According to CEQA, an impact that results in a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource is considered a significant impact on the environment. A substantial adverse change could result from physical demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of the historical resource would be materially impaired (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 [b][1]). Material impairment is defined as demolition or alteration in an adverse manner [of] those characteristics of a historical resource that convey its historical significance and that justify its inclusion in, or eligibility for inclusion in, the CRHR or a local register (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5[b][2][A]).
If it can be demonstrated that a project will cause damage to a unique archaeological resource, the lead agency may require reasonable efforts be made to permit any or all of these resources to be preserved in place or left in an undisturbed state. To the extent that resources cannot be left undisturbed, mitigation measures are required (PRC Section 21083.2[a][b]).
CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4 stipulates an EIR shall describe feasible measures to minimize significant adverse impacts. In addition to being fully enforceable, mitigation measures must be completed within a defined time period and be roughly proportional to the impact of the project.
Generally, a project which is found to comply with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings (the Standards) is considered to be mitigated below a level of significance (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4 [b][1]). For historical resources of an archaeological nature, lead agencies should also seek to avoid damaging effects where feasible. Preservation in place is the preferred manner to mitigate impacts to archaeological sites; however, data recovery through excavation may be the only option in certain instances (CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4[b][3]).
Environmental Impact Analysis
Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.4-9
California Register of Historical Resources
The CRHR was established in 1992 and codified by PRC Sections 5024.1 and 4852. The CRHR is an authoritative listing and guide to be used by State and local agencies, private groups, and citizens in identifying the existing historical resources of the State and to indicate which resources deserve to be protected, to the extent prudent and feasible, from substantial adverse change (PRC Section 5024.1[a]). The criteria for eligibility for the CRHR are consistent with the NRHP criteria but have been modified for state use to include a range of historical resources that better reflect the history of California (PRC Section 5024.1[b]). Unlike the NRHP however, the CRHR does not have a defined age threshold for eligibility; rather, a resource may be eligible for the CRHR if it can be demonstrated sufficient time has passed to understand its historical or architectural significance (California Office of Historic Preservation 2006). Further, resources may still be eligible for listing in the CRHR even if they do not retain sufficient integrity for NRHP eligibility (California Office of Historic Preservation 2006). Generally, the California Office of Historic Preservation recommends resources over 45 years of age be recorded and evaluated for historical resources eligibility (California Office of Historic Preservation 1995:2).
Properties are eligible for listing in the CRHR if they meet one of more of the following criteria:
Criterion 1: Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of California’s history and cultural heritage.
Criterion 2: Is associated with the lives of persons important to our past.
Criterion 3: Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, region, or method of construction, or represents the work of an important creative individual, or possesses high artistic values.
Criterion 4: Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.
California Public Resources Code
Section 5097.5 of the California PRC states:
No person shall knowingly and willfully excavate upon, or remove, destroy, injure or deface any historic or prehistoric ruins, burial grounds, archaeological or vertebrate paleontological site, including fossilized footprints, inscriptions made by human agency, or any other archaeological, paleontological or historical feature, situated on public lands, except with the express permission of the public agency having jurisdiction over such lands. Violation of this section is a misdemeanor.
As used here, “public lands” means lands owned by or under the jurisdiction of the state or any city, county, district, authority, or public corporation, or any agency thereof. Consequently, public agencies are required to comply with PRC Section 5097.5 regarding their activities, including construction and maintenance, as well as for permit actions (e.g., encroachment permits) undertaken by others.
If a project can be demonstrated to cause damage to a unique archaeological resource, the lead agency may require reasonable efforts to permit any or all of these resources to be preserved in place or left in an undisturbed state. To the extent that resources cannot be left undisturbed, mitigation measures are required (PRC Section 21083.2[a-c]).
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.4-10
Codes Governing Human Remains
The disposition of human remains is governed by Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code and PRC Sections 5097.94 and 5097.98 and falls within the jurisdiction of the NAHC. If human remains are discovered, the County Coroner must be notified within 48 hours and there should be no further disturbance to the site where the remains were found. If the remains are determined by the coroner to be Native American, the coroner is responsible for contacting the NAHC within 24 hours. The NAHC, pursuant to Section 5097.98, will immediately notify those persons it believes to be most likely descended from the deceased Native Americans so they can inspect the burial site and make recommendations for treatment or disposal.
California Health and Safety Code
Section 7050.5 of the California Health and Safety Code states that in the event of discovery or recognition of any human remains in any location other than a dedicated cemetery, there shall be no further excavation or disturbance of the site or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains until the coroner of the county in which the remains are discovered has determined if the remains are subject to the Coroner’s authority. If the human remains are of Native American origin, the coroner must notify the NAHC within 24 hours of this identification.
Assembly Bill 52 of 2014
AB 52 expanded CEQA by defining a new resource category, “tribal cultural resources.” AB 52 establishes that “a project with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource is a project that may have a significant effect on the environment” (PRC Section 21084.2). AB 52 further states when feasible, the lead agency shall establish measures to avoid impacts that would alter the significant characteristics of a tribal cultural resource (PRC Section 21084.3). PRC Section 21074 (a)(1)(A) and (B) defines tribal cultural resources as “sites, features, places, cultural landscapes, sacred places, and objects with cultural value to a California Native American Tribe,” and meets either of the following criteria:
Listed or eligible for listing in the CRHR, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in PRC Section 5020.1(k).
A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of PRC Section 5024.1.
In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of PRC Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American Tribe.
In recognition of California Native American tribal sovereignty and the unique relationship of California local governments and public agencies with California Native American tribal governments and with respect to the interests and roles of project proponents, it is the intent AB 52 to accomplish the following:
Recognize that California Native American prehistoric, historic, archaeological, cultural, and sacred places are essential elements in tribal cultural traditions, heritages, and identities.
Establish a new category of resources in CEQA called “tribal cultural resources” that considers the tribal cultural values in addition to the scientific and archaeological values when determining impacts and mitigation.
a.
b.
1. 2.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.4-11
Establish examples of mitigation measures for tribal cultural resources that uphold the existing mitigation preference for historical and archaeological resources of preservation in place, if feasible.
Recognize that California Native American tribes may have expertise with regard to their tribal history and practices, which concern the tribal cultural resources with which they are traditionally and culturally affiliated (because CEQA calls for a sufficient degree of analysis, tribal knowledge about the land and tribal cultural resources at issue should be included in environmental assessments for projects that may have a significant impact on those resources).
In recognition of their governmental status, establish a meaningful consultation process between California Native American tribal governments and lead agencies, respecting the interests and roles of all California Native American tribes and project proponents, and the level of required confidentiality concerning tribal cultural resources, early in the CEQA environmental review process, so that tribal cultural resources can be identified, and culturally appropriate mitigation and mitigation monitoring programs can be considered by the decision-making body of the lead agency.
Recognize the unique history of California Native American tribes and uphold existing rights of all California Native American tribes to participate in, and contribute their knowledge to, the environmental review process pursuant to CEQA.
Ensure that local and tribal governments, public agencies, and project proponents have information available, early in CEQA environmental review process, for purposes of identifying and addressing potential adverse impacts to tribal cultural resources and to reduce the potential for delay and conflicts in the environmental review process.
Enable California Native American tribes to manage and accept conveyances of, and act as caretakers of, tribal cultural resources.
Establish that a substantial adverse change to a tribal cultural resource has a significant effect on the environment.
AB 52 also establishes a formal consultation process for California tribes regarding those resources.
The consultation process must be completed before a CEQA document can be certified or adopted.
AB 52 requires that lead agencies “begin consultation with a California Native American tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the proposed project.” Native American tribes to be included in the process are those that have requested notice of projects proposed in the jurisdiction of the lead agency.
Senate Bill 18 of 2004
California Government Code Section 65352.3 (adopted pursuant to the requirements of SB 18) requires local governments to contact, refer plans to, and consult with tribal organizations prior to making a decision to adopt or amend a general or specific plan. The tribal organizations eligible to consult have traditional lands in a local government’s jurisdiction, and are identified, upon request, by the Native American Heritage Commission. As noted in the California Office of Planning and Research’s Tribal Consultation Guidelines (2005), “The intent of SB 18 is to provide California Native American tribes an opportunity to participate in local land use decisions at an early planning stage, for the purpose of protecting, or mitigating impacts to, cultural places.”
3. 4.
5. 6.
7. 8.
9. City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.4-12
Carlsbad General Plan
The City of Carlsbad General Plan, which was adopted in 2015, includes goals and policies relating to cultural resources (City of Carlsbad 2015). As presented in the Arts, History, Culture, and Education Element and Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation Element, these include:
Arts, History, Culture, and Education Element
Goal 7-G.1 Recognize, protect, preserve, and enhance the city’s diverse heritage.
Goal 7-G.2 Make Carlsbad’s history more visible and accessible to residents and visitors.
Policy 7-P.1 Prepare an updated inventory of historic resources in Carlsbad, with recommendations for specific properties and districts to be designated in national, state, and local registries, if determined appropriate and with agreement of the property owners.
Policy 7-P.2 Encourage the use of regional, state and federal programs that promote cultural preservation to upgrade and redevelop properties with historic or cultural value.
Consider becoming a participant in the Mills Act tax incentive program.
Policy 7-P.3 Formalize a program of historical markers/plaques at resources in state and national registers or of local importance.
Policy 7-P.4 Promote community education of historic resources, integration and celebration of such resources as part of community events: a. Enhance the community’s recognition that objects of historic importance increase both fiscal and community value; b. Promote the use of historic resources for the education, pleasure and welfare of the people of the city. Cooperate with historic societies, schools, libraries, parks and community members to stimulate public interest in historic preservation; and c. Maintain historical reference materials on file at the Carlsbad City Library.
Policy 7-P.5 Encourage the rehabilitation of qualified historic structures through application of the California Historical Building Code.
Policy 7-P.6 Ensure compliance with the City of Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidelines to avoid or substantially reduce impacts to historic structures listed or eligible to be listed in the National Register of Historic Places or the California Register of Historical Resources.
Policy 7-P.7 Implement the City of Carlsbad Cultural Resources Guidelines to avoid or substantially reduce impacts to archaeological and paleontological resources.
Policy 7-P.8 During construction of specific development projects, require monitoring of grading, ground-disturbing, and other major 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.
c. Local
Environmental Impact Analysis
Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.4-13
Policy 7-P.9 Ensure that treatment of any cultural resources discovered during site grading complies with the City of Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidelines. Determination of the significance of the cultural resource(s) and development and implementation of any data recovery program shall be conducted in consultation with interested Native American tribes. All Native American human remains and associated grave goods shall be returned to their most likely descendent and repatriated. The final disposition of artifacts not directly associated with Native American graves shall be negotiated during consultation with interested tribes; if the artifact is not accepted by Native American tribes, it shall be offered to an institution staffed by qualified professionals, as may be determined by the City Planner. Artifacts include material recovered from all phases of work, including the initial survey, testing, indexing, data recovery, and monitoring.
