Ocean
□ Survey Area
SAN BERNARDINO
COUNTY
RIVERSIDE
COUNTY
SAN DIEGO
COUNTY
IMPERIAL
COUNTY
HMP Existing Hardline Conservation Areas
D Coastal Zone (CCC)
Source: City of Carlsbad SanGIS CCC Aeria l Photo : SANDAG & SanGIS 20 17 Base maps: Esri Light Gray Canvas Esti World Topographic Figure 1 Project Vicinity and Location
LACKHAWK Within City of Carlsbad HMP and CCC Boundaries n _v ,_r _o _n _m_e _n t_a_l_!_!~ o~~~!::::==~ ~ ---~~~::.2~~~ !..-2::~~~~~E~n~c~i~n~a~W~a~s~te~w~a~te~r ~A:..u!'.t~h~o~ri~ty A 2 ·0<feet Flood Contro l Channel Rip Rap Main tenance Projec t Pac1t1c Ocear,
/
/
/
I I I
I
I I
I I
I
/ /
/
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
n Survey Area
Lj 5-mile Buffer
Animals D
l - Belding's sava nnah sparrow
2 - California glossy snake
3 - California horned lark
4 - Califo rnia least tern
5 - coas t horned lizard
6 - coas t patch-nosed snake
7 - coas tal cactus wren
8 - coas tal Califo rnia gnatcatcher
9 - Crotch bumb le bee
lO - Dulzura pocke t mouse
l l - least Bell's vireo
12 - light-footed Ridgway 's rail
13 - northwestern San Diego pocket mouse
14 - Mexican long -tongued bat
15 - mimic tryonia (=California brackis hwa ter snail)
C lub
-----
.......... ............ _ --------
G
16 - monarch - Californ ia overw intering popu lation 1---------------------- ~ -___.._... ____ .£1.. ______ -=------. 17 _ northwestern San Diego pocket mouse Plants D 53 - Orcutt 's pincushion Natural Comm unities D l8 _ orange-throa ted whiptai l 36 - Blochman's dudleya 54 - Palmer's goldenbush 71 - Southern Coastal Salt Marsh 19 - poc keted free-tai led bat 37 - California adolph ia 55- Palmer's grapplinghoo k 72- Southern Maritime Chaparral 20 - Riverside fairy shrimp
21 - San Diego black-tailed jackrabbit
22 - San Diego desert wood rat
23 - San Diego fairy shrimp
24 - Southern California legless lizard
25 - Southern California legless lizard
26 - southern Californ ia rufous-crow ned sparrow
27 - southwestern willow flycatcher
28 - tidewater goby
29 - vernal pool fairy shrimp
30 - western snowy plover
31 - western yellow bat
32 - white-faced ibis
33 - white-tailed kite
34 - yellow-breasted chat
35 - yellow warbler
Source: CDFW Base map: Esn Topograp hic Mop
38 - California Orcutt grass
39 - cliff spurge
40 - coast woolly -heads
41 - Coulter's goldfie lds
42 - Coulter's saltbush
43 - decumbent golde nbush
56 - San Diego barrel cactus 73 - Southern Riparian Forest 57 - San Diego button-ce lery 7 4 - Southern Riparian Scrub 58 - San Diego goldenstar 75 - Southern Sycamore Alder
59 - San Diego marsh-elder Riparian Woo dland
60 - San Diego sagewort 7 6 - Southern Willow Scrub
61 - San Diego thorn-min t
44- Del Mar manzanita 62 - sea dahlia
45 - Del Mar Mesa sand aster 63 - Shaw's agave
46 - Encinitas baccharis 64 - south coas t saltscale
47 - estuary seab lite 65 - spreading navarretia
48 - little mousetail 66 - sticky dudleya
49 - Nuttall's acmispo n 67 - summer holly
50 - Nuttall's scrub oak 68 - thread -leaved brodiaea
51 - Orcutt 's brodiaea 69 -wart-stemmed ceanothus
52 - Orcutt's hazard ia 70 - Wiggins· cryptantha
S 11
ti, QI.I
Pr 1101
p II
SA
DIEGU
VALL
Figure 2
l
Miles
CNDDB Results
Encina Wastewater Authority
Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Maintenance Project
D Survey Area
!:.. '"'j 5-mile Buffer
USFWS Species
D California Orcu tt grass
D California leas t tern
Source: USFWS Base map: Esri Topograph ic Map
D
D D D
Riverside fairy shrimp
San Diego fa iry shrimp
San Diego thornm int
cactus wren
coasta l Cal ifornia gnatc a tcher
Cardiff by '""~' fa Dr
the Sea\
D least Bell's vireo
D light-foo ted Ridgway's rail
D thread-leaved brodiaea
versatile fairy shrimp
D western snowy plover
Vista
~
i'! • !!
°o t,._
"'iue""
Figure 3
LACKHAWK USFWS Species Occurrence Results
nv _•_ro_ n_m_e_n_t_a_l ...:~ !N~o~~~==~ ~ ~ ---~~~:::.: ~ ~~~~~~ EJnl.c~in::a~ W~a~s~te~w~a~t~e~r:::.A~u~t~h10:::r2:it~y A 1 ·tiles Flood Contro l Channel Rip Rap Main tenance Projec t
LACKHAWK
Survey Area
Projec t Area
Conc rete Energy Dissipation Apron
Permanen t Impact Area/G routed Rip Rap Bed
Vegetation
D Non-Vegeta ted Channel
D Southern Willow Scrub
- Coas tal Freshwater Marsh
D Disturbed Coasta l Scrub
D Urban/Developed
,,
.~
,;.
<
...
-~\ ~
~~
Figure 4
Vegetation Communities / Land Use Cover Types
n _v•-ro_n_m_en_ t_a _l J.!~o~~~==6i0 ~ ---~~~~~ ~ ~~~~E~n~c~i~na.e__!W~a~st!.!e~w~a~t~e~r~A:._!u~t:::h~o~rit~y A Feet Flood Contro l Channel Rip Rap Main tenance Projec t Source: USDA NRCS Aerial Pho to : SANDAG & SonGIS 2017
~ 5 !:,ACKHAWK
~ n viro nm e nt al AO 200
Feet
□ Survey Area
Soils
Coastal beaches
Huerhuero loam, 2 to 9 percen t slopes
Marina loamy coarse sand, 2 to 9 percent slopes
- Salinas clay, 0 to 2 percent slopes
• Terrace escarpments
Tidal flats
Figure 5
Soils
Encino Wastewater Author ity
Flood Contro l Channel Rip Rap Maintenance Projec t
D Survey Area National Hydrograph y Data set (NHD)
National Wetland s Inventory (NWI)
- Estuarine and Marine Deepw ater
Estua rine and Marine Wetland
Freshwater Emergent Wetland
- Freshwater Forested/Shrub Wetland
- Freshwater Pond
- Riverine
- Forested/Shrub Riparian
Source: USFWS NWI USGS NHD Aerial Photo : SANDA G & SanGIS 2017 /''✓ Stream/ River
/''✓ Connecto r
[Z] Reservoir
[2J Sea/Ocean
I
I
' I
I
I
I
I
I
\
' I
\
I
'
I
' I
Figure 6
LACKHAWK Hydrology
n v_ i-r o_n_m_e _n t-a-1 ...!.~·N~o~~~==~ ~ ---~ ~ ~~~ ~~~ ~~E~n~c~in::a!:.!W~a~st~e~w~a~t~e~r~A::..u.!:t~h::lo~r~ity A UXfeet Flood Contro l Channel Rip Rap Main tenance Projec t
ATTACHMENT B
Site Photographs
5LACKHAWK
Encina Wastewater Authority Channel Maintenance Project Biological Resource Assessment – Site Photographs
Carlsbad, San Diego County, California
Photo 1: An overview of the southern willow scrub habitat and non-vegetated channel habitat looking northwest from the eastern edge of the Project site.
Photo 2: A representative photo of the interface of the urban/developed landscape habitat at the eastern edge of the non-vegetated channel and Project.
Encina Wastewater Authority Channel Maintenance Project Biological Resource Assessment – Site Photographs
Carlsbad, San Diego County, California
Photo 3: Southwest-facing photo of the transition of the urban/developed landscape habitat to southern willow scrub habitat on the southern edge of the unvegetated channel within the Project.
Photo 4: A representative photo of the non-vegetated channel surrounded by the southern willow scrub habitat looking east-northeast from the southwest edge of the channel within the Project.
Encina Wastewater Authority Channel Maintenance Project Biological Resource Assessment – Site Photographs
Carlsbad, San Diego County, California
Photo 5: Another representative photo of the non-vegetated channel surrounded by the southern willow scrub habitat looking north from the southwest edge of the channel.
Photo 6: A representative photo of the interface of the non-vegetated channel and the surrounding southern willow scrub habitat at the southwest edge of the channel.
Encina Wastewater Authority Channel Maintenance Project Biological Resource Assessment – Site Photographs
Carlsbad, San Diego County, California
Photo 7: West-facing Photo showing the disturbed coastal scrub habitat within the Survey Area. The photo shows the interface of disturbed coastal scrub habitat with the urban/developed landscape. Project shown in background isolated from these areas.
Photo 8: East-facing photograph of the NCTD railroad tracks located within the urban/developed landscape east of the unvegetated channel within the Survey Area adjacent to the Project. Disturbed coastal scrub habitat shown in background.
