2022-11-08; City Council; Resolution 2022-256 — Carlsbad City Council, November 8, 2022

RESOLUTION NO. 2022-256

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD,

CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING AN ADDENDUM TO THE CITY OF CARLSBAD GENERAL PLAN EIR STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NO. 2011011004 (EIR 13-02),

AND APPROVING A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION FROM R-15, RESIDENTIAL TO R-15/O,
RESIDENTIAL/OFFICE ON A PARCEL GENERALLY LOCATED AT 2754 JEFFERSON STREET (APN 203-201-01-00) WITHIN LOCAL FACILITIES MANAGEMENT ZONE 1
CASE NAME: JEFFERSON MIXED-USE
CASE NO.: GPA 2021-0004 (DEV2020-0116)
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California has determined that pursuant to the provisions of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, the Planning Commission did, on Aug. 17, 2022, hold a duly noticed public hearing as prescribed by law to consider an Addendum to the City of Carlsbad General Plan EIR State Clearinghouse No. 2011011004 (EIR 13-02) and a General Plan Amendment GPA 2021-0004, as referenced in Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 7458, and 7459; and the Planning Commission adopted Resolution Nos. 7458, and 7459 recommending to the City Council that they be adopted and approved; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Carlsbad held a duly noticed public hearing to consider said Addendum to the City of Carlsbad General Plan EIR State Clearinghouse No. 2011011004 (EIR 13- 02) and General Plan Amendment GPA 2021-0004; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all persons desiring to be heard, the City Council considered all factors relating to the Addendum to the City of Carlsbad General Plan EIR State Clearinghouse No. 2011011004 (EIR 13-02} and General Plan Amendment GPA 2021-0004.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, as follows:

1. That the above recitations are true and correct.

2. That the recommendation of the Planning Commission for the adoption of an Addendum to the City of Carlsbad General Plan EIR State Clearinghouse No. 2011011004 {EIR 13-02) attached hereto as Attachment A; and approval of General Plan Amendment GPA 2021-0004 attached hereto as Attachment B are adopted and approved, and that the findings of the Planning Commission contained in Planning Commission Resolution Nos. 7458 and 7459 on file with the City Clerk and incorporated herein by reference, are the findings and of the City Council. The substantive findings and determinations are incorporated herein as though fully set forth herein.

3. The General Plan Land Use Map is amended as shown on the maps marked GPA 2022- 0004 dated July 15, 2022, and attached hereto as Attachment B and made a part hereof. The complete General Plan Land Use Map being amended is on file with the Office of the City Clerk.

4. This action is final the date this resolution is adopted by the City Council. The Provisions of Chapter 1.16 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, "Time Limits for Judicial Review" shall apply:
"NOTICE"
The time within which judicial review of this decision must be sought is governed by Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1094.6, which has been made applicable in the City of Carlsbad by Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 1.16. Any petition or other paper seeking review must be filed in the appropriate court not later than the ninetieth day following the date on which this decision becomes final; however, if within ten days after the decision becomes final a request for the record is filed with a deposit in an amount sufficient to cover the estimated cost or preparation of such record, the time
within which such petition may be filed in court is extended to not later than the thirtieth day following the date on which the record is either personally delivered or mailed to the party, or his attorney of record, if he has one. A written request for the preparation of the record of the proceedings shall be filed with the Office of the City Clerk, City of Carlsbad, 1200 Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad, CA 92008.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Carlsbad on the 8th day of November, 2022, by the following vote, to wit:

AYES:

NAYS:

ABSENT:

Hall, Blackburn, Bhat-Patel, Acosta, Norby.

None.

MATT HALL, Mayor
� FAVIOLA MEDINA, City Clerk Services Manager
(SEAL)
Addendum #3 to the Comprehensive General Plan Update
certified Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR, EIR 13-02) Prepared for:

City of Carlsbad
1635 Faraday Avenue
Carlsbad, California 92008
Contact: Ms. Jessica Evans
Prepared by:
605 Third Street
En
cinitas, California 92024
Contact: Sean Kilkenny
AUGUST 2022
Attachment A
DUDEK

1 3583
i January 2022
Table of Contents
SECTION PAGE NO.

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................. III 1 INTRODUCTION ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ ............. 1

1.1 Project Overview ..................................................................................................................................... 3

1.2 Project Planning Setting ......................................................................................................................... 4

1.3 California Environmental Quality Act Compliance ................................................................................ 6 2 SUMMARY OF FINDINGS ................................ ................................ ................................ ............................... 7 3 CHECKLIST ................................ ................................ ................................ ................................ .................... 9

3.1 Aesthetics ............................................................................................................................................ 13

3.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources ................................................................................................... 14

3.3 Air Quality ............................................................................................................................................. 16

3.4 Biological Resources ........................................................................................................................... 18

3.5 Cultural Resources .............................................................................................................................. 20

3.6 Energy .................................................................................................................................................. 23

3.7 Geology and Soils ................................................................................................................................ 25

3.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions ................................................................................................................ 28

3.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ..................................................................................................... 29

3.10 Hydrology and Water Quality ............................................................................................................... 33

3.11 Land Use and Planning ....................................................................................................................... 38

3.12 Mineral Resources .............................................................................................................................. 39

3.13 Noise .................................................................................................................................................... 40

3.14 Population and Housing ...................................................................................................................... 43

3.15 Public Services .................................................................................................................................... 44

3.16 Recreation ............................................................................................................................................ 46

3.17 Transportation .................................................................................................................................... 47

3.18 Tribal Cultural Resources .................................................................................................................... 50

3.19 Utilities and Service Systems .............................................................................................................. 53

3.20 Wildfire ................................................................................................................................................. 57 4 REFERENCES AND PREPARERS................................ ................................ ................................ .................. 60

4.1 References Cited ................................................................................................................................. 60

4.2 List of Preparers .................................................................................................................................. 60

ADDENDUM #3 TO THE COMPREHENSIVE GENERAL PLAN UPDATE CERTIFIED FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR, EIR 13-02)
1 3583
ii January 2022

APPENDICES
A Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation Report
B CAP Checklist
C Stormwater Standards Questionaire (Form E-34)
D Noise Impact Analysis

FIGURES
1 Project Location ................................................................................................................................................ 61 2 Project Site ........................................................................................................................................................ 63 3 General Plan Land Use Designation ................................................................................................................ 65 4 Zoning ................................................................................................................................................................ 67 5 Preliminary Site Plan ......................................................................................................................................... 71

Acronyms and Abbreviations
Acronym/Abbreviation Definition
AQMP Air Quality Management Plan
BANL Base Ambient Noise Level
BESS Battery Energy Storage System
BMP Best Management Practice
BSU Battery Step Up Transformer
CBC California Building Code
CCR California Code of Regulations
CDFW California Department of Fish and Wildlife
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CESA California Endangered Species Act
CFD Community Facilities Districts
CGP Construction General Permit
CNPS California Native Plant Society
CRPR California Rare Plant Rank
DEH Department of Environmental Health
DOC California Department of Conservation
EIR Environmental Impact Report
ESA Environmental Assessment Report
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
FESA Federal Endangered Species Act
GHG greenhouse gas
GPU General Plan Update
HCP Habitat Conservation Plan
LHMP Local Hazard Mitigation Plan
MBTA Migratory Bird Treaty Act
MLD Most Likely Descendant
MRZ Mineral Resource Zone
MS4 Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System
MW megawatt
MWh megawatt-hour
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
PDF Project Design Feature
RWQCB Regional Water Quality Control Board
SR State Route
SRA State Responsibility Area
SWP State Water Project
SWPPP Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan
TCR tribal cultural resource
USACE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
UWMP Urban Water Management Plan
VHFHSZ Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones
VMT vehicle miles traveled
WM Waste Management
WQMP Water Quality Management Plan

Executive Summary
This Third Addendum to the Final Certified Comprehensive General Plan Update (Addendum #3) has been prepared by the City of Carlsbad in conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, Public Resources Code section 21000 et seq.), the regulations promulgated thereunder (CEQA Guidelines, 14 California Code of Regulations section 15000 et seq.), and the city’s environmental review procedures (Chapter 19.04 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code) to consist of the following (collectively referred to herein as the “Project”):

1. Zoning and land use change to reconcile split zoning; and

2. Construction of four proposed condominium units and professional office space.

As part of its approval of the Comprehensive General Plan Update on Sept. 22, 2015, the City Council adopted City Council Resolution No. 2015 -242, certifying Environmental Impact Report (EIR 13 -02) and adopting Findings of Fact, a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Addendum #1 to the Final EIR was prepared for the 2020 Climate Action Plan Update, and was adopt ed by City Council Resolution No. 2020-146 on July 14, 2020. Addendum #2 to the Final EIR was prepared for the updated Housing Element by City Council Resolution No. 2021-073 on August 6, 2021.

Addendum #3 is associated with the Project, which would reconcile split zoning. The population and economic growth assumptions under the Project are the same as what was utilized for the Comprehensive General Plan Update. The Project accommodates growth, rather than inducing it. The purpose of this Addendum is to pr ovide updated information to the Final Certified EIR. Section 15164(a) of the CEQA Guidelines states that “[t]he lead agency or a responsible agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred.”
Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines provides that a subsequent EIR is required when (1) substantial changes are proposed in the project or circumstances that will require major revisions of the prior EIR due to new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or (2) new information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the prior EIR was certified, shows that (a) the project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the prior EIR, (b) significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the prior EIR, (c) mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative, or (d) mitigation measures or alternatives that are considerably different from those analyzed in the prior EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.

As discussed in the following sections, the new information and minor technical modifications are not considered “significant” pursuant to CEQA. Specifically, Addendum #3 to the Final EIR finds that the impacts resulting from implementation of the General Plan Update as described in the Final EIR remain the same, aside from the Project’s proposed modification, and the mitigation measures would remain unchanged and are still valid and enforceable.

No considerably different mitigation measures or feasible alternatives have been identified. The Addendum to the Final EIR finds that the previously identified impacts and mitigation measures, as described in the Final EIR, are still applicable. Therefore, the Final EIR, as certified, remains adequate and complete.

2 August 2022
All other environmental analysis sections are not contained herein because the original Final EIR for those environmental areas are still applicable and do not req uire updated information. CEQA does not require that the original Final EIR be circulated with the Addendum, but the original Final EIR is available for public review from the city upon request. Therefore, please refer to the original Final EIR for other environmental topics not contained in this Addendum.

3 August 2022
1 Introduction

1.1 Project Overview
The Jefferson Mixed Use: Townhome and Professional Office Project (Project) is located within the City of Carlsbad (city) on two existing lots on Jefferson Street (2754 and 2770 Jefferson Street ; see Figure 1 – Project Location).

Each lot is currently developed with a single-family residence (see Figure 2 – Project Site). The proposed project involves the demolition of the t wo existing single-family units and development of four condominium units with a standalone professional office building. The project would also include a Tentative Tract Map to create one, 0.33- acre lot for air space condominium units and a Zone Change and General Plan Amendment to allow the proposed office and residential uses on the same parcel as explained below.

Condominium Units
The four proposed condominium units would range in size from 1,905 square feet to 2,076 square feet in three stories. Each unit would include a two-car garage , and two additional guest parking spaces would be provided.

Maximum building height would be approximately 34 feet and 11 inches. The architectural style of the condo units is designed to be contemporary beach cottage.

Professional Office
The standalone professional office would be approximately 683 square feet in size, with an additional 214 square feet of mezzanine, and a maximum building height of approximately 23 feet and 9 inches. The professional office would include a total of three parking spaces, in accordance with city requirements. The architectural style is designed to be compatible with the proposed condominium units.

Zoning and Land Use Designation
To accommodate the development of the proposed condominiums and professional office , the Project would include a Tentative Tract Map, Zone Change, and General Plan Amendment for land use re-designation to allow for the construction of fou r residential air -space condominiums and an office use. The Tentative Tract Map will consolidate two lots and subdivide the project site for residential air-space and commercial condominiums.

The lot addressed as 2770 Jefferson Street has a land use designation of R-15/O and is zoned R-P-Q, which allows for an office use with residential uses. 2754 Jefferson Street has a land use designation of R-15 and is zoned RD- M and allows for multi-family residential uses. To avoid a split zone development, the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change are proposed to change the land use designation to R —15/O and the zone to R -P-Q to allow both multi-family residential and office on one lot. The proposed General Plan Amendment and Zone Change would not increase the density/intensity of development permitted on the project site because the proposed land uses are located where the existing land use and zoning designations allow for it. More specifically, the proposed office would occupy the area on 2770 Jefferson Street that currently allows for office uses and residential uses, and the residential component will span across both l ots and allow for multi -family residential uses. Table 1 provides a breakdown of the existing and proposed zoning and General Plan land use designations for the Project site (see also Figures 3a, 3b, 4a and 4b).

4 August 2022
Table 1. Existing and Proposed Zoning and Land Uses
Zoning Land Use Designation
Existing
2754 Jefferson RD-M – Residential Density-
Multiple Zone R-15 – Residential
2770 Jefferson R-P-Q– Residential Professional
Zone R-15/O – Residential/Office
Proposed
Project R-P-Q– Residential Professional
Zone R-15/O – Residential/Office
Notes:

RD-M: Residential Density-Multiple Zone
R-P-Q: Residential Professional – Qualified Development Overlay Zone R-15: Residential (15 dwelling units/acre)
R-15/O: Residential (15 dwelling units/acre and office) As shown in Table 1, the existing zoning and land use designations of the Project site allow for residential and office uses, consistent with the uses proposed by the Project. However, the Project would include office uses where the project site is designated as R-15 (Residential) and residential units where the project site is designated as R-15/O (Residential and Office). Therefore, because the existing lots have different zoning as shown in Table 1, the Project would require a Zone Change and General Plan Amendment to be in compliance with the R-P-Q zone; however, the project would not increase the intensity or density of development.

Construction
Grading associated with Project construction would result in 202 cubic feet of cut and 80 cubic feet of fill, with 122 cubic feet of export or which would balance on-site through compaction. Construction is anticipated to begin in mid to late 2022 and take approximately 18 months to complete.

Discretionary Actions
The Project would require the processing and approval of the following:
• General Plan Amendment (GPA 2021-0004)
• Zone Change (ZC 2021-0004)
• Tentative Tract Map (CT 2021-0001)
• Planned Development Permit (PUD 2021-0004)
• N
onresidential Planned Development Permit (PUD 2022-002) • Site Development Plan (SDP 2021-0014)

1.2 Project Planning Setting
The city is located in the northwestern portion of San Diego County (County) and the Project site is located in the northwestern portion of the city. Specifically, the Project site is approximately 1,500 feet west of Interstate 5 (I-5), 1,700 feet southeast of Buena Vista Lagoon, and 0.6 mile east of the Pacific Ocean. The Project site encompasses

0.33-acres and is an infill lot that is relatively flat (approximately 56 feet above mean sea level). As an existing infill site developed with existing single-family residential units, there are no significant or sensitive biological or

5 August 2022
environmental resources onsite or in the adjacent vicinity. The Project site is also located outside of the city's Coastal Zone.

1.3 California Environmental Quality Act Compliance
CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 through 15164 set forth the criteria for determining the appropriate additional environmental documentation, if any, to be completed when there is a previously adopted ND or a previously certified EIR for the project. CEQA Guidelines, Section 15162(a) and 15163 state that when an ND has been adopted or an EIR certified for a project, no Subsequent or Supplemental EIR or Subsequent Negative Declaration shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in light of the whole public record, one or more of the following:

1. Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.

2. Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.

3. New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the Negative Declaration was adopted, shows any of the following:
a. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or Negative Declaration; or
b. Significant effects previously examined will be substantia lly more severe than shown in the previously adopted Negative Declaration or previously certified EIR; or c. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more signifi cant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or d. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous Negative Declaration or EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.

CE
QA Guidelines, Section 15164(a) states that an Addendum to a previously certified EIR may be prepared if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a
Subsequent or Supplemental EIR have occurred.

CEQA Guidelines, Section 15164(b) states that an Addendum to a previously adop ted Negative Declaration may be prepared if only minor technical changes or additions are necessary.

If th
e factors listed in CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162, 15163, or 15164 have not occurred or are not met, no chan
ges to the previously certified EIR or pr eviously adopted ND are necessary. See Section 2, Summary of Findings, for further information.

The Project is consistent with the analysis performed for the city’s General Plan & Climate Action Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (G P/CAP FEIR) certified in September 2015 (City of Carlsbad 2015a). A comprehensive environmental evaluation has been completed for the Project as documented in the attached Checklist. This evaluation concludes that the Project qualifies for an exemption from additional environmental review because it is both consistent with the land use characteristics established by the city’s General Plan, as analyzed by the GP/CAP FEIR, and all required findings can be made.

7 Augus
t 2022
2 Summary of Findings
The Project is consistent with the analysis performed for the city’s GP/CAP FEIR certified in September 2015. A comprehensive environmental evaluation has been completed for the Project as documented throughout Chapter 3 of this document. This evaluation concludes that the Project qualifies for an exemption from additional environmental review because it is consistent with the development density and land use characteristics established by the city’s General Plan, as analyzed by the city’s GP/CAP FEIR, and all required findings can be made.

CEQA: 15162. Subsequent EIRs and Negative Declarations
15162. (a) When an EIR has been certified or a
negative declaration adopted for a project, no
subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project
unless the lead agen cy determines, on the basis
of substantial evidence in the light of the whole
record, one or more of the following:
(1) Substantial changes are proposed in the
project which will require major revisions of the
previous EIR or negative declaration due to the
involvement of new significant environmental
effects or a substantial increase in the severity of
previously identified significant effects;
The project does not propose substantial changes
compared to the analysis contained in the GP/CAP
FEIR. While the project would include a Zone
Change and General Plan Amendment, the
underlying uses would be consistent with the
development type and intensity anticipated by the
General Plan. The Project would include a Tentative
Tract Map, Zone Change, and General Plan
Amendment for land use re-designation to allow for
the construction of four residential air -space
condominiums and an office use. The Tentative
Tract Map will consolidate two lots and subdivide
the project site for residential air -
space and
commercial condominiums. To avoid a split zone
development, the General Plan Amendment and
Zone Change are proposed to change the land use
designation to R —15/O and t he zone to R -P-
Q to
allow both multi-family residential and office on one
lot. A s explained in Section 3.1
, below, such
changes would not result in new significant
environmental effects or a substantial increase in
the severity of previously identified significant
effects.
(2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the
circumstances under which the proj ect is
undertaken which will require major revisions of
the previous EIR or Negative Declaration due to
the involvement of new significant environmental
effects or a substantial increase in the severity of
previously identified significant effects;
Since adoption of the GP/CAP FEIR, CEQA has been
updated to provide for new or revised guidelines
related to energy, cultural resources/tribal cultural
resources, transportation, and wildfire. As
described in Section 3, below, the proposed project
would be consistent with the development type and
intensity anticipated by the General Plan and would
not result in new significant environmental effects
or a substantial increase in the severity of
previously identified significant effects.