Policy 7-P.10 Require consultation with the appropriate organizations and individuals (e.g., Information Centers of the California Historical Resources Information Systems [CHRIS], the Native American Heritage Commission [NAHC], and Native American groups and individuals) to minimize potential impacts to cultural resources that may occur as a result of a proposed project.
Policy 7-P.11 Prior to occupancy of any buildings, a cultural resource monitoring report identifying all materials recovered shall be submitted to the City Planner.
Education Element and Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation Element Policy 4-P.32 Where appropriate, designate as open space those areas that preserve historic, cultural, archeological, paleontological and educational resources.
Policy 4-P.34 Promote expansion of recreational and educational use opportunities in areas of significant ecological value, such as lagoons, where discretionary use of the resource allows. Consider partnering with private foundations for the conservation of such lands and the development of educational programming. Combine historically significant sites with recreational learning opportunities, where possible. Utilize community parks in support of historical and cultural programs and facilities when feasible and appropriate. Coordinate the efforts of the Historic Preservation City of Carlsbad Historic Preservation Ordinance
As detailed in Title 22 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code, the City of Carlsbad Historic Preservation Ordinance (Ord. CS-438 § 3, 2022; Ord. NS-433 § 2, 1997; Ord. 9776 § 1, 1985) authorizes the Historic Preservation Commission to establish and adopt a historic resources inventory, as approved by the City Council, by the procedures outlined in the ordinances. An eligible property may be nominated and designated as a historic resource if it satisfies the requirements set forth below.
Historic resources may be designated as historic sites, historic landmarks, and historic districts. A historic resource may be considered and approved by council for designation as a historic resource if it is at least 50 years, attained significance in the last 50 years, its owner has consented to its designation, and it meets one of the following criteria:
a) It is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history, or the historic, cultural or architectural heritage of California or the United States; or
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.4-14
b) It is associated with the lives of persons important to local, California, or United States history; or
c) It embodies distinctive characteristics of a region, style, type, period or method of construction, or is representative of a notable work of an acclaimed builder, engineer, designer or architect that embodies significant structural, engineering, or architectural achievement; or
d) It has yielded or has the potential of yielding information important to the prehistory or history of the local area, California or the United States (Ord. CS-438 § 4, 2022; Ord. NS-433 § 3, 1997; Ord. NS-141 § 5, 1991; Ord. 9776 § 1, 1985)
In addition, Section 22.06.030 of the Municipal Code defines a historic district as a grouping of buildings, structures or other improvements that, among other criteria, it is a geographically definable area with a concentration of contributing resources linked historically, culturally, or architecturally through location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling and/or association; and consists of contributing resources share a time period in which most of the original construction occurred or with some other shared historical, cultural or architectural period of context or significance (Ord. CS-438 § 4, 2022; Ord. NS-433 § 3, 1997; Ord. 9835 § 2, 1987; Ord. 9776 § 1, 1985).
Sections 22.08.010 through 22.08.030 of the Municipal outline requirements for projects that would involve the alteration, demolition, or relocation of a nominated or designated historic resource or projects within the boundaries of a historic district. All applications for a permit for work involving a historic site, historic district, landmark, other than routine maintenance or repair, are subject to the review of the city planner and, in certain cases, the historic preservation commission. Except in certain circumstances, such as those of economic hardship, a permit may be issued only if the proposed work would not substantially destroy or alter a designated resource, would comply with the Standards, and would be compatible with the resource’s historical character (Ord. CS-438 § 5, 2022; Ord. NS-433 § 4, 1997; Ord. 9776 § 1, 1985).
Carlsbad Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Resources Guidelines The Carlsbad Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Resources Guidelines (City of Carlsbad 2017; henceforth referred to as “Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidelines”) provide procedures for the identification and treatment of said resources within the city’s boundaries. Among other things, the document identifies, minimal qualifications standards for cultural resources professionals, areas of potential sensitivity for cultural resources, methods and standards of analysis, procedures for the identification and analysis of cultural resources, and standards for the preparation of cultural resources studies.
4.4.3 Existing Conditions
A California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) records search was conducted by the South Coastal Information Center (SCIC) in July 2022 for the proposed project. The SCIC is the official state repository for cultural resources records and reports for the county in which the project falls.
The purpose of the records search was to identify previously recorded cultural resources, as well as previously conducted cultural resources studies within the project area and a 0.5-mile radius surrounding it. Additionally, the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), the California Register of Historic Resources (CRHR), the California Historical Landmarks list, the Archaeological Environmental Impact Analysis
Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.4-15
Determination of Eligibility (ADOE) list, and the Built Environment Resources Directory (BERD) were reviewed, as well as its predecessor the California State Historic Property Data (HPD) File.
The CHRIS records search and background research identified seven cultural resources within Carlsbad, including one built environment resource and six archaeological resources. Among these, only the built environment resource, 2550 Carlsbad Boulevard (P-37-037179), was evaluated for historical resource significance and it was recommended ineligible for NRHP, CRHR, and local listing in 2012 (Davis 2012).
In addition to the CHRIS records search and background research, the city requested a review of the Sacred Lands File (SLF) by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). In accordance with both AB 52 and SB 18, the city conducted consultation with tribal contacts who had either previously requested consultation or were identified by the NAHC as being traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area. The results of the SLF search and tribal consultation are discussed in further detail below.
Historical Resources in Project Area
The following sections discuss the presence of known historical resources, which are properties that have been listed, determined eligible, or previously recommended eligible for listing in the NRHP, CRHR, and the local register, in addition to potential historical resources, which include any property 45 years or more of age that has not been previously evaluated for inclusion in the NRHP, CRHR, or local register.
Known Historical Resources
A review of NRHP, California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) website, the BERD, city of Carlsbad historic property list, and previous historical resources documentation prepared in or for the city of Carlsbad1 identified four known historical resources on or immediately adjacent to one of the 18 sites making up the project area.
Site 4 contains Agua Hedionda/Marron Adobe (2770 Sunny Creek Road), which was previously recommended eligible for listing in the NRHP.
Agua Hedionda District with an OHP status code of 2S, meaning it has been determined eligible for the NRHP and automatically listed in the CRHR. However, the BERD does not provide locational information for this district and it could not be confirmed whether the district is located on a project site.
The property at 2560 Carlsbad Boulevard, located west of Site 14, was identified as potentially locally significant in the 1990 City of Carlsbad Cultural Resources Survey (Roth & Associates 1990).
The property at 2476 Mountain View Drive, located across Carlsbad Boulevard west of Site 14, was identified as potentially locally significant in the 1990 City of Carlsbad Cultural Resources Survey (Roth & Associates 1990).
1 City of Carlsbad. n.d. Working Paper 4: History, the Arts and Cultural Resources, High Quality Education and Community Services; City of Carlsbad. n.d. Carlsbad General Plan, Draft Environmental Impact Report; City of Carlsbad. 2015. Carlsbad General Plan. Septe mber 2015; City of Carlsbad. 2019. “Historic” Properties in Carlsbad. November 21, 2019. Document on file with the City of Carlsbad; Roth & Associates. 1990. City of Carlsbad Cultural Resources Survey. Prepared for City of Carlsbad Housing and Redevelopment. Februa ry 18, 1990; WESTEC Services, Inc. 1980. Regional Historic Preservation Study, Carlsbad, CA. Prepared for Comprehensive Planning Organization of the San Diego Region. April 19, 1980.
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.4-16
Red Apple Inn/Army and Navy Academy, located immediately west of Site 14, was identified as potentially locally significant in the 1980 Regional Historic Preservation Survey (WESTEC Services 1980).
The potential Carlsbad Village Historic District, as identified in the 2015 General Plan EIR, encompasses Sites 14 and 15.
The potential Old Carlsbad Historic District, as identified in the 2015 General Plan EIR, borders a portion of the west boundary of Site 14, along Carlsbad Boulevard.
Although none of the known historical resources are formally listed on the NRHP, CRHR, or local register, each has been recommended eligible for designation and as such qualifies as a historical resource pursuant to CEQA. Available documentation did not, in all cases, provide clear locational information and Table 4.4-1 below may not represent a complete inventory of known historical resources. As such, other designated historical resources may be located in or adjacent to the project area. Future projects should consult Appendix C, which consists of lists of known known historical resources identified in previous historical resources surveys conducted in Carlsbad.
Table 4.4-1 Known Historical Resources on and Adjacent to the Rezone Sites Resource Name Location Proximity to Site Eligibility Status Agua Hedionda/
Marron Adobe
2770 Sunny Creek Road Adjacent to Site 4 Recommended eligible for listing in the NRHP
N/A 2560 Carlsbad Boulevard West of Site 14 Potentially eligible for local designation
N/A 2476 Mountain View Drive Adjacent to Site 14 (across Carlsbad Boulevard west)
Potentially eligible for
local designation
N/A 2787 State Street Adjacent to Site 14 (100 feet
southeast)
Potentially eligible for
local designation
Red Apple Inn/Army
and Navy Academy
2585 Carlsbad Blvd Immediately adjacent to Site 14 Potentially eligible for local designation
Carlsbad Village
potential historic
district
Bounded generally by Laguna
and Ocean drives on the
north; Oak and Walnut
avenues on the south;
Interstate 5 and Jefferson and
Maddison streets on the east;
and Ocean and Garfield
streets on the west
Sites 14 and 15 are located
within the potential historic
district boundaries
Potentially eligible for
local designation
Old Carlsbad potential
historic district
Bounded generally by State
Route 78 on the north, El
Camino Real on the east, the
coast and Agua Hedionda
Lagoon on the west, and
Cannon Road on the south
Site 14 borders the potential
historic district on the north
Potentially eligible for
local designation
Sources: BERD; City of Carlsbad n.d., 2015, 2019; Roth & Associates 1980; WESTEC Services, Inc. 1990 Environmental Impact Analysis
Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.4-17
Potential Historical Resources
A review of historical aerial photographs and topographic maps indicates that, excluding known historical resources, six of the project sites contain buildings or structures that are presently 45 years or more of age, the typical age threshold for historical resources consideration under CEQA (California Office of Historic Preservation 1995:2). As such, these properties have the potential to qualify as historical resources pursuant to CEQA pending further investigation. No additional rezone sites contain buildings or structures that will become 45 years of age within the anticipated buildout year of the General Plan of 2035. Table 4.4-2 below contains an inventory of the Housing Element Sites. The inventory presented below may not be exhaustive, however, and additional potential historical resources may be located on project sites pending site-specific analysis.