ATTACHMENT C
Observed Plant and Wildlife Species
5LACKHAWK
Encino wastewater Alithor/ty Chonnel Maintenance ProJec:1 Btologicol Resource Assessrnent - Observed Plont Species List San Diego , Son Diego County CL\
OBSERVED PLANT SPECIES LIST
MONOCOTS
CYPERACEAE Sedae Family
Schoenoolectus acutus California bull rush
POACEAE Grass Family
**Cortaderia SP. pampas arass
0ICOTS
APIACEAE Carrot Family
* Apium graveolens common celery
ASTERACEAE Aster Family
Baccharis salicif olia mule fa t
Deinandra f asciculata clustered tarweed
**Dittrichia graveolens stinkwort
Erigeron canadensis horseweed
**Glebionis coronaria crown daisy
**Helminthotheca echioides bristly ox-tongue
lsocoma menziesii coast goldenbush
Pluchea odorata salt marsh fleabane
Pseudognaphalium californicum ladies' tobacco
Xanthium strumarium rough cockleburr
BORAGINACEAE Borage Family
Heliotropium curassavicum salt heliotrope
BRASSICACEAE Mustard Family
**Hirschfeldia incana short podded mustard
CHENOPODIACEAE Amaranth Family
**Sa/so/a tragus Russian thistle
*Dysphanfa ambrosioides Mexican tea
EUPHORBIACEAE Spurge Family
**Ricinus communis castor bean
Euphorbia macu/ata spotted spurge
FABACEAE Pea Family
*Melilotus a/bus white sweetclover
FRAN KENIACEAE Sea Heath Family
Frankenia salina alkali heath
MYRSINACEAE Myrsine Family
*Lysimachia arvensis scarlet pimperne l
MYRTACEAE Myrtle Family
Encino Wastewater Authority Channel Maintenance Project Biological Resource Assessment - Observed Plant Species List Son Diego, San Diego County, CA
**Eucalyptus g/obulus
OLEACEAE
Fraxinus sp.
ONOGRACEAE
Oenothera elata ssp. hookeri
SALICACEAE
Salix lasiolepis
SCROPHULARIACEAE
**Myoporum laetum
TYPHACEAE
Typha sp.
blue gum
Olive and Lilac Family
ash tree
Evening Primrose Family
common evening primrose
Willow Family
Arroyo willow
Nightshade Family
lollypop tree
Cat-tail Family
cattail
Key to Symbols: • Non-native; •• Non-na tive and Invasive accord ing to the California Invasive Plant Counci l Encino Wastewater Autho11ty Channel Maintenance Project Biological Resources As:.essment - Observed Wildlife Species Ust San Diego, San Diego County, CA
OBSERVED WILDLIFE SPECIES LIST
ACTINOPTERYGII RAY-FINNED FISH
POECILLIDAE Livebearers and Topminnows
Gambusia affinis mosquitofish
AVES BIRDS
AEGITHALIDAE Bushtits
Psaltriparus minimus bushtit
ARDEIDAE Herons, Earets, Bitterns
Ardea herodias areat -blue heron
Butorides virescens green heron
CHARA.DRIIDAE Plovers and La0winas
Charadrius vociferus killdeer
COLUMBIDAE Piaeons and Doves
Zenaida macroura mournina dove
CORVIDAE Javs, Maaoies and Crows
Corvus brachvrhvnchos American crow
Corvus corax common raven
EMBERIZIDAE Sparrows and Buntinas
Pioilo crissatis California towhee
FRINGILLIDAE Finches and Allies
Haemorhous mexicanus house finch
Soinus osaltria lesser aoldfinch
MIMIDAE Mockinabirds and Thrashers
Mimus po/yglottos northern mockingbird
PARULIDAE New World Warblers
Setoohaaa coronata vellow -rumped warb ler
PASSERELLIDAE New World Sparrows
Melospiza melodia song sparrow
PICIDAE Woodpeckers
Dryobates nuttallii Nuttall 's woodpecker
TROCHILIDAE Hummingbirds
Calypte anna Anna's hummingbird
TYRANNIDAE Tyrant Flycatchers
Empidonax difficilis Pacific -slope flycatcher
Sayornis nigricans black phoebe
Tyrannus vociferans Cassin's kingbird
TROGLODYTIDAE Wrens
Troqfodytes aedon house wren
VIREONIDAE Vireos
Vireo gilvus warbling vireo
Vireo huttoni Hutton's vireo
Encino Wastewater Autho,ity Channel Maintenance Project Biological Resources Assessment - Observed Wildlife Species Ust San Diego, San Diego County , CA
DECAPODA DECAPODS
ASTACIDAE Cravfish
Cambarus sp. crayfish
INSECTA INSECTS
NYMPHALIDAE Brush-footed Butterflies
Nymphalis antiopa mournina cloak
PIERIDA Whites and Sulfurs
Phoebis sp. sulfer
MAMMALIA MAMMALS
PROCYONIDAE Raccoons and Relatives
Procyon lotor Common raccoon
REPTILIA REPTILES
PHRYNOSOMATIDAE Lizards
Scelooorus occidentalis Baio California tree froa
*Non-native
ATTACHMENT D
Jurisdictional Delineation Report
5LACKHAWK
Blackhawk Environmental, Inc.
1720 Midvale Drive
San Diego, CA 92105
Phone: 619.972.7932
Phone: 619.972.8714
www.blackhawkenv.com
ENCINA WASTEWATER AUTHORITY FLOOD CONTROL
CHANNEL RIP RAP BED MAINTENANCE PROJECT
JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION REPORT
CITY OF CARLSBAD, SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
Prepared for:
Encina Wastewater Authority
1230 Columbia Street, Suite 440
6200 Avenida Encinas, Carlsbad, CA 92011
Contact: Doug Campbell, Director of Environmental Compliance Telephone: 760.268.8861
E-mail: [email protected]
Prepared by:
Blackhawk Environmental, Inc.
1720 Midvale Drive
San Diego, CA 92105
Contact: Ian Maunsell
Telephone: 206.920.3266
E-mail: [email protected]
December 1, 2020
5lACKHAWK
Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project - Jurisdictional Delineation Report
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
1 TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ........................................................................................................................................ 2
1.0 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................................ 4
1.1 Project Description ....................................................................................................................................... 4
2.0 REGULATORY SETTING ................................................................................................................................. 6
2.1 USACE Waters of the U.S. ............................................................................................................................ 6
2.1.1 Regulatory Definition ............................................................................................................................. 6
2.1.2 Wetland Parameters .............................................................................................................................. 6
2.1.2.1 Hydrophytic Vegetation ................................................................................................................. 6
2.1.2.2 Hydric Soils ........................................................................................................................................ 7
2.1.2.3 Wetland Hydrology .......................................................................................................................... 7
2.1.3 Atypical Situations .................................................................................................................................. 8
2.1.4 Vernal Pools ............................................................................................................................................ 8
2.2 USACE Non-Wetland Waters of the U.S. .................................................................................................... 8
2.3 CDFW Jurisdictional Waters ........................................................................................................................ 9
2.4 RWQCB Jurisdictional Waters ..................................................................................................................... 9
2.5 California Coastal Commission and the City of Carlsbad .................................................................... 10
3.0 METHODS ................................................................................................................................................... 11
4.0 RESULTS ....................................................................................................................................................... 13
4.1 Hydrology .................................................................................................................................................... 13
4.1.1 Tributaries & Natural Drainages .......................................................................................................... 13
4.2 Vegetation .................................................................................................................................................. 13
4.2.1 Areas Supporting Hydrophytic Vegetation and/or Open Water ................................................... 14
4.2.1.1 Southern Willow Scrub (Holland Code 63320) ............................................................................ 14
4.2.2 Areas Lacking Hydrophytic Vegetation or Hydric Soils ................................................................... 14
4.2.2.1 Non-Vegetated Channel (Holland Code 13200) ...................................................................... 14
4.3 Soils ............................................................................................................................................................... 14
4.3.1 Hydric Soils ............................................................................................................................................ 15
5.0 JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION ................................................................................................................. 16
5.1 USACE Jurisdiction ...................................................................................................................................... 16
5.2 RWQCB Jurisdiction .................................................................................................................................... 16
5.3 CDFW Jurisdiction ....................................................................................................................................... 16
5.4 CCC/City Jurisdiction ................................................................................................................................ 17
6.0 PROJECT IMPACTS ..................................................................................................................................... 18
6.1 Direct Impacts ............................................................................................................................................ 18
6.2 Indirect Impacts ......................................................................................................................................... 19
6.3 Permit Authorization ................................................................................................................................... 19
8.0 REFERENCES ............................................................................................................................................... 22
ATTACHMENTS
A FIGURES
B SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
C JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION DATA FORMS
Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project - Jurisdictional Delineation Report
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Blackhawk Environmental, Inc. (Blackhawk Environmental) aquatic resource specialists conducted a jurisdictional delineation in support of the proposed Encina Wastewater Authority (EWA) Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project (Project), in the City of Carlsbad (City), San Diego County, California. The Project is located at the terminus of the existing flood control channel associated with the Encina Wastewater Pollution Control Facility (EWPCF), located at 6200 Avenida Encinas in the City of Carlsbad, California ( Figure 1). Proposed activities include annual maintenance and clearing activities within an approximately 7,000 square-foot bed of grouted rip rap.
EWA conducts annual maintenance (authorized under RWQCB Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification No. R9-2017-0044), that includes all areas of the EWPCF flood control channel from the eastern boundary of the EWPCF extending west to the concrete energy dissipation apron at the outflow end of the channel beneath the North County Transit District (NCTD) railroad tracks. Areas west of the concrete energy dissipation apron, however, are not currently authorized for maintenance .
Beyond the concrete energy dissipation apron, lies an approximately 7,000-square foot grouted rip rap bed. The proposed Project would allow EWA to conduct initial restoration (removal of debris, soil, vegetation) as well as annual maintenance of this grouted rip rap bed. Currently, the grouted rip rap bed is impacted by years of sediment accumulation and now supports native riparian scrub habitat.
While annual channel maintenance outlined in the 2017 BRA continues to support original flood control channel capacity, a recent 2019 storm event came very close to overflooding the channel and EWPCF. Therefore, the proposed Project is in alignment with EWA’s overall intent to preserve the original design flow conveyance capacity of the flood control channel and is a crucial maintenance component to prevent potential flooding from large storm events that could disrupt the services provided by the EWPCF.
A Biological Resource Assessment (BRA) for the Project was performed by Blackhawk Environmental on October 2, 2020. The BRA included the proposed Project Area and an additional 100-foot buffer (Survey Area). Within the Survey Area, the BRA identified the following vegetation communities/land use cover types: Non-vegetated Channel, Southern Willow Scrub, Coastal Freshwater Marsh, Disturbed Coastal Scrub, and Urban/Developed. A jurisdictional assessment was conducted simultaneously to delineate potentially jurisdictional areas within the Project Area footprint. Methods for delineating wetlands followed guidelines set forth by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ([USACE] 1987), including the Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (Arid Supplement; USACE 2008). All figures depicting the Project Area and delineation results are shown in Attachment A. Representative photographs of the Project and Survey Area are shown in Attachment B. Data forms are included in Attachment C.