Or
(3) New info rmation of substantial importance,
which was not known and could not have been

8 August 2022
known with the exercise of reasonable diligence
at the time the previous EIR was certified as
complete or the Negative Declaration was
adopted, shows any of the following:
(A) The project will have one or more significant
effects not discussed in the previous EIR or
negative declaration;
As described below, all project impacts would be
less than significant.
(B) Significant effects previously examined will be
substantially mor e severe than shown in the
previous EIR;
As described below, all project impacts would be
less than significant.
(C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously
found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible,
and would substantially reduce one or more
significant effects of the project, but the project
proponents decline to adopt the mitigation
measure or alternative; or
As described below, all project impacts would be
less than significant and no measures that would
have previously been
considered infeasible are
required.
(D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are
considerably different from those analyzed in the
previous EIR would substantially reduce one or
more significant effects on the environment, but
the project proponents
decline to adopt the
mitigation measure or alternative.

As described below, all project impacts would be
less than significant and no measures that were
previously declined to be implemented are required.

3 Checklist

1. Project title:

Jefferson Mixed Use: Townhome and Professional Office Project

2. Lead agency name and address:

City of Carlsbad,
16 35 Faraday Avenue
Carlsbad, California 92008

3. Contact person and phone number:

Ms. Lauren Yzaguirre, (442) 339-2634

4. Project location:

The Project site is located at 2754 and 2770 Jefferson Street, Carlsbad, CA 92008.

5. Project sponsor’s name and address:

Mr. Ed Scarpelli, (760) 685-0947

6. General plan designation:

Northern lot (2754 Jefferson): R-15 (15 du/acre)
Southern lot (2770 Jefferson): R-15/O (15 units/acre and office)

7. Zoning:

Northern lot (2754): RD-M (Residential Density-Multiple) Southern lot (2770): R-P-Q (Residential Professional Qualified Development Overlay Zone)

8. Description of project. (Describe the whole action involved, including but not limited to later phases of the project, and any secondary, support, or off-site features necessary for its implementation. Attach additional sheets if necessary):

The project proposes the demolition of two, existing single -family homes and the construction of four, attached townhomes and an 897 square foot office space. See Figure 5, Preliminary Site Plan. The project would include the following components:
• Tentative Tract Map
• General Plan Amendment
• Zone Change

1 0 August 2022
• Planned Development Permit
• Nonresidential Planned Development Permit
• Site Development Plan

9. Surrounding land uses and setting (Briefly describe the project’s surroundings):

The Project is surrounded on the north, northeast, and east by multi-family housing; single family homes to the south, and Jefferson Street and professional/office uses to the west.

10. Other public agencies whose discretionary approval is r equired (e.g., permits, financing approval, o r participation agreement):

N/A.

11. Have California Native American tribes traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21080.3.1? If so, is there a plan for consultation that includes, for example, the determi nation of significance of impacts to tribal cultural resources, procedures regarding confidentiality, etc.?
Yes, please refer to Section 3.18.

1 1 August 2022
Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a “Potentially Significant Impact,” as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.

Aesthetics Agriculture and
Forestry Resources
Air Quality
Biological Resources Cultural Resources Energy
Geology and Soils Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
Hazards and Hazardous
Materials
Hydrology and Water Quality Land Use and
Planning
Mineral Resources
Noise Population and
Housing
Public Services
Recreation Transportation Tribal Cultural Resources
Utilities and Service Systems Wildfire Mandatory Findings of Significance
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
1 2 August 2022
Determination (To be completed by the Lead Agency)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:

I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE D
ECLARATION will be prepared.

I f ind that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.

I find that the proposed project MAY have a “potentially significant impact” or “potentially significant unless mitigated” impact on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.

I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.

Signature Date
□
□
□
□
1 3 August 2022

3.1 Aesthetics
Since the previous EIR was certified, are there any changes in the project, changes in circumstances under which the project is undertaken and/or "new information of substantial importance" that cause one or more effects to aesthetic resources including: scenic vistas; scenic resources including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, or historic buildings within a state scenic highway; existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings; or day or nighttime views in the area?

YES NO
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts to scenic vistas would be less than significant. Scenic vistas in the city consist of the scenic corridors and views to and from the coastline, open spaces, and hillsides. The city’s General Plan regulates development of these areas, and contains policies to ensure that opportunities to enjoy scenic views are either preserved or enhanced. T he majority of land uses introduced in the city’s General Plan and analyzed in the GP/CAP FEIR, including the Project site, focused development in infill areas to relieve pressure on development of open space and agricultural areas. Future development within the city would generally result in the intensification of existing urban uses, as well as conversion of vacant land into urban uses.

The Project site is located on a previously disturbed infill site with two existing single-family residences and is immediately surrounded by single and multi-family residential and commercial/office uses. There are no scenic vistas or scenic corridors in the immediate Project vicinity. The Project would be consistent with the uses, aesthetic, and scale surrounding the Project site. Thus, impacts would be less than significant.

The GP/CAP FEIR concluded t here to be no impact related to state scenic highways. The city does not contain officially designated State Scenic Highways. The closest eligible State Scenic Highway is I-5, located approximately 1,500 feet east of the Project site (Caltrans 2021). The Project site is an infill site surrounded by existing development similar to that proposed by the Project (multi-family residential and office uses).

Existing development within the city between the Project site and I -5 disrupts any potential views of the eligible state scenic highway from the Project site and immediate vicinity. Thus, because the Project site is not visible from any scenic highway and does not contain scenic resources including trees, rock outcroppings or historic buildings, no impact to scenic resources within a state scenic highway would occur.

The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts to consistency with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality would be less than significant. The General Plan directs new development into underutilized or previously developed areas, where any proposed changes in land use and physical design are intended to increase visual quality. The General Plan also seeks to ensure that any development or redevelopment observes design guidelines to ensure visual compatibility with the surrounding environment. Accordingly, the GP/CAP FEIR determined that because the General Plan recognizes the sensitivity of preserving the visual character of the existing neighborhoods and open spaces throughout t he city, development in accordance with General Plan land use designations would be unlikely to result in visual degradation of the city or surroundings (City of Carlsbad 2015a).

1 4 August 2022
Zone). The Project would include a Tentative Tract Map, Zone Change, and General Plan Amendment for land use re-designation to allow for the construction of four residential air-space condominiums and an office use.

The Tentative Tract Map will consolidate two lots and subdivide the project site for residential air-space and commercial condominiums. To avoid a split zone development, the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change are proposed to change the land use designation to R —15/O and the zone to R-P-Q to allow both multi-family residential and office on one lot.. Thus, upon approval of the proposed Zone Change and General Plan Amendment, the proposed uses would comply with the zoning and land use designations on the Project site. In addition, upon approval, the Project would be consistent with the city’s Zoning Ordinance and General Plan and would be visually compatible with surrounding development including the residential and office uses in the immediate vicinity. The Project would be constructed pursuant to development standards contained in the Zoning Ordinance, including building setbacks, building heights, lot coverage, land uses, grading, and parking. Thus, because the Project would not conflict with land use designation and zoning of the site upon approval, would be consistent with surrounding uses, and would adhere to city’s development standards in the Zoning Ordinance; impacts would be less than significant.

The GP/CAP FEIR impact to light and glare would be less than significant. Development pursuant to the General Plan would introduce new sources of light into the city including residential and non -residential interior and exterior lighting, parking lot lighting, commercial signage lighting, and lamps for streetscape and public recreational areas . Although all new development pursuant to the General Plan would incrementally contribute to light pollution throughout the city, new development would take place in or near developed and urbanized areas, where moderate light and glare already exist. The General Plan includes polices related to buffering between development and sensitive habitats, and between commercial, residential, and industrial uses. New development would also be required to comply with the city’s Zoning Ordinances regulating light and glare and development buffers (City of Carlsbad 2015a).

Through adherence to the applicable city standards, the Project would not generate excessive light or glare.

The Project would introduce new development consistent with the existing development surrounding the Project site. Lighting associated with the Project would consist of typical residential and commercial lighting, such as internal lighting and external building lighting for security purposes. Windows included in the Project could result in some minimal glare. However, such glare would be typical of surrounding uses and would not be substantial. Lighting on the Project site would also comply with applicable zoning ordinance development standards. Finally, the Project site is surrounded by existing development, and not subject to Habitat Management Plan or Local Coastal Program lighting requirements. Therefore, impacts associated with light and glare would be less than significant.

3.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Since the previous EIR was certified or previous ND was adopted, are there any changes in the project, changes in circumstances under which the project is undertaken and/or "new information of substantial importance" that cause one or more effects to agriculture or forestry resources including: conversion of Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to a non-agricultural use, conflicts with existing zoning for agricultural use or Williamson Act contract, or conversion of forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public Resources Code section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government Code section 51104(g))?

1 5 August 2022
YES NO
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts to Farmland be less than significant.

According to the California Department of Conservation California Important Farmland Finder, the Project site is designated as Urban and Built-Up Land (DOC 2018). The Project site is also designated and zoned for residential and office uses and is surrounded by existing residential and commercial/office uses. The Project would include a Tentative Tract Map, Zone Change, and General Plan Amendment for land use re-designation to allow for the construction of four residential air-space condominiums and an office use. The Tentative Tract Map will consolidate two lots and subdivide the project site for residential air -space and commercial condominiums. To avoid a split zone development, the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change are proposed to change the land use designation to R—15/O and the zone to R-P-Q to allow both multi-family residential and office on one lot. However, it is noted that the proposed uses are consistent with the intensity and density allowed under the existing zoning and land use designations of the Project site. Thus, because the Project would not convert agricultural land and is consistent with the designated land use and zoning of the site, no impact would occur.

The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts related to conflicts with existing agricultural zoning or Williamson Act contracts would be less than significant. The only Williamson Act contract within the city is located at the Flower Fields property and the General Plan does not include any new land uses that would affect the status of the Flower Fields Williamson Act contract.

The Project site is designated and zoned for residential and office uses and currently contains existing single-family residences. The Project site is also surrounded by existing residential and commercial uses and there are no agriculturally zoned lands in the project vicinity. Therefore, the Project would not conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use or a Williamson Act contract and no impact would occur.

The GP/CAP FEIR concluded no impact would occur to forest land, timberland, or timberland production.

There are no properties within the city that are zoned for forest land, timberland, or timberland production (City of Carlsbad 2019).

The GP/CAP FEIR also concluded no impact would occur due to the loss or conversion of forest land. There are no forest lands within the city (City of Carlsbad 2019).

No forestland timberland, or timberland production exists within the city , including the Project site ; therefore, no impact would occur.

The GP/CAP FEIR concluded this impact related to changes to the existing environmental which could result in the conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural uses would be less than significant.

The Project site is designated and zoned for residential and office uses and the Project proposes development o f four condominiums, a professional office, and associated parking consistent with the existing zoning and land use designations. Therefore, the Project would not result in the conversion of any farmland to non-agricultural use or forest land to non-forest use. Therefore, no impact would occur.

1 6 August 2022

3.3 Air Quality
Since the previous EIR was certified, are there any changes in the project, changes in circumstances under which the project is undertaken and/or "new information of substantial importance" that cause one or more effects to air quality including: conflicts with or obstruction of implementation of the San Diego Regional Air Quality Strategy or applicable portions of the State Implementation Plan (SIP); violation of any air quality standard or substantial contribution to an ex isting or projected air quality violation; a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard; exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations; or creation of objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?

YES NO
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts to conflicts or obstruction of implementation of the applicable air quality plans would be less than significant. The San Diego Air Pollution Control District (SDAPCD) and San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) are responsible for developing and implementing the clean air plan for attainment and maintenance of the National Ambient Air Qu ality Standards ( NAAQS) and California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) in the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB). The San Diego County Regional Air Quality Strategy (RAQS) relies on information from California Air Resources Board (CARB) and SANDAG, including mobile and area source emissions, as well as information regarding projected growth in San Diego County and the cities in the county, to project future emissions and then determine from that the strategies necessary for the reduction of emissions through regulatory controls. CARB mobile source emission projections and SANDAG growth projections are based on population, vehicle trends, and land use plans developed by San Diego County and the cities in the county as part of the developme nt of their general plans (City of Carlsbad 2015a).

If a project proposes development that is greater than that anticipated in the local general plan and SANDAG’s growth projections, the project might be in conflict with the RAQS and may contribute to a potentially significant cumulative impact on air quality. The proposed project would be consistent with the zoning and land use designation of the site. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with SANDAG’s growth projections or the RAQS, and the project would not c onflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan. Impacts would be less than significant.

A comparison between the project and the GP/CAP FEIR analysis was conducted to determine whether the project’s construction and operation would result in a cumulatively considerable net increase in emissions of criteria air pollutants for which the SDAB is designated as nonattainment under NAAQS or CAAQS compared to the previous CEQA analysis.

Construction
The Project would include a Tentative Tract Map, Zone Change, and General Plan Amendment for land use re-designation to allow for the construction of four residential air-space condominiums and an office use. The Tentative Tract Map will consolidate two lo ts and subdivide the project site for residential air -space and commercial condominiums. To avoid a split zone development, the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change are proposed to change the land use designation to R —15/O and the zone to R-P-Q to allow both

1 7 August 2022
multi-family residential and office on one lot. However, it is noted that the proposed uses are consistent with the intensity and density allowed under the existing zoning and land use designations of the Project site .

Therefore, the construction emissions associated with grading, building construction, architectural coating, and asphalt paving are determined to be adequately addressed in the GP/CAP EIR. Furthermore, it is anticipated that equipment and vehicle emissions would decrease compared to emissions evaluated in the GP/CAP FEIR due to more stringent standards for in-use off-road equipment and heavy-duty trucks, as well as fleet turnover replacing older equipment and vehicles in later years. The project would be subject to SDAPCD Rule 55, Fugitive Dust Control, which requires the project take steps to restrict visible emissions of fugitive dust beyond the property line. Compliance with Rule 55 would limit fugitive dust (PM10 and PM2.5) generated during grading and construction activities. The project would also be subject to SDAPCD Rule

67.0.1 – Architectural Coatings, which establishes maximum VOC contents of 50 and 100 grams per liter for flat and non -flat coatings, respectively. Accordingly, due to the project’s consistency with zoning and land use designation of the site, as well as implementation of more stringent requirements associated with construction, the project would not r esult in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant during construction.

Operations
As discussed above, the Project would include a Tentative Tract Map, Zone Change, and General Plan Amendment for land use re -designation to allow for the construction of four residential air -space condominiums and an office use. The Tentative Tract Map will consolidate two lots and subdivide the project site for residential air-space and commercial condominiums. To avoid a split zone development, the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change are proposed to change the land use designation to R —15/O and the zone to R -P-Q to allow b oth multi-family residential and office on one lot .. However, it is noted that the proposed uses are consistent with the intensity and density allowed under the existing zoning and land use designations of the Project site. Therefore, the operational emissions associated with project operation are addressed in the GP/CAP EIR. T he project would result in 45 average daily trips (ADT), and the existing single-family homes generate 20 ADT, therefore, the proposed project would generate the addition of approximately 25 ADT (net) at the project site, which is considered to be a minimal amount and would not result in requirement of a TDM plan or measures as explained in Section 3.17, below . Furthermore, it is anticipated that vehicle emissions would decrease compared to emissions assumed in the GP/CAP FEIR due to increased vehicle emission control technologies, more stringent standards specifically for he avy- duty trucks, and fleet turnover replacing older vehicles. In addition, energy emissions associated with the project are anticipated to decrease compared to emissions associated with the older residential structures currently present at the project site, due to increased building efficiency, availability of technology, and more stringent building codes. Accordingly, due to reduced emissions associated with mobile sources (vehicle trips), area, and energy sources (building operation), the project would no t generate additional pollutant emissions or create an additional impact not previously addressed in the GP/CAP FEIR. Impacts would be less than significant.

The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts to sensitive receptors from substantial pollutant concentrations would be less than significant because construction of projects pursuant to the General Plan would be short-term and diesel exhaust particulate matter emissions from off-road construction equipment and trucks would be controlled through compliance with airborne toxic control measures (ATCMs) adopted by CARB (City of Carlsbad 2015a). Sensitive receptors are those individuals more susceptible to the effects of air pollution than the population at large. People most likely to be affected by air pollution include children, older people, and people with cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases. Sensitive receptors include residences,

1 8 August 2022
schools, playgrounds, childcare centers, athletic facilities, long-term healthcare facilities, rehabilita tion centers, convalescent centers, and retirement homes.

Construction activities associated with the Project would result in temporary sources of on-site fugitive dust and construction equipment emissions. The nearest sensitive receptors are the multi-fam ily and single - family residences located directly adjacent to the northern and southern boundaries of the Project site, respectively. Construction activities would be those typical of building construction, and would not require the extensive use of heavy-duty construction equipment, which is subject to a CARB Airborne Toxics Control Measure (ATCM) for in-use diesel construction equipment to reduce diesel particulate emissions. While the Project could expose these adjacent sensitive receptors to pollutant c oncentrations from construction activities, construction would be temporary and would be required to comply with CARB adopted ATCMs to reduce air emissions from mobile and stationary sources . Therefore, through compliance with existing regulations, the project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations and impacts would be less than significant.

The GP/CAP FEIR concluded odor impacts would be less than significant . Odors would be potentially generated from vehicles and equipment exhaust emissions during construction of the Project. Potential odors produced during construction would be attributable to concentrations of unburned hydrocarbons from tailpipes of construct ion equipment and asphalt pavement application. Such odors would disperse rapidly from the Project site and generally occur at magnitudes that would not affect substantial numbers of people. Therefore, impacts associated with odors during construction would be less than significant.

Land uses and industrial operations associated with odor complaints include agricultural uses, wastewater treatment plants, food -processing plants, chemical plants, composting operations, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fibe rglass molding facilities ( City of Carlsbad 2015a ). The Project would in clude four condominiums and a professional office which would not create any new sources of odor during operation.

Therefore, Project operations would result in an odor impact that would be less than significant.

3.4 Biological Resources
Since the previous EIR was certified, are there any changes in the project, changes in circumstances under which the project is undertaken and/or "new information of substantial importance" that cause one or more effects to biological resources including: adverse effects on any sensitive natural community (including riparian habitat) or species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in a local or regional plan, policy, or regulation, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; adverse effects to federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act; interference with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with wildlife corridors, or impeding the use of native wildlife nursery sites; and/or conflicts with the provisions of any adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Communities Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional or state habitat conservation plan, policies or ordinances? YES NO
A
s discussed in the GP/CAP FEIR, d irect impacts to special-status species could result from the conversion of habitat either temporarily, as a result of grading, excavation, and construction activities, or permanently □ ~
1 9 August 2022
from the ongoing operation and/or maintenance of a project or pl an. Indirect impacts could result from elevated dust or noise levels or increased sediment loads in runoff from construction activities. Indirect impacts could also result from permanent alterations to hydrology upstream of habitats supporting sensitive sp ecies, including increased runoff, sedimentation, or pollutant loads, and increased human activity. However, most new development expected to occur pursuant to the General Plan would be within existing developed areas.

Jurisdictional wetlands and waters occur within the city primarily in the vicinity of the Batiquitos, Agua Hedionda, and Buena Vista lagoons with other wetland habitats occurring along creeks and drainages.