Table 4.4-2 Inventory of Rezone Sites
Site APN Location Construction Date Eligibility Status
1 1563011600 North County Plaza,
1810 Marron Road
N/A N/A
2 1563011100;
1563011000;
1563010600;
1563023500;
1563022300
The Shoppes at
Carlsbad, 2525 El
Camino Real
N/A N/A
3 1670805000;
1670804900;
1670803400
Chestnut Avenue at El
Camino Real
Vacant N/A
4 2090901100;
2090607200
Zone 15 cluster,
College Ave at El
Camino Real, and
2820 Sunny Creek Rd
Circa 1978 (2090607200) N/A
5 2100902400 Avenida Encinas car
storage lot, Avenida
Encinas at Cannon
Road
N/A N/A
6 2122700500 Crossings Golf Course
Lot 5
Vacant N/A
7 2120210400 Salk Avenue parcel,
Salk Avenue at Fermi
Court
Vacant N/A
8 2120404700 Cottage Row, 1400
Plame Tree Lane
Circa 1978 Unknown
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.4-18
Site APN Location Construction Date Eligibility Status
9 2120402600;
2121100700;
2121100600;
2121100500;
2121100800;
2121100400;
2121100300;
2121100200;
2121100100
West Oaks industrial
site
Circa 1964 transmission
lines (2121100500,
2121100800, 2121100200,
and 2121100100)
Unknown
10 2132621700 Bressi Ranch Colt
Place industrial
parcel, Palomar
Airport Road east of
Innovation Way
Vacant Unknown
11 2132631900;
2132632000
Bressi Ranch Gateway
Road industrial
parcels, Gateway
Road at Palomar
Airport Road
Vacant Unknown
12 2210140300;
2210150800
Industrial sites east of
Melrose Drive, 5980
Eagle Dr
Vacant Unknown
14 1552001200;
7601663700
Carlsbad Village Train
Station Parking Lot,
near railroad tracks at
Carlsbad Boulevard
Railroad tracks on parcels
are pre-1937
Unknown
15 2040100500;
2040100600
City’s Oak Yard, Oak
Avenue and Tyler
Street
Circa 1964 (2040100600);
circa 1967 (2040100500)
Unknown
16 2110500900;
2110500800
Caltrans Maintenance
Station & Pacific
Sales, 6100 Paseo Del
Norte
Circa 1978 Unknown
17 2141502000;
2141500800
NCTD Poinsettia
Coaster Station, Costa
Boulevard west of
Embarcadero Lane
Circa 1995 Unknown
18 2141602800;
2141711100;
2141602500;
2160100100;
2160100200;
2160100300;
2160100400;
2160100500
North Ponto Parcels,
7200 Ponto Drive
Circa 1964 (2141711100);
circa 1978 (2141602500)
Unknown
Environmental Impact Analysis
Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.4-19
Site APN Location Construction Date Eligibility Status
19 2550120500 Vacant and parking
lot for La Costa
Glen/Forum, Calle
Barcelona west of El
Camino Real
NA N/A
Source: NETROnline 2022
Archaeological Resources in the Project Area
As stated above, the CHRIS records search that was conducted for the proposed project identified six archaeological resources within the project area. Additionally, the city received a response to their SLF search request from the NAHC on November 9, 2020, that indicated that Carlsbad is positive for Sacred Lands. Though it is known that archaeological resources have been identified within Carlsbad, information on archaeological resources is confidential and will not be further discussed here.
Tribal Cultural Resources in the Project Area
As part of its tribal cultural resource identification process pursuant to California Assembly Bill (AB) 52, the city sent letters via certified mail to four Native American tribal contacts who had previously requested consultation. Under AB 52, tribes have 30 days to respond and request consultation.
The tribal contacts included the following:
Cami Mojado, Cultural Resources Manager of the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians Michael Mirelez, Cultural Resource Director of the Torres Martinez Desert Cahuilla Indians Cheryl Madrigal, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer of the Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians Michael Linton, Chairperson of the Mesa Grande Band of Mission Indians As part of its tribal cultural resource identification process pursuant to Senate Bill (SB) 18, the city sent letters via certified mail to 25 Native American tribal contacts identified by the NAHC as being traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area. Under the provisions of SB 18, have 90 days to respond and request consultation. The tribal contacts included the following:
Raymond Welch, Chairperson of the Barona Group of the Capitan Grande Ralph Goff, Chairperson of the Campo Band of Diegueño Mission Indians Robert Pinto, Chairperson of the Ewiiaapaayp Band of Kumeyaay Indians Michael Garcia, Vice Chairperson for the Ewiiaapaayp Band of Kumeyaay Indians Virgil Perez, Chairperson of the Iipay Nation of Santa Ysabel Rebecca Osuna, Chairperson of the Inaja-Cosmit Band of Indians Lisa Cumper, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer of the Jamul Indian Village Erica Pinto, Chairperson of the Jamul Indian Village
Carmen Lucas, Tribal Spokesperson of the Kwaaymii Laguna Band of Mission Indians Norma Contreras, Chairperson of the La Jolla Band of Luiseño Indians Javaughn Miller, Tribal Administrator of the La Posta Band of Diegueño Mission Indians City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.4-20
Gwendolyn Parada, Chairperson of the La Posta Band of Diegueño Mission Indians Angela Elliott Santos, Chairperson of the Manzanita Band of Kumeyaay Nation Michael Linton, Chairperson of the Mesa Grande Band of Diegueño Mission Indians Shasta Gaughen, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer of the Pala Band of Mission Indians Temet Aguilar, Chairperson of the Pauma Band of Luiseño Indians Mark Macarro, Chairperson of the Pechanga Band of Luiseño Indians Cheryl Madrigal, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer of the Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians San Luis Rey Tribal Council of the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians Allen Lawson, Chairperson of the San Pasqual Band of Diegueño Mission Indians Joseph Ontiveros, Chairperson of the Soboba Band of Luiseño Indians Cody Martinez, Chairperson of the Sycuan Band of the Kumeyaay Nation John Christman, Chairperson of the Viejas Band of Kumeyaay Indians Isaiah Vivanco, Chairperson of the Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians The Pala Band of Mission Indians, Rincon Band of Lusieno Indians, and San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians have formally requested consultation.
4.4.4 Impact Analysis
Historical and Archaeological Resources
If a project may cause a substantial adverse change in the characteristics of a resource that convey its significance or justify its eligibility for inclusion in the CRHR or a local register, either through demolition, destruction, relocation, alteration, or other means, then the project would have a significant effect on the environment (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5[b]). Impacts would be significant if the project would:
1) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to §15064.5.
2) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5.
3) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries.
Threshold 1 broadly refers to historical resources. To more clearly differentiate between archaeological and built environment resources, analysis under Threshold 1 has been limited to built environment resources. Archaeological resources, including those that may be considered historical resources pursuant to Section 15064.5 and those that may be considered unique archaeological resources pursuant to Section 21083.2, are considered under Threshold 2.
Direct impacts can be assessed by identifying the types and locations of proposed development, determining the exact locations of cultural resources within the project area, assessing the significance of the resources that may be affected, and determining the appropriate mitigation.
Removal, demolition, or alteration of historical resources can permanently impact the historic fabric of an archaeological site, structure, or historic district. a. Methodology and Significance Thresholds
Environmental Impact Analysis
Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.4-21
The State Legislature, in enacting the CRHR, amended CEQA to clarify which properties are significant, as well as which project impacts are considered to be significantly adverse. A project with an effect that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource is a project that may have significant effect on the environment (CEQA Guidelines Section 150645[b]). A substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource means demolition, destruction, relocation, or alteration of the resource or its immediate surroundings such that the significance of a historical resource would be materially impaired (CEQA Guidelines Section 150645[b][1]).
The CEQA Guidelines further state that “[t]he significance of an historical resource is materially impaired when a project… [d]emolishes or materially alters in an adverse manner those physical characteristics of an historical resource that convey its historical significance and that justify its inclusion in the California Register … local register of historic resources… or its identification in an historic resources survey.” As such, the test for determining whether or not the project will have a significant impact on identified historical resources is whether it will materially impair physical integrity of the historic resource such that it could no longer be listed in the CRHR or a local landmark program.
Tribal Cultural Resources
Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines identifies the following criteria for determining whether a project’s impacts would have a significant impact to tribal cultural resources:
Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources Code section 21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural landscape that is geographically defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is:
Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code section 5020.1(k), or A resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resource Code section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.
In accordance with both AB 52 and SB 18, the City has conducted consultation as the lead agency.
This consultation included written communication with a total of 27 tribal contacts. The AB 52 and SB 18 letters were sent on October 24, 2022, and May 9, 2023, respectively. At the time of the release of the Draft SEIR, the Pala Band of Mission Indians, Rincon Band of Lusieno Indians, and San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians have formally requested consultation. Consultation is ongoing.
The 2015 General Plan EIR determined that impacts to historical and archaeological resources would be less than significant with regard to adverse changes to historical landmarks and other historical resources, adverse changes to archeological resources, or the disturbance of human remains (Section 3.7, Historical, Archaeological, and Paleontological Resources: 3.7-18 through 3.7-23).
Individual development projects are subject to project-specific development and planning review, including tribal consultation, and built environment evaluation if necessary.
1. a.
b.
b. Prior Environmental Analysis
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.4-22
The proposed project involves land use changes to encourage development on 18 rezone sites beyond what was anticipated in the 2015 General Plan EIR and could therefore result in new impacts related to cultural or tribal cultural resources. Therefore, all the CEQA checklist items listed above under Methodology and Significance Thresholds are addressed in this analysis.
Some components associated with the proposed project, including updates to the Local Coastal Plan, Public Safety Element, and Master and Specific Plans for consistency between the city’s planning documents, in and of themselves would not result in physical changes to the environment such that impacts to cultural or tribal cultural resources would occur. Therefore, this analysis focuses on impacts associated with implementation of the rezone program which would facilitate the development of 18 rezone sites listed in Table 2-4 in Section 2, Project Description.
Threshold 1: Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
Impact CUL-1 DEVELOPMENT FACILITATED BY THE PROJECT COULD IMPACT KNOWN AND PREVIOUSLY UNIDENTIFIED HISTORICAL RESOURCES. IMPACTS TO HISTORICAL RESOURCES WOULD BE SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE.
The project consists of amendments to the 2015 General Plan necessary to implement programs of the city’s Housing Element. Although the EIR for the 2015 General Plan found there would be less than significant impacts to historical resources, as discussed below, site-specific analysis for the current project finds that construction activities facilitated by project may cause significant and unavoidable impacts to historical resources.
The project would rezone 18 project sites identified in the Housing Element to facilitate housing.