The jurisdictional assessment identified that the proposed Project includes a portion of Encinas Creek that supports likely jurisdictional streambed, wetland and riparian areas. The portion of Encinas Creek within the Project A rea is best characterized as a modified, engineered, concrete, grouted rip rap, relatively permanent stream that flows directly to the Pacific Ocean . No additional natural drainage features were observed. The primary hydrological input for the Project Area is from the EWPCF flood control channel, which was previously evaluated as part of the Encina Wastewater Authority Biological Resources Assessment (Rincon 2017). The channel is a non-natural, engineered, concrete, and partially impounded conveyance that was historically a natural, non-channelized portion of Encinas Creek. The Encina Wastewater Authority Biological Resources Assessment (Rincon 2017) concluded that “ The Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project - Jurisdictional Delineation Report
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
3 flood control channel remains a functioning part of the Encinas Creek as it connects (during flood - stage) the historical reach of Encinas Creek to the east of the EWPCF, with its reach to the west of the EWPCF. Consequently, the flood control channel is considered part of Encinas Creek, even though it is concrete and channelized within the EWPCF. Therefore, activities planned to occur in the project footprint will be occurring in a jurisdictional waterway and subject to the jurisdiction of the USACE, San Diego RWQCB (Regional Water Quality Control Board), and CDFW (California Department of Fish and Wildlife)” (Rincon, 2017). W ithin the proposed Project, Encinas Creek is best characterized as a Relatively Permanent Water (RPW) with regular flow expected for at least three months of the year under normal conditions. Additional non-seasonal flow likely occurs due to irrigation runoff and other anthropogenic input sources. Ordinary high water mark (OHWM) and bank-to-bank streambed widths of Encinas Creek within the Project Area are defined by the boundary of the Non-vegetated Channel and range from approximately 58 feet to 70 feet in width. The channelized portion of Encinas Creek, outside the Project Area, is primarily concrete lined, including the energy dissipation apron at the outflow end of the flood control channel within the Project Area. Immediately west of the concrete energy dissipation apron is a 7,000 square foot area composed of grouted rip rap. Evidence of short- term high volume and high velocity flow were evident in the form of drift deposits, scouring and water marks. Drift deposits were observed at and above the top of the streambed, indicating that the creek within the Project Area is subject to flooding during rain events. Additional evidence of hydrology included evidence of inundation, saturation, drainage patterns, soil cracks, sediment deposits, water lines and the presence of aquatic invertebrates.
In addition to strong hydrological indicators, a variety of wetland and riparian -associated vegetation communities were mapped within the Project Area. These areas included conditions considered “problematic” due to seasonal flooding and vegetation maintenance, but generally indicated a dominance of hydrophytic plant species meeting the vegetation requirements for the USACE/RWQCB Hydrophytic Indicators Dominance Test.
The Project Area further presents various “problematic” soil conditions due to annual scouring during flood events and sedimentation resulting in hydric indicators being potentially jumbled in the soil horizon. These soil conditions were evaluated for potential of hydric soil indicators. A total of one Sample Point and associated three test pits were evaluated to determine the presence and extent of hydric soils within the Project Area. If necessary due to “problematic ” conditions, hydric soils were assumed present based on review of adjacent areas on site, reference locations, observation of local relief, expected function under normal circumstances, and review of historic aerial photographs.
The proposed Project is expected to directly impact a total of 0.104 acre (38 linear feet) of likely USACE Wetland Waters of the U.S. , RWQCB Wetland Waters of the State, CDFW riparian habitat, and CCC (California Coastal Commission)/City palustrine wetland habitat. Additionally, the proposed Project is expected to directly impact a total of 0.46 acre (20 linear feet) of likely USACE Non-Wetland Waters of the U.S., RWQCB Non-Wetland Waters of the State, CDFW streambeds, and CCC/City riverine habitat.
The Project proposes initial restoration (removal of debris, soil, vegetation) as well as annual maintenance of EWPCF flood control channel rip rap bed, therefore all impacts proposed would be permanent. No indirect impacts to jurisdictional waters are anticipated.
As proposed, the Project would require permit authorization from the USACE, RWQCB, CDFW and CCC/City for proposed impacts to Waters of the U.S., Waters of the State, streambeds, and riparian habitats.
Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project - Jurisdictional Delineation Report
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
4 1.0 INTRODUCTION
Blackhawk Environmental, Inc. (Blackhawk) was contracted by Encina Wastewater Authority (EWA) to provide a Jurisdictional Delineation Report (JDR) for the proposed Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project (Project) located within approximately 7,000 square foot (sq. ft.) of area at the western terminus of the existing flood control channel associated with the Encina Wastewater Pollution Control Facility (EWPCF), located at 6200 Avenida Encinas in the City of Carlsbad, California (Figure 1).
The Encina Wastewater Authority Biological Resources Assessment Report (Rincon 2017) (2017 BRA) was prepared by Rincon Consultants, Inc. in January of 2017, for a similarly related EWPCF channel maintenance project. The 2017 BRA identified potential project-related impacts and habitat types for proposed annual maintenance to restore as -designed flow capacity to the EWPCF flood control channel. The 2017 BRA however, did not include an evaluation of the 7, 000 sq. ft. rip rap bed located beyond the western terminus of the flood control channel. Therefore, Blackhawk conducted a biological assessment for the newly proposed Project; results of this biological assessment are presented in the Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project Biological Summary Report (Blackhawk 2020) ( BRA). Based on the presence of potentially jurisdictional wetland types associated with the proposed Project , a formal jurisdictional assessment was prepared concurrently with the BRA. The formal jurisdictional delineation, conducted on October 2, 2020, focused on documenting existing site conditions, such as soils, topography, hydrology, vegetation and potentially jurisdictional aquatic resources, in the areas proposed for direct Project impacts.
The purpose of the jurisdictional delineation was to document waters occurring within the Project Area, that may be considered jurisdictional by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), RWQCB, California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and/or the California Coastal Commission (CCC) , and to provide necessary background information for avoidance measur es by engineering and for analysis by USACE, RWQCB, CDFW and/or CCC if permits are required.
1.1 Project Description
EWA operates and maintains a sewer system as well as wastewater treatment facilities and the flood control channel that serve the Encinas Cre ek Watershed within northern San Diego County. The east/west oriented flood control channel bisects the EWPCF into EWPCF North and EWPCF South and conveys runoff from the upstream Encinas Creek watershed (Carlsbad Hydrologic Unit, hydrologic area 904.40) and the EWPCF. The flood control channel terminates at an energy dissipation apron abutting a vegetated area west of the North County Transit District (NCTD) railroad tracks. The flood control channel is approximately 32 feet wide, 10 feet high, and 800 fee t long (0.8 acre). Flow enters a triple box culvert downstream of the EWPCF site crossing under Avenida Encinas and the NCTD train tracks.
Each culvert measures approximately 8 feet tall by 10 feet wide, spanning a length of 320 feet. At the culvert’s exit, a concrete apron dissipates hydraulic energy and conveys the stormwater downstream into a natural stream channel before proceeding under Pacific Coast Highway into the Pacific Ocean.
As stated in the 2017 BRA, service s provided by the EWPCF have (in the past) been disrupted, due to heavy storm-induced flow events that overwhelm the flood control channel. Although the flood control channel was designed to handle heavy storm -induced flow events and runoff from Encinas Creek, lack of regular maintenance within the channel reduced the stormwater flow conveyance capacity Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project - Jurisdictional Delineation Report
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
5 of the channel. Annual maintenance within the channel, from EWA’ s ea stern property line and westward to the concrete energy dissipation apron at the outflow end of the channel beneath the NCTD railroad tracks , is currently permitted by RWQCB Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification No. R9-2017-0044. Despite annual maintenance of EWA’s 0.8 -acre concrete-lined flood control channel, intense storm events in 2019 continued to cause significant flooding and risk overwhelming the channel capacity. This is due to approximately 3 -4 feet of build- up (composed of debris, sediment, and vegetation) above the grouted rip rap bed, west of the concrete energy dissipation apron at the outflow end of the channel , that acts like a dam. During large storm events, this “dam” impedes the historical outflow path for stormwater and runoff from En cinas Creek to the Pacific Ocean. Potential flooding of the EWPCF during future storm events remains a serious risk without regular maintenance of the grouted rip rap bed. Flooding events compromise and/or disrupt wastewater treatment services by flooding roadways, process tanks, building and other critical facilities within the EWPCF. Additionally, prolonged disruption of services at the EWPCF would affect the 380,000 residents it serves and could impact water quality entering the Pacific Ocean if partially treated effluent must be discharged.
The purpose of the proposed Project is to restore the original (as-designed) flow conveyance capacity, at the outflow end of the EWPCF flood control channel , through scheduled annual maintenance, consisting primarily of the removal of accumulated debris, sediment and vegetation above the grouted rip rap bed. The grouted rip rap bed is located west of the concrete energy dissipation apron and concrete-lined flood control channel, approximately 25 feet west of the NCTD railroad tracks. It is anticipated that approximately 900 cubic yards (CY) of total solids volume will be removed from above the grouted rip rap bed. Annual maintenance within the grouted rip rap bed will be the only permanent impact of this Project. The proposed Project is intended to be performed in conjunction with previously authorized flood control channel maintenance . All maintenance work will be completed within the concrete- lined and rip rap portions of the channel, culvert and energy dissipation structure; no new construction of permanent structures is proposed as part of the proposed Project. Project maintenance is proposed to be completed within a an approximately 14-day period initially and is proposed annually thereafter. Project timing is contingent on approvals and permit authorizations but is anticipated to occur initially during the 2021 dry season.
The majority of the Project footprint occurs at the outflow end of the EWPCF flood control channel; however, construction vehicles and equipment will access the main flood control channel from within the EWPCF using an existing vehicle access ramp. Other areas associated with the Project include a temporary dewatering area, a temporary stockpile location and a sediment spreading area within the EWPCF associated with the annual flood control channel maintenance as described in the 2017 BRA and authorized under permit RWQCB Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification No. R9- 2017-0044. Dewatering activities, for settling of sand, silt and organic materials, will be completed within a bermed temporary dewatering area within the flood control channel. Dry weather flows may also be diverted through one of three box culverts using temporary sandbag barriers. During rain events, all equipment will be removed from the channel, and if necessary, work will be suspended. Large debris and trash will be properly disposed off-site, and the remaining sediment (soil/organic material) will be transported from the flood control channel to the EWPCF South Parcel sediment spreading area via EWPCF internal roads and Avenida Encinas. EWA will implement standard construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) such as straw wattles and silt fences, that will be installed as needed at the South Parcel to prevent sediment from leaving the site and enter ing the Avenida Encinas public right-of-way. Hydraulic mulch (e.g., bonded fiber matrix) will be applied as needed on top of the Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project - Jurisdictional Delineation Report
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
6 placed sediment to prevent erosion and promote vegetative covering that will provide permanent erosion protection once established.