Vernal pools occur in several scattered locations throughout the city on marine terraces. As such, development on or adjacent to these areas could potentially affect these resources either directly through fill or indirectly through the alteration of the hydrologic regime. However, if jurisdictional resources are determined to be potentially impacted by a project, all such future development projects would requir e Clean Water Act Section 404/401 Permits from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) and Regional Water Quality Control Board ( RWQCB), respectively, and a 1600 -Series Streambed Alteration Agreement with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife ( CDFW). Future projects potentially affecting jurisdictional wetlands and waters would comply with the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), CDFW, and ACOE “no net loss” policy and would require mitigation, including wetland creation and restoration/enhancement. Finally, the city’s HMP is supplemented by the city’s Guidelines for Riparian and Wetland Buffers, which provides buffer design recommendations and identifies allowable uses and land use restrictions for riparian/wetland buffer zones. The guidelines also include minimization and mitigation measures designed to protect riparian and wetland habitats from pre -construction and construction activities. Therefore, implementation of the General Plan Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation Element goals and policies, and compliance with the measures listed in the Guidelines for Wetland and Riparian Buffers, and with applicable federal, state, and local regulations was determined to reduce impacts to federally protected wetland to below a level of significance (City of Carlsbad 2015a).

Under existing conditions, the Project site is currently developed with two single-family residences and does not contain any candidate, sensitive, or special status species or habitat areas which would support such species. Further, the Project site is surrounded by existing development in all directions and no natural habitat areas exist in the Project vicinity. The Project site and surrounding area is also designated as Urban/Disturbed land within the HMP (City of Carlsbad 2004). As such, redevelopment of the Project site would result in less than significant impacts to candidate, sensitive, and special-status species.

The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts to conflicts with local policies and ordinances protecting biological resources would be less than significant. The city has developed a set of guidelines to aid in the implementation of the HMP. These include the Guidelines for Biological Studies, Guide lines for Preserve Management, Guidelines for Habitat Creation and Restoration, and Guidelines for Riparian and Wetland Buffers. The General Plan was developed to promote consistency with other city plans and ordinances that provide policy direction fo r the preservation of biological resources in the city. Therefore, implementation of the General Plan Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation Element goals and policies was determined to ensure consistency with the HMP guidelines , resulting in a less than significant impact ( City of Carlsbad 2015a).

The Project site and surrounding area is designated as Urban/Disturbed land within the HMP ( City of Carlsbad 2004). While the Project site contains some trees scattered around the property, which may be removed during construction of the Project , the city does not have a tree preservation policy for trees on

2 0 August 2022
private property. Consistent with the GP/CAP FEIR, the Project would not conflict with local policies or ordinances related to biological resources. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impact s due to conflicts with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, NCCP or other approval habits conservation plan would be less than significant. The city implements the HMP, which serves as the city’s subarea plan under the MHCP. All future development projects pursuant to the HMP are required to comply the conditions of the HMP. Therefore, implementation of the General Plan Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation Element goals and policies was determined to ensure that impacts related to conflicts with the adopted HMP would be less than significant ( City of Carlsbad 2015a).

The Project site is developed with two single-family residences and is not identified as a conservation area within the HMP. Further, the Project site and surrounding area is designated as Urban/Disturbed land within the HMP (City of Carlsbad 2004). As such, redevelopment of the Project site would not result in conflicts with the provisions of the HMP and impacts would be less than significant.

3.5 Cultural Resources
Since the previous EIR was certified, are there any changes in the project, changes in circumstances under which the project is undertaken and/or "new information of substantial importance" that cause one or more effects to cultural resources including: causing a change in the significance of a historical or archaeological resource as defined in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5; destroying a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature; and/or disturbing any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?

YES NO
T
he GP/CAP FE IR concluded a total of five properties within the city were potentially eligible for nomination to the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and seven properties were identified as potential California Historical Landmarks. The General Plan includes goals and policies to minimize or avoid impacts to historical resources by requiring the protection and preservation of such resources. Additionally, historic resources within the city are subject to the city’s Historic Preservation Ordinance (Municipal Code Title 22), which includes criteria for including resources in the city ’s historic resources inventory, historic site and landmark designation procedures, and historic district designation procedures. The City of Carlsbad Tribal, Cultural, and Paleon tological Resources Guidelines are also in place to help protect historic resources within the city (City of Carlsbad 2017). Therefore, any development pursuant to the General Plan would be required to comply with the city ’s Historic Preservation Ordinance, Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Resources Guidelines, and applicable General Plan goals and polices to ensure impacts would be less than significant (City of Carlsbad 2015a).

The Project site is currently developed with two single-family residences. Although implementation of the Project would result in demolition of the existing on -site residences. An assessment of these residences was performed to determine their eligibility for listing as historic resources. The historic architecture survey indicated that the two structures are standard 2 -x-4-inch wood-frame houses set on reinforced concrete foundations. Background research and survey work indicate that neither property is eligible on local, state, □ ~
2 1 August 2022
or federal registries. (Appendix A, Loveless Linton, Inc, April 2021) Therefore, the Project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to §15064.5 and no impact would occur.

The GP/CAP F EIR concluded impact s to ar chaeological resources would be less than significant Approximately 480 prehistoric sites were recorded in the city during the 1990 Cultural Resources Survey; therefore, there is potential for archaeological sites to be found within Carlsbad due to the existence of previously identified sites. More specifically, future development projects pursuant to the General Plan may involve grading, excavation, or other ground-disturbing activities, which could disturb or damage unknown archaeological resources. H owever, the General Plan includes goals and policies to minimize or avoid impacts to archaeological resources by requiring the protection and preservation of such resources.

Additionally, the city’s Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Resources Guidelines are also in place to help protect archeological resources within the city ( City of Carlsbad 2017). Therefore, any development pursuant to the General Plan would be required to comply with the city’s Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Resources Guidelines and applicable General Plan goals and polices to ensure impacts would be less than significant (City of Carlsbad 2015a).

Under existing conditions, the Project site is currently developed with two single-family residences. No areas on the Project site contain undisturbed land. A pedestrian survey of the project site did not reveal any cultural resources (Loveless Linton, Inc April 2021) Therefore, the likelihood that intact archeologica l resources exist on the P roject site is low due to previous site disturbance. The city’s Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Resources Guidelines also identify fully developed areas of the city as having low archeological resource sensitivity. N onetheless, as recommended in Appendix A, due to the lack of subsurface testing, it is recommended to have a qualified Archaeological Principal managing the project and a qualified archaeological monitor present. Per the City of Carlsbad Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines (Carlsbad, 2017), the project shall implement Standard Treatment 5 for construction monitoring, which requires the following:

Standard Treatment 5: Construction Monitoring
Monitoring by a qualified professional archaeologist, Native American monitor, and/or tribal representative shall only be used after reasonable and good -faith efforts, as determined by the City and through consultation, have been made to identify eligible cultural resources or significant tribal cultural resources prior to project approval. Monitoring can also be used to ensure avoidance of eligible cultural resources or significant tribal resources during ground -disturbing activities. Monitoring is appropriate in th e following circumstances (and shall follow the requirements and provisions of Section 8.2.2.4 when tribal cultural resources are involved):
• when buried archaeological or known or potential tribal cultural resources are likely in the vicinity, but their specific location is unknown
;
• w
hen ground-disturbing activities will come within 100 feet of a recorded non-tribal eligible cultural resource;
• W
hen within, or within close proximity to, a known or potential TCR; • when installing or verifying the placement and integrity of temporary exclusionary (orange barrier or silk) fencing around resources that must be avoided; and/o r

2 2 August 2022
• when “pioneering” (br eaking ground for) temporary/preliminary access roads for geotechnical trenching or boring.

M
onitoring is considered a last resort to minimizing or mitigating adverse effects and is not the default treatment for all projects. Any monitoring required must be justified and balanced by a reporting schedule.

Should the City determine that monitoring is not an appropriate mitigation, then the City, with permission from the landowner, may extend an opportunity to members of the public or consulting parties to visit the project during construction on a volunteer basis, provided that the visitors receive safety training and sign liability release waivers. The City shall not have the authority to grant property access to private property over the objections of the landowner
This recommendation is consistent with General Plan Policy 7-P.8 and 7-p.9, which state:
7-P.8 During construction of specific development projects, require monitoring of grading, ground-disturbing, and other major earthmoving activities in previously undisturbed areas or in areas with known archaeological or paleontological resources by a qualified professional, as well as a tribal monitor during activities in areas with cultural resources of interest to local Native American tribes. Both the qualified professional and tribal monitor shall observe grading, ground-disturbing, and other earth-moving activities. 7-P.9 Ensure that treatment of any cultural resources discovered during site grading complies with the City of Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidelines. Determination of the significance of the cultural resource(s) and development and implementation of any data recovery program shall be conducted in consultation with interested Native American tribes. All Native American human remains and assoc iated grave goods shall be returned to their most likely descendent and repatriated. The final disposition of artifacts not directly associated with Native American graves shall be negotiated during consultation with interested tribes; if the artifact is not accepted by Native American tribes, it shall be offered to an institution staffed by qualified professionals, as may be determined by the City Planner. Artifacts include material recovered from all phases of work, including the initial survey, testing, indexing, data recovery, and monitoring Therefore, with compliance with the General Plan, implementation of the Project would not c ause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5 .

Impacts would be less than significant.

Human remains, particularly those interred outside formal cemeteries, could be disturbed during grading, excavation, or other ground -disturbing activities associated with future development pursuant to the General Plan. However, Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 includes specific provisions for the protection of human remains in the event of discovery.

Under existing conditions, the Project site is currently developed with two single-family residences. No areas on the Project site contain undisturbed land. Therefore, the likelihood that human remains exist on the Project site is low due to previous site disturbance. Moreover, the city’s Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Resources Guidelines also identify fully developed areas of the city as having low archeological resource

2 3 August 2022
sensitivity. Therefore, implementation of the Project would not result in disturbance of any human remains, including those interred outside of dedicated cemeteries. Impacts would be less than significant.

Further, Health and Safety Code § 7050.5, CEQA Guidelines § 15064.5(e), and PRC § 5097.98 mandate the regulatory process to be followed in the unlikely event of an accidental discovery of any human remains in a location other than a dedicated cemetery. Specifically, the process is as follows:

The San Diego County Coroner must be notified within 24 hours of the discovery of potentially human remains. The Coroner must then determine within two working days of being notified if the remains are subject to his or her authority. If the Coroner recognizes the remains to be Native American, he or she must contact the NAHC by phone within 24 hours. The NAHC then designates a Most Likely Descendant (MLD) with respect to the human remains within 48 hours of notification.

The MLD will then have the opportunity to recommend to the Project proponent means for treating or disposing, with appropriate dignity, the human remains and associated grave goods within 24 hours of notification.

Although unlikely, there is the possibility of human remains being discovered during ground disturbing activities on the Project site. Project compliance with Health and Safety Code § 7050.5, CEQA Guidelines § 1
5064.5(e), and PRC § 5097.98 would ensure potential impacts to human remains would not result in any peculiar or site-specific impacts than were already identified in the GP/CAP FEIR.

3.6 Energy
Since the previous EIR was certified, are there any changes in the project, changes in circumstances under which the project is undertaken and/or "new information of substantial importance" that cause one or more effects to energy including:
resulting in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation, and/or conflicts with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency? YES NO
T
he GP/CAP FE IR concluded impact s due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary energy consumption would be less than signifi cant. Development pursuant to the General Plan would increase future energy consumption within the city, resulting in additional demand for electricity and natural gas supply and services. The General Plan contains policies to ensure energy efficient d esigns in new development and encourage energy efficiency upgrades in existing development , both of which would minimize wasteful, inefficient energy consumption. Further, all projects are required to comply with existing California Building Code (CBC), in clude Title 24 which ensures new structures achieve ever -increasing energy efficiency standards. Therefore, required compliance with Title 24 energy performance standards and General Plan energy conservation policies was determined to ensure less than sign ificant impacts in the GP/CAP FEIR (City of Carlsbad 2015a).

Construction
During construction, temporary electric power use would be required for as-necessary lighting and electronic equipment. Fuels for construction would primarily consist of diesel and gasoline, which would be consumed □
2 4 August 2022
throughout construction of the Project by construction equipment and vehicles traveling to and from the Project site. Due to the relatively small size of the Project and temporary nature of construction, energy used during construction would be minimal in comparison to regional energy consumption. Additionally, the Project would be required to CARB’s ATCMs to reduce air emissions as discussed above in Section 3.3, Air Quality. Compliance with CARB’s ATCMs would also reduce energy usage such as through limits on idling time. Finally, the construction of the project is considered previou sly accounted for in the GP/CAP FEIR because the uses are consistent with the underlying land use designation and zoning. Therefore, the Project would not result in the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources during construction. Impacts would be less than significant.

Operation
During operation, the Project would require electricity for multiple purposes including, but not limited to, building heating and cooling, lighting, appliances, refrigeration, electronics, and other uses associated with the Project’s land uses. Natural gas would not be used. Petroleum used during Project operation would primarily consist of Project residents, employees, and customers traveling to and from the Project site.

Although the Project would utilize energy during project operation, the project would be designed to maximize energy performance and would comply with Title 24 energy performance standards. More specifically, the proposed project would comply with efficiency standards regarding roofing, ceilings, and insulation; comply with wet appliance energy efficiency standards; utilize low -pollutant emitting exterior and interior finish materials, such as adhesives, sealants, caulks, paints and coatings, carpet systems, and composite wood products; and comply with energy efficiency requirements for dry appliances and lighting. Additionally, regarding petroleum, over the lifetime of the P roject, the fuel efficiency of the vehicles being used by the residents, employees, and customers is expected to increase. As such, the amount of petroleum consumed as a result of vehicular trips to and from the Project site during operation would decrease over time. Finally, the Project site is currently developed with two single-family residences which utilize energy on the Project site. Therefore, redevelopment of the Project site would result in less net energy usage than development on a vacant lot. I mplementation of the Project would not result in the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessa ry consumption of energy resources during operation. Impacts would be less than significant.

The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impact s due to conflicts with state or local plans for renewable energy or energy efficiency would be less than significant. As discussed in the GP/CAP FEIR, all future development pursuant to the General Plan would be required to comply with the latest California Building Code (CBC) requirements, including CBC Energy Efficiency Standards, as well as all federal, state, and loca l rules and regulations pertaining to energy consumption and conservation. The General Plan also includes goals and policies which emphasize citywide energy reduction strategies. Therefore, through implementation of the city’s General Plan policies , and concurrent implementation of the city’s Climate Action Plan (CAP) , the GP/CAP FEIR determined the General Plan would assist the city in meeting energy reduction goals and GHG emission reduction targets resulting in a less than significant impact related to conflicts with state or local plans for renewable energy or energy efficiency (City of Carlsbad 2015a).

The Project would comply wi th Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, which contains energy efficiency standards for residential and non -residential buildings based on a state mandate to reduce California’s energy demand. Specifically, Title 24 addresses a number of energy efficiency measures that impact energy used for lighting, water heating, heating, and air conditioning, including the energy impact of the building envelope such as windows, doors, skylights, wall/floor/ceiling assemblies, attics, and roofs.

Part 6 of Title 24 specifically establishes energy efficiency standards for residential and non -residential

2 5 August 2022
buildings constructed in the State of California in order to reduce energy demand and consumption. The Project would comply with Title 24, Part 6, per state regula tions. In addition, Title 24, Part 11, contains mandatory energy measures that are applicable to the Project under the CALGreen Code.

The Project would result in an increased demand for electricity, and petroleum. In accordance with Title 24 mandatory compliance, the Project would comply with efficiency standards regarding roofing, ceilings, and insulation; comply with wet appliance energy efficiency standards; utilize low-pollutant emitting exterior and interior finish materials, such as adhesives, sealant s, caulks, paints and coatings, carpet systems, and composite wood products; and comply with energy efficiency requirements for dry appliances and lighting.

Compliance with all of these mandatory measures would decrease the consumption of electricity and petroleum. Because the Project would comply with Title 24, no conflict with existing energy standards and regulations would occur. Impacts would be less than significant.

3.7 Geology and Soils
Since the previous EIR was certified, are there any changes in the project, changes in circumstances under which the project is undertaken and/or "new information of substantial importance" that result in one or more effects from geology and soils including: exposure of people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault, seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction, strong seismic ground shaking, or landslides; result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil; produce unstable geological conditions that will result in adverse impacts resulting from landslides, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse; being located on expansive soil creating substantial risks to life or property; and/or having soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater.

YES NO
A
preliminary geotechnical investigation was prepared for the proposed project by GeoSoils Inc. i n December 2020 and has been incorporated as Appendix B of this document. The results of the preliminary geotechnical investigation have been incorporated into the analysis below.

Seismic activity is to be expected in Southern California. However, the city is not listed as being affected by an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone (City of Carlsbad 2015a). As the Project site is located within the city, implementation of the Project would result in no impact related to rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map.

Although the Project site and city are not listed as being affected by an Alquist -Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone, the potential for seismic ground shaking still exists as the city is located within a seismically active region. The nearest known faults are the Rose Canyon and Newport-Inglewood faults, located approximately

3.8 miles west and approximately 4 miles northwest of the city’s western boundary, respectively (City of Carlsbad 2015a). Per the preliminary geotechnical investigation, the project site is subject to moderate to strong ground shaking should an earthquake occur along any of a number of the regional, Holocene-active fault systems. However, future development pursuant to the General Plan would be required to comply with the city’s Building Codes and Regulations (Municipal Code Title 18) and the most recent building design standards of the CBC, which require all structures to be designed and constructed to resist the effects of □ ~
2 6 August 2022
earthquake mo tions. In addition, the project would be required to comply with the recommendations outlined in the preliminary geotechnical investigation, such as foundation design requirements and retaining wall design parameters, which would ensure imp acts associated with seismic ground shaking would be less than significant.

The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts due to seismic related ground failure including liquefaction would be less than significant. As discussed therein, while some areas of the city have a higher risk of liquefaction due to the presence of hydric soils or soils that are often saturated o r characteristic of wetlands, most of the city has a low liquefaction risk. For all future development pursuant to the General Plan, and particularly development in areas with higher liquefaction risk, new buildings would be constructed in compliance with the city’s Building Codes and Regulations, the CBC, and the General Plan policies to reduce risk of seismic- related ground failure, inclu ding from liquefaction. According to the GP/CAP FEIR, the Project site is not located within a potential liquefaction hazard area (City of Carlsbad 2015a). The Project would also be required to comply with the city’s Building Codes and Regulations, the CBC, General Plan policies, and the recommendations of the preliminary geotechnical investigation, to reduce risk of seismic related ground failure, including from liquefaction. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts due to landslides would be less than significant. As discussed therein, landslide risk is determined by steep slopes that have 25 percent or greater incline, soil series data, and soil-slip susceptibility. The city does not include any areas identified as being susceptible to landslides and the overall risk of landslides is low. The Project site and surrounding area are relatively flat (i.e., slopes far below 25%) and not located near any hills, the susceptibility of the proposed project to significant landslide events is considered low. In addition, the Project would also be required to comply with the city’s Building Codes and Regulations, the CBC, General Plan policies , and the recommendations of the preliminary geotechnical investigation, which would also reduce risks associated with landslides. Therefore, no impact due to landslides would occur.