One site, Site 4, is immediately adjacent to a known historical resource, Agua Hedionda/Marron Adobe (2770 Sunny Creek Road), which has been recommended eligible for the NRHP. One project site, Site 14, is located immediately adjacent to known historical resources that have been previously identified as eligible for the local register (Table 4.4-1). Additionally, Sites 14 and 15 are located within the boundaries of the potential Carlsbad Village Historic District, and Site 14 is immediately adjacent to the potential Old Carlsbad Historic District. There are also 6 sites (Sites 4, 8, 9, 14, 15, and 18) containing buildings or structures that have been that have not been subject to a previous historical resources evaluation but which currently meet the 45-year age threshold generally triggering the need for evaluation (Table 4.4-2). No additional project sites contain properties that will become 45 years age over the life of the General Plan, which will be in effect through 2035. Pending further analysis there is potential for these previously unevaluated properties to qualify as historical resources pursuant to CEQA. For the purposes of this study, these properties are considered potential historical resources.
Although the project does not propose any specific construction activities, reasonably foreseeable development facilitated by the project could impact historical resources through demolition, construction, and reconstruction activities, which may result in impacts to historical resources. Such impacts may include direct physical changes to a historical resource or the introduction of new visual elements into a historical resource’s setting. The City of Carlsbad has adopted policies to minimize impacts to historical resources, which would apply to future development facilitated by the project. As outlined above in Section 4.4.2, Regulatory Setting, General Plan policies 7-P.1, 7-P.2, 7-P.5, and 7-P.6 promote the identification, designation, and retention of historically significant c. Project Impacts and Mitigation
Environmental Impact Analysis
Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.4-23
buildings. In addition, under city’s Historic Preservation Ordinance, projects involving the alteration, demolition, or relocation of a nominated or designated property or work within a nominated or designated historic site or historic district, are subject to a permit review process designed to reduce impacts to historical resources. In most cases, the approval of a permit for a project involving a nominated or designated historical resource would be required to adhere to the Standards, which would minimize impacts to the maximum feasible extent (Carlsbad Municipal Code (or CMC) sections 22.08.010 through 22.08.030).
Finally, to ensure consistent methods and procedures for the identification of yet unknown historical resources and assessment of impacts to historical resources, the City has adopted the Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidelines. Per the City’s guidelines, a historical resources evaluation shall be prepared for developments involving a property that contains buildings or structures that are 45 years of age or older. For the current project, such sites include, but are not necessarily limited to, Sites 4, 8, 9, 14, 15, and 18, where buildings and structures of 45 years or more of age are known to be present. The evaluation shall be prepared prior to any construction activities by a qualified architectural historian or historian who meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional Qualifications Standards (PQS) in architectural history or history (36 CFR Part 61). If qualifying historical resources are identified, an impacts assessment shall be prepared to determine whether the project would cause changes to the historical resource that would impair its ability to convey its historical significance, which would constitute an impact pursuant to CEQA. In cases where a project would result affect a historical resource, avoidance or adherence to the Standards is preferable.
However, where these remedies are not feasible, the City’s guidelines provide two standard treatments applicable to historical resources which may be used to mitigate impacts. These include:
Standard Treatment 4: Project-Specific Public Interpretation and Education. Any eligible cultural resource may be interpreted for the benefit of the general public through the development and installation of one or more interpretive panels in parks, along trails, or at scenic overlooks. The consultation conducted with SLRBMI would determine whether or not this measure is appropriate for Native American cultural resources. The number, location, and content of the panels shall not disclose the locations of confidential archaeological sites. Panels will measure approximately two feet by three feet and will be displayed along newly constructed trails within the permit area. Panels may be upright or may be lower and angled.
Panels will be printed, manufactured, and installed by appropriate and experienced professionals. Immediately following installation, photographs and GPS coordinates of the installed signs will be provided to the City as proof of compliance with this requirement. Should the subject of the panels or signs be Native American culture, then the SLRBMI shall be afforded an opportunity to review and comment on the draft panels, prior to manufacturing.
Standard Treatment 6: HABS/HAER/HALS-Like Documentation. The Historic American Building Survey (HABS), Historic American Engineering Record (HAER), and Historic American Landscape Survey (HALS) programs are administered by the NPS, in consultation with the federal agency and SHPO. These programs provide documentation for eligible buildings and structures. For the purpose of these Guidelines, federal agencies, NPS, and SHPO are not involved; however, documentation comparable with this program may be utilized. It should be noted that this documentation does not mitigate certain impacts to CEQA-defined Historical Resources to a less-than-significant level.
In addition to the above-cited standard treatments, under some circumstances, the project applicant may negotiate with the City to develop non-standard treatments tailored to the specific City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.4-24
conditions of a project. Adherence to the relevant General Plan policies, the Historic Preservation Ordinance, and the relevant elements of the Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidelines would reduce impacts to historical resources. However, these measures do not in all cases require the retention of historical resources, adherence to the Standards. or other actions to prevent impacts to historical resources as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(b). Moreover, although the application of the City’s Standard Treatments 2 and 6, in addition to unspecified non-standard treatments, would potentially reduce impacts to the maximum extent feasible, legal precedent has established that the loss of historical fabric cannot be readily compensated for by commemorative mitigation.2 As such, measures to reduce impacts outlined above would not in all cases avoid impacts to historical resources. Therefore, impacts to historical resources would be potentially significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required because adherence to the relevant General Plan policies, the Historic Preservation Ordinance, and the relevant provisions of the Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidelines would reduce impacts to the maximum extent feasible. No other feasible mitigation measures are available.
Significance After Mitigation
No feasible mitigation measures are required beyond adherence to applicable General Plan policies, the Historic Preservation Ordinance, and the relevant provisions of the Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidelines. As explained above, measures to reduce impacts outlined above would not in all cases avoid impacts to historical resources. Therefore, impacts to historical resources would be significant and unavoidable.
Threshold 2: Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to Section 15064.5?
Impact CUL-2 DEVELOPMENT FACILITATED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT COULD ADVERSELY AFFECT IDENTIFIED AND PREVIOUSLY UNIDENTIFIED ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCES. HOWEVER, THIS IMPACT WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH ADHERENCE TO THE CARLSBAD CULTURAL RESOURCE GUIDELINES.
Although the EIR for the 2015 General Plan found there would be less than significant impacts to archaeological resources, archaeological sites are known to be present in the project area and the vicinity. Therefore, ground-disturbing activities associated with development facilitated by the proposed project have the potential to damage or destroy historic-age or prehistoric archaeological resources that may be present on or below the ground surface, particularly in areas not studied in a cultural resources investigation or when excavation depths exceed those attained previously for past development. Each of the rezoned parcels has the potential to contain archaeological resources. Consequently, damage to or destruction of known or previously unknown archaeological resources could occur because of the proposed project.
The Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidelines addresses treatment of cultural resources should they be identified as a result of development associated with the proposed project. Therefore, potential impacts to archaeological resources would be less than significant with adherence to the Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidelines.
2 League For Protection of Oakland's Architectural and Historic Resources, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. City of Oakland et al., Montgomery Ward & Co., Inc., et al. No. A074348. First District, Division One. Feb 10, 1997.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.4-25
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required because, like under the 2015 General Plan EIR, impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
Threshold 3: Would the project disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries?
Impact CUL-3 GROUND-DISTURBING ACTIVITIES ASSOCIATED WITH DEVELOPMENT UNDER THE PROPOSED PROJECT COULD RESULT IN DAMAGE TO OR DESTRUCTION OF HUMAN BURIALS. HOWEVER, THIS IMPACT WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT THROUGH ADHERENCE TO STATE HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SECTION 7050.5 AND PUBLIC RESOURCES CODE SECTION 5097.98.
Human burials outside of formal cemeteries can occur in prehistoric archaeological contexts. While no known burial sites have been identified in the city, excavations during construction activities could have the potential to disturb these resources, which could include Native American burial sites.
The Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidelines Standard Treatment 11: Post-Review Discoveries section addresses treatment of human remains should they be disturbed as a result of development associated with the project. Moreover, human burials, in addition to being potential archaeological resources, have specific provisions for treatment in PRC Section 5097. The California Health and Safety Code (Section 7050.5, 7051, and 7054) has specific provisions for the protection of human burial remains. Existing regulations address the illegality of interfering with human burial remains, and protect them from disturbance, vandalism, or destruction. They also include established procedures to be implemented if Native American skeletal remains are discovered. PRC Section 5097.98 also addresses the disposition of Native American burials, protects such remains, and provides for the establishment of the NAHC to resolve any related disputes. All development projects are also subject to State of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 which states that, if human remains are unearthed, no further disturbance can occur until the county coroner has made the necessary findings as to the origin and disposition of the remains pursuant to the PRC Section 5097.98. If the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner has 24 hours to notify the Native American Heritage Commission which will determine and notify a most likely descendant (MLD). The MLD shall complete the inspection of the site and make recommendations to the landowner within 48 hours of being granted access. With adherence to these existing regulations as well as the Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidelines, the impact to human remains would be less than significant. No mitigation is required.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required because, like under the 2015 General Plan EIR, impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.4-26
Threshold 4a: Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a Tribal cultural resource as defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 that is listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k)?
Threshold 4b: Would the project cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a Tribal cultural resource as defined in Public Resources Code Section 21074 that is a resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1?
Impact CUL-4 DEVELOPMENT FACILITATED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT COULD ADVERSELY IMPACT TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES. CONSULTATION WITH NATIVE AMERICAN TRIBAL REPRESENTATIVES IS ONGOING. THIS
IMPACT WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH ADHERENCE TO THE CARLSBAD CULTURAL RESOURCE GUIDELINES.
As part of its tribal cultural resources identification process under AB 52 and SB18, the city sent letters via certified mail to twenty-seven tribal contacts that were identified as traditionally and culturally affiliated with the project area. The Pala Band of Mission Indians, Rincon Band of Lusieno Indians, and San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians have formally requested consultation and consultation with these tribes is ongoing. Although no specific tribal cultural resources on the rezone sites have been identified during the preparation of this document, tribal cultural resources are known to exist in Carlsbad. Development facilitated by the proposed project has the potential to adversely impact tribal cultural resources. The Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidelines addresses identification and treatment of tribal cultural resources that may be impacted as a result of development associated with the proposed project. Therefore, potential impacts to tribal cultural resources would be less than significant with adherence to the Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidelines. No mitigation is required.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required because, like under the 2015 General Plan EIR, impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
The geographic scope for cumulative cultural resource impacts includes areas in the vicinity Carlsbad, including adjacent unincorporated County land and adjacent incorporated cities. This geographic scope is appropriate for cultural resources because such resources are regionally specific. The geographic scope for cumulative tribal cultural resource impacts includes Luiseño and Kumeyaay/Diegueño traditional territory. This geographic scope is appropriate for tribal cultural resources because tribal cultural resources are regionally specific and determined by the local tribes. Cumulative buildout in this region would have the potential to adversely impact cultural and tribal cultural resources.