2.0 REGULATORY SETTING
2.1 USACE Waters of the U.S.
According to the USACE Wetland Delineation Manual, wetlands are defined as “those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances, do support a prevalenc e of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions.”
2.1.1 Regulatory Definition
In accordance with Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA), USACE regulates the discharge of dredged or fill material into Waters of the United States. On April 21, 2020, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and USACE together published the Navigable Waters Protection Rule (Rule) to the Federal Register, defining the scope of waters subject to regulation under the Clean Water Act (CWA).
In this final rule, and pursuant to U.S. Supreme Court Cases in United States v. Bayside Bayview Homes (Riverside Bayview), Solid Waste Agency of Northern Cook Count v. United States (SWANCC) and Rapanos v. United States (Rapanos), the term “Waters of the United States” is defined by the final Rule:
• All traditional navigable waters (TNW) currently used, or used in the past, or may be susceptible to use in interstate or foreign commerce, including all waters subject to the ebb and flow of the tide;
• The territorial seas;
• All interstate waters including interstate wetlands;
• Certain lakes, ponds, and impoundments of waters otherwise defined as waters of the United States under the definition;
• Perennial and intermittent tributaries of waters identified above; • Wetlands adjacent to other waters (other than waters that are themselves wetlands) identified above (33 Code of Federal Regulations [CFR] Part 328.3[a]).
2.1.2 Wetland Parameters
Wetlands are delineated using three parameters: hydrophyti c vegetation, wetland hydrolog y and hydric soils. According to USACE, indicators for all three parameters must normally be present to qualify as a wetland.
2.1.2.1 Hydrophytic Vegetation
Hydrophytic vegetation is defined as “the sum total of macrophytic plant life growing in water or on a substrate that is at least periodically deficient in oxygen as a result of excessive water content” (USACE 1987). P otential wetland areas were surveyed by walking through the Project Area and making observations of those areas exhibiting char acteristics of jurisdictional waters or wetlands. Vegetation units with potential wetland areas were examined, and data for each vegetation s tratum (i.e., tree, shrub, herb and vine) were recorded on the datasheet provided in the Arid West Supplement (USACE 2008). The percent absolute cover of each species present was visually estimated and recorded.
Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project - Jurisdictional Delineation Report
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
7 The wetland indicator status of each species recorded was determined by using the National Wetland Plant List (Lichvar, et. al. 2016). An obligate (OBL) indicator status refers to plants that are almost always hydrophytic and rarely in uplands. A facultative wet (FACW) indicator status refers to plants that usually are hydrophytic but are occasionally found in non-wetlands. A facultative (FAC) indicator status refers to plants that commonly occur as either a hydrophyte or non-hydrophyte. Facultative upland (FACU) species occasionally are hydrophytic but usually occur in uplands. Upland (UPL) species almost always occur in uplands and are rarely hydrophytic . A n ot indicated (NI) status refers to species that have insufficient data available to determine an indicator status at this time for the local region.
Plant species nomenclature follows that contained in the Jepson Online Interchange (Jepson Flora Project 2018). Dominant species with an indicator status of NI or not listed in the 2016 National Wetland Plant List were evaluated as either wetland or upland indicator species based on local professional knowledge of where the species are most often observed in habitats characteristic of southern California.
2.1.2.2 Hydric Soils
A hydric soil is a soil that is saturated, flooded, or ponded long enough during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions that favor the growth and regeneration of hydrophytic vegetation (USACE 1987). Hydric soil indicators are formed predominantly by the accumulation or loss of iron, manganese, sulfur or carbon compounds (USACE 2008). The hydric soil criterion is considered fulfilled at a location if soils in the area can be inferred to have a high groundwater table, evidence of prolonged soil saturation exists, or any indicators suggesting a long -term reducing environment in the upper 18 inches of the soil profile are present. Additionally, soils mapped by the United States Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Natural Resources Conserva tion Service (NRCS) as hydric were referenced prior to field verification.
A sampling point was selected within a potential wetland area where the apparent boundary between wetland and upland was inferred based on changes in the composition of the vegetation and topography. The soil pit was dug to a depth of at least 10 inches or to a depth necessary to determine soil color, evidence of soil saturation, depth to groundwat er, and indicators of a reducing soil environment (e.g., mottling, oxidation, gleying, sulfidic odor).
2.1.2.3 Wetland Hydrology
The presence of wetland hydrology indicators confirm that inundation or saturation has occurred on a site, but may not provide information about the timing, duration, or frequency of the event. Hydrology features are generally the most ephemeral of the three wetland parameters (USACE 2008). Hydrologic information for the site was obtained by reviewing USGS topographic maps, historic and current aerial photographs, and by directly observing hydrology indicators in the field. The wetland hydrology criterion is considered fulfilled at a location if, based upon the conclusions inferred from the field observations, an area has a high probability of being periodically inundated or has soils saturated to the surface at some time during the growing season to develop anaerobic conditions in the surface soil environment, especially the root zone (USACE 1987). If at least one primary indicator or at least two secondary indicators are found at a sample point, the wetland hydrology criterion is considered fulfilled.
Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project - Jurisdictional Delineation Report
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
8 2.1.3 Atypical Situations
Because there are situations in which one or more of the wetland parameters has been removed or altered as a result of recent natural events or human activities, the definition of a wetland includes the phrase “under normal circumstances” (USACE 1987). To describe these conditions, USACE uses definitions for atypical situations and problem areas. They are as follows:
Atypical situation: refers to areas in which one or more parameters (vegetation, soil, and/or hydrology) have been sufficiently altered by recent human activities or natural events to preclude the presence of wetland indicators of the parameter (USACE 1987).
Problem areas: . . . wetland types in which wetland indicators of one or more parameters may be periodically lacking due to normal seasonal or annual variations in environmental conditions that result from causes other than human activities or catastrophic natural events. Representative examples of problem areas include seasonal wetlands, wetlands on drumlins, prairie potholes, and vegetated flats (USACE 1987).
Atypical situations and problem areas may lack one o r more of the three criteria, yet still may be considered wetlands. Background information on the previous condition of the area, field observations and/or the identification of undisturbed reference sites adjacent to atypical sites may indicate that the site met the wetland criteria prior to disturbance. Additional delineation procedures would be employed if normal circumstances did not occur on a site.
2.1.4 Vernal Pools
Vernal pools are considered “problem areas” because vegetation or hydric soils may be lacking due to seasonal filling by rainfall and eventual drying. As described in the Arid Supplement , “the species composition of some wetland plant communities in the Arid West can change in response to seasonal weather patterns and long-term climatic fluctuations. Wetland types that are influenced by these shifts include vernal pools, playa edges, seeps and springs. Lack of hydrophytic vegetation during dry periods should not immediately eliminate a site from further consideration as a wetland.” In addi tion, since they support seasonally ponded soils, when soil investigations are performed within vernal pools, they may lack hydric soil indicators . The USACE includes problem soils as “seasonally ponded, depressional wetlands (that) occur in basins and valleys throughout the Arid West. Most are perched systems, with water ponding above a restrictive soil layer, such as a hardpan or clay layer, that is at or near the surface (e.g., in Vertisols). Some of these wetlands lack hydric soil indicators due to limi ted saturation depth, saline conditions or other factors.”
2.2 USACE Non-Wetland Waters of the U.S.
The USACE also requires the delineation of non-wetland jurisdictional Waters of the U.S. These waters must have strong hydrology indicators , such as the presence of seasonal flows and an ordinary high watermark (OHWM). An ordinary high watermark is defined as:
. . . that line on the shore established by the fluctuations of water and indicated by physical characteristics such as [a] clear, natural line impressed on the bank, shelving, Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project - Jurisdictional Delineation Report
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
9 changes in the character of soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, the p resence of litter and debris, or other appropriate means that consider the characteristics of the surrounding areas (33 CFR Part 328.3).
Areas delineated as non -wetland jurisdictional waters may lack wetland vegetation or hydric soil characteristics. Hydric soil indicators may be missing because topographic position precludes ponding and subsequent development of hydric soils. Absence of wetland vegetation can result from frequent scouring due to rapid water flow. These types of jurisdictional waters are delineated by the lateral and upstream/downstream extent of the OHWM of the particular drainage or depression.
2.3 CDFW Jurisdictional Waters
Under Sections 1600–1607 of the Fish and Game Code, CDFW regulates activities that would divert or obstruct the natural flow or substantially change the bed, channel, or bank of any river, stream, or lake that supports fish or wildlife. CDFW has jurisdiction over riparian habitats (e.g., riparian woodland) associated with watercourses. CDFW j urisdictional waters are delineated by the distances between the outer edges of riparian vegetation or at the top s of the bank s of streams or lakes, whichever is wider. Although CDFW does not regulate vernal pools under Section 1602 of the Fish and Game Code, CDFW will assert jurisdiction over isolated riparian features (including vernal pools) if California state threatened and/or endangered species are present via the California Endangered Species Act, or which provide resources directly or indirectly to fish and wildlife of the region. CDFW may also assert jurisdiction over modified or man-made waterways; such jurisdiction is generally based on the value of such features to support riparian or aquatic plant or animal species. For clarification, of features that may be subject to CDFW jurisdiction, the CDFW Legal Advisor has prepared the following opinion (CDFG ESD 1994):
• Natural waterways that have been subsequently modified and which have the potential to contain fish, aquatic insects, and riparian vegetation will be treated like natural waterways. • Artificial waterways that have acquired the physical attributes of natural strea m courses and which have been viewed by the community as natural stream co urses should be treated by [CDFW] as natural waterways.
• Artificial waterways without the attributes of natural waterways should generally not be subject to Fish and Game Code provisions.