The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts due to substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil would be less than significant. As discussed therein, the city has the potential for erosion from water, wind, and agricultural/development tillage, as well as coastal erosion from storms an d rising sea-levels. However, future development pursuant to the General Plan would be required to comply with the city ’s Grading Ordinance (Municipal Code Chapter 15.16), which establishes minimum requirements for grading , including the requirement to obtain a grad ing permit. The grading permit requires a stormwater maintenance program, construction stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP), and other such documentation and information as may be necessary to demonstrate that the grading work will be carried out i n substantial compliance with all city codes and standards, and the requirements of the city’s Landscape Manual. The city also has a designated Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone where additional protection efforts are necessary. Through compliance with city regulations, codes, and ordinances, impacts related to soil erosion or the loss of topsoil were determined to be less than significant (City of Carlsbad 2015a).

The Project site is located on disturbed land that is currently devel oped with two single-family residences and is not located within the city ’s Coastal Zone (City of Carlsbad 2019). Soil erosion and/or the loss of topsoil would be likely to occur when soil is exposed during construction activities. Wind and water are the two main methods of erosion, and human activities that remove vegetation or otherwise disturb soil are the biggest influence on erosion potential. Per the preliminary geotechnical investigation, soils present at the project site are considered erosive. However, the proposed project would be required to comply with

2 7 August 2022
the recommendations outlined in the preliminary geotechnical investigation, which includes temporary erosion control measures and design of site drainage to eliminate the potential of concentrated flows along the ground surface (Appendix B). Further, the Project would be required to obtain a grading permit , and comply with subsequent grading requirements , which would reduce soil erosion during construction. The Project would require submittal of a SWPPP for review and approval by city staff. The SWPPP describes the erosion and sediment control Best Manageme nt Practices ( BMPs) to be used during the construction phase. Thus, impacts would be less than significant.

The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts to geologic units being unstable would be less than significant. As discussed therein, the city does not include any areas identified as being susceptible to landslides, and the overall risk of landslides is low. Subsidence risk is also low in the County due to the prevalence of granitic soils. Although some areas of the city have higher risk of liquefaction, liquefaction risk is considered low in most of the city. Future development pursuant to the General Plan would be required to comply with the city’s Grading Ordinance , which requires a geotechnical i nvestigation as part of the grading permit application process that would identify potential hazards and provide recommendations consistent with city standards (City of Carlsbad 2015a).

The Project site and surrounding area are relatively flat and not located near any hills. Thus, per the preliminary geotechnical investigation , potential landslide impacts are considered low . Additionally, the Project site is not located in a potential liquefaction hazard area as identified by the GP/CAP FEIR (City of Carlsbad 2015a) and the preliminary geotechnical investigation indicated that potential for liquefaction on- site is relatively low. The Project site is also not located in an area of subsidence risk.

Consistent with the determination in the GP/CAP FEIR, t he Project would be required to obtain a grading permit, which requires a geotechnical investigation as part of the grading permit application process that would identify potential hazards and provide recommendations consistent with city standards. Per the preliminary geotechnical investigation, undocumented artificial fill is present on-site. In addition, perched groundwater was encountered on-site, which could result in geotechnical hazards. However, the proposed project would be required to comply wi th the recommendations outlined in the preliminary geotechnical investigation to address potential soil hazards associated with artificial fill and perched groundwater on - site. More specifically, artificial fill would be removed to expose the underlying we athered old paralic deposits, and then be reused as compacted fills in accordance with the recommendations of the geotechnical investigation. To address potential issues associated with perched groundwater , recommendations in the geotechnical investigation include installation of concrete cut -off barriers or vertically installed impermeable membranes along the perimeter of the project’s driveway; placement of a subgrade enhancement geotextile (SEG) atop the driveway subgrade ; i ncreased fill compaction to 95 percent of the laboratory standard (per ASTM D 1557); deepening footings to extend at least 1 foot below the pavement subgrade ; and implementation of low permeability concrete is in the construction of the building foundations and slab-on-grade floor. Therefore, compliance with grading permit requirements and the recommendations outlined in the preliminary geotechnical investigation would ensure impacts would be less than significant.

The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts due to expansive soils would be less than significant. As discussed therein, most of the soils in the city have low shrink-swell potential. However, future projects pursuant to the General Plan may be located on expansive soils. Compliance with the city’s Grading Ordinance, which requires a geotechnical investigation as part of the grading permit application process that would identify potential hazards and provide recommendations consistent with city standards, was determined to ensure

2 8 August 2022
impacts associated with expansive soils would be less than significant (City of Carlsbad 2015a). Consistent with the determination of the GP/CAP FEIR, the Project would be required to comply with the city’s Grading Ordinance, and subsequent grading permit requirements , which would reduce risks to life and property associated with expansive soils. Additionally, the Project would be required to comply with the CBC including Title 24. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

Finally, the Project would connect to the existing sewer system and does not propose use of septic tanks.

Therefore, no impact due to the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems would occur.

The GP/CAP F EIR concluded impact s to paleontological resources would be less th an significant. As discussed therein, geologic formations in the city are primarily the Lusardi Formation of the Cretaceous Age as well as the Santiago Formation and Del Mar Formation of the Tertiary Age that overlie the Lusardi Formation. These formations are known to produce significant fossils or have the potential to contain fossils. Therefore, future development pursuant to the General Plan could result in direct or indirect impacts to paleontological resources, and specifically during grading, excavation, and ground-disturbing activities.

However, the majority of development anticipa ted pursuant to the General Plan, such as the proposed project, would involve redevelopment of or new development within existing developed areas. Compliance with the General Plan policies would minimize or avoid impacts to paleontological resources, in addition to subsequent measures to be implemented as applicable (City of Carlsbad 2015a).

Under existing conditions, the Project site is currently developed with two single-family residences. No areas on the Project site contain undisturbed land. Therefore, the likelihood that intact paleontological resources exist on the Project site is low due to previous site disturbance. Further, the project includes a total of approximately 200 cubic yards of cut, which is a small amount of excavation and not likely to e ncounter depths that were not disturbed by previous grading and development activity. Nonetheless, as recommended in Appendix A, due to the lack of paleontological evaluation within the high sensitivity area, it is recommended to consult with and conduct a record search with the San Diego Natural History Museum prior to all earth-moving activities within the project area. This recommendation is consistent with General Plan Policy 7-P.8, which states:
7-P.8 During construction of specific development proje cts, require monitoring of grading, ground-disturbing, and other major earthmoving activities in previously undisturbed areas or in areas with known archaeological or paleontological resources by a qualified professional, as well as a tribal monitor during activities in areas with cultural resources of interest to local Native American tribes. Both the qualified professional and tribal monitor shall observe grading, ground-disturbing, and other earth-moving activities.

Therefore, with compliance with the Ge neral Plan Policy 7 -P.8, implementation of the Project would not directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature . Impacts would be less than significant.

3.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Since the previous EIR was certified, are there any changes in the project, changes in circumstances under which the project is undertaken and/or "new information of substantial importance" that result in one or more new significant effects or a substantial increase in the sev erity of previously identified significant

2 9 August 2022
effects associated with greenhouse gas emissions or compliance with applicable plans, policies or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing greenhouse gas emissions? YES NO
T
he GP/CAP FE IR concluded impacts due to the generation of greenhouse gas emissions that may have a significant effect on the environment would be less than significant. The city prepared its CAP in September 2015, which was subsequently revised and updated in May 2020. city A CAP Consistency Che cklist was prepared for the proposed project by Rincon Consultants, Inc in January 2021 and incorporated as Appendix C of this document. Per the CAP Consistency Checklist, the proposed project would be consistent with the city’s CAP, through implementation of features such as light emitting diode (LED) lighting in outdoor areas; not exceeding 90 percent of the energy budget per Title 24, Part 6, Energy Budget for the Standard Design Building; implementation of on -site photovoltaic systems; use of steel framing for the non- residential component of the project; installation of water heating systems that meet the criteria outlined in city Ordinances CS-348 and CS-347 and Sections 150.1(c)8A and 120.11 of the California Energy Code; installation of an electric vehicle charging system (Level II) in each residential garage and one electric vehicle charging system (Level II) for employee parking (Appendix C). Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts t o conflicts with applicable plans, policies or regulations adopted for reducing GHG emissions would be less than significant. Through implementation of city policies as delineated in the proposed General Plan, and implementation of the CAP, the proposed General Plan would support the 2009 San Diego RES renewable energy goals and the CARB passenger vehicle GHG emissions reduction targets through measures that would reduce vehicle miles traveled (VMT) throughout the city.

Additionally, CARB’s LCFS, which aims to reduce the carbon intensity of the life-cycle of gasoline and diesel fuels by 10 percent by 2020, would further assist in meeting energy reduction goals and GHG emission reduction targets.

As discussed above, the proposed project would be consistent with the city’s CAP. In addition, the project would be consistent with the zoning and land use designation of the project site. Therefore, GHG emissions associated with the project have been accounted for in existing documents, including the city’s CAP. Lastly, the project would comply with all applicable regulations to the extent required by law and would implement General Plan policies aimed towards reducing GHG emission. Therefore, the project would not generate conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs. Impacts would be less than significant.

3.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Since the previous EIR was certified, are there any changes in the project, changes in circumstances under which the project is undertaken and/or "new information of substantial importance" that res ult in one or more effects from hazards and hazardous materials including: creation of a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, storage, use, or disposal of hazardous materials or wastes; creation of a significan t hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment; □ ~
-
-
3 0 August 2022
production of hazardous emissions or handling hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school; location on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 creating a hazard to the public or the environment; location within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport; within the vicinity of a private airstrip resulting in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area; impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan; and/or exposure of people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? YES NO
T
he GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts due to the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials would be less than significant. Future development pursuant to the General Plan would potentially include land uses that would require the routine use, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials and waste within the city . Future construction activities associated with development pursuant to the General Plan may also generate hazardous materials and waste, such as fuels and oils from construction equipment and vehicles. However, th e transport, storage, use, and disposal of hazardous materials and wastes is extensively regulated by federal, state, and local policies , which provide a high level of protection to the public. Regulations associated with using, transporting, or disposing of hazardous materials include Resource Conversion and Recovery Act (RCRA), the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act, the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act, California Health and Safety Code, CCR Title 22, CCR Title 27, SB 1889, and the Consolidated Fire Code. The city continues to maintain permitting requirements, as administered by the County of San Diego’s DEH requirements, for all land uses that handle, store, or generate hazardous waste. Compliance with General Plan policies and federal and state regulations was determined to ensure impacts associated with the routine use, transp ort, and disposal of hazardous materials would be less than significant (City of Carlsbad 2015a).

The Project would involve demolition of the two existing single -family residences onsite and development of four condominiums, a professional office, and associated parking. Construction of the Project would involve the transport of commonly used hazardous substances, such as gasoline, diesel fuel, lubricating oil, grease, and solvents. However, as previously described, hazardous materials are highly regula ted in California, including the methods by which they are transported, used, and stored. All such uses of these substances would be subject to applicable and required regulatory controls . Additionally, construction is temporary and use of these materials would cease upon completion. The use of these materials for their intended purpose would not pose a significant risk to the public or environment. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant during construction.

During Project operation, the transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials would be limited to consumer products such as household cleaning products, landscaping chemicals and fertilizers, and other substances associated with household and office uses, similar to the existing land uses. However, as previously described, hazardous materials are highly regulated in California, including the methods by which they are transported, used, and stored. All such uses of these substances would be subject to applicable and required regulatory controls. Additionally, transport, use, and disposal of consumer product by future project occupants would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment as these are regularly used and typically obtained in small quantities. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. □ ~
3 1 August 2022
The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts due to upset or accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment would be less than significant. As discussed therein, future development pursuant to th e General Plan could involve the use, transportation, disposal, and storage of hazardous materials in the city. Accordingly, accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment could occur. However, the County DEH, Hazardous Material Division is the designated Certified Unified Program Agency ( CUPA) for the County. With proper implementation of CUPA programs, in conjunction with other state and federal regulations, impacts of reasonably foreseeable accidents and/or upset conditions involving the release of hazardous materials were determined to be less than significant (City of Carlsbad 2015a).

Construction of the Project would result in the transport of commonly used hazardous substances, such as gasoline, diesel fuel, lubricating oil, grease, and solvents. However, hazardous materials are highly regulated in California, including the methods by which they are transported, used, and stored. Compliance with applicable regulations would reduce potential for reasonably foreseeable upset and accident of such hazardous substances during construction. Additionally, construction is temporar y and use of these materials would cease upon completion.

Once Project construction is complete, the transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials would be limited to consumer products such as household cleaning products, landscaping chemicals and fertilizers, and other substances associated with household and office uses. Furthermore, all hazardous materials would be transported and handled in accordance with all federal, state, and local laws regulating the management and use of hazardous materials, reducing the potential for reasonably foreseeable upset and accident of such hazardous substances during construction. Additionally, potential upset and accident conditions from consumer products used by future project occupants would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment as these are regularly used products and typically obtained in small quantities. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

The GP/CAP F EIR concluded impact s due to emissions or handling of hazardous mate rials within one quarter mile of an existing or proposed school would be less than significant. As discussed therein, future development could result in the handling of hazardous materials or generation of hazardous emissions within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. However, individual users of hazardous materials would continue to be regulated by local disclosure, permitting, and notification requirements of the “Disclosure of Hazardous Materials” program consistent with all federal, state, and local laws. Additionally, the General Plan encourages compatibility of adjacent land uses, which would limit the ability for users of substantial amounts of hazardous materials, such as industrial uses, from operating near a school (City of Carlsbad 2015a). The Project site is located approximately 0. 45 miles southwest of the near est school (Buena Vista Elementary School). Therefore, the Project would not emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of a school.

Impacts would be less than significant.

The GP/CAP F EIR concluded impact s due to projects included on the Cortese list that could create a significant hazards to the public or the environment would be less than significant. As discussed therein, there are a number of sites in the city that are i ncluded on a list of hazardous material sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 or that need further investigation . However, the General Plan contains policies designed to lessen the impact of sites contaminated with hazardous materials.

Therefore, implementation of General Plan policies was determined to ensure the impact of posing a significant hazard to the public or environment through a project’s location on a site included on a list of

3 2 August 2022
hazardous material sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 would be less than significant. The Project site is not contained on any lists compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 or on the California DTSC (EnviroStor) and State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) (GeoTracker) databases for contaminated sites (DTSC 2021; SWRCB 2021). Therefore, no impact would occur.

The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts due to project located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport would be less than significant. As discussed in the GP/CAP FEIR, the General Plan guides future development to be consistent with the land use compatibility policies of the McClellan - Palomar Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP). The city also requires review of all proposed development projects within the Airport Influence Area (AIA) to ensure consistency with the ALUCP (City of Carlsbad 2015a). The Project site is located approximately 4.25 miles northwest of the McClellan-Palomar Airport and is not within the AIA. Therefore, the Project would not result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the Project area and no impact would occur.

The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts to emergency response and evacuation plans would be less than significant. As discussed therein, the city has adopted the City of Carlsbad Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) prepared in conjunction with the Unified San Diego County Emergency Services Orga nization.

Although future development pursuant to the General Plan could affect implementation of the city’s EOP, implementation of General Plan policies and required compliance with the city ’s EOP was determined to ensure impacts would be less than significant (City of Carlsbad 2015a).

The Project would result in development of 4 condominiums, a professional office, and associated parking on an infill site. During Project construction, a temporary, slight increase in traffic on roadways surrounding the Project site may occur due to increased truck loads or the transport of construction equipment to and from the Project site during demolition of the existing single-family residences and construction of the Project. However, all construction activi ties including staging would occur in accordance with city requirements, which would ensure that adequate emergency access to the Project site in the event of an emergency or evacuation order would be provided during construction of the Project. Additionally, as discussed in Section 3.17, the Project would result in the net addition of 25 average daily trips (ADT) during Project operation, which is minimal and would not be expected to interfere with emergency response or evacuation. This anticipated increase is consistent with the General Plan. Therefore, the Project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response or emergency evacuation plan, including the city’s EOP. Impacts would be less than significant.

The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts due to exposure of people and structures to wildland fires would be less than significant. Due to natural vegetation areas located within and adjacent to the city, the city is a medium fire hazard area for wildland fires which threaten both developed and undeveloped property, primarily in the eastern portion of the city. However, much of the new development pursuant to the General Plan would replace existing structures built before modern building codes for fire safety and building systems were in place. Thus, projected buildout would replace older facilities with newer facilities that would comply with modern building code requirements, including Chapter 9 (Fire Protection Systems) of the California Building Code, which requires such improvements as fire sprinkler systems and fire alarms. In addition, urban wildland fire risk will be reduced through the adoption of the Uniform Fire Code implemented by the city, which states all portions of a building shall be within 150 feet of a serviceable fire access road. In addition, the Carlsbad Fire Department provides adequate service to city residents in the event of fire hazards in wildlands and urban areas. Lastly, General Plan Policies 6 -P.33 and 6-P.35 would

3 3 August 2022
reduce potential impacts associated with the risk of loss, injury, or death involving wild land fires ( City of Carlsbad 2015).

The Project site is not located within a fire hazard severity zone. A “moderate” threat fire hazard severity zone is located approximately 700 feet north of the Project site (City of Carlsbad 2015a). Nonetheless, due to distance of this area and intervening development, the Project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized a reas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands. In addition, the Project would be required to comply with existing regulations, such as the Uniform Fire Code and the California Building Code, to prevent the spread of wildfire, and would implement G eneral Plan Policies 6 -P.33 and 6 -P.35, directed to reduce impacts associated with wildfire. Therefore, the P roject would not expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fir es.

Impacts would be less than significant.

3.10 Hydrology and Water Quality
Since the previous EIR was certified, are there any changes in the project, changes in circumstances under which the project is undertaken and/or "new information of substantial importance" that cause one or more effects to hydrology and water quality including: violation of any waste discharge requirements; an increase in any listed pollutant to an impaired water body listed under section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act; cause or contribute to an exceedance of applicable surface or groundwater receiving water quality objectives or degradation of beneficial uses; substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level; substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area in a manner which would result in substantial erosion, siltation or flooding on- or off-site; create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems; provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff; place housing or other structures which would impede or redirect flood flows within a 100-year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map, including County Floodplain Maps; expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss , injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam; and/or inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? YES NO
T
he GP/CAP FE IR concluded that impacts to surface or ground water quality would be less than significant.

Water quality standards and waste discharge requirements set out in Municipal Permit Order No. Order R9- 2015-0100 (MS4 Permit) , National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES ) Permit No.