It is possible that future cumulative projects would result in impacts to known or unknown historical resources. While impacts to such resources would be addressed on a case-by-case basis and would likely be subject to mitigation measures similar to those imposed for development facilitated by the project, cumulative development may result in direct or indirect impacts to historical resources. As such, cumulative historical impacts would be significant. Development facilitated by the project d. Cumulative Impacts
Environmental Impact Analysis
Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.4-27
would adhere to the provisions of the Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidelines related to historical resources. However, even after implementation of these guidelines, the proposed project would result in a considerable contribution to this cumulative impact.
Buildout of cumulative projects would result in significant cumulative impacts to unknown archaeological resources. In the event that individual cumulative projects would result in impacts to known or unknown cultural resources, impacts to such resources would be addressed on a case-by- case basis, and would likely be subject to mitigation measures similar to those imposed for development facilitated by the project. As such, cumulative archaeological impacts would be less than significant without mitigation as development facilitated by the project must adhere to the Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidelines. With adherence to these guidelines, impacts to archaeological resources would be less than significant; therefore, the proposed project would not result in a considerable contribution to this cumulative impact.
Future projects and cumulative projects in the region would involve ground-disturbing activities which could encounter human remains. If human remains are found, the proposed project and cumulative projects would be required to comply with the State of California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, as described in Impact CUL-3, above. With adherence to the Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidelines and existing regulations relating to human remains, cumulative impacts would be less than significant, and the proposed project would not result in a considerable contribution to this cumulative impact.
Cumulative development in the region would disturb areas with the potential to contain tribal cultural resources. Given the potential to damage these unknown tribal cultural resources, cumulative impacts could be significant. Cumulative projects are reviewed separately by the appropriate jurisdiction and undergo environmental review when it is determined that the potential for significant impacts exists. In the event that future cumulative projects would result in impacts to known or unknown tribal cultural resources, impacts to such resources would be addressed on a case-by-case basis, and would be subject to the Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidelines. With adherence to these guidelines, cumulative impacts would be less than significant, and the proposed project would not result in a considerable contribution to this cumulative impact.
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.4-28
This page intentionally left blank.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Geology and Soils
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.5-1
4.5 Geology and Soils
This section addresses the potential physical environmental effects related to seismic hazards, underlying soil characteristics, slope stability, erosion, and paleontological resources within the City of Carlsbad from implementation of the project.
4.5.1 Setting
a. Regional Geology
Carlsbad is situated in the Peninsular Ranges, the southwestern most province of the 11 major geomorphic provinces1 in California (California Geological Survey [CGS] 2002). In general, the Peninsular Ranges consist of northwest-southeast trending mountain ranges and faults. More specifically, the City of Carlsbad lies in the Coastal Plain Region of the Peninsular Ranges, which extends from the Pacific Coast to the western foothills of the Peninsular Ranges (County of San Diego 2007). The Coastal Plain Region is underlain by marine and non-marine sedimentary rocks deposited within the last 75 million years overlying a basement consisting of plutonic igneous rocks. b. Local Geology and Soils
Carlsbad is within the coastal portion of the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province, a region characterized by northwest-trending structural blocks and intervening fault zones. Typical lithologies in the Peninsular Ranges include a variety of igneous, intrusive rocks associated with the Cretaceous-age (between approximately 65 and 135 million years old) Southern California Batholith (a large igneous intrusive body). In western San Diego County, batholithic rocks are often intruded into Jurassic-age (between approximately 135 and 195 million years old) metavolcanic and/or metasedimentary units, with these basement rocks locally overlain by Tertiary-age (between approximately 2 and 65 million years old) marine and non-marine sedimentary strata. Tertiary rocks in the western portion of the county are associated primarily with a number of sea level advance and retreat cycles over approximately the last 55 million years, including sedimentary units in Carlsbad and vicinity as described below (City of Carlsbad 2014).
Topographically, the Peninsular Ranges Province is composed of generally parallel ranges of steep- sloping hills and mountains separated by alluvial valleys. More recent uplift and erosion has produced the characteristic canyon and mesa topography present today in western San Diego County, as well as the deposition of surficial materials including Quaternary-age (less than approximately two million years old) alluvium, colluvium and topsoil (City of Carlsbad 2014).
The elevation of the city ranges from approximately sea level to 1,000 feet above mean sea level (United States Geological Survey [USGS] 2023). Surficial soils primarily consist of clays, loams, and sands, including but not limited to Altamont clay, Diablo clay, Bonsall loam, Chesterton loam, Cieneba loam, Escondio loam, Exchequer loam, Fallbrook loam, Friant loam, Gaviota loam, Huerhuero loam, Las Posas loam, Carlsbad sand, Corralitos sand, Las Flores sand, Marina sand. The most abundant soil orders
2 include Alfisols, Entisols, Inceptisols, Mollisols, and Vertisols. The soil orders in the Oceanside Quadrangle, in which the city is located, is shown in Figure 4.5-1.
1 A geomorphic province is defined as a region of unique topography and geology that is distinguished from other regions based on its landforms and geologic history.
2 Soil orders represent a grouping of soils with distinct characteristics and ecological significance.
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.5-2
Figure 4.5-1 Soil Orders in Carlsbad
:... _. J City Li mits
Highway
Major Street
Planned Street
Railro ad
- Potentia l Housing Sites*
Dominant Soil Order
- Alfisols
Entiso ls
lncepti sols
Mol lisols
Verti sols
Bodies of Water
No Soil
- Data Not Availab le
• Site 13 was designated as a low priority
site by the City Council and is therefore
not shown on this map
N
o~--....,.., o~;_s ___ _.1.s A
Miles ~
Imagery provided by Esri and its licensors © 2023.
Additional data provided by City of Carlsbad, 2022; SSURGO, 2021.
City of
Encinitas
Environmental Impact Analysis
Geology and Soils
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.5-3
c. Geologic and Seismic Hazards
Earthquake Faults
CGS establishes criteria for classification of faults. There are no active faults that run directly through Carlsbad; however, there are several regional Quaternary faults offshore of Carlsbad (Figure 4.5-2). Quaternary-age faults are less than approximately 2 million years old. Age- undetermined faults are faults where the recency of fault movement has not been determined.
Faults can be “age-undetermined” if the fault in question has simply not been studied to determine its recency of movement. Within the framework of the Alquist-Priolo Act (the A-P Act; see discussion in section 4.5.2 below), age-undetermined faults within regulatory Earthquake Fault Zones can be considered Holocene-active (surface displacement within the past 11,700 years) until proven otherwise (CGS 2018).
Regional Faults
There are no active faults that run directly through Carlsbad. Additionally, CGS does not include Carlsbad on its list of cities affected by Alquist–Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones. The Elsinore Fault Zone and Newport-Inglewood-Rose Canyon Fault Zone, the nearest Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones, are located approximately 20 miles northeast and 21 miles south, respectively, of Carlsbad.
Other faults in the region include the Coronado Bank, La Nacion, Agua Caliente, and San Jacinto.
Figure 4.5-2 shows regional faults around Carlsbad.
Recent Regional Seismic Activity
Historic documents record that an earthquake centered either on the Rose Canyon or Coronado Bank faults struck San Diego on May 27, 1862, damaging buildings in Old Town San Diego and causing ground rupture near the San Diego River mouth. This earthquake is believed to have had a magnitude of about 6.0 based on descriptions of the damage it caused. The strongest recorded earthquake in the San Diego area was a magnitude of 5.3 on the Richter scale that struck on July 13, 1986, on the Coronado Bank fault, 25 miles offshore of Solana Beach. There have been several moderate earthquakes recorded within the Rose Canyon Fault Zone as well. On June 17, 1985, three earthquakes hit San Diego measuring 3.9, 4.0, and 3.9, respectively, and on October 28, 1986, a stronger earthquake with a magnitude of 4.7 occurred (City of Carlsbad 2014).
Surface Rupture
Surface rupture represents the breakage of ground along the surface trace of a fault, which is caused by the intersection of the fault surface area ruptured in an earthquake with the Earth's surface. Fault displacement occurs when material on one side of a fault moves relative to the material on the other side of the fault. This can have particularly adverse consequences when buildings are located within the rupture zone. It is not feasible, from a structural or economic perspective, to design and build structures that can accommodate rapid displacement involved with surface rupture. Amounts of surface displacement can range from a few inches to tens of feet during a rupture event.
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.5-4
Figure 4.5-2 Regional Faults near Carlsbad
t.
'
\\
\~
\ ~
\\ San l
Imagery provided by Esri and its ficensors © 2023.
Additional data provided by City of Carlsbad, 2022; USGS, 2020. • 6
·. / \ Oceansld
·~~
·-~
'
~i ~s-
t;;
\ "-;; .. -· .....
~ . . ... \ ····
\
~
,~
~ , I
City Limit s
Highway
Majo r Street
Planned Street
Railroad
Fault Lines
0 Offshore Quaternary Faults
latest Quaternary (<15,000 years), well
constrained location
latest Quaternary (<15,000 years),
moderately constrained location
latest Quaternary (<15,000 years),
inferred location
late Quate rnary (<130,000 years), we ll
constrained location
late Quate rnary (<130,000 years),
moderately constrained location
late Quaternary (<130,000 years),
inferred locatio n
undi fferen ti ated Quaternary(<l,6
million years), well constrained location
undi fferen ti ated Quaternary(<l,6
million years), moderately constrained
locatio n
undifferentiated Quaternary(<L6
million years), infer red location
6 N
A
Environmental Impact Analysis
Geology and Soils
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.5-5
The A-P Act regulates development near active faults to mitigate the hazard of surface fault rupture.
Essentially, this Act contains two requirements: (1) it prohibits the location of most structures for human occupancy across the trace of active faults; and (2) it establishes Earthquake Fault Zones and requires geologic/seismic studies of all proposed developments within 1,000 feet of the zone. The Earthquake Fault Zones are delineated and defined by the State Geologist and identify areas where potential surface rupture along a fault could occur. There are no Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones in Carlsbad, as described above.
Ground Shaking
Fault activity has the potential to result in ground shaking, which can be of varying intensity depending on the intensity of earthquake activity, proximity to that activity, and local soils and geology conditions. Carlsbad lies in a seismically active region of Southern California. The type and magnitude of seismic impacts are dependent on the distance to the epicenter of the earthquake, the nature of the fault on which the earthquake is located, and the intensity and magnitude of the seismic event. Although located near fault lines, Carlsbad lies within a medium-low probabilistic peak ground acceleration zone, or an area of medium-low ground shaking potential (City of Carlsbad 2014).
The major cause of structural damage from earthquakes is ground shaking. The intensity of ground motion expected at a particular site depends upon the magnitude of the earthquake, the distance to the epicenter, and the geology of the area between the epicenter and the property. Greater movement can be expected at sites located on poorly consolidated material, such as alluvium, within close proximity to the causative fault, or in response to a seismic event of great magnitude. d. Secondary Seismic Effects
Potential hazards resulting from the secondary effects of ground-shaking include liquefaction and earthquake-induced landslides. Soil-disturbing activities such as grading, soil compaction, and cut and fill activities can create or exacerbate conditions that increase the chance of such effects during or independent of seismic activity.