CDFW jurisdictional limits may also include artificial stock ponds and irrigation ditches constructed within uplands, and outer drip line limits of adjacent riparian habitat supported by a river, stream, or lake regardless of the riparian area’s federal wetland status or its locati on beyond the defined bed, bank or channel.
2.4 RWQCB Jurisdictional Waters
RWQCB is the regional agency responsible for protecting water quality in California. The jurisdiction of this agency includes Waters of the S tate as mandated by the federal CWA Section 401 . When CWA Section 404 jurisdiction is not present for isolated wate r, the RWQCB may assert jurisdiction via the California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. Waters of the State are defined as “any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters, within the boundaries of the state”. The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act provides a regulatory framework to provide comprehensive protections for Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project - Jurisdictional Delineation Report
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
10 surface and groundwater within the State of California. Waters subject to jurisdiction under the Porter- Cologne Water Quality Control Act require that any discharge that may negatively impact or otherwise affect a Water of the State must coordinate with RWQCB. During coordination, RWQCB may require implementation of mitigation measures or other requirements to protect overall water quality.
2.5 California Coastal Commission and the City of Carlsbad
The Legislature enacted the California Coastal Act in 1976, following the passage of Proposition 20, a referendum expressing the desire of the people of California to protect its coastal resources and includes jurisdiction of 1, 100 miles of coastline throughout the State of California. Division 20 of the Public Resources Code, Section 30000 et seq. (the Coastal Act) established a comprehensive coastal protection program and made permanent the CCC as a state agency. The first goal of the Coastal Act is to “[p]rotect, maintain, and, where feasible, enhance and restore the overall quality of t he coastal zone environment and its natural and artificial resources.” (§ 30001.5, subd. (a).). ” The CCC considers applications for coastal development permits in its jurisdiction; certifies long term plans, including local coastal programs that allow local governments to issue coastal development permits; considers appeals of certain local approvals; sets policy in coastal matters; conducts enforcement, from negotiations for the settlement of violations to the imposition of fines and litigation; and ensures the consistency of federally-approved development in the Coastal Zone. The Proposal does not affect federal consistency regulations. Existing regulations are located in Title 14, Division 5.5, Section 13001 et seq. Shortly after passage of the Coastal Ac t, the Commission adopted a full set of procedural regulations. Wetlands defined under the Coastal Act (Section 30121 of California Coastal Act as of January 1, 2005) were delineated based upon the USFWS definition (Cowardin et al. 1979) of wetlands.
To meet the requirements of the California Coastal Act, the City has provided the L ocal Coastal Program (LCP) Land Use Plan, adopted by the California Coastal Commission (CCC) in 1980 (and amended in 1984 and 1985). The purpose of the LCP Land Use Plan is to ensure that development within the City’s Coastal Zone protects and enhances coastal resources and is consist with the California Coastal Act.
Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project - Jurisdictional Delineation Report
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
11 3.0 METHODS
A jurisdictional delineation, following the guidelines set forth by USACE (1987, 2008), was performed to gather field data at potential ly jurisdictional Waters of the U.S. and Waters of the State within the proposed Project Area. The jurisdictional delineation was conducted by Blackhawk wetland specialist Kris Alberts on October 2, 2020. To account for all potential Project impact areas and provide a greater landscape conte xt to sensitive aquatic resources , all areas inside the Project A rea were initially assessed for jurisdictional resources ( Figure 2). Potential w etlands were then deline ated within the Project Area based on commonality among vegetation community characteristics and three - parameter testing methodology . To account for any changes in existing conditions and to ensure consistency with City’s HMP and supporting documents/programs for areas considered wetlands, the delineation effort refined, and updated vegetation mapping performed as part of the biological resource survey (Figure 2).
Prior to conducting the field delineation, a site map was generated with available aerial imagery, and potentially jurisdictional features were identified and marked with lines and Global Positioning System (GPS) coordinates to assist in field verification. Soil types mapped within the Project Area were consulted prior to field efforts to target areas with potentially hydric soils. In addition, the following sources were consulted to identify land use history and provide additional context to potentially atypical and problematic jurisdictional wetlands within the Project Area, including :
• USGS Encinitas, California quadrangle topographic map (USGS 2011) • Historical aerial photographs (NETR 1947)
• Current and historical aerial photographs (Google 2020) • National Wetland Inventory (USFWS 2020)
• California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) search for sensitive riverine, riparian and/or aquatic species (CDFW 2020)
Once on site, the potential wetland locations were examined to determine the presence of any of the three wetland parameters or drainage channels. Soil type and classification data used in the delineation were provided by the Natural Resource Conservation Service’s web soil survey (accessed September 2020) (Figure 3).
Potential waters and wetland locations observed within the Project site were evaluated using the methodology set forth in the USACE Wetland Delineation Manual (USACE 1987) and the Arid West Supplement (USACE 2008). The three parameters used to determine the presence of wetland areas included presence of 1) a dominance of hydrophytic vegetation, 2) wetland hydrology and 3) hydric soils. Criteria for determining presence of wetland hydrology indicators may include evidence of inundation, saturation, water marks, drainage patterns, soil cracks, drift lines, sediment deposits, presence of aquatic invertebrates and other variables. Vegetation was analyzed using dominant species wetland indicator status ( USDA 2018). Soil samples were collected and described according to the methodology provided in the Arid West Supplement. Soil chroma and values were determined by utilizing a standard Munsell soil color chart (Gretag/Macbeth 2000). Where indicators of hydric soils were observed at sample points, “test pits” were excavated to serve as additional soil samples to determine the extent of hydric soil indicators where wetland hydrology and vegetation remained consistent surrounding the initial sample point location.
Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project - Jurisdictional Delineation Report
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
12 Suspected non-wetland jurisdictional areas were evaluated for the presence of definable channels , OHWM, and connectivity to a TNW or relatively permanent water (RPW). Identification of the OHWM followed the Corps Regulatory Guidance Letter No. 05 -05, Ordinary High Water Mark Identification (USACE 2005).
Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project - Jurisdictional Delineation Report
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
13 4.0 RESULTS
A discussion of the local hydrology within the Project Area and an additional 100 -foot buffer (Survey Area), description of the major vegetation units observed in delineated areas within the Project Area, and soil types encountered are presented below. The locations of soil sampling and “test pits” are shown as “Wetland Sample Point” and “Hydric Test Point”, respectively, in Figure 4. A copy of the USACE Wetland Determination Data Form summarizing information on hydrology, vegetation, and soils observed at the Wetland Sample Point is provided in Attachment C.
4.1 Hydrology
Elevations within the Project Area generally drain towards the center of the Project Area, where the site is bisected by the concrete energy dissipation apron of the EWPCF flood control channel. The EWPCF flood control channel was historically a natural, non -channelized portion of Encinas Creek.
Although it is now channelized, the EWPCF flood control channel remains a functioning part of Encinas Creek, connecting the upstream Encinas Creek watershed (Carlsbad Hydrologic Unit, hydrologic area 904.40) with its historical reach west of the EWPCF facility (Figure 5). Surface and storm water from the upstream Encinas Creek watershed, as well as outflow from the EWPCF, flow in a generally east -west direction through the concrete-lined flood control channel, discharging into the Project Area, west of the NCTD railroad tracks. At the easternmost boundary of the Project Area, channel flow enters a triple box culvert. At the culvert’s exit, hydraulic energy is dissipated over a concrete apron and grouted rip rap bed. Above the western extent of the rip rap bed lies a relatively level and vegetated shelf. Upon meeting this shelf, surface and storm water continue to flow in a westerly direction through the Project Area, meeting the natural stream channel of Encinas Creek before proceeding under the Pacific Coast Highway and onto the Pacific coastline where it ultimately discharges into the Pacific Ocean.
4.1.1 Tributaries & Natural Drainages
Approximately 190 linear feet of Encinas Creek occur within the Survey Area (Figure 4). No additional natural drainage features were observed. Within the Project Area, Encinas Creek is best characterized as RPW and stream, with regular flow expected for at least three months of the year under normal conditions. Additional non-seasonal flow likely occurs due to irrigation runoff and other anthropogenic input sources. OHWM and bank-to-bank streambed widths of Encinas Creek wi thin the Project Area are defined by the boundary of the Non-Vegetated Channel and range from approximately 58 feet to 70 feet in width. Within the Project Area, the primary channel or the creek is generally comprised of silt and sediment accumulated over grouted rip rap. Evidence of short-term high volume and velocity flow were evident in the form of drift deposits, scouring and water marks. Drift deposits were observed at and above the top of the streambed, indicating that the creek within the Project Area is subject to flooding during rain events. Additional evidence of hydrology included sediment deposits, inundation and saturation visible on aerial imagery, water stained leaves, crayfish burrows, water lines and a dry- season water table.
4.2 Vegetation
A total of two vegetation communities and land use cover types were identified in the BRA to occur within the Project Area: Non-Vegetated Channel and Southern Willow Scrub (Blackhawk 2020) .
Vegetation communities were described according to Holland (1986) and Oberbauer (2008). Of the Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project - Jurisdictional Delineation Report
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
14 two vegetation communities/land use cover types, only one supports hydrophytic vegetation and/or riparian vegetation: Southern Willow Scrub.
4.2.1 Areas Supporting Hydrophytic Vegetation and/or Open Water
4.2.1.1 Southern Willow Scrub (Holland Code 63320)
Southern Willow Scrub consists of moderate density riparian woodland with predominately smaller riparian trees and some larger riparian trees throughout. Within the Project Area, this community is dominated by arroyo willow (Salix lasiolepis; FACW), with a n herbaceous understo ry dominated by rough cockleburr (Xanthium strumarium; FAC) and salt marsh fleabane ( Pluchea odorata; FACW). A total of 0.104 acres of this community were mapped within the Project Area. Vegetation dominance within Southern Willow Scrub was evaluated using the USACE dominance test and is included on the Wetland Determination Data Form Sample Point (SP) 1 included in Attachment C. Southern Willow Scrub habitat present within the Project was determined to meet USACE and RWQCB criteria for dominance of wetland vegetation as represented by Sample Point (SP)1 and is likely considered wetland under the jurisdiction of the CCC . Furthermore, these areas are likely considered riparian habitat under the jurisdiction of CDFW.