CAS0109266, issued by the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). As NPDES Permit CAS0100266 is based on the federal Clean Water Act, the Porter –Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Division 7 of the Water Code, commencing with Section 13000), applicable state and federal regulations, all applicable provisions of statewide water quality control plans and policies adopted by the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB), the Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin adopted by the RWQCB, the California Toxics Rule, the SIP , and NPDES compliance would ensure compliance with other applicable plans and regulations pertaining to water quality. The General Plan would allow for additional development within the city that would increase the amount of impervious surfaces and could theref ore □ ~
3 4 August 2022
increase the amount of runoff and associated pollutants during both construction and operation. However, the city’s Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) Manual, included as Volume 4 of the city’s Engineering Standards, requires every construction activity within the city that has the potential to negatively affect water quality to prepare a construction ( SWPPP). The SWPPP requirements ensure compliance with the City of Carlsbad Stormwater Ordinance and the Municipal Permit. Projects that would result in the disturbance of one acre or more of land or would create more than 5,000 square feet of impervious surfaces are subject to the post-construction priority development project requirements in the city’s SWPPP Manual and must prepare a storm water management plan in conformance with city standards. Projects that are limited to trenching and resurfacing associated with utility work that do not disturb more than one acre are subject to the post -construction standard storm water requirements.

Standard storm water requirements are located in Volume 4 and Volume 5 of the city ’s Engineering Standards. The SWPPP accommodates the requirements of the city ’s NPDES Permit, thereby ensuring NPDES compliance.

In addition, the GP/CAP FEIR determined that the General Plan incorporates various goals and policies pertaining to water quality and promote the protection of the city’s natural water bodies, prevent water pollution from agricultural run-off and other sources, ensure preparation and implementation of applicable water quality plans, require incorporation of BMPs, and otherwise ensure compliance with the city’s NPDES Permit and other related regulations. These goals and policies include Goal 4-G-12, Policy 5-P.56, 4-P.57, 4- P.58, 4-P.59, 4-P.60, 4-P.61, 4-P.62, 4-P.63, 4-P.64. Overall, the GP/CAP FEIR concluded that the General Plan policies would promote improved water quality in the city and continued compliance with federal, state, and local water quality regulations, and would ensure that water quality is protected to the maximum extent practicable. Therefore, implementation of the General Plan and the city’s SWPPP ensures that impacts to hydrology and water quality are less than significant (City of Carlsbad 2015).

The proposed project would result in disturbance of approximately 0.32 acres, including creating 0.16 acres of new impervious surface. The city’s Engineering Standards requires every construction activity within the city that has the potential to negatively affect water quality to prepare a construction SWPPP. Therefore, the proposed project would be required to prepare a SWPPP prior to construction and comply with the SWPPP requirements to ensure construction runoff was property treated.

Projects that do not disturb more than one acre are subject to the post-construction standard storm water requirements. In addition, projects must meet, at a minimum, standard storm water requirements, including LID requirements . T o address post -development pollutants that may be generated from the proposed projects, Form E-34, Stormwater Standards Questionnaire and E -36, Standard Project Requirement Checklist were prepared for the proposed, which incorporates Permanent Storm Water Best Management Practices (BMPs) into the project design per the City of Carlsbad BMP Design Manual. The E- 34 Stormwater Standards Questionnaire and E -36 Standard Project Requirement Checklist have been incorporated as Appendix D.

Per the E-34 Stormwater Standards Questionnaire, the proposed project is a standard project and is subject to Standard Project subject to Trash Capture Req uirements and must comply with Trash Capture Requirements of the Carlsbad BMP Design Manual , and would also be required to incorporate LID strategies. The project would implement the following LID strategies per Form E-36:
• Sidewalk and walkways would direct runoff to pervious areas

3 5 August 2022
• Parking areas/lots, driveways and patios/decks/courtyards would be constructed of permeable materials,
• Rooftops would install BMPs to direct runoff to impervious areas • Sustainable landscaping would be installed; and
• Trash and refuse storage would have overhead covering and wind protection The proposed project would be required to comply with all existing regulations related to water quality, including NPDES Permit No. CAS0109266. Lastly, the proposed project would comply with existing General Plan policies, including Goal 4-G-12, Policy 5-P.56, 4-P.57, 4-P.58, 4-P.59, 4-P.60, 4-P.61, 4-P.62, 4-P.63, 4-P.64, implemented to promote water quality. Therefore, the project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality. Impacts would be less than significant.

The GP/CAP EIR concluded impacts to groundwater would be less than significant. The only groundwater basin located within the city is the Batiquitos Lagoon Valley Groundwater Basin. The groundwater in this basin is not considered a good source of irrigation or municipal use due to the high content of chloride, sulfate, and total dissolved solids. The primary purveyor of water for the city is the Carlsbad Municipal Water District (CMWD), which currently does not utilize any local groundwater or surface water supplies to serve the city.

The city’s Storm Water Standards Manual contains numerous goals and policies to prevent stormwater pollution that could affect groundwater quality. In addition, various General Plan policies, including 9-P.5 and 9-P.6, would help to reduce water usage and future demands for groundwater. Overall, impacts on groundwater associated with the General Plan were determined to be less than significant ( City of Carlsbad 2015).

The Project would not propose groundwater extraction during construction or operational activities. Because the proposed would be consistent with the zoning and General Plan land use designation of the project site, the project has been accounted for in the projected growth of the city and as such would not result in a significant increase of water of groundwater use in the city. In addition, the proposed project would result in redevelopment of the project site, and therefore would not introduce a substantial increase in impervious surfaces, that could result in significant impacts to groundwater recharge. Additionally, the project would adhere to General Plan goals and policies that are aligned with sustainable groundwater management, as well as existing regulations, such as the city ’s SWPPP, to prevent stormwater pollution that could affect groundwater quality. Therefore, the project would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwate r management of the basin. Impacts would be less than significant.

The GP/CAP EIR concluded impacts due to the alteration of existing drainage patterns that would either result in substantial erosion or siltation, or a substantial increase in the rate or amount of runoff would be less than significant. Increases to impervious surfaces, such as roofs, patios, driveways, and parking areas would lead to increased stormwater flow. An increase in runoff volumes could result in hydromodification effects to the creek systems within the city, which occur when rainfall runoff is increased from impervious areas above the natural rainfall rate that would otherwise occur. However, any development that would occur under the General Plan would be subject to the erosion and runoff control provisions contained in the city’s SWPPP, Jurisdictional Runoff Management Plan (JRMP) and the city’s Grading and Drainage Ordinances. Specific development occurring during buildout of the General Plan would also comply with flood damage prevention measures

3 6 August 2022
contained in Chapter 21.110 of the city’s Municipal Code. These measures restrict de velopment in areas of special flood hazards and control erosion, which would in turn limit and control the alteration of existing drainage patterns. Adherence to local regulations would ensure that, in the course of development under the General Plan, watercourses and drainage patterns would not be altered in a manner that would significantly increase the rate or amount of either runoff or erosion, thereby causing on- or off-site flooding.

In addition, the General Plan goals and policies, including 4 -P.56, 4-P.57, and 4 -P.63, are intended to preserve natural watercourses or naturalized drainage channels, and to ensure future development incorporates BMPs to reduce runoff from a site. For these reasons, erosion and siltation impacts associated with the General Plan would be less than significant (City of Carlsbad 2015).

The proposed project would be subject to existing regulations, including the erosion and runoff control provisions contained in the city ’s SWPPP, JRMP, the city’s Grading and Drainage Ordinances , and flood damage prevention measures contained in Chapter 21.110 of the city’s Municipal Code. In addition, the project would include redevelopment of the project site, which is surrounded by development an all sides; as such, the development of the Project would not cause a significant change to surface bodies of water in a manner that could cause siltation or erosion, thereby causing on- or off-site flooding. Upon completion of construction, the project would result in a slight increase of impervious areas on-site; thus, the project would reduce potential erosion or siltation from occurring on the site. In addition, the proposed project would be required to comply with the recommendations outlined in the preliminary geotechnical investigation, which includes temporary erosion control measures and design of site drainage to eliminate the potential of concentrated flows along the ground surface (Appendix B). Lastly, the pro ject would implement General Plan goals and policies, includ ing 4-P.56, 4-P.57, and 4 -P.63, which are intended to preserve natural watercourses or naturalized drainage channels, and to ensure future development incorporates BMPs to reduce runoff from a site. Therefore, the project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off site. Impacts would be less than significant.

The GP/CAP EIR concluded impacts due to runoff which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff would be less than significant. Future development/redevelopment allowed under the General Plan could impact the existing drainage system. Increases to impervious surfaces, such as roofs, patios, driveways, and parking areas would lead to increased stormwater flow. However, the City of Carlsbad’s Grading and Drainage Ordinances and SWPPP Manual ensure compliance with NPDES permit requirements, as well as with applicable state and federal laws. Additionally, every construction activity within the city that has the potential to negatively affect water quality must prepare a construction SWPPP. The SWPPP requirements in the SWPPP Manual ensure compliance with the Carlsbad Grading and Drainage Ordinance. Projects that would result in the disturbance of one acre or more of land or would create more than 5,000 square feet of impervious surfaces are subject to the post-construction priority development project requirements in the city’s SWPPP Manual and must prepare a SWPPP. Projects that are limited to trenching and resurfacing associated with utility work that do not disturb more than one acre are subject to the post-construction standard storm water requirements.

Furthermore, the proposed General Plan, which would guide development in the city over the next 20 years, contains goals and policies pertaining to water quality, including Goal 4-G.12 and Policies 4-P.48 and 4-P.56, through 4-P.63. The proposed goals and policies promote the protection of the city’s natural water bodies, prevent water pollution from agricultural run-off and other sources, ensure preparation and implementation of applicable water quality plans, require incorporation of BMPs, and otherwise ensure compliance with the

3 7 August 2022
city’s NPDES Permit and other related regulations. Overall, the proposed General Plan goals and policies would promote improved water quality in the city and continued compliance with federal, state, and local water quality regulations, and would ensure that water quality is protected to the maximum extent practicable.

Compliance with the city’s current regulations and the General Plan policies such as Goal 4-G.12 and Policies 4-P.48 and 4-P.56, through 4-P.63 would ensure that the runoff as a result of future development under the General Plan would not exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm drain systems or generate substantial pollutant runoff. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant (City of Carlsbad 2015).

During construction, the proposed project would be required to prepare a SWPPP to ensure the project does not negatively affect water quality. In addition, the project would result in a slight increase of impervious areas on-site. However, the proposed project would be required to implement BMPs and LID requirements in order to reduce the volume of runoff from impervious surfaces and increase the amount of natural filtration of pollutants from storm water occurring on site. All runoff generated by the project would discharge into the city’s storm drain system. Lastly, the project would implement General Plan goals and policies, to ensure the Project would not exceed the capacity of drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. Therefore, through compliance with existing regulations, the project would not create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. Impacts would be less than significant.

The GP/CAP EIR concluded impact s due to impeding or redirecting flood flows would be less than significant. The city requires a special use permit for any development proposed in areas of special flood hazards and areas of flood -related erosion hazards (Municipal Code Chapter 21.110). The Floodplain Management Regulations restrict or prohibit land uses considered unsafe in a floodplain. Developments that are not subject to the Floodplain Management Regulations are also reviewed by the City of Carlsbad Land Development Engineering Division for flooding potential. Proposed grading and drainage improvements are analyzed to ensure that drainage is not diverted from its natural drainage basin to another basin that was not designed to take that additional flow. In addition, General Plan goal and policies such as Goal 6 -G.1 and Policies 6 -P.4 through 6-P.11 would further reduce any potential impacts associated with structures located within flood hazard areas. Therefore, compliance with the city ’s regulations regarding building within flood hazard areas and General Plan policies, would ensure that flood impacts associated with the General Plan would be less than significant (City of Carlsbad 2015).

As shown in Figure 3.8-1 of the GP/CAP EIR, the proposed project would not be located within a 100-year floodway or floodplain of a 500 -year floodplain (City of Carlsbad 2015). In addition, as discussed above, the project has been reviewed by the City of Carlsbad Land Development Engineering Division for flooding potential. Therefore, the project would not impede or redirect flood flows, and impacts would be less than significant.

The GP/CAP EIR concluded impact s due to the release of pollutants due to project inundation in flood hazard, tsunami and seiche zones would be less than significant. Figure 3.8-1 of the GP/CAP EIR, show Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)-designated 100-year and 500 -year flood hazard zones within the city (City of Carlsbad 2015). The city requires a special use permit for any development proposed in areas of special flood hazards and areas of flood -related erosion hazards (Municipal Code Chapter

21.110). Developments that are not subject to the Floodplain Management Regulations are also reviewed by the City of Carlsbad Land Development Engineering Division for flooding potential. As shown in Figure

3.8-3 or the GP/CAP EIR, the only areas identified within the city as having risk for tsunami run-up are the immediate vicinity of the Buena Vista, Agua Hedionda, and Batiquitos L agoons. Seiches are defined as

3 8 August 2022
wave-like oscillatory movements in enclosed or semi-enclosed bodies of water such as lakes of reservoirs.

Potential effects from seiches include flooding damage and related hazards in surrounding areas from spilling or sloshing waves, as well as increased pressure on containment structures. The County of San Diego maps zones of high risk for dam inundation throughout the county. The high -risk areas are located east of the Agua Hedionda and Batiquitos Lagoons (City of Carlsbad 2015).

Per Figure 3.8-3 of the city’s GP/CAP EIR, the project would not be located within a tsunami projected runup zone (City of Carlsbad 2015). In addition, the project is not located east of the Agua Hedionda and Batiquitos Lagoons and is not adjacent to the ocean. Therefore, potential for seiche is not considered high in the vicinity of the project site. Therefore, the project is not located in flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, and would not the risk release of pollutants due to project inundation. Impacts would be less than significant.

Since the adoption of the GP/CAP FEIR in 2015, the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Environment Checklist was updated to include conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater m anagement plan as an additional threshold to be analyzed. Therefore, this threshold was not previously explicitly analyzed in the GP/CAP FEIR. However, the GP/CAP EIR determined impacts associated with water quality and groundwater management be less than significant (see Thresholds a and b, above, respectively).

The proposed project would comply with all applicable provisions of statewide water quality control plans and policies adopted by the SWRCB, the Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin adopted by the RWQCB, the California Toxics Rule, the SIP , and NPDES compliance would ensure compliance with other applicable plans and regulations pertaining to water quality. In addition, the only groundwater basin within the city is the Batiquitos Lagoon Valley Groundwater Basin. The groundwater in this basin is not considered a good source of irrigation or municipal use due to the high content of chloride, sulfate, and total dissolved solids. The Batiquitos Lagoon Valley Groundwater Basin is considered a very low priority basin and therefore implementation of a or sustainable groundwater management plan is not required (Department of Water Resources 2019).

3.11 Land Use and Planning
Since the previous EIR was certified, are there any changes in the project, changes in circumstances under which the project is undertaken and/or "new information of substantial importance" that cause one or more effects to land use and planning including: physically dividing an established community; and/or conflicts with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? YES NO
T
he GP/CAP FEIR concluded there to be no impact due to the physical division of an establish community.

Implementation of the General Plan was determined to improve connectivity within and between existing neighborhoods and provide more linkages within the city and the region (City of Carlsbad 2015a).

The Project would result in development of 4 condominiums, a professional office, and associated parking on an infill site within an established community as contemplated by the General Plan. While the project □ ~
3 9 August 2022
would include a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change, these actions would not result in development that would be inconsistent with the underlying planned and permitted uses, would not introduce different uses to an area, and would not divide the community. Impacts would be less than significant.

The GP/CAP FEIR determined no impact to result from the division of an established community . As the Project would hav e no impact for the reasons detailed above, the Project would be consistent with the analysis provided within the GP/CAP FEIR because it would not result in project-specific peculiar impacts not identified within the GP/CAP FEIR.

The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts due to conflicts with land use plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect would be less than si gnificant. A s discussed in the GP/CAP FEIR, the General Plan was determined not to conflict with any other agencies’ applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect, and the pr eparation of amendments to other city policies and regulations where required was incorporated into the General Plan (City of Carlsbad 2015a).

The Project site is designated as R -15 (Residential) and R-15/O (Residential and Office) and zoned RD-M (Residential Density-Multiple Zone) and R -P-Q (Residential Professional – Qualified Development Overlay Zone). The proposed uses would comply with the existing zoning and land use designations on the Project site; however, the Project would include a Tentative Tract Map, Zone Change, and General Plan Amendment for land use re-designation to allow for the construction of four residential air-space condominiums and an office use. The Tentative Tract Map will consolidate two lots and subdivide the project site fo r residential air-space and commercial condominiums. To avoid a split zone development, the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change are proposed to change the land use designation to R —15/O and the zone to R -P-Q to allow both multi -family residential and of fice on one lot . However, it is noted that the proposed uses are consistent with the intensity and density allowed under the existing zoning and land use designations of the Project site. Upon approval, the Project would be consistent with the city ’s Zoning Ordinance and General Plan and would be compatible with surrounding development including the residential and office uses in the immediate vicinity. The Project would be constructed pursuant to development standards contained in the Zoning Ordinance, including building setbacks, building heights, lot coverage, land uses, grading, and parking. Finally, as discussed throughout this Checklist, the Project would not result in any significant and unavoidable environmental impacts. Thus, because the Project would not result in any environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect, impacts would be less than significant.

3.12 Mineral Resources
Since the previous EIR was certified, are there any changes in the project, changes in circumstances under which the project is undertaken and/or "new information of substantial importance" that cause one or more effects to mineral resources including: the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state; and/or loss of locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? YES NO
□ ~
4 0 August 2022
The GP/CAP F EIR concluded there to be no impact s due to the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and residents of the state or the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan. As discussed therein, no mineral resources of economic value to the region and the residents of the state have been identified in the city. Additionally, the city has not been delineated as a locally important mineral recovery site (City of Carlsbad 2015a). The Project would result in development of 4 condominiums, a professional office, and associated parking on an infill site within the city. No impact would occur.

3.13 Noise
Since the previous EIR was certified, are there any changes in the project, changes in circumstances under which the project is undertaken and/or "new information of substantial importance" that result in one or more effects from noise including: exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies; exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne n oise levels; a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project; a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing with out the project; for projects located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, or for projects within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expos e people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
YES NO
T
he GP/CAP FE IR concluded impacts due substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels would be less than significant. As discussed therein, noise sources associated with implementation of the General Plan include temporary construction noise mainly generated by on-site construction equipment and the transportation of equipment, materials, and workers to and from construction sites, and permanent noise associated with traffic from new development and increased land use intensity. Regarding temporary construction noise, the GP/CAP FEIR, concluded compliance with the city’s Noise Ordinance and General Plan Noise Element goals and policies would reduce noise levels from construction traffic and activities to less than significant levels. Additionally, future development pursuant to the General Plan would undergo environmental review for individual projects, where additional mitigation would be implemented as required to maintain less than significant noise levels from construction (City of Carlsbad 2015a).

Construction
The city’s Noise Ordinance exempts noise sources as sociated with construction activities from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. , Monday through Friday, and from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays. Typical noise limitations apply on Sundays and federal holidays. In accordance with the city’s Noise Ordinance, construction of the Project would occur during the permissible hours , and the amount and type of construction would be consistent with the amount of construction anticipated in the General Plan .

Therefore, noise associated with construction of the Project would be less than significant.