Liquefaction and Collapse
Liquefaction is a phenomenon that occurs in soils where granular sediment or fill material either contain, or lie immediately above, high moisture content. Ground shaking or other rapid loading can reduce the strength and stiffness of a soil and transform it momentarily from a solid state to a liquid state. Collapsible soils are unsaturated soils that experience a radical rearrangement of particles and a decrease in volume upon wetting, additional loading, or both, similar to liquefiable soils (United States Bureau of Reclamation 1992). Buildings in areas that experience liquefaction may suddenly sink or suffer major structural damage. Most of Carlsbad does not have liquefaction potential.
However, three east-west bands in the northern, central, and southern portions of the city have liquefaction potential primarily from National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) Soil Type D, as well as from tidal flats, riverwash, and Tujunga sand. Figure 4.5-3 illustrates liquefaction potential throughout Carlsbad.
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.5-6
Figure 4.5-3 Liquefaction Risk in Carlsbad
:._ .. J City Li mit s
Highway
Major Street
Planned Street
Ra ilroad
- Potential Housing Sites•
Potential Liquefaction
- Tidal flats
Riverwa sh
--
NEHRP Soil Type D
Tujunga sand, 0 to 5 percent
slope s
,., Site 13 was designated as a low priority
site by the City Council and is therefore
not shown on this map
N
o~---o~·;_s ___ ~1.s ~
M il es ~
Imagery provided by Esri and its licensors © 2023 .
Additional data provided by City of Carlsbad, 20ZZ.
F)
_ _:-··
~;~~ 'f.e
City of
Encinitas
-\:.~ Ou\
\C'"o
.,...~o
Environmental Impact Analysis
Geology and Soils
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.5-7
Landslides and Slope Stability
Seismic ground shaking can also result in landslides and other slope instability. Landslides occur when slopes become unstable, and masses of earth material move downslope. Landslides are usually rapid events, often triggered during periods of rainfall or by earthquakes. Mudslides and slumps are a shallower type of slope failure. They typically affect the upper soil horizons rather than bedrock features. Usually, mudslides and slumps occur during or soon after periods of rainfall, but they can be triggered by seismic shaking. As shown in Figure 4.5-4, the city has mixed levels of landslide susceptibility.
e. Other Geologic Hazards
Some of the geotechnical hazards discussed above, such as landslides and slope instability, can be triggered by or occur independently of seismic events. Others, such as subsidence, expansive soils, lateral spreading, and soil erosion occur independently of seismic events, and are discussed here.
Subsidence
Subsidence refers to the sinking of a large area of ground surface in which material is displaced vertically with little or no horizontal movement. Subsidence originates at great depths below the surface when subsurface pressure is reduced by the natural loss or human withdrawal of fluids (e.g. groundwater, natural gas, or oil), or can occur due to soil compression. Soils in San Diego County are generally granitic and there have been no documented incidents of subsidence in the county or the city (City of Carlsbad 2014).
Expansive Soils
Expansive soils swell with increases in moisture content and shrink with decreases in moisture content. These soils usually contain high clay content. Foundations for structures constructed on expansive soils require special design considerations. Because expansive soils can expand when wet and shrink when dry, they can cause foundations, basement walls and floors to crack, causing substantial structural damage. As such, structural failure due to expansive soils near the ground surface is a potential hazard. Most of the soils in Carlsbad have low shrink-swell potential (City of Carlsbad 2014).
Lateral Spreading
Lateral spreading is a type of liquefaction induced ground failure that can occur on gentle slopes or near free-faces, such as river channels, which results in the horizontal displacement of soil (United States Geological Survey 2015). Lateral spreading can be considerably damaging to foundations, bridges, roadways, pipelines, and other structures. As discussed above under Liquefaction, most of Carlsbad does not have liquefaction potential and therefore does not have lateral spreading potential.
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.5-8
Figure 4.5-4 Landslide Susceptibility in Carlsb ad
:_ __ J City Li mits
Highway
Majo r Street
Plann ed Street
Railroad
.
- Potential Hous ing Sites•
Landslide Susceptibility ••
5 6
7 - 8
- 9
- 10
"Site 13 was designated as a low priority
site by the City Council and is therefore
not shown on this map
"" The higher the number,
the greater the susceptibility
0 0.75 N
1.5 J..
._ ___ M_i.,.1le_s ___ _,I ~
Imagery provided by Esri and its licensors © 2023.
p
I)
Additional data provided by City of Carlsbad, 2022; CGS, Map Sheet 58, 2018. -; -- ';~~·· :
co\011ei
t ~
·· \ 1l ~.
~✓-
-~()'\
· f
."J,-f#,, "I\..,.
0,1.: ,,i
,,, .. ~-
-~~- t .-·
Environmental Impact Analysis
Geology and Soils
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.5-9
Soil Erosion
Erosion refers to the removal of soil by water or wind. Factors that influence erosion potential include the amount of rainfall and wind, the length and steepness of the slope, and the amount and type of vegetative cover. Depending on how well protected the soil is from these forces; the erosion process can be very slow or rapid. Removal of natural or manufacture protection can result in substantial soil erosion and excessive sedimentation and pollution problems in streams, lakes, and estuaries.
Within Carlsbad, erosion from water, wind, and agricultural/development tillage, as well as coastal erosion from storms and rising sea-levels have the potential to threaten the city’s water quality, economic viability, and supply of natural resources. In terms of coastal erosion, beaches are the first line of defense against ocean waves, providing a buffer between the waves and coastal properties.
When beaches are cut back during storms, they progressively lose their buffering ability, making further erosion more likely. The most direct approach to reduce or avoid coastal erosion is to limit the amount of development in the areas likely to be affected by coastal erosion. In addition, the city has identified specific areas where additional protection efforts are necessary, including drainage/erosion, slope stability, and seismic hazards; within the Coastal Zone, the city has designated these areas as part of the Coastal Resource Protection Overlay Zone (City of Carlsbad 2014).
f. Paleontological Resources
Paleontological resources, or fossils, are the remains and traces of prehistoric life. Fossils are typically preserved in layered sedimentary rocks and the distribution of fossils is a result of the sedimentary history of the geologic units within which they occur. Fossils occur in a non-continuous and often unpredictable distribution within some sedimentary units, and the potential for fossils to occur within sedimentary units depends on several factors. Although it is not possible to determine whether a fossil will occur in any specific location, it is possible to evaluate the potential for geologic units to contain scientifically significant paleontological resources, and therefore evaluate the potential for impacts to those resources and provide mitigation for paleontological resources if they do occur during construction.
The Carlsbad Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Resources Guidelines (City of Carlsbad 2017; henceforth referred to as “Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidelines”) adopted by the City in 2017 provide guidelines for managing paleontological resources. These guidelines provide a paleontological sensitivity rating for each of the geologic units mapped within the city by Kennedy and Tan (2007). These geologic units and their paleontological sensitivities are listed in Table 4.5-1.
There are several known geological formations within Carlsbad, including the Lusardi Formation of the Cretaceous Age, as well as the Santiago Formation and Del Mar Formation of the Tertiary Age.
These formations include a sequence of sedimentary rock units that record portions of the last 140 million years of earth history. The Lusardi Formation consistently produces significant fossils and consists of sandstones and conglomerate that were deposited in a shallow sea that covered the region approximately 74 million years ago (City of Carlsbad 2014).
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.5-10
Table 4.5-1 Geologic Units within City of Carlsbad and their Paleontological Sensitivity Geologic Unit Age
Paleontological
Sensitivity Sites
alluvial floodplain deposits Late Holocene Low 1, 2, 4
marine beach deposits Late Holocene Moderate None
paralic estuarine deposits Late Holocene Moderate None
young alluvial flood-plain deposits Holocene and late Pleistocene Low 8, 9 landslide deposits Holocene and Pleistocene Low 6
undivided old alluvial flood-plain deposits late to middle Pleistocene Low 4 old alluvial flood-plain deposits, unit 6 late to middle Pleistocene Low None old alluvial flood-plain deposits, unit 5 late to middle Pleistocene Low None old paralic deposits, units 7-8 late to middle Pleistocene High None old paralic deposits, units 6-7 late to middle Pleistocene High 5, 14-18 old paralic deposits, unit 6 late to middle Pleistocene Moderate None old paralic deposits, units 2-4 late to middle Pleistocene High None undivided very old alluvial flood-plain deposits middle to early Pleistocene Low None very old paralic deposits, undivided middle to early Pleistocene Low None very old paralic deposits, unit 13 middle to early Pleistocene Low 1 very old paralic deposits, unit 12 middle to early Pleistocene Low 3 very old paralic deposits, units 10-11 middle to early Pleistocene Low None very old paralic deposits, unit 10 middle to early Pleistocene Low 6 Dacite Stock Miocene Low None
Delmar Formation middle Eocene Moderate None
Santiago Formation middle Eocene High 1-3, 6,
8-12
Torrey Sandstone middle Eocene Low None
Point Loma Formation Late Cretaceous High 4, 7
Lusardi Formation Late Cretaceous Moderate None
undivided tonalite mid-Cretaceous Low None
Leucogranodiorite of Lake Hodges mid-Cretaceous Low None undivided metasedimentary and metavolcanic
rocks
Mesozoic Low None
Source: City of Carlsbad 2017
Environmental Impact Analysis
Geology and Soils
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.5-11
Figure 4.5-5 Paleontological Sensitivity in Carlsbad
City of Carlsbad Geology
C_j City Limits
D Geologic Units
Paleontological Sensitivity
Low
Moderate
- High
Water Body
0 0.S I Miles:
I I I I I I I I
~ Kilometers A,
I :62,500 I inch = I mile
Map by Amite Simmons, Cogstooe Resource Management Inc., Orange, Callfofnia. 2016
-~
, " l. •• '
Lal<
21 ·So l.inJ Bit.1ch
Copyright e20f1-ef(I") Delorme , N EQ. Sources: USGS. ESRJ, TANA., ANO, Sources Esn d'et5,f!le, USGS, NP
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.5-12
Carlsbad is located in the Encinitas, San Luis Rey, San Marcos, and Rancho Santa Fe, U.S. Geological Survey 7.5-minute topographic quadrangles. The geology of the region was mapped by Kennedy and Tan (2007), who identified the following geologic units within the city:
modern beach deposits
modern to early Pleistocene-aged alluvial floodplain deposits (subdivided into various units) modern to early Pleistocene-aged paralic deposits (subdivided into various units) Holocene to Pleistocene-aged landslide deposits
dacite stock
Delmar Formation
Santiago Formation
Torrey Sandstone
Point Loma Formation
Lusardi Formation
undivided Cretaceous-aged tonalite
leucogranodiorite of Lake Hodges
undivided Mesozoic-aged metasedimentary and metavolcanic rocks Areas of high paleontological sensitivity are shown in Figure 4.5-5. As shown therein, much of Carlsbad is within an area of high paleontological sensitivity, which consists of landforms that typically contain archaeological sites or for which there is a higher concentration of previously recorded resources. The high potential units in Carlsbad are the Point Loma Formation and the Santiago Formation (City of Carlsbad 2017).