4.2.2 Areas Lacking Hydrophytic Vegetation or Hydric Soils
One vegetation community and/or land cover types that is lacking in hydrophytic vegetation or hydric soils occurs within the Project Area: Non-Vegetated Channel. This vegetation community/land cover type is generally composed of open water, bare ground, or upland plant species and do not meet the hydrophytic vegetation criteria for wetlands. A c omplete description of th is vegetation community/land cover type is provided in the Biological Survey Report (Blackhawk, 2020). Additionally, this vegetation community/land cover type was observed to exhibit indicators of hydrology in the absence of hydrophytic vegetation and is further discussed below.
4.2.2.1 Non-Vegetated Channel (Holland Code 13200)
Areas of Non -Vegetated Channel were observed to be largely devoid of vegetation as a result of scouring, as well as the soil being inundated with standing water. These areas do not meet criteria for dominance of wetland veg etation. However, due to strong hydrologic indicators including watermarks, drift deposits, flowlines and inundation, these areas are likely considered jurisdictional non- wetland waters of the U.S. by USACE, non -wetland waters of the State by RWQCB, wetland by the CCC/City and streambed by CDFW. A total of 0.082 acres of this community were mapped within the Project Area.
4.3 Soils
One distinct soil series mapped by USDA (1973) occurs within the Project: Tidal flats (Tf) (Figure 3). Tidal flats soil series is described as hydric according to USDA. Total acreage of this soil series within the Project Area is 0.192.
During the October 2, 2020 site visit, one Wetland Sample Point (WSP-1) and three Hydric Test Points (HTP-1-3) were evaluated to determine if conditions for hydric soils existed on site. Locations of the Wetland Sample Point and associated Hydric Test Points are shown in Figure 4. The field data sheet for Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project - Jurisdictional Delineation Report
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
15 the Wetland Sample Point describing field soils conditions is included in Attachment C. Presence of hydric soils were determined to occur on site through a variety of indicators. In general, hydric soils corresponded to the channel formed by the streambed of Encinas Creek, as well as the surrounding Southern Willow Scrub.
4.3.1 Hydric Soils
Presence of hydric soil indicators in the Southern Willow Scrub within the Project Area was determined through assessment of WSP-1. Soil conditions at WSP-1 were considered “problematic” due to annual scouring during flood events and sedimentation resulting in hydric indicators being potentially jumbled in the soil horizon. Though these soil conditions were evaluated for potential hydric soil indicators, the Redox Dark Surface (F6) indicator was observed present. Three additional Hydric Test Pits (HTP-1, HTP- 2, and HTP-3; Figure 4) were dug in areas of similar vegetation and hydrology to confirm that uniform hydric soil conditions existed throughout the Project Area. Due to uniform conditions in vegetation and hydrological indicators, hydric soil conditions from WSP-1 were applied to the extent of the Southern Willow Scrub habitat within the Project Area. Based on the criteria set forth by the USACE and RWQCB in determining hydric soils within a wetland, soils were found hydric for WSP-1. By extension of the hydric soils observed at HTP -1 through HTP -3, the hydric soil of WSP -1 was representative of all hydric soils occurring within the Southern Willow Scrub within the entire Project Area.
Encino Wastewater Authority Flood Control Chonnel Rip Rop Bed Maintenance ProJect - Jurisd1,:tiona/ Delineation Report
City of Corfsbud, Sar, Diego County. CA
5.0 JURISDICTIONAL DELINEATION
Figure 4 identifies the locations of likely USACE, CDFW, RWQCB, and CCC/City jurisdictional waters within the Survey Area. Table l summarizes the acreages of each jurisdiction.
Table 1. Likely Jurisdictional Waters Within the Project Area Jurisdictional Waters Acres (Linear Feet)
Likely USACE Jurisdiction
Wetland Waters of the U.S. 0.104 (38)
Non-Wetland Waters of the U.S. 0.082 (52}
Likely USACE Total Jurisdiction 0.186 (90)
Likely RWQCB Jurisdiction
Wetland Waters of the State 0.104 (38)
Non-Wetland Waters of the State 0.082 (52)
Likely RWQCB Total Jurisdiction 0.186 (90)
Likely CDFW Jurisdiction
Riparian Only 0.104 (38}
Streambed (Bank-to-Bank) 0.082 (52)
Likely CDFW Total Jurisdiction 0.186 (90)
Likely CCC/ Citv Jurisdiction
Palustrine Wetland 0.104 (38)
Riverine 0.082 (52)
Likely CCC/ City Total Jurisdiction 0.186 (90)
5.1 USACE Jurisdiction
Likely USACE jurisdictional waters within the Project Area total 0.186 acre (90 linear fee t) of Waters of the U.S. within Encinas Creek. Encinas Creek includes 0.082 acre (52 linear feet} of assumed USACE jurisdictional non-vegetated channel and 0. l 04 acre (38 linear feet) of adjacent wetlands . Project related impacts to Encinas Creek and associated wetlands are likely subject to regu lation under the Clean Water Act.
5.2 RWQCB Jurisdiction
Likely RWQCB jurisdictional waters within the Project Area total 0.186 acre (90 linear feet} of Waters of the State within Encinas Creek. Encinas Creek includes 0.082 acres (52 linear feet) of assumed RWQCB jurisdictional non-vegetated channel and 0. l 04 acre (38 linear feet) of adjacent wetlands. Project related impacts to Encinas Creek and associated wetlands are likely subject to regulation under the Porter Cologne Water Quality Control Act .
5.3 CDFW Jurisdiction
Likely CDFW jurisdict ional waters within the Project Area total 0.186 acre (90 linear feet) of modified streambed of Encinas Creek and its associated wetlands. Within the Project, Encinas Creek, includes
0.082 acres (52 linear feet) of likely CDFW-jurisdictiona l streambed. An additional 0.104 acre (38 linear 16 Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project - Jurisdictional Delineation Report
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
17 feet) of adjacent Southern Willow Scrub within the Project Area is likely considered CDFW-jurisdictional riparian habitat. Project-related impacts to Encinas Creek and the associated riparian areas and its associated riparian habitat would likely be subject to the terms and conditions of a CDFW Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreement.
5.4 CCC/City Jurisdiction
Likely CCC and City jurisdictional wetlands within the Project Area total 0.186 acre (90 linear feet) of wetland habitat. Within the Project Area, wetland habitats include 0.104 acre (38 linear feet ) of palustrine wetland and 0.082 acres (52 linear feet) of riverine areas. These areas are likely subject to regulation by CCC and the City’s Land Use Plan under the Coastal Act (Section 30121 of California Coastal Act).
Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project - Jurisdictional Delineation Report
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
18 6.0 PROJECT IMPACTS
Direct and indirect impacts associated with the Project are discussed below.
6.1 Direct Impacts
Implementation of the proposed Project will result in loss or modification of wetlands and waters associated with the removal of habitat from within the Project and restoration (removal of debris, soil, vegetation) of the grouted rip rap areas to original flow . Proposed activities include the removal of debris, sediment and vegetation within the Project Area. Following initial removal, these areas are proposed for recurring annua l maintenance in conjunction with EWPCF channel cleanout and are therefore considered “permanent”. Areas of proposed impacts are to be restricted to the existing footprint of the flood control channel grouted rip rap area . These areas are shown on Figure 2 and 4 as “Permanent Impact Areas” and include all areas proposed for ground disturbance, grubbing, clearing and dredging. Removal of debris and sediment is unlikely to constitute a “discharge of dredge or fill materials” into waters because it will involv e excavation of materials only with no placement of fill other than incidental fallback.
Temporary impact areas will include a dewatering/settling area (with sandbag barrier), temporary sediment stockpiling and spreading areas, outside the Project and Survey Area, but within the EWPCF and South Parcel, discussed in the 2017 BRA. For the purpose of impacts analysis, use of tempor ary impact areas described above, including the concrete energy dissipation apron (0.035 acres, 32 linear feet), are not considered new impacts , as they are currently permitted for impacts under a CEQA Categorical Exemption and RWQCB Clean Water Act Section 401 Water Quality Certification No. R9- 2017-0044. These areas are identified in Figures 2 and 3 of the 2017 BRA (Rincon 2017). Therefore, no temporary impacts are anticipated for Project implementation.
As shown in Table 2, constr uction of the Project is expected to directly impact a total of 0.104 (permanent) acre of likely USACE Waters of the U.S. and RWQCB Waters of the State, 0.046 (permanent) acre of likely CDFW streambeds, 0.104 acre of likely CDFW riparian habitat (permanent), 0.046 acre of likely CCC /City riverine habitat, and 0.104 acre of likely CCC/City palustrine wetland . No indirect impacts are anticipated.
Encino Wastewater Authority Flood Control Chonnel Rip Rop Bed Maintenance Pro1ect - Jurisd1.:tional De/ineatlc,n Report
Ctty of Corfsbud, Son Diego Co1..nty, CA
Table 2. Summary of Proposed Project Impacts to Jurisdictional Resources Jurisdictional Waters
Impacts Acres (Linear Feet)
Temporary Permanent
Likely USACE Jurisdiction
Wetland Waters of the U.S. 0 0.104 (38]
Non -Wetland Waters of the U.S. 0 0.046 (20)
Likely USACE Total Jurisdiction 0 0.150 (58)
Likely RWQCB Jurisdiction
Wetland Waters of the State 0 0.104 (38]
Non-Wetland Waters of the State 0 0.046 (20]
Likely RWQCB Total Jurisdiction 0 0.150 (58)
Likely CDFW Jurisdiction
Riparian Only 0 0.104 (38)
Streambed (Bank-to-Bank) 0 0.046 (20)
Likely CDFW Total Jurisdiction 0 0.1 so (58)
Likely CCC/ Citv Jurisdiction
Palustrine Wetland 0 0.104 (38)
Riverine (Non-veqetated Channel) 0 0.046 (20)
Likely CCC/City Total Jurisdiction 0 0.150 (58)
6.2 Indirect Impacts
The Project has been designed to incorporate stormwater filtration facili ties, which are expected to manage runoff and pollutant discharge during initia l restora tion (removal of debr;is, soil, vegetation) and long-term operation. Potential discharges and downstream water quali ty effects will be managed through the implementation of in-construction Best Management Practices (BMPs). Proposed restoration of as-designed flow is not anticipated to significantly alter or impact normal hydrologic regime. Further, downstream flow will be maintained throughout implementa tion of the Project. With these considerations, indirect impac ts to both on-site and off-site jurisdictional waters are not anticipated.