Operation
□ ~
4 1 August 2022
Regarding permanent noise from traffic and increased land use intensity, additional traffic noise would vary depending on a combination of factors such as variations in daily traffic volumes, shielding prov ided by existing and proposed structures, intervening ground properties and meteorological conditions. However, similarly to temporary construction noise, noise associated with future traffic and development pursuant to the General Plan would also be required to comply with the city’s Noise Ordinance and General Plan Noise Element goals and policies to maintain less than significant noise levels. Specifically, the Noise Element’s Land Use and Noise Compatibility Policies encourage development of compati ble land uses and requires the use of project design techniques such as increasing setbacks and using non-sensitive buildings to shield noise-sensitive outdoor spaces from noise (City of Carlsbad 2015a).

Outdoor Spaces
During Project operation, the Project would be required to comply with the city’s noise regulations, which require exterior noise levels of 65 CNEL or less at outdoor use areas of mixed-use developments and interior noise levels of 45 CNEL or les in residential space. As determined in the Acoustical Analysis Report for Townhouse Duplexes and Professional Office Mixed Use, December 2020, prepared by Eilar Associates, Inc. (Appendix E), all private outdoor use areas would have noise impacts of 65 CNEL or less, in compliance with the city’s noise standards. Additionally, worst-case traffic noise impacts were calculated at building facades and were found to range from 46 CNEL at the east facade of the commercial building to 65 CNEL at the west facade of Unit 1 (Appendix E). Therefore, noise levels at outdoor spaces would meet city noise standards and impacts would be less than significant.

Interior Residential Spaces
Within dwelling unit interiors, calculations show that worst-case traffic noise levels at the west and south facades of Unit 1 exceed 60 CNEL; therefore, interior noise levels may exceed 45 CNEL with windows open at Unit 1 . Façade noise impacts at Units 2, 3, and 4 are not expected to exceed 60 CNEL however, and therefore they are expected to meet the 45 CNEL limit. Accordingly, only Unit 1 was further analyzed in Appendix E. The exterior wall is proposed to be constructed of stucco over plywood sheathing over 2x6 wood-studs, with a single layer of gypsum board on the interior. This assembly was evaluated for the interior noise analysis conducted in all rooms within Unit 1. With the proposed exterior wall and exterior windows and glass doors with a minimum STC rating of 25 in place, interior noise levels were determined to remain below 45 CNEL in all rooms within Unit 1 with windows and exterior doors closed. However, noise levels would exceed 45 CNEL with windows open. Accordingly, mechanical ventilation is proposed for all habitable spaces within Unit 1. In instances where interior habitable space is exposed to noise levels greater than 45 CNEL with all windows and patio doors in the open position, appropriate means of air circulation and provision of fresh air must be present to allow windows to remain closed for extended intervals of time so that acceptable levels of noise can be maintained on the interior. With the proposed exterior wall assembly, exterior glazing with an STC rating of 25, and mechanical ventilation in Unit 1, all interior residential space is expected to comply with City of Carlsbad and State of California noise requirements. Units 2, 3, and 4 are expected to meet interior noise limits with typical construction methods, and therefore, no specific project design features are required for interior noise control in these units (Appendix E). Impacts would be less than significant.

4 2 August 2022
Interior Professional Office
CALGreen requires that nonresidential structures that are exposed to greater than 65 dBA during any hour of operation must control interior noise levels to be 50 dBA or less. Contemporary exterior building construction is expected to achieve at least 15 decibels of exterior -to-interior noise attenuation with windows open. As a result, exterior noise levels of more than 65 dBA can result in interior conditions that fail to meet the 50 dBA requirement for nonresidential space. As calculated in Appendix E, noise impacts at non-residential building facades are not anticipated to exceed 65 CNEL . Therefore, all non -residential spaces on-site are expected to comply with the state’s interior noise regulations of 50 CNEL or less with typical building construc tion, and therefore, no special design features are required for non-residential spaces (Appendix E). Impacts would be less than significant.

The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts due to the generation of excessive groundborne vibration would be less than sign ificant. As discussed therein, sources of groundborne vibration and noise associated with implementation of the General Plan include construction activities, heavy vehicles traveling on roadways and trains on nearby sensitive land uses, and operation of heavy equipment associated with certain industrial operations . However, construction of development pursuant to the General Plan would be required to comply with noise limitations specified in the city’s Noise Ordinance. Additionally, sensitive land uses are not anticipated to be sited within distances susceptible to significant vibration from heavy vehicles traveling on roadways (i.e. primarily freeways) and railroads. The city’s Municipal Code (Planned Industrial Zone, Chapter 21.34. 090, Performance Standards) also contains requirements for limitations on the operation of heavy vibration -causing equipment . Accordin gly, construction and operation of future development pursuant to the General Plan was determined to result in a less than significant impact upon compliance with the city’s Municipal Code (City of Carlsbad 2015a).

The Project could result in temporary groundborne vibration and/or noise during construction activities.

However, heavy machinery associated with more conventional construction activities (such as bulldozers, heavy trucks , etc) typically produces negligible levels of groundborne vibration beyond a distance of approximately 25 feet. Additionally, as described above, the city ’s Noise Ordinance exempts noise associated with construction activities from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday, and from 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays. In accordance with the city’s Noise Ordinance, construction of the Project would occur during the permissible hours. Further, the project includes a limited amount of earthwork, and due to the smaller size of the project site (approximately 1/3 of an acre), smaller construction equipment would be anticipated to be employed. Therefore, groundborne vibration and noise associated with construction of the Project would be less than significant. Operation of the Project would not result in any ongoing activities that would induce groundborne vibration or noise. Therefore, no groundborne vibration or noise impacts would occur during operation.

The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts to projects located within the vicinity or a private airstrip or airport land use plan would be less than significant. McClellan-Palomar Airport ALUCP includes development policies regarding the compatibility of development areas and exposure to noise. Additionally, the General Plan Noise Element includes goals and policies to encourage development of compatible land uses within the AIA as depicted in the ALUCP . Therefore, compliance with the city’s General Plan Noise El ement and the ALUCP was determined to ensure less than significant impacts (City of Carlsbad 2015a).

4 3 August 2022
The Project site is located approximately 4.25 miles northwest of the McClellan-Palomar Airport and is not within the AIA. Ther efore, the Project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels and no impact would occur.

3.14 Population and Housing
Since the previous EIR was certified, are there any changes in the project, changes in circumstances under which the project is undertaken and/or "new information of substantial importance" that result in one or more effects to population and housing including displacing substantial numbers of existing housing or people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? YES NO
T
he GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts due to unplanned growth would be less than significant. As discussed therein, buildout of the General Plan would increase the city ’s buildout from the existing 46,382 dwelling units to approximately 54,599 dwelling units for a total buildout population of approximately 135,000. The city’s share of the county population is expected to increase slightly, from 3.4 percent in 2013 to 3.6 percent in 2035. The estimated population growth resulting from the General Plan was determined to be consistent with or below the growth assumptions of the city’s Growth Management Plan (City of Carlsbad 2015a).

Since adoption of the General Plan, the City Council adopted the Housing Element Update in May 2021.

The Housing Element provides for opportunities for the city to provide more housing in compliance with the city’s latest Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) allocation. The Housing Element Update also comports with re cent revisions in state law providing for the production or more housing, including compliance with SB 330 which limits local agencies ability to restrict housing development.

The Project would result in the development of four condominiums and a professional office at intensities that are consistent with the plan intensities under the General Plan . Moreover, the Project site currently contains two single-family residences so the net increase of the project would amount to two condominium units or 5.2 persons (based on 2.61 persons per housing as identified in the May 2021 Housing Element Update). Therefore, the net housing and population inducement amount to less than on the Project site would be negligible. Impacts would be less than significant.

The GP/CAP FEIR concluded there to be no impact due to displacement of a substantial number of people or housing . As discussed therein, implementation of the General Plan would not directly displace any housing units, businesses, or people. Re development of existing uses would likely occur; however, such development would take place over time and development pursuant to the General Plan would facilitate anticipated growth within the city (City of Carlsbad 2015a).

The Project would involve demolition of the two existing single-family residences on the Project site and development of four condominiums. Due to the relatively small scale of the proposed development, the Project would not result in the displacement of a substantial number of existing people or housing. Rather, the Project would redevelop the Project site to include more housing than existing conditions. Impacts would be less than significant.
□ ~
4 4 August 2022

3.15 Public Services
Since the previous EIR was certified, are there any changes in the project, changes in circumstances under which the project is undertaken and/or "new information of substantial importance" that result in one or more substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities or the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the following public services: fire protection, police protection, schools, parks, or other public facilities? YES NO
T
he GP/CAP FE IR concluded impact to fire service to be less than significant. Fire stations 1 and 2 were determined to need remodeling or reconstruction . Station 3 was already planned to be relocated to the Robertson Ranch Master Plan area. Although these stations were identified as needing upgrades, the GP/CAP FEIR determined that renovation or relocation of existing facilities would cause a minimal increase to the city ’s built footprint and would not result in significant effects on the environment. Additionally, policies contained in the General Plan serve to keep service demand increases to a minimum and new development would occur in areas already well-served by fire protection services. Accordingly, impacts were determined to be less than significant (City of Carlsbad 2015a). Since adoption of the 2015 General Plan, the planned relocation of Station 3 was completed.

The Project would result in development of four condominiums and a professional office, which would require fire protection services. However, the Fire Department already serves the Project site as two existing single-family residences exist on-site. The closest Fire Station is Station 1, located approximately 0.4 mile east of the Project site. Redevelopment of the project site would increase the land use intensity of the site, which may slightly increase demand for fire protection services. However, the Project site is already located in a well-served area and would not significantly increase demand for fire services to the extent that new facilities would be required to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives. Finally, the Project would be required to pay development impact fees in accordance with the city’s most recently adopted Master Fee Schedule. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

The GP /CAP F EIR concluded impact s to police protection would be less than significant. As discussed therein, in order to accommodate increases in demand from population growth, the city’s Police Department expects the need to grow. The Police Department has been considering relocating some or all of its services within the Public Safety and Service Center or to other facilities in order to meet the space needs of additional staff and equipment. Relocating services to and from this space or nearby facilities would not necessitate new constr uction, and therefore would have minimal effects on the environment.

However, it was also considered to expand the Public Safety and Service Center, which would require new construction. The General Plan contains policies which serve to mitigate any increases in demand for police services and any physical alterations of the Public Safety and Service Center would have limited impact on the city’s built environment. Ultimately, the GP/CAP FEIR concluded that compliance with existing building and construction codes, as well as General Plan policies, would ensure impacts are less than significant (City of Carlsbad 2015a).
□ ~
4 5 August 2022
The Project would result in development of four condominiums and a professional office, which would require police protection services. However, the Police Department already serves the Project site as two existing single-family residences exist on-site. Redevelopment of the project site would increase the land use intensity of the site, which may slightly increase demand for police protection services. However, the Project site is already located in a well-served area and would not significantly increase demand for police services to the extent that new facilities would be required to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives. Finally, the Project would be required to pay development impact fees in accordance with the city ’s most recently adopted Master Fee Schedule. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

The GPU EIR concluded impacts to schools would be less than significant. As discussed therein, the city’s student population is expected to remain relatively stable or decline in three of the four school districts serving the city. Although development pursuant to the General Plan would result in additional students from new housing units, ongoing demographic trends are causing reductions in the population of school - aged children in the city. Projected changes in enrollment and capacity based on buildout of the General Plan were also determined to be adequately served by existing school capacity.

The Project would result in development of four condominiums and a professional office, which may induce new student populations within the city. However, due to the relatively small scale of the Project, in addition to the GP/CAP FEIR’s determination that student populations in the city would be served by existing school capacity, any potential students generated by the Project would be minimal and would be served by existing schools within the Carlsbad Unified School District (CUSD). Additionally, the Project would be required to pay developer fees in accordance with the CUSD’s most recently adopted fee rates. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

For the GP/CAP FEIR analysis on parks see Section 3.16(a) below. In summary, given the existing park facilities and planned parkland within the city , and General Plan policies that support the city ’s Growth Management Plan, a surplus of parkland was anticipated to accommodate the buildout population of the General Plan without any resulting deterioration of existing parks. Impacts to parks and recreation facilities were determined to be less than significant (City of Carlsbad 2015a).

The Project would generate population growth on the site as discussed in Section 3.14 above. However, the net population increase from demolition of the existing two single -family residences and construction of four condominiums and a professional office would be minimal. As determined in the GP/CAP FEIR, a surplus of parkland was also anticipated to accommodate development pursuant to the General Plan.

Additionally, the Project would be required to pay development impact fees in accord ance with the city ’s most recently adopted Master Fee Schedule. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts to other public facilities would be less than significant. An increase in population from the new addition of two new condominium units will cause a nominal increase in demand for public services, including libraries. Buildout of the General Plan is anticipated by the GP/CAP FEIR to result in a deficit in library space, though the deficit is expected to occur gradually over the planning horizon.

If new or expanded library facilities are planned and constructed in the future, such a project would have to demonstrate compliance with CEQA, and would be subject to building and construction codes that would ensure construction activities have minimal effects on the environment . Additionally, as discussed in the GP/CAP FEIR, the city would have a surplus of administrative space at buildout of the General Plan for other public facilities. Should additional space become necessary, these needs could be met through the leasing

4 6 August 2022
or purchase of existing space rather than through new construc tion. Finally, the General Plan includes policies that promote ongoing development of library facilities and complement the Growth Management Plan in such a way that new residential development could not be permitted unless adequate services and facilities were guaranteed. Such policies include charging impact fees on new development to fund the future construction of public facilities. Accordingly, impacts were determined to be less than significant (City of Carlsbad 2015a).

The Project would generate population growth on the site as discussed in Section 3.14 above. However, the net population increase from demolition of the existing two single -family residences and construction of four condominiums and a professional office would be minimal. Therefore, population induced by the Project would not result in the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, including library facilities and other public facilities. Impacts would be less than significant.

3.16 Recreation
Since the previous EIR was certified, are there any changes in the project, changes in circumstances under which the project is undertaken and/or "new information of substantial importance" that result in an increase in the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or othe r recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated; or that include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
YES NO
T
he GP/CAP FEIR concluded impact s due to deterioration of recrea tional facilities due to increase use would be less than significant. Development associated with future land uses consistent with the General Plan would increase population in the form of new residents in the city. These new residents are expected to use park and recreational facilities, and this additional use may result in greater demands on parks and recreational facilities in the city such that deterioration of these facilities could occur or be accelerated.

Applying the city’s current park standard of 3.0 acres per 1,000 population in each city quadrant, projected demand for parkland at buildout would be an additional 393.5 acres citywide. Meanwhile, development of planned parks under the General Plan would increase t he city’s parkland by 443.9 acres, resulting in a surplus distributed among all four of the city’s quadrants. Therefore, park provision under the General Plan would be more than sufficient to accommodate demand from future residents and impacts wer e determined to be less than significant (City of Carlsbad 2015a).

The Project would result in minor population growth on the site. The net population increase from demolition of the existing two single -family residences and construction of four condominiums and a professional office would be minimal. As determined in the GP/CAP FEIR, a surplus of parkland was also anticipated to accommodate development pursuant to the General Plan. Additionally, the Project would be required to pay development impact fees in accordance with the city’s most recently adopted Master Fee Schedule , including park fees. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

The GP/CAP FEIR concluded impacts due to the construction or expansion of recreation facilities would be less than significant. A t buildout of the General Plan, the city would have a surplus in parkland to □ ~
4 7 August 2022
accommodate anticipated increased population. The General Plan also contains policies that complement the facilities performance standards established by the citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan and ensure the continued maintenance of park quality. General Plan policies directly reference the Growth Management Plan park standard, and describe specific implementation guidelines for achieving it. The policies also require that new and existing parks are assessed for their abilities to meet the recreational needs of nearby residents in terms of amenities and accessibility. They also seek to ensure that new parks are developed or existing parks are improved concurrently with any development that would generate an increase in park users in the vicinity (City of Carlsbad 2015a). Finally, future development of park s and recreation facilities in the city would be required to comply with building and construction codes , and undergo environmental review as required.

The Project would include development of four condominiums and a professional office and would not include any recreational facilities . Additionally, as previously described, the city would have a surplus of parkland at buildout of the General Plan. Therefore, the Project would not require the construction of new or expanded recreational facilities. Finally, the Project would be required to pay development impact fees in accordance with the city’s most recently adopted Master Fee Schedule, including park fees. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

3.17 Transportation
Since the previous EIR was certified, are there any changes in the project, changes in circumstances under which the project is undertaken and/or "new information of substantial importance" that cause effects to transportation/traffic including whether the project w ould result in : conflicts with a program , plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle , and pedestrian facilities; conflicts or inconsistency with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b); substa ntial increase in hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment); and/or inadequate emergency access? YES NO
T
he GP/CAP EI R concluded this impact to be significant and unavoidable. In summary, the General Plan would improve pedestrian, bicycle, and transit infrastructure and would implement goals and policies that would further reduce impacts to those facilities. The General Plan is not inconsistent with nor does it conflict with any policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, roadway, bicycle, or pedestrian fa cilities or the performance or safety of those facilities (City of Carlsbad 2015).

The project site is currently developed with a single -family rental residence. The project involves the demolition of the existing two existing single-family rental units and development of four condominium units with a standalone professional office building. Therefore, the amount of vehicle trips generated as a result of the Project would be negligible and would not result in a significant increase of trips at the project s ite that would result in a conflict with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. Additionally, the project would be consistent with the General Plan’s adopted goals and policies. Consistent with development pursuant to the General Plan, the Project would not conflict with any policies, plans, or programs regarding public transit, roadway, □ ~
4 8 August 2022
bicycle, golf cart network, or pedestrian facilities or the performance or safety of those facilities. Impacts would not occur.

Since the time of adoption of the GP/CAP EIR, state law has required that transportation impacts be based on vehicle miles traveled (VMT) instead of LOS. In 2013, the California Legislature adopted Senate Bill 743 (SB 743), which amended CEQA to require transportation impacts to be determined using a threshold that balances congestion management with greenhouse gas reductions by measuring vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and directed the Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to revise the CEQA Guidelines to reflect this change. 1 The resulting CEQA Guideline section setting VMT as the transportation significance metric requires the change to be implemented by July 1, 2020.
2 In January 2019, California’s Natural Resources Agency finalized updates to the CEQA Guidelines including the incorporation of the SB 743 modifications. The changes were approved by the Office of Administrative Law and are now in effect. As such, as of Ju ly 1, 2020, LOS can no longer be the basis for determining an environmental effect under CEQA, and the analysis of impacts to transportation is now based on VMTs.

Per the SANDAG Not So Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates for the San Diego Re gion, condominium projects (or any multi -family project of 6 to 20 dwelling unit per acre) is anticipated to generate approximately 8 ADT per dwelling unit. Therefore, the four proposed units would generate 32 ADT.

Single-tenant office use is anticipated t o generate approximately 14 ADT per 1,000 square feet of office use (SANDAG 2002). Using the 14 ADT per 1,000 square foot of office trip generation, a total of 13 ADT is expected from the office use.

Combined, the proposed project would generate approximately 45 ADT (32 ADT from the residential uses and 13 ADT from the office use). The two existing single-family homes would generate 20 ADT (10 trips per home); therefore, the net increase is 25 ADT.