4.5.2 Regulatory Setting
a. Federal
Clean Water Act
Congress enacted the Clean Water Act (CWA), formerly the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, with the intent of restoring and maintaining the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the waters of the United States. The CWA requires states to set standards to protect, maintain, and restore water quality through the regulation of point source and non-point source discharges to surface water. Those discharges are regulated by the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit process (CWA Section 402). NPDES permitting authority is administered by the California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and its nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards (RWQCBs).
Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000
Congress passed the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 to amend the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act by invoking new and revitalized approaches to mitigation planning.
Section 322 of the Act emphasized the need for state and local government entities to closely coordinate on mitigation planning activities, and makes the development of a hazard mitigation plan a specific eligibility requirement for any local government applying for federal mitigation grant funds. Communities with an adopted and federally-approved hazard mitigation plan thereby Environmental Impact Analysis
Geology and Soils
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.5-13
become pre-positioned and more apt to receive available mitigation funds before and after the next declared disaster.
To implement the new Stafford Act provisions, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) published requirements and procedures for local hazard mitigation plans in the Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) at Title 44, Chapter 1, Part 201.6. These regulations specify minimum standards for developing, updating, and submitting local hazard mitigation plans for FEMA review and approval at least once every five years.
b. State
California Building Code
The California Building Code (CBC), Title 24, Part 2 provides building codes and standards for the design and construction of structures in California. The 2022 CBC is based on the 2015 International Building Code with the addition of more extensive structural seismic provisions. Chapter 16 of the CBC contains definitions of seismic sources and the procedure used to calculate seismic forces on structures. The CBC requires addressing soil-related hazards, such as treating hazardous soil conditions involving removal, proper fill selection, and compaction. In cases where soil remediation is not feasible, the CBC requires structural reinforcement of foundations to resist the forces of expansive soils.
Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act
The A-P Act of 1972 was passed into law following the destructive February 9, 1971, magnitude 6.6 San Fernando earthquake. The A-P Act provides a mechanism for reducing losses from surface fault rupture on a statewide basis. The intent of the A-P Act is to ensure public safety by prohibiting the siting of most structures for human occupancy across traces of active faults that constitute a potential hazard to structures from surface faulting or fault creep. This A-P Act groups faults into categories of active, potentially active, and inactive. Historic and Holocene age faults are considered active, Late Quaternary and Quaternary age faults are considered potentially active, and pre- Quaternary age faults are considered inactive.
Seismic Hazards Mapping Act
The Seismic Hazards Mapping Act (the Act) of 1990 was passed into law following the destructive October 17, 1989 M6.9 Loma Prieta earthquake. The Act directs the CGS to delineate Seismic Hazard Zones. The purpose of the Act is to reduce the threat to public health and safety and to minimize the loss of life and property by identifying and mitigating seismic hazards. Cities, counties, and State agencies are directed to use seismic hazard zone maps developed by CGS in their land-use planning and permitting processes. The Act requires that site-specific geotechnical investigations be performed prior to permitting most urban development projects within seismic hazard zones.
California Public Resources Code
Section 5097.5 of the Public Resources Code states:
No person shall knowingly and willfully excavate upon, or remove, destroy, injure or deface any historic or prehistoric ruins, burial grounds, archaeological or vertebrate paleontological site, including fossilized footprints, inscriptions made by human agency, or any other archaeological, paleontological or historical feature, situated on public lands, except with the express City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.5-14
permission of the public agency having jurisdiction over such lands. Violation of this section is a misdemeanor.
Here “public lands” means those owned by, or under the jurisdiction of, the state or any city, county, district, authority, or public corporation, or any agency thereof. Consequently, public agencies are required to comply with Public Resources Code Section 5097.5 for their own activities, including construction and maintenance, and for permit actions (e.g., encroachment permits) undertaken by others.
c. Regional and Local
San Diego County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan The 2023 San Diego County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP) was approved by the San Diego County Board of Supervisors in February 2023 as an update to the 2018 MJHMP.
However, the 2023 MJHMP is still pending final approval from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The MJHMP identifies risks and ways to minimize damage by natural and human- caused disasters. It was prepared to comply with the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 to increase disaster planning funding, and is intended to educate the public, help serve as a decision-making tool, supplement and enhance local policies regarding disaster planning, and improve multi- jurisdiction coordination. Topics related to geology, soils, and seismicity are addressed in the MJHMP, including earthquake, liquefaction, and rain-induced landslide.
The MJHMP identifies wildfire, earthquakes, hazardous materials, flooding, and severe weather as the top five hazards in Carlsbad due to the potential loss of life, injuries, and damage to property, as well as the significance in the disruption of services (San Diego County 2023). After FEMA approval and local adoption, the annexes to the MJHMP for each city within the county will be updated.
Pending those approvals, the 2018 MJHMP identifies goals for hazard mitigation in Carlsbad, including “reducing the possibility of damage and losses to existing assets, including people, critical facilities/infrastructure, and public facilities due to earthquakes.” Various actions are outlined in the MJHMP to assist the city in reaching this goal (San Diego County 2018).
Carlsbad General Plan
The following General Plan Arts, History, Culture, and Education Element policies are related to paleontological resources:
3 Policy 7-P.7 Implement the City of Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidelines to avoid or substantially reduce impacts to archaeological and paleontological resources.
Policy 7-P.8 During construction of specific development projects, require monitoring of grading, ground-disturbing, and other major 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.
3 The current Carlsbad General Plan, adopted in 2015, lists several policies related to geology and soils in the Public Safety Element. The existing Public Safety Element policies would be replaced by the updated Public Safety Element policies as part of this project; therefore, policies from the 2015 General Plan that are being removed as part of the Public Safety Element Update are not included in this section.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Geology and Soils
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.5-15
Policy 7-P.9 Ensure that treatment of any cultural resources discovered during site grading complies with the City of Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidelines. Determination of the significance of the cultural resource(s) and development and implementation of any data recovery program shall be conducted in consultation with interested Native American tribes. All Native American human remains and associated grave goods shall be returned to their most likely descendent and repatriated. The final disposition of artifacts not directly associated with Native American graves shall be negotiated during consultation with interested tribes; if the artifact is not accepted by Native American tribes, it shall be offered to an institution staffed by qualified professionals, as may be determined by the City Planner. Artifacts include material recovered from all phases of work, including the initial survey, testing, indexing, data recovery, and monitoring.
Policy 7-P.10 Require consultation with the appropriate organizations and individuals (e.g., Information Centers of the California Historical Resources Information Systems [CHRIS], the Native American Heritage Commission [NAHC], and Native American groups and individuals) to minimize potential impacts to cultural resources that may occur as a result of a proposed project.
Policy 7-P.11 Prior to occupancy of any buildings, a cultural resource monitoring report identifying all materials recovered shall be submitted to the City Planner.
City of Carlsbad Municipal Code
Building Code
The City Building Code (Carlsbad Municipal Code [CMC] Title 18) is intended to regulate the construction of applicable facilities and encompasses (and formally adopts) associated elements of the CBC (Title 24, Part 2, Volumes 1 and 2) and the California Building Standards Code. Specifically, this includes guidelines related to “regulating the erection, construction, enlargement, alteration, repair, moving, removal, demolition, conversion, occupancy, equipment, use, height, area, and maintenance of all buildings or structures in the city of Carlsbad…” Grading and Erosion Control
Chapter 15.16 of the CMC establishes minimum requirements for grading and dictates that a grading permit is required for any grading. An application for a grading permit must include but is not limited to submittal of grading plans, engineering calculations, a soils investigation, and a geotechnical report. The Grading Ordinance is intended to facilitate appropriate planning, design, and construction of development within the city, while ensuring compatibility with associated physical conditions, environmental resources and legal/regulatory requirements. The grading permit requires a stormwater maintenance program, construction stormwater pollution prevention plan, and other such documentation and information as may be necessary to demonstrate that the grading work will be carried out in substantial compliance with all city codes and standards, and the requirements of the city’s Landscape Manual.
Septic Tank Systems
Chapter 13.20 of the CMC governs the installation and construction of septic tank systems within the city. Septic tank systems are not permitted unless the public sewer system is not adjacent to the proposed development, or the utilities director determines that extension of the public sewer City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.5-16
system is not feasible; or the sewer moratorium pursuant to Section 18.05.020 of this code is in effect and none of the exceptions of that section are applicable. All septic tank systems that are permitted are required to meet all requirements of the CMC as well as Chapter 3 of Division 8 of Title 6 of San Diego County Code of Regulatory Ordinances.
City of Carlsbad Landscape Manual
The City of Carlsbad adopted its Landscape Manual in February 2016 which outlines policies and requirements for landscaping and provides guidance for the implementation of CMC Chapter 18.50, Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. Policies within the Landscape Manual are related to sustainability, water conservation, planting, irrigation, streetscape, fire protection, and soil revegetation or erosion control (City of Carlsbad 2016).
Technical Guidelines for Geotechnical Reports
The city’s Geotechnical Report Guidelines identify specific requirements for various levels of geotechnical evaluation, including reconnaissance studies, preliminary geotechnical investigation reports, and as-graded geotechnical reports. Guidelines for all of the noted reports include requirements such as literature review; field investigation/mapping; descriptions of geologic, seismic, and engineering conditions; and conclusions/recommendations to identify potential issues and related mitigation requirements, and to ensure conformance with applicable regulations and standards (City of Carlsbad 1993).
4.5.3 Impact Analysis
a. Methodology and Significance Thresholds
Significance Thresholds
Based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines a project may be deemed to have a significant impact on geology and soils if it would:
Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:
a. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault;
b. Strong seismic ground shaking;
c. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction; or d. Landslides;
Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil; Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse;
Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property; Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater; or
1. 2.
3. 4.
5. Environmental Impact Analysis
Geology and Soils
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.5-17
Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature.
Methodology
This section describes the potential environmental impacts of the project relevant to geology and soils. The impact analysis is based on an assessment of baseline conditions for the area, including topography, geologic and soil conditions, and seismic hazards, as described above under Subsection
4.5.1, Setting. This analysis identifies potential impacts based on the predicted interaction between the affected environment and construction, operation, and maintenance activities related to development under the proposed project. This section describes impacts in terms of location, context, duration, and intensity, and recommends mitigation measures, when necessary, to avoid or minimize impacts.