6.3 Permit Authorization
USACE, RWQCB, CDFW, and CCC jurisdictiona l waters are regulated by the U.S. and State of California governments. To avoid permitting requ irements of these agencies, all impacts to jurisdictional waters would need to be avoided . Impacts proposed for the Project would require the following permit authorizations prior to Project development:
l) Impacts to Waters of the U.S. would require a CWA Section 404 permit issued by USACE 2) Impacts to Waters of the State would require a Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act Section 401 permit issued by RWQCB
3) Impac ts to CDFW-jurisdictional streambeds and riparian areas would require a Lake and Streambed Alteration Act Section 1602 permit issued by CDFW 19 Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project - Jurisdictional Delineation Report
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
20 4) Impacts to CCC /City jurisdiction would require a Coastal Development Permit issued by the California Coastal Commission
Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project - Jurisdictional Delineation Report
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
21 7.0 SURVEYOR CERTIFICATION
This report was prepared for Encina Wastewater Authority. All data, statements, analyses, findings and attachments within this report are accurate and truthful in terms of describing the existing conditions and the Project as proposed to Blackhawk Environmental and are based on best available knowledge at the time of the report. Any use which a third party makes of this report, or any reliance on or decisions made based on it, are the responsibilities of such third parties. Blackhawk Environmental accepts no responsibility for damages, if any, suffered by any third party as a result of decisions made or actions based on this report.
Ian Maunsell
Senior Biologist
uw
Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project - Jurisdictional Delineation Report
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
22 8.0 REFERENCES
Baldwin, B. G., D. H. Goldman, D. J. Keil, R. Patterson, T. J. Rosatti, and D. H. Wilken, editors. 2012 The Jepson Manual: Vascular Plants of California, Second Edition. University of California Press, Berkeley, CA.
Blackhawk Environmental, Inc.
2020 E ncina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project:
Biological Resource Assessment. City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA.
Calflora
2020 Information on California plants for education, research and conservation. [web application]. Berkeley, California: The Calflora Database [a non -profit organization].
Available: http://www.calflora.org/. Accessed September 2020.
California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) Environmental Services Division (ESD) 1994 A Field Guide to Lake and Streambed Alteration Agreements, Sections 1600 -1607, California Fish and Game Code.
California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW)
2020 California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB). RareFind Version 5.0. Database Query for the Heber, USGS 7.5 -minute quadrangles. Wildlife and Habitat Data Analysis B ranch.
Version dated April, 2018.
City of Carlsbad
2004 Habitat Management Plan for Natural Communities in the City of Carlsbad. December 1999, as amended. Final Approval, November 2004. Available at:
http://www.carlsbadca.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=27193. Accessed:
28 September 2020.
City of Carlsbad
2008 Guidelines for Biological Studies. Available at:
http://www.carlsbadca.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=24331. Accessed:
28 September 2020.
City of Carlsbad
2014. City of Carlsbad Local Coastal Program 1996. Amended 2000, 2002, 2003, 2006, 2010, and 2014. Available at:
http://www.carlsbadca.gov/civicax/filebank/blobdload.aspx?BlobID=24088. Accessed:
28 September 2020.
Federal Geographic Data Committee
2013 Classification of wetlands and deepwater habitats of the United States. FGDC- STD-004- 2013. Second Edition. Wetlands Subcommittee, Federal Geographic Data Committee and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, DC.
Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project - Jurisdictional Delineation Report
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
23 Google
2020 Google Earth. US Department of State Geographer. Data SIO, U.S. Navy, NGA, GEBCO. earth.google.com/
Holland, R.
1986 Preliminary descriptions of the terrestrial natural communities of California. Unpublished document, California Department of Fish and Game, Natural Heritage Divis ion.
Sacramento, California.
Jepson Online Interchange
2018 Jepson Flora Project 2018. http://ucjeps.berkeley.edu/jepson_flora_project.html.
Lichvar, R.W., D.L. Banks, W.N. Kirchner, and N.C. Melvin. 2016. The National Wetland Plant List: 2016 wetland ratings. Phytoneuron 2016-30: 1-17. Published 28 April 2016. ISSN 2153 733X
Munsell Color
2009 Munsell Soil Color Charts. X-rite. Grand Rapids, Michigan.
NETR Online
1947 Available on www.historicaerials.com. Accessed April 2018.
Oberbauer, T., Kelly, M. and J. Buegge
2008 Draft Vegetation Communities of San Diego County. Based on “Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural Communities of California”. Holland.
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
2017 Biological Resources Assessment January 2017 Encina Wastewater Authority, City of Carlsbad, California.
United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE)
1987 Wetlands Delineation Manual, Technical Report Y-87-1, U.S. Army Engineer W aterways Experiment Station Vicksburg, MS.
2008 Regional Supplement to the Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual: Arid West Region (Version 2.0), ed. J.S. Wakeley, R.W. Lichvar, and C.V. Noble. ERDC/EL TR -08-28.
Vicksburg, MS: U.S. Army Engineer Research and Development Center.
2020 Navigable Waters in Los Angeles District. Available URL:
https://www.spl.usace.army.mil/Missions/Regulatory/Jurisdictional- Determination/Navigable-Waterways/ [Accessed September 2020].
United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) 2010 Soil Survey Staff, Natural R esources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Official Soil Series Descriptions. Available URL:
“http://soils.usda.gov/technical/classification/osd/index.html” [Accessed August 2018].
Encina Wastewater Authority Flood Control Channel Rip Rap Bed Maintenance Project - Jurisdictional Delineation Report
City of Carlsbad, San Diego County, CA
24 Soil Survey Staff, Natural Resources Conservation Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Web Soil Survey. Available online at http://websoilsurvey.nrcs.usda.gov/.
Accessed [August 2018].
2018 Natural Resources Conservation Service. Wetland Indicator Status Plants Database. https://plants.usda.gov/wetinfo.html
United States Fish & Wildlife Service (USFWS)
2019 National Wetlands Inventory. https://www.fws.gov/wetlands/data/mapper.html.
United States Geological Survey (USGS)
2011 7.5-minute topographic quadrangle map for Encinitas, California.
ATTACHMENT A
Figures
5LACKHAWK
KERN COUNTY
LOS ANGELES
COUNTY
~
Project Site
~
Pacific Ocean
□ Survey Area
SAN BERNARDINO
COUNTY
RIVERSIDE
COUNTY
SAN DIEGO
COUNTY
IMPERIAL
COUNTY
HMP Existing Hardline Conservation Areas
D Coastal Zone (CCC)
Source: City of Carlsbad SanGIS CCC Aeria l Photo : SANDAG & SanGIS 20 17 Base maps: Esri Light Gray Canvas Esti World Topographic Figure 1 Project Vicinity and Location
LACKHAWK Within City of Carlsbad HMP and CCC Boundaries n _v ,_r _o _n _m_e _n t_a_l_!_!~ o~~~!::::==~ ~ ---~~~::.2~~~ !..-2::~~~~~E~n~c~i~n~a~W~a~s~te~w~a~te~r ~A:..u!'.t~h~o~ri~ty A 2 ·0<feet Flood Contro l Channel Rip Rap Main tenance Projec t
LACKHAWK
Survey Area
Project Area
Concrete Energy Dissipation Apron
Permanen t Impact Area/Grouted Rip Rap Bed
Vegetation
D Non-Vegeta ted Channel
D Southern Willow Scrub
- Coas tal Freshwater Marsh
D Disturbed Coastal Scrub
D Urban/Developed
,,
.~
,;.
<
...
-~\ ~
~~
Figure 2
Vegetation Communities / Land Use Cover Types
n _v•-ro_n_m_e_n t- a-1 ....!.~·N~o~~~==~60~:!..._ __ ___.!:~~~~~~~~~~E1n~ c~in~a£..!W~a~st~e~w~a~te~r~A~u~t~h~o~r~ity A Feet Flood Contro l Channel Rip Rap Maintenance Projec t Source: USDA NRCS Aerial Photo : SANDAG & SonGIS 2017
~f>!:ACKHAWK
~ nvironmental AO 200
Feet
□ Survey Area
Soils
Coastal beaches
Huerhuero loam, 2 to 9 percen t slopes
Marina loamy coarse sand, 2 to 9 percent slopes
• Salinas clay, o to 2 percent slopes
• Terrace escarpments
Tidal flats
Figure 3
Soils
Encino Wastewate r Authori ty
Flood Contro l Channel Rip Rap Maintenance Projec t
r_J
□
Survey Area
Project Area
Concre te Energy Dissipation Apron
r--• _· J Permanent Impact Area/Gro uted Rip Rap Bed
o Wetland Sample Point
o Hydric Test Points
Aeria l Source: Nearmap 2020
USACE/ RWQCB Wetland Waters of the u.s and State,
CDFW Riparian, CCC Palustrine Wetland (1 .154 acres)
D Southern Willow Scrub
- Coastal Freshwa ter Marsh
USACE/ RWQCB Non-Wetland Waters of the U.S and State,
CDFW Steambed , and CCC Riverine (0.082 acre)
D Non-Vegeta ted Cha nnel
Figure 4
Jurisdictional Delineation LACKHAWK
n_v•-ro_n_m_e_n_ta_1_..!_!~ o~~~~==~60~:!.._ _ __.!~ ~:_::~ ~ ~~~ ~~~E!ln:.c~i_S:n~a:.W~a~s~t~e.::w~a~te~r:::.A~u::!t.:hto~ri~ty A Feet Flood Contro l Channel Rip Rap Maintenance Projec t
ATTACHMENT B
Site Photographs
5LACKHAWK
Encina Wastewater Authority Channel Maintenance Project Jurisdictional Delineation Report – Site Photographs
San Diego, San Diego County, California
Photo 1: An overview of the southern willow scrub habitat and non-vegetated channel looking northwest from the eastern edge of the Project site.
Photo 2: A representative photo of the non-vegetated channel surrounded by the southern willow scrub habitat looking east/northeast from the southwest edge of the channel.
Encina Wastewater Authority Channel Maintenance Project Jurisdictional Delineation Report – Site Photographs
San Diego, San Diego County, California
Photo 3: Another representative photo of the non-vegetated channel surrounded by the southern willow scrub habitat looking north from the southwest edge of the channel.
Photo 4: A representative photo of the interface of the non-vegetated channel and the surrounding southern willow scrub habitat at the southwest edge of the channel.