TDM requirements for new developments vary by development type and the expected average daily employee trips (see Table 2-1 TDM Plan Applicability). All developments that meet the threshold of 110 employee ADT are required to submit a TDM plan using the TDM Plan template for the respective tier (TDM Plan Templates for Non-Residential Projects) and are subject to the same monitoring and reporting schedule described in section 2.7. The proposed project would generate a total of 45 ADT, which is below the Screening Criteria of 110 ADT. Therefore, the proposed project is screened out from additional VMT analysis under Section 3.2.1.

Small Projects, under the City’s VMT Guidelines. Therefore, the proposed project would be exempt from a TDM plan (City of Carlsbad 2019). As such, because vehicle trips generated by the Project would be negligible, the Project would not conflict with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b). Thus, impacts would be less than significant.
1 Public Resources Code Section 21099(b)(2) provides that “automobile delay, as described solely by level of service or similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion shall not be considered a significant impact on the environment pursuant to this division.”
2 CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3(b)(1), (b)(4), and (c) provide that “Vehicle miles traveled exceeding an applicable threshold of significance may indicate a significant impact. . . . A lead agency has discretion to choose the most appropriate methodology to evaluate a project’s vehicle miles traveled, including whether to express the change in absolute terms, per capita, per household or a ny other measure. A lead agency may use models to estimate a project’s vehicl e miles traveled. . . . Beginning on July 1, 2020, the provisions of this section shall apply statewide

4 9 August 2022
As the Project would have less than significant impacts for the reasons detailed above, the Project would be consistent with the analysis provided within the GP/CAP EIR because it would not increase impacts identified within the GP/CAP EIR and would not result in project-specific peculiar impacts not identified in the GP/CAP EIR.

The GP/CAP EIR concluded this impact to be less than significant. Per the GP/CAP EIR, various policies, including policy 3 -P.10, 3-P.12, 3-P.13, and 3 -P.16, have been implemented into the proposed General Plan in order to ensure that design hazards would not occur and that impacts would be less than significant.

Policies identified in the GP that support the reduction of hazards or incompatible uses include, but are not limited to: design new streets, and explore funding opportunities for existing streets, to minimize traffic volumes and/or speed, as appropriate, within residential neighbo rhoods without compromising connectivity for emergency first responders, bicycles, and pedestrians consistent with the city’s Carlsbad Active Transportation Strategies (Policy 3 -P.12); consider innovative design and program solutions to improve the mobilit y, efficiency, connectivity, and safety of the transportation system. Innovative design solutions include, but are not limited to, traffic calming devices, roundabouts, traffic circles, curb extensions, separated bicycle infrastructure, pedestrian scramble intersections, high visibility pedestrian treatments and infrastructure, and traffic signal coordination (Policy 3 -P.13); engage Caltrans, the Public Utilities Commission, transit agencies, the Coastal Commission, and railroad agency(s) regarding opportunities for improved connections within the city (Policy 3 -P.16). Therefore, with compliance with existing laws, rules and regulations, the Project, pursuant to the GP , would not substantially increase hazards due to a geometric design feature or incompatible uses (City of Carlsbad 2015).

Access to the Project site would be provided via Jefferson Street. T he Project does not include any substantial changes to the geometry of streets or intersections. Additionally, the Project would adhere to the aforementioned policies of the GP and would comply with existing laws, rules and regulations.

Therefore, impacts associated with hazardous design features would be less than significant.

The GP/CAP EIR concluded this impact to emergency response be less than significant. Per the GP/CAP EIR, emergency accessibility typically is assessed at a project -level. Implementation of the following proposed P olicies identified in the GP that support the reduction of potential impacts associated with emergency access include, but are not limited : design new streets, and explore funding opportunities for existing streets, to minimize traffic volumes and/or speed, as appropriate, within residential neighborhoods without compromising connectivity for emergency first responders, bicycles, and pedestrians consistent with the city’s Carlsbad Active Transportation Strategies (Policy 3-P.12); encourage physical planning and community design practices that deter crime and promote safety (Policy 6 -P.29); maintain close coordination between planned improvements to the circulation system within the city and the location of fire stations to assure adequat e levels of service and response times to all areas of the community (6 - P.30); and enforce the Uniform Building and Fire codes, adopted by the city, to provide fire protection standards for all existing and proposed structures (Policy 6-P.33) (City of Carlsbad 2015).

As discussed above, access to the Project site would be provided via Jefferson Street. The Project driveways would be designed and constructed according to city standards under the direction of a licensed and qualified engineer. The Project site would be accessible to emergency responders during construction and operation of the Project. Additionally, the Project would adhere to GP policies and implementation actions related to emergency access. Finally, the net increase of approximately 25 ADT would not result in traffic generation that may impede emergency access. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

5 0 August 2022

3.18 Tribal Cultural Resources
Since the previous EIR was certified, are there any changes in the project, changes in circumstances under which the project is undertaken and/or "new information of substantial importance" that cause one or more effects to tribal cultural resources including: causing a change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource as defined in Public Resource Code §21074?
YES NO
Since the adoption of the GP/CAP FEIR in 2015, the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Environment Checklist was updated to include tribal cultural resources as an additional resource area to be analyzed. Therefore, tribal cultural resources were not previously explicitly analyzed in the GP/CAP FEIR. Cultural resources were already evaluated within the Cultural Resources section of the GP/CAP FEIR. The GP/CAP FEIR determined that development of the GP/CAP would result in less than significant impacts associated with the cultural resources (see Section 3.5, above).

Tribal cultural resources include “sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American tribe that are eligible for inclusion in the California Register of Historical Resources or included in a local register of historical resources.” Lead agencies have discretion to determine, based on substantial evidence, whether a resource qualifies as a tribal cultural resource.

As described in Section 3.5, above, under existing conditions, the Project site is currently developed with two single -family residences. No areas on the Project site contain undisturbed land. Furthermore, the project only proposes a limited amount of cut, approximately 200 cubic yards. Therefore, the likelihood that intact archeological resources exist on the Project site is low due to previous site disturbance. Nonetheless, there is potential for other archaeological sites to be found within Carlsbad due to the existence of previously identified sites throughout the city.

Accordingly, a request was made to the Native American Heritage Committee (NAHC) on March 5, 2021, to conduct a search of the Sacred Lands File (SLF) to determine if any sacred sites or landforms were recorded within the vicinity of the parcel (Appendix A). The NAHC indicated that the SLF search was positive for the project area and recommended that the La Jolla Band of Luiseño Indians and the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians be contacted in addition to twenty eight recommended contacts (see Appendix A). Letters were drafted and emailed to the NAHC recommended Nativ e American tribal representatives, hard-copy letters were mailed to each contact and follow -up emails and phone calls were made. The following information was collected regarding this project.

Viejas Band of Mission Indians stated that the project area may contain sacred sites to the Kumeyaay people and requested these sacred sites be avoided with adequate buffer zones. Additionally, Viejas requested, as appropriate, that all NEPA/CEQA/NAGPRA laws be followed, and that Viejas should be contacted immediately if there are any changes to the project description or inadvertent discoveries.

Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians stated that they have specific concerns that the project may impact tangible Tribal Cultural Resources (TCRs), Traditional Cultural Landscapes (TCLs), and potential Traditional Cultural Properties (TCPs). The Rincon Band recommended conducting an archaeological/cultural resources study, □ ~
5 1 August 2022
to include an archeological record search and complete intensive survey of the property. Additionally, they ask for a professional Tribal monitor from the Rincon Band to accompany the archaeologist during the survey.

The city also reached out to the Tribes to conduct AB 52 consultation. The Rincon Band requested to consult directly with the lead agency regarding project impacts to cultural resources, and agreed with the proposed mitigation measures, and found that the mitigation measures satisfied Rincon Band’s concerns.

Further, the San Luis Rey Band also requested consultation with the city regarding the project and reviewed the proposed mitigation measures and found that mitigation measures satisfy the San Luis Rey Band’s concerns.

As anticipated by the General Plan/CAP FEIR , future development projects pursuant to the General Plan may involve grading, excavation, or other ground -disturbing activities, which could disturb or damage unknown archaeological resources. However, the General Plan includes goals and policies t o minimize or avoid impacts to archaeological resources by requiring the protection and preservation of such resources.

Accordingly, a project-specific Historical and Archaeological Inventory Report was prepared for the proposed project (Appendix A). The following measure was recommended regarding Tribal Cultural Resources:

Due to the interest and concerns form the local Native American community, it is recommended to further consult with interested tribal representatives, which should include, but is not limited to, sharing project construction plans and timelines, further consulting on specific concerns, and hiring a qualified local tribal representative for Native American Monitoring. The proposed project would implement Section 8.2.2.4, Tribal Monitoring, from the City’s Tribal, Cultural and Paleontological Guidelines which provides for the following:

Prior to the commencement of any ground -disturbing activities, including but not limited to exploratory geotechnical investigations/borings for contractor bidding purposes, the project developer shall enter into a Pre -Excavation Agreement, otherwise known as a Tribal Cultural Resources Treatment and Tribal Monitoring Agreement, with the SLRBMI or other Luiseño tribe. This agreement will contain provisions to address the proper treatme nt of any tribal cultural resources and/or Luiseño Native American human remains inadvertently discovered during the course of the project. The agreement will outline the roles and powers of the Luiseño Native American monitors and the archaeologist, and m ay include the following provisions. In some cases, the language below may be modified in consultation with SLRBMI if special conditions warrant.

1. A Luiseño Native American monitor shall be present during all ground disturbing activities.

Ground disturbing activities may include, but are not be limited to, archaeological studies ,
g
eotechnical investigations, clearing, grubbing, trenching, excavation, preparation for utilities and other infrastructure, and grading activities.

2. Any and all uncovered artifacts of Luiseño Native American cultural importance shall be returned to the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians, and/or the Most Likely Descendant, if applicable,

5 2 August 2022
and not be curated, unless ordered to do so by a federal agency or a court of competent jurisdiction.

3. The Luiseño Native American monitor shall be present at the project’s preconstruction meeting to consult with grading and excavation contractors concerning excavation schedules and safety issues, as well as to consult with the archaeologist PI concerning the proposed archaeologist techniques and/or strategies for the project.

4. Luiseño Native American monitors and archaeological monitors shall have joint authority to temporarily divert and/or halt construction activities. If tribal cultural resources are discovered during construction, all earth-moving activity within and around the immediate discovery are a
m
ust be diverted until the Luiseño Native American monitor and the archaeologist can assess the n
ature and significance of the find.

5. If a significant tribal cultural resource(s) and/or unique archaeological resource(s) are discovered during ground-disturbing activities for this project, the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians shall be notified and consulted regarding the respectful and dignified treatment of those resources.

Pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 21083.2(b) avoidance is the preferred method of preservation for archaeological and tribal cultural resources. If, however, the Applicant is able to demonstrate that avoidance of a significant and/or unique cultural resource is infeasible and a data recovery plan is authorized by the City of Carlsbad as the lead agency, the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians shall be consulted regarding the drafting and finalization of any such recovery plan.

6. When tribal cultural resources are discovered during the project, if the archaeologist collects such resources, a Luiseño Native American monitor must be present during any testing or cataloging of those resources. If the archaeologist does not collect the tribal cultural resources that ar e
u
nearthed during the ground disturbing activities, the Luiseño Native American monitor may, at their discretion, collect said resources and provide them to the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians for dignified and respectful treatment in accordance with their cultural and spiritual traditions.

7. If suspected Native American human remains are encountered, California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5(b) states that no further disturbance shall occur until the San Diego County Medical Examiner has made the necessary findings as to origin. Further, pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98(b) remains shall be left in place and free from disturbance until a final decision as to the treatment and disposition has been made. Suspected Native American remains shall be examined in the field and kept in a secure location at the site.

A Luiseño Native American monitor shall be present during the examination of the remains. If th e
S
an Diego County Medical Examiner determines the remains to be Native American, the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) must be contacted by the Medical Examiner within 24 hours. The NAHC must then immediately notify the “Most Likely Descendant” about the discovery .

T
he Most Likely Descendant shall then make recommendations within 48 hours, and engage in consultation concerning treatment of remains as provided in Public Resources Code 5097.98.

8. In the event that fill material is imported into the project area, the fill shall be clean of tribal c
ultural resources and documented as such. Commercial sources of fill material are already permitted as appropriate and will be culturally sterile. If fill material is to be utilized and/or exported from areas within the project site, then that fill material shall be analyzed and confirmed by an archeologist and Luiseño Native American monitor that such fill material does not contain tribal cultural resources.

5 3 August 2022

9. No testing, invasive or non-invasive, shall be permitted on any recovered tribal cultural resources without the written permission of the SLRBMI.

10. Prior to the release of the grading bond, a monitoring report and/or evaluation report, if appropriate, which describes the results, analysis and conclusions of the monitoring program shall be submitted by the archaeologist, along with the Luiseño Native American monitor’s notes a
nd comments, to the City of Carlsbad for approval. Said report shall be subject to confidentiality as an exception to the Public Records Act and will not be available for public distribution.

Such measures are consistent with the following General Plan policies:
7-P.8 During construction of specific development projects, require monitoring of grading, ground-disturbing, and other major earthmoving activities in previously undisturbed areas or in areas with known archaeological or paleontological resources by a qualified professional, as well as a tribal monitor during activities in areas with cultural resources of interest to local Native American tribes. Both the qualified professional and tribal monitor shall observe grading, ground-disturbing, and other earth-moving activities. 7-P.9 Ensure that treatment of any cultural resources discovered during site grading complies with the City of Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidelines. Determination of the significance of the cultural resource(s) and development and implementation of any data recovery program shall be conducted in consultation with interested Native American tribes. All Native American human remains and associated grave goods shall be returned to their most likely descendent and repatriated. The final disposition of artifacts not directly associated with Native American graves shall be negotiated during consultation with interested tribes; if the artifact is not accepted by Native American tribes, it shall be offered to an institution staffed by qualified professionals, as may be determined by the City Planner. Artifacts include material recovered from all phases of work, including the initial survey, testing, indexing, data recovery, and monitoring 7-P.10 Require consultation with the appropriate organizations and individuals (e.g., Information Centers of the California Historical Resources Information Systems [CHRIS], the N ative American Heritage Commission [NAHC], and Native American groups and individuals) to minimize potential impacts to cultural resources that may occur as a result of a proposed project.
7-P.11 Prior to occupancy of any buildings, a cultural resource m onitoring report identifying all materials recovered shall be submitted to the City Planner.

Therefore, with compliance with the General Plan, implementation of the Project would not c ause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a Tribal Cultural Resource. Impacts would be less than significant.

3.19 Utilities and Service Systems
Since the previous EIR was certified, are there any changes in the project, changes in circumstances under which the project is undertaken and/or "new information of substantial importance" that cause effects to

5 4 August 2022
utilities and service systems including: exceedance of wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board; require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities, new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects; require new or expanded en titlements to water supplies or new water resources to serve the project; result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments; be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project’s solid waste disposal needs; and/or noncompliance with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? YES NO
Wastewater Facilities
The GP/CAP EIR finds that future growth envisioned by the city would result in less than significant impacts to wastewater facilities. Three wastewater districts provide sewer services to the city’s planning area:

Carlsbad Wastewater Division (CWWD), Leucadia Wastewater District (LWWD), and Vallecitos Water District (VWD) ( City of Carlsbad 2015). The proposed project site is located within CWWD’s service area .

Wastewater generated within the CWWD’s sewer service area is treated at the EWPCF. Carlsbad’s current ownership capacity for treatment at the Encina Water Pollution Control Facility ( EWPCF) is 9.24 million gallons per day (mgd) (average flow). The 2012 Sewer Master Plan projected future 2035 wastewater flows to be approximately 10.0 mgd, based on growth estimates prior to the proposed General Plan. The city has requested an additional 1.02 mgd for a total of 10.26 mgd, which is currently pending. Buildout under the proposed General Plan would result in additional wastewater that would need to be treated at the EWPCF.

The proposed General Plan would allow for additional growth beyond the CWWD growth projections. Current regulations require compliance with water quality standards and would not allow development without adequate utility capacity, including water or wastewater treatment capacity. Future development projects allowed under the proposed General Plan would be r eviewed by the city and the applicable water and wastewater providers to determine that sufficient capacity exists to serve the development (City of Carlsbad 2015). In addition, the city’s Sewer System Management Plan has been updated in 2019 updated to reflect the proposed General Plan growth projections (City of Carlsbad 2019). Lastly, the proposed General Plan contains goals and policies that promote sustainability and reduce impacts associated with construction of new facilities by limiting the need for additional water supplies. More specifically, Goals 2-G.22 and 2-G.23, and Policies 2-P.8, and 2-P.55 through 2-P.58, P-G.4, and 9-P.3 through 9-P.7, reduce impacts related to the construction of water and wastewater treatment facilities. As disc ussed in Section 1.1, above, t he proposed project would include a Tentative Tract Map , Zone Change, and General Plan Amendment for land use re -designation to allow for the construction of four residential air -space condominiums and an office use. The Tentative Tract Map will consolidate two lots and subdivide the project site for residential air-space and commercial condominiums. To avoid a split zone development, the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change are proposed to change the land use designation to R —15/O and the zone to R -P-Q to allow both multi -family residential and office on one lot . Therefore, the proposed project has already been accounted for in future planning documents and the amount of wastewater required for both the construction phase and the operations phase would not require any expansion of existing wastewater facilities.

Therefore, the proposed project would not result in additional adverse physical effects associated with wastewater facilities beyond those already identified in other sections of this environmental analysis. □ ~
5 5 August 2022
Water Facilities
The GP/CAP EIR finds that future growth envisioned by the city would result in less than significant impacts to water facilities. Three water districts provide water service withi n Carlsbad: Carlsbad Municipal Water District (CMWD), Olivenhain Municipal Water District ( OMWD), and Vallecitos Water District ( VWD). The CMWD provides water service to the project site (CMWD 2021). The majority of the future growth generated by the proposed General Plan would be located within the CMWD service area. The city has identified efforts to conserve water, increase use of recycled water, and continue to consider new alternative sources of water. The p roposed General Plan would require an update to the CMWD W ater Master Plan ( City of Carlsbad 2015). CMWD’s Potable Water Master Plan was updated in 2019 to correspond with the new General Plan (CMWD 2019). As discussed above, the proposed project would inc lude a Tentative Tract Map, Zone Change, and General Plan Amendment for land use re-designation to allow for the construction of four residential air-space condominiums and an office use. The Tentative Tract Map will consolidate two lots and subdivide the project site for residential air-space and commercial condominiums. To avoid a split zone development, the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change are proposed to change the land use designation to R—15/O and the zone to R -P-Q to allow both multi -family residential and office on one lot .

Therefore, the proposed project has already been accounted for in future planning documents and the amount of wastewater required for both the construction phase and the operations phase would not require any expansion of existing wastewater facilities. In addition, as discussed above, the proposed General Plan contains goals and policies that promote sustainability and reduce impacts associated with construction of new facilities by limiting the need for additional water supplies. More specifically, Goals 2-G.22 and 2-G.23, and Policies 2-P.8, and 2-P.55 through 2-P.58, P-G.4, and 9-P.3 through 9-P.7, reduce impacts related to the construction of water and wastewater treatment facilities . Therefore, the proposed project would not result in additional adverse physical effects associated with water facilities beyond those already identified in other sections of this environmental analysis.

Electric Power Facilities
The GP/CAP EIR finds that , despite the overall increase in future energy use associated with the General plan, the state’s current and future energy code and the proposed General Plan policies would ensure energy efficient designs in new development and encourage energy efficiency upgrades in existing development. The project site is already served by existing electric power and would not result in relocation or construction of new or expanded electric facilities. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in additional adverse physical effects associated with electric facilities beyond those already identified in other sections of this environmental analysis.

Natural Gas
The project site would not use natural gas and therefore, would not result in relocation or construction of new or expanded natural gas facilities. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in additional adverse physical effects associated with natural gas facilities beyond those already identified in other sections of this environmental analysis.

Telecommunication Facilities
Under existing conditions, the Project site is developed with two existing residences. Therefore, the project site is already served by existing telecommunication facilities and would not result in relocation or

5 6 August 2022
construction of new or expanded telecommunication facilities. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in additional adverse physical effects associated with telecommunication facilities beyond those already identified in other sections of this environmental analysis.

Water Supply
The GP/CAP EIR concluded impacts to water supply would be less than significant. As described above, the proposed project is located within CMWD’s service area. According to the 2010 WMP, CMWD expects to have adequate water supply available to meet the projected demand within their jurisdictions to 2035, due to future projects and/or meeting SB X7-7 water conservation goals. These improvements may include the need to utilize local groundwater and surface water supplies. CMWD updated their UWMP in June 2021.

Per the 2021 UWMP, CMWD’s projected supplies in normal, single-dry years, and multiple-dry years (CMWD 2021). In addition, the proposed General Plan goals and policies are intended to ensure that future development occurs according to the city’s Growth Management Plan and is coordinated with availability of public facilities, including water supply.

As discussed above, the Project would include a Tentative Tract Map , Z one Change, and General Plan Amendment for land use re -designation to allow for the con struction of four residential air -space condominiums and an office use. The Tentative Tract Map will consolidate two lots and subdivide the project site for residential air-space and commercial condominiums. To avoid a split zone development, the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change are proposed to change the land use designation to R—15/O and the zone to R-P-Q to allow both multi-family residential and office on one lot. Therefore, the proposed project has already been accounted for in future planning documents , as it relates to water supply.

Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

Wastewater
The GP/CAP EIR concluded impact related to wastewater treatment capacity would be less than significant.

The city’s current ownership capacity for treatment at the EWPCF is 9.24 mgd (average flow). The 2012 Sewer Master Plan projected future 2035 wastewater flows to be approximately 10.0 mgd, based on growth estimates prior to the proposed General Plan. The city has requested an additional 1.02 mgd for a total of

10.26 mgd, which is currently pending. The proposed General Plan includes goals and policies that would help reduce impacts, including Goals 2-G.22 and 2-G.23, and Policies 2-P.8, 2-P.56 through 2-P.59, 9-P.10, and 9-P.11. The proposed project would be consistent with the existing zoning and land use designations of the project site currently allow for residential and office uses, consistent with the uses proposed by the project.

Therefore, the proposed project has already been accounted for in future planning documents and the amount of wastewater required for both the construction phase and the operations phase would not result in a significant increase in wastewater treatment beyond the provider’s existing commitments. Under existing conditions, the Project site is developed with two existing residences. Therefore, the project site is already served by existing wastewater treatment facilities. Therefore, th e Project would not result in significant increase of wastewater services at the site and would not impact any wastewater treatment provider.

Solid Waste
The GP/CAP EIR concluded impact s related to generating solid waste in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure would be less than significant. The city provides solid waste hauling services via a contract with Waste Management of North County. Solid waste is collected by Waste Management and transported

5 7 August 2022
to the Sycamore Canyon and Otay landfills for disposal. Assembly Bill (AB) 939 requires local governments to divert 50 percent of their community’s solid waste, and the recent goal that has been set by CalRecycle of 75 percent recycling, composting, or source reduction of solid waste by 2020.

The proposed project would be consistent with the existing zoning and land use designations of the project site currently allow for residential and office uses, consistent with the uses proposed by the project.

Therefore, the proposed pr oject has already been accounted for in future planning documents and the amount of solid waste generated by the proposed project. Additionally, with adherence to the appliable waste management plans and regulations set by the state and local jurisdiction, as well as compliance with General Plan goals and policies related to solid waste disposal, impacts to solid waste generated by the project would be less than significant.

The GP/CAP EIR concluded impacts to compliance with reduction strategies and regulations related to solid waste be less than significant. Development of future land uses, as designated in the proposed General Plan would be required to comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. Furthermore, the policies provided in the proposed General Plan regarding solid waste disposal, recycling, etc., would further ensure compliance with applicable regulations ( City of Carlsbad 2015). The Project would deposit all solid waste at a permitted solid waste facil ity. Additionally, t he Project would adhere to the requirements of AB 939, as well as comply with GP/CAP goals, policies, and implementation actions related to solid waste disposal. Impacts would be less than significant.

3.20 Wildfire
Wildland fire hazards were previously evaluated within the Hazards and Hazardous Materials section of the GP/CAP FEIR. The GP/CAP FEIR determined that development of the GP/CAP would result in less than significant impacts associated with the risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires (see Section 3.8, above).

Since the adoption of the GP/CAP FEIR in 2015, the CEQA Guidelines Appendix G Environment Checklist was updated to include wildfire as an additional resource area to be analyzed. Specifically, the significance thresholds were established relative to projects located in or near state responsibility areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones. Because the project site is neither located in or near a state responsibility area or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zones, impacts from the proposed project would be less than significant. Nonetheless, the following analysis is provided for informational purposes.

Implementation of the General Plan would result in new development and population growth, resulting in an increase in demand for emergency services, which could affect the implementation of adopted emergency response and evacuation plans. However, the city has adopted the City of Carlsbad Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) prepared in conjunction with the Unified San Diego County Emergency Services Organization, which addresses the city’s planned response to extraordinary emergency situations associated with any type of natural dis aster, technological incident, or state of war emergency. The EOP includes the city as part of the Statewide Emergency Management System. With the compliance of the emergency EOP and proposed General Plan goal and policies, including Goal 6-G.3 and Policies 6-P.31, 6- P.34, 6-P.36, and 6-P.37, the potential to impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan, associated with the GP/CAP, would be less than significant (City of Carlsbad 2015).

5 8 August 2022
The proposed project would be developed on a site that is already developed with existing residences. As discussed in Section 3.17, the proposed project would result in the addition of 45 ADT “(or a net increase of 25 ADT), which is minimal and is not expected to impair emergenc y response. Therefore, the project would not substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan.

Impacts would be less than significant.

The project site is not located within a fire hazard severity zone. A “moderate” threat fire hazard severity zone is located approximately 700 feet north of the project site (City of Carlsbad 2015). Nonetheless, due to distance of this area and the intervening developed nature of surrounding land us es, the proposed project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands. In addition, the proposed project would be required to comply with existing regulations, such as the Uniform Fire Code and the California Building Code, to prevent the spread of wildfire , and would implement General Plan Policies 6 -P.33 and 6-P.35, directed to reduce impacts associated with wildfire.

Therefore, the proposed project would not exacerbate wildfire risks and thereby expose project occupants to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

As discussed above, the project site is not located within a fire hazard severity zone.

The project would not
introduce additional infrastructure which may exacerbate wildfire risk as no off-site or on-site infrastructure improvements are proposed or required. In addition, the proposed project would be required to comply with existing regulations, such as the Uniform Fire Code and the California Building Code, to prevent the spread of wildfire, and would implement General Plan Policies 6 -P.33 and 6 -P.35, directed to reduce impacts associated with wildfire. Accordingly, it is not anticipated that the Project would exacerbate fire risk through the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure. Impacts would be less than significant.

As previously discussed, the Project site is not located in a fire hazard severity zone , nor is it adjacent to steep hillsides or drainages which may experience flooding or landslides post -wildfire. Rather, the project site and surrounding area is generally flat and development of the project site would not result in changes to the existing topographical or drainage conditions of the project area. Thus, the Project would not expose people or structures to a significant risk, including downslopes or downstream flooding or landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire instability, or drainage changes. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

5 9 August 2022
I

NTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

4 References and Preparers

4.1 References Cited
14 CCR 15000–15387 and Appendices A through L. Guidelines for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, as amended.

City of Carlsbad. 2015a. City of Carlsbad General Plan & Climate Action Plan Final Environmental Impact Report.

Adopted
September 2015. Accessed June 2021.
https://www.carlsbadca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/3396/637434858512530000 City of Carlsbad . 2020. City of Carlsbad Climate Action Plan. Adopted September 2015. Updated May 2020. https://www.carlsbadca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/4192/637446665168800000

4.2 List of Preparers
City of Carlsbad
Jessica Evans, Associate Planner
Cliff Jones, Principal Planner
DUDEK
Sean Kilkenny, Project Manager
Vanessa Currie, Environmental Planner
Iulia Roman, Environmental Planner
Joe Harrison, Environmental Planner
Hannah Wertheimer, Editor
Felisa Pugay, Publications Specialist

6 1 August 2022
Figure 1 Project Location

Project Location
Carlsbad Seaside Village Condos Project
SOURCE: SANGIS 2021; Bing Maps
Date: 6/30/2021 - Last saved by: agreis - Path: Z:\Projects\j1358301\MAPDOC\DOCUMENT\Figure1-ProjectLocation.mxd 02 ,0001,000
Feet
Project Boundary
FIGURE 1
Chula Vista
Solana Beach
Encinitas
San Diego
Carlsbad
Oceanside
La Mesa
Santee
Poway
San Marcos
Escondido
Vista
Imperial
Beach
Del Mar
Coronado
Riverside
County
Mexico
905
209
75 52
94 125
241
9854
73 274
195
56 86
111
67 74
74 76 79
78 805
215
15 5
8 Project Site
Project Site
DUDEK
6 2 August 2022
I

NTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

6 3 August 2022
Figure 2 Project Site

Date: 6/30/2021 - Last saved by: agreis - Path: Z:\Projects\j1358301\MAPDOC\DOCUMENT\Figure2-ProjectSite.mxd

JEFFERSON ST

MADISON ST

ARBUCKLE PL

HOME AVE
Project Site
Carlsbad Seaside Village Condos Project
SOURCE: SANGIS 2020, 2021
0 200100
Feet
Project Boundary
FIGURE 2
DUDEK 6
6 4 August 2022
I

NTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

6 5 August 2022
Figure 3a Existing General Plan Land Use Designation

Date: 7/1/2021 - Last saved by: agreis - Path: Z:\Projects\j1358301\MAPDOC\DOCUMENT\Figure3a-Existing_GPLU.mxd V
V
V
V
V
R-15
R-15
R-15/O
R-15/O

JEFFERSON ST

MADISON ST

ARBUCKLE PL

HOME AVE
Existing General Plan Land Use Designations
Carlsbad Seaside Village Condos Project
SOURCE: City Carlsbad 2021; SANGIS 2020, 2021
0 10050
Feet
Project Boundary
Existing General Plan Land Use
R-15, Residential 8-15 du/ac
R-15/O, Residential 8-15 du/ac/Office
V, Village
FIGURE 3a
DUDEK 6
6 6 August 2022
I

NTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

67 Augus
t 2022
Figure 3b Proposed General Plan Land Use Designation

Date: 1/26/2022 - Last saved by: agreis - Path: Z:\Projects\j1358301\MAPDOC\DOCUMENT\Figure3b-Proposed_GPLU.mxd V
V
V
V
V
R-15
R-15
R-15/O
R-15/O
R-15/O

JEFFERSON ST

MADISON ST

ARBUCKLE PL

HOME AVE
Proposed General Plan Land Use Designations
Carlsbad Seaside Village Condos Project
SOURCE: City Carlsbad 2021; SANGIS 2020, 2021
0 10050
Feet
Project Boundary
Proposed General Plan Land Use
R-15, Residential 8-15 du/ac
R-15/O, Residential 8-15 du/ac/Office
V, Village
FIGURE 3b
DUDEK 6
6 8 August 2022
I

NTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

6 9 August 2022
Figure 4a Existing Zoning

Date: 7/1/2021 - Last saved by: agreis - Path: Z:\Projects\j1358301\MAPDOC\DOCUMENT\Figure4a-Existing_Zoning.mxd RD-M
V-B
V-B
V-B
V-B
V-B
R-3
R-3
R-P-Q
R-P-Q

JEFFERSON ST

MADISON ST

ARBUCKLE PL

HOME AVE
Existing Zoning
Carlsbad Seaside Village Condos Project
SOURCE: City Carlsbad 2021; SANGIS 2020, 2021
0 10050
Feet
Project Boundary
Existing Zoning
R-3, Multi-Family Residential
R-P-Q, Residential Professional (Qualified Overlay Zone) RD-M, Residential Density-Multiple
V-B, Village-Barrio
FIGURE 4a
--
-
DUDEK 6
7 0 August 2022
I

NTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

7 1 August 2022
Figure 4b Proposed Zoning

Date: 7/1/2021 - Last saved by: agreis - Path: Z:\Projects\j1358301\MAPDOC\DOCUMENT\Figure4b-Proposed_Zoning.mxd RD-M
V-B
V-B
V-B
V-B
V-B
R-3
R-3
R-P-Q
R-P-Q

JEFFERSON ST

MADISON ST

ARBUCKLE PL

HOME AVE
Proposed Zoning
Carlsbad Seaside Village Condos Project
SOURCE: City Carlsbad 2021; SANGIS 2020, 2021
0 10050
Feet
Project Boundary
Proposed Zoning
R-3, Multi-Family Residential
R-P-Q, Residential Professional (Qualified Overlay Zone) RD-M, Residential Density-Multiple
V-B, Village-Barrio
FIGURE 4b
--
-
DUDEK 6
7 2 August 2022
I

NTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

7 3 August 2022
Figure 5 Preliminary Site Plan

83 83
83 5()
*DUDJH
*DUDJH *DUDJH
*DUDJH
8QLW
8QLW
8QLW
8QLW
YLVLWRU

SDUNLQJ

SDUNLQJ

YLVLWRU

SDUNLQJ
&RPPHUFLDO8QLW
%XLOGLQJVHW
EDFNOLQH
3URSHUW\OLQH
3URSHUW\OLQH
%XLOGLQJVHW
EDFNOLQH
%XLOGLQJVHW
EDFNOLQH
3URSHUW\OLQH
3URSHUW\OLQH
DERYHXQLW
IORRUHOHYDWLRQ
6ORSH

6ORSH

IOXVKZLWKXQLW
IORRUHOHYDWLRQ
IOXVKZLWKXQLW
IORRUHOHYDWLRQ
6ORSH

6 :

6 (

6 (

1 :
-())(
5621675((7

6LWH3ODQ1RWHV

KLJKPDVRQU\ZDOO
PD[LPXPKHLJKWPDVRQU\ZDOO

KLJKYLQ\OIHQFHDQG
ZLGHJDWHZLWKODWFK
KLJKVHDWZDOOZLWK:,IHQFH
[VTXDUHPDVRQU\EDVH FROXPQ
6WDPSHGFRQFUHWHSDWLRDQGRUHQWU\
$'$YDQSDUNLQJVSDFH
[FROXPQEDVHZLWKOLJKWSRVW

&RQFUHWHZDONZD\DQGFRQFUHWHSDWLR
3DWKZD\OLJKWLQJ
+2$FRQWUROOHG

8QLWVHQWU\OLJKWLQJ
+2$FRQWUROOHG

(;,67,1*
6758&785(
(;,67,1*
6758&785(

([LVWLQJSRZHUSROH
([LVWLQJ6%&ULVHU
5HORFDWHGZDWHUPHWHU
FRQYHUWHGWRLUULJDWLRQPHWHU
1HZEDFNIORZSUHYHQWHU
1HZ)LUH+\GUDQWDQGODWHUDOOLQH
1HZ)LUH5LVHUV
5HORFDWHGZDWHUPHWHU
([LVWLQJSRZHUSROH
([LVWLQJ6%&ULVHU
1HZ)LUH5LVHUV
'6 '6 '6 '6 '6 '6
'6
'6
'6
'6
'6
'6'6'6
'6
'6
'6
'6
'6
'6
'6
'6
'6
'6
'6
1HZWUDQVIRUPHU

*UDSKLF6FDOH
LQFK IHHW1
'(6,*1&2'(
7KH
HGLWLRQRI&DOLIRUQLD&RGHRI5HJXODWLRQV7LWOH
LQFOXGHV

3DUW
&DOLIRUQLD%XLOGLQJ6WDQGDUGV
$GPLQLVWUDWLYH&RGH

3DUW9ROXPHDQG
&DOLIRUQLD%XLOGLQJ&RGH
3DUW
&DOLIRUQLD(OHFWULFDO&RGH
3DUW
&DOLIRUQLD0HFKDQLFDO&RGH
3DUW
&DOLIRUQLD3OXPELQJ&RGH
3DUW
&DOLIRUQLD(QHUJ\&RGH

3DUW
&DOLIRUQLD+LVWRULFDO%XLOGLQJ&RGH
3DUW

&DOLIRUQLD)LUH&RGH
3DUW
&DOLIRUQLD([LVWLQJ%XLOGLQJ&RGH
3DUW
&DOLIRUQLD*UHHQ%XLOGLQJ6WDQGDUGV&RGH
3DUW
&DOLIRUQLD5HIHUHQFH6WDQGDUGV&RGH
/RFDO0XQLFLSDO&RGHV
Preliminary Site Plan
Carlsbad Seaside Village Condos Project
FIGURE 5
Z:\Projects\j1358301\MAPDOC\DOCUMENT
SOURCE: Karnak Planning & Design, 2022
DUDEK
\
\
' '
' '
\
'
' '
\
\
' ' \
' ' \
' ' \
' ' \
' ' '
' ' \
'
' ' ' \
' ' \
' ' \
7 4 August 2022
I

NTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Appendix A
Historical and Archaeological Inventory Report
Scarpelli Property Redevelopment Project
Carlsbad, San Diego County, California 92008

NTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Appendix B
Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation

NTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Appendix C
CAP Checklist

NTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Appendix D
Stormwater Standards Questionnaire
(Form E-34)

NTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

Appendix E
Noise Impact Analysis

NTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK

M A D IS O N
S T

JEFFERSON ST

HOME AVARBUCKLE PL

M A D IS O N
S T

JEFFERSON ST

HOME AVARBUCKLE PL
GPA 2021-0004 Jefferson Mixed-Use
GPA 2021-0004
July 15, 2022

EXISTING

PROPOSED
V-B
R-15
R-15/O
V-B
R-15
R-15
V-B
R-15
R-15/O
V-B
R-15
R-15
From: To:

A. 203-201-01-00 R-15 R-15/O
B. 203-201-02-00 R-15/O R-15/O
ZC 2021-0003 / CT 2021-0001 / PUD 2021-0004 /PUD 2022-0002 SDP 2021-0014 (DEV2020-0016)
General Plan Land Use Designation Changes
Property
Related Case File No(s):

A
B
A
B
Attachment B

Carlsbad City CouncilNovember 8, 2022

Carlsbad City Council
November 8, 2022