Encina Wastewater Authority Channel Maintenance Project Jurisdictional Delineation Report – Site Photographs
San Diego, San Diego County, California
Photo 5: A representative photo of a soil test pit containing hydric indicators in the southern willow scrub habitat adjacent to the non-vegetated channel.
Photo 6: A representative photo showing hydric soils from a sampling pit in the southern willow scrub habitat. Note the prominent redox concentrations in the soil matrix, visible as rusty-colored splotches and as pore linings.
ATTACHMENT C
Jurisdictional Delineation Data Forms
5LACKHAWK
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West – Version 2.0 WETLAND DETERMINATION DATA FORM – Arid West Region
Project/Site: City/County: Sampling Date:
Applicant/Owner: State: Sampling Point:
Investigator(s): Section, Township, Range:
Landform (hillslope, terrace, etc.): Local relief (concave, convex, none): Slope (%):
Subregion (LRR): Lat: Long: Datum:
Soil Map Unit Name: NWI classification:
Are climatic / hydrologic conditions on the site typical for this time of year? Yes No (If no, explain in Remarks.) Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology significantly disturbed? Are “Normal Circumstances” present? Yes No Are Vegetation , Soil , or Hydrology naturally problematic? (If needed, explain any answers in Remarks.) SUMMARY OF FINDINGS – Attach site map showing sampling point locations, transects, important features, etc.
Hydrophytic Vegetation Present? Yes No
Hydric Soil Present? Yes No
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes No
Is the Sampled Area
within a Wetland? Yes
No
Remarks:
VEGETATION – Use scientific names of plants.
Dominance Test worksheet:
Number of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A)
Total Number of Dominant
Species Across All Strata: (B)
Percent of Dominant Species
That Are OBL, FACW, or FAC: (A/B)
Prevalence Index worksheet:
Total % Cover of: Multiply by:
OBL species x 1 =
FACW species x 2 =
FAC species x 3 =
FACU species x 4 =
UPL species x 5 =
Column Totals: (A) (B) Prevalence Index = B/A =
Hydrophytic Vegetation Indicators:
Dominance Test is >50%
Prevalence Index is 3.0
1 Morphological Adaptations
1 (Provide supporting
data in Remarks or on a separate sheet)
Problematic Hydrophytic Vegetation
1 (Explain)
1 Indicators of hydric soil and wetland hydrology must
be present, unless disturbed or problematic.
Absolute Dominant Indicator
Tree Stratum (Plot size: ) % Cover Species? Status
1. 2.
3. 4.
= Total Cover
Sapling/Shrub Stratum (Plot size: )
1. 2.
3. 4.
5. = Total Cover
Herb Stratum (Plot size: )
1. 2.
3. 4.
5. 6.
7. 8.
= Total Cover
Woody Vine Stratum (Plot size: )
1. 2.
= Total Cover
% Bare Ground in Herb Stratum % Cover of Biotic Crust Hydrophytic
Vegetation
Present? Yes
No
Remarks:
Encina Water Authority
Carlsbad/San Diego
10-2-20
Encina Water Authority
CA
1 Kris Alberts, Desiree Johnson, Loren
flat southern willow scru
none
0 C
33.114762
-117.322389
NAD 83
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
10’ x 10’
Salix lasiolepis
40 Yes
FACW
Eucalyptus globulus
30 No
UPL
70 None
0 10’ x 10’
Xanthium strumarium
10 Yes
FAC
Pluchea odorata
5 Yes
OBL
Apium graveolens
3 No
FCW
Erigeron candensis
1 No
UPL
Euphorbia sp.
1 No
UPL
20 None
0 70
0 3
3 100
5 5
3 6
150
50 160
32 90
321
3.57 ✔
✔
Bare ground consists of ample leaf litter and some open water.
US Army Corps of Engineers Arid West – Version 2.0 SOIL Sampling Point:
Profile Description: (Describe to the depth needed to document the indicator or confirm the absence of indicators.) Depth Matrix R e d o x F e a t u r e s (inches) C o l o r ( m o i s t ) % C o l o r ( m o i s t ) % Type 1 Loc
2 Texture Remarks
1 Type: C=Concentration, D=Depletion, RM=Reduced Matrix, CS=Covered or Coated Sand Grains. 2 Location: PL=Pore Lining, M=Matrix.
Hydric Soil Indicators: (Applicable to all LRRs, unless otherwise noted.) Indicators for Problematic Hydric Soils 3 :
Histosol (A1) Sandy Redox (S5) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR C) Histic Epipedon (A2) Stripped Matrix (S6) 2 cm Muck (A10) (LRR B) Black Histic (A3) Loamy Mucky Mineral (F1) Reduced Vertic (F18) Hydrogen Sulfide (A4) Loamy Gleyed Matrix (F2) Red Parent Material (TF2) Stratified Layers (A5) (LRR C) Depleted Matrix (F3) Other (Explain in Remarks) 1 cm Muck (A9) (LRR D) Redox Dark Surface (F6)
Depleted Below Dark Surface (A11) Depleted Dark Surface (F7) Thick Dark Surface (A12) Redox Depressions (F8)
3 Indicators of hydrophytic vegetation and
Sandy Mucky Mineral (S1) Vernal Pools (F9) wetland hydrology must be present, Sandy Gleyed Matrix (S4) unless disturbed or problematic.
Restrictive Layer (if present):
Type:
Depth (inches):
Hydric Soil Present? Yes
No
Remarks:
HYDROLOGY
Wetland Hydrology Indicators:
Primary Indicators (minimum of one required; check all that apply) Secondary Indicators (2 or more required) Surface Water (A1) Salt Crust (B11) Water Marks (B1) (Riverine) High Water Table (A2) Biotic Crust (B12) Sediment Deposits (B2) (Riverine) Saturation (A3) Aquatic Invertebrates (B13) Drift Deposits (B3) (Riverine) Water Marks (B1) (Nonriverine) Hydrogen Sulfide Odor (C1) Drainage Patterns (B10) Sediment Deposits (B2) (Nonriverine) Oxidized Rhizospheres along Living Roots (C3) Dry-Season Water Table (C2) Drift Deposits (B3) (Nonriverine) Presence of Reduced Iron (C4) Crayfish Burrows (C8) Surface Soil Cracks (B6) Recent Iron Reduction in Tilled Soils (C6) Saturation Visible on Aerial Imagery (C9) Inundation Vis ble on Aerial Imagery (B7) Thin Muck Surface (C7) Shallow Aquitard (D3) Water-Stained Leaves (B9) Other (Explain in Remarks) FAC-Neutral Test (D5) Field Observations:
Surface Water Present? Yes
No Depth (inches):
Water Table Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
Saturation Present? Yes No Depth (inches):
(includes capillary fringe)
Wetland Hydrology Present? Yes
No
Describe Recorded Data (stream gauge, monitoring well, aerial photos, previous inspections), if available:
Remarks:
1 0-16
10YR 3/1
98 10YR 5/8
2 C
PL
sandy cl
sandy clay loam
Annual scouring during flood events and sedimentation results in hydric indicators jumbled in the soil horizon.
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
~-=c n 1995-0254937 19-JUH-1995 09=30 AM
463
RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND )
WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: )
City Clerk )
CITY OF CARLSBAD )
1200 Carlsbad Village Drive )
Carlsbad. California 92008 l
Space above
OFFICIAL RECORDS
SAH DIEGO COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE
GREGORY S"ITH, COUNTY RECORDER RF: 8.00 FEES:
AF~ 7.00
MF: 1.00
this line for Recorder's use
Parcel No. 214-010-01-00
HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENT
DRAINAGE
16. 00
In consideration of the City's approval of a grading plan (Plan No. 341-2A and/or improvement plans (Plans No. 341-2) for development to occur on property described as Carlsbad Seapointe Resort (CT 93-10), We Carlsbad Seapointe Resort L.P. the owner(s) of said property promise to indemnify and to hold the City of Carlsbad and any of its agencies or employees harmless from liability for injuries to persons, or damage to or taking of property, directly or indirectly caused by the diversion of waters, the alteration of the normal flow of surface waters or drainage, or the concentration of surface waters or drainage from the drainage system or other improvements identified in the approved plans: or by the design, construction or maintenance of the drainage system or other improvements identified in the approved plans.
Approval of the plans by the City shall not constitute an assumption by the City of any responsibility for such damage or taking. City shall not be an insurer or surety for the design or construction of the improvements pursuant to the approved plans, nor shall any officer or employee thereof be liable or responsible for any accident, loss or damage happening or occurring during the construction work or improvements as specified in this agreement.
Agreements/AG-14.FRN - 1 - REV. 5/21/90
It is fli~her agreed that.tAJ>ibove-~wner(s) will maintain all drainage systems to insure a free flow to a satisfactory point of discharge unless said systems are accepted as public facilities.
It is further agreed that this agreement shall be binding on all heirs, successors or assigns having an interest in all or any part of the property described herein.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this
instrument this 4-9 day ot /1101} , 19 9 "J .
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
RONALD R. BALL
City Attorney
Carlsbad Seapointe Resort, L.P., a Califoria
Limited Partnership
By: continental Commercial Corporation,
eneral Partne
By: ____ W~-~~~~-· ._
Davids. Brown, Co-Presic!""ent & secretary
By:~
,()-ri~orney
(Proper notarial acknowledgment of execution by the OWNER(S) must be attached) •
Agreements/AG·14.FRN - 2 - REV. 5/21/90
465
State of California ---~==-=='------
County of --~S_a=n~D~ie-g...,o ___ _ } ss.
On cTJ1~ o27 ,1 19 2.S- , before me, Cynthia A. Jacgues. Notary Public personally ~eared Timothy J. Stripe , personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she executed the same in his/her authorized capacity, and that by his/her signature on the instrument the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature {2~.4-< A -&,ugM.ilA..,
Notary Publ
State of California -----====-------County of ----=S=an=-=D:;..::i=eg..,_o=------ } ss. 466
On 71/~ c:Q. CJ , /9 9S , before me, Cynthia A. Jacgues. Notary Public personally ~ared ' David S. Brown , personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she executed the same in his/her authorized capacity, and that by his/her signature on the instrument the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Signature ~ ii ~d-C q,.cµ.a
· Notary Pu~ iJ