Paleontological Sensitivity
Paleontological sensitivity refers to the potential for a geologic unit to produce scientifically significant fossils. Direct impacts to paleontological resources occur when earthwork activities, such as grading or trenching, cut into the geologic deposits within which fossils are buried and physically destroy the fossils. Sensitivity is determined by rock type, history of the geologic unit in producing significant fossils, and fossil localities recorded from that unit. Paleontological sensitivity is derived from the known fossil data collected from the entire geologic unit, not just from a specific survey.
The Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidelines (City of Carlsbad 2017) assigned paleontological sensitivity ratings to each of the geologic units in the City of Carlsbad based on previous fossil collections. Geologic units can be assigned high, moderate, or low, paleontological sensitivities.
High-sensitivity geologic units consist of those containing localities that have produced significant paleontological resources. Moderate-sensitivity geologic units are those that have produced a few fossil localities or represent depositional environments that have a high likelihood of producing fossils. Low-sensitivity geologic units are those that are unlikely to produce fossils due to their young age, high-energy depositional environment, or nature of their formation (i.e., metamorphic or igneous rocks). Development within areas of high paleontological sensitivity may be likely to result in impacts to paleontological resources.
b. Prior Environmental Analysis
The 2015 General Plan EIR determined that impacts to geology, soils, and seismicity would be less than significant for adverse effects related to rupture of a known fault, strong ground shaking, seismic-related ground failure, or landslides; soil erosion; landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse; locating development on expansive soils; and installing septic tanks and alternative waste water disposal systems in expansive soils (Section 3.5, Soils, Geology, and Seismicity: 3.5-15 through 3.5-22). It further stated that individual development projects would be subject to project-specific development and planning review, including adherence to standards for geology, soils, and seismicity impacts. The 2015 General Plan EIR analyzed impacts associated with paleontological resources in Section 3.7, Historical, Archaeological, and Paleontological Resources and determined that impacts to paleontological resources would be less than significant with compliance with General Plan policies to protect such resources.
The proposed project involves land use changes to encourage development on 18 rezone sites beyond what was anticipated in the 2015 General Plan EIR and could therefore result in new
6. City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.5-18
impacts related to geology and soils. Therefore, all the CEQA checklist items listed above under Methodology and Significance Thresholds are addressed in this analysis. c. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Some components associated with the proposed project, including updates to the Local Coastal Plan and Master and Specific Plans for consistency between the city’s planning documents, in and of themselves would not result in physical changes to the environment such that impacts to geology and soils would occur. Therefore, this analysis focuses on impacts associated with implementation of the rezone program which would facilitate the development of 18 rezone sites listed in Table 2-4 in Section 2, Project Description, as well as updates to the Public Safety Element which includes policies related to geology and soils.
Threshold 1: Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault?
Impact GEO-1 SIMILAR TO THE DEVELOPMENT ANALYZED IN THE 2015 GENERAL PLAN EIR,
DEVELOPMENT FACILITATED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD NOT BE SUBJECT TO RUPTURE OF A KNOWN EARTHQUAKE FAULT. THIS IMPACT WOULD REMAIN LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.
There are no Alquist Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones in Carlsbad. As shown in Figure 4.5-2, there are no other known faults in Carlsbad. As such, development facilitated by the project would not directly or indirectly cause substantial adverse effects involving rupture of a known earthquake fault. Therefore, impacts related to rupture of a known earthquake fault would remain less than significant, as concluded in the 2015 General Plan EIR.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required because, like under the 2015 General Plan EIR, impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Geology and Soils
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.5-19
Threshold 2: Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving strong seismic ground shaking? Threshold 3: Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
Threshold 4: Would the project directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving landslides? Impact GEO-2 SIMILAR TO THE DEVELOPMENT ANALYZED IN THE 2015 GENERAL PLAN EIR,
DEVELOPMENT FACILITATED BY THE PROJECT COULD BE LOCATED IN AREAS THAT WOULD BE EXPOSED TO SEISMIC EVENTS, INCLUDING GROUND SHAKING, LIQUEFACTION, AND LANDSLIDES. COMPLIANCE WITH THE
CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE AND CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE WOULD REDUCE GROUND SHAKING, LIQUEFACTION, AND LANDSLIDE HAZARDS. WITH REQUIRED ADHERENCE TO EXISTING POLICIES AND
REGULATIONS THAT REQUIRE GEOLOGIC HAZARD INVESTIGATIONS WHERE WARRANTED, CONTROL SITING OF
DEVELOPMENT, AND REQUIREMENT OF SAFE CONSTRUCTION PRACTICES, IMPACTS WOULD REMAIN LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.
Development facilitated by the project would potentially expose a larger number of residents to the effects of seismic ground shaking, liquefaction, and landslides from local and regional earthquakes.
The 18 sites that would be rezoned under the proposed project are subject to ground shaking, liquefaction, and landslides. Specifically, sites in the north of the city (Sites 1, 2, and 4) are subject to liquefaction due to the presence of river wash, tidal flats, or other soil hazards, and most sites overlap with areas known to be subject to varying degrees of landslide potential. Development facilitated by the project would be required to be built to current seismic standards, including but not limited to the CBC and CMC, that could better withstand the adverse effects of strong ground shaking than existing development.
In addition to compliance with mandatory CBC requirements as codified in CMC Title 18, CMC Chapter 15.16 identifies that a project applicant must prepare a geotechnical investigation prior to approval of a grading permit. Additionally, the city sets forth guidelines for geotechnical reports, as described under Regulatory Setting. Compliance with provisions of CMC Chapter 15.16 and Title 18 would reduce potential impacts related to seismic hazards of individual development projects facilitated by the project.
Additionally, policies 6-P.20 through 6-P.31 of the Public Safety Element Update, listed below, would further reduce impacts of strong seismic ground shaking, liquefaction, and landslides, as these polices would require geotechnical investigations and reports for development in areas susceptible to geologic and soil hazards, review of grading and development plans, and incorporation of design features that minimize potential for seismic damage.
Policy 6-P.20 Allow for consideration of seismic and geologic hazards at the earliest possible point in the development process, preferably before comprehensive engineering work has commenced.
Policy 6-P.21 Maintain geotechnical report guidelines identifying specific requirements for various levels of geotechnical evaluation, including reconnaissance studies, preliminary geotechnical investigation reports, and as-graded geotechnical reports.
Policy 6-P.22 Use information in Figure 6-4 as a generalized guideline for planning purposes and in determining the type and extent of geotechnical report to be required for a City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.5-20
proposed development project. When a geotechnical report is required, require submission of the report and demonstration that a project conforms to all mitigation measures recommended in the report prior to city approval of the proposed development (as required by state law).
Policy 6-P.23 Require a geotechnical investigation and report of all sites proposed for development in areas where geologic conditions or soil types are susceptible to liquefaction. Also require demonstration that a project conforms to all mitigation measures recommended in the geotechnical report prior to city approval of the proposed development (as required by state law).
Policy 6-P.24 Prohibit location of critical structures directly across known earthquake faults unless a geotechnical and/or seismic investigation is performed to show that the earthquake fault is neither active nor potentially active.
Policy 6-P.25 Require applicants to conduct detailed geologic and seismic investigations at sites where the construction of critical structures (high-occupancy structures and those that must remain in operation during emergencies) and structures over four stories are under consideration.
Policy 6-P.26 In accordance with California state law, deny subdivision maps if a project site is not physically suitable for either the type or density of a proposed development because of specific, adverse impacts on public health and safety conditions, such as geologic, seismic, or other hazards and there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid such adverse impacts.
Policy 6-P.27 Require qualified geotechnical engineering professionals to review grading plans and inspect areas of excavation during and after grading, to evaluate slope stability and other geotechnical conditions that may affect site development and public safety. In areas of known or suspected landslides and/or adverse geologic conditions, the following determinations should be made: extent of landslide, depth-to-slide plane, soil types and strengths, presence of clay seams and ground water conditions.
Policy 6-P.28 Continue to regulate development, including remodeling or structural rehabilitation, to ensure adequate mitigation of safety hazards on sites having a history or threat of seismic dangers, erosion, subsidence, or flooding.
Policy 6-P.29 Regularly inspect locations with high landslide susceptibility directly following major storm and atmospheric events.
Policy 6-P.30 Develop mitigation strategies for new areas deemed at risk to slope instability by considering the risks associated with climate change impacts which are anticipated to cause more frequent landslides from more extreme and frequent rain events and wildfires.
Policy 6-P.31 M inimize risks from landslides by requiring new development to be sited outside of hazard areas, when possible, and to incorporate design that minimizes the potential for damage.
Overall, compliance with the CBC, CMC, and General Plan policies would reduce the potential for loss, injury, or death following a seismic event and impacts would remain less than significant, as concluded in the 2015 General Plan EIR.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Geology and Soils
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.5-21
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required because, like under the 2015 General Plan EIR, impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
Threshold 5: Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? Impact GEO-3 SIMILAR TO THE DEVELOPMENT ANALYZED IN THE 2015 GENERAL PLAN EIR,
DEVELOPMENT FACILITATED BY THE PROJECT WOULD INCLUDE GROUND DISTURBANCE SUCH AS EXCAVATION AND GRADING THAT WOULD RESULT IN LOOSE OR EXPOSED SOIL. DISTURBED SOIL COULD BE ERODED BY WIND OR DURING A STORM EVENT, WHICH WOULD RESULT IN THE LOSS OF TOPSOIL. ADHERENCE TO PERMIT
REQUIREMENTS AND CITY REGULATIONS WOULD ENSURE THAT THIS IMPACT WOULD REMAIN LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.
Development facilitated by the project would involve construction activities such as stockpiling, grading, excavation, paving, and other earth-disturbing activities. Loose and disturbed soils are more prone to erosion and loss of topsoil by wind and water.
Construction activities that disturb one or more acres of land are subject to the Construction General Permit (Order 2009-0009, as amended by Orders 2010-0014-DWQ and 2012-006-DWQ; Municipal Permit Order No. R9-2013-0001, as amended by Orders R9-2015-0001 and R9-2015-0100; NPDES Permit No. CAS0109266, issued by the California RWQCB, San Diego Region). Compliance with the permit requires each qualifying development project to file a Notice of Intent with the SWRCB. Permit conditions require preparation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), which must describe the site, the facility, erosion and sediment controls, runoff water quality monitoring, means of waste disposal, control of construction sediment and erosion control measures, maintenance responsibilities, and non-storm water management controls. Grading and drainage plans accompanying the Construction General Permit application must include BMPs for erosion prevention and sediment control, fencing at waterways and in sensitive areas, and limitation of disturbed areas. The permit applications must also demonstrate compliance with NPDES permit provisions.
As described in Section 4.8, Hydrology and Water Quality, development within the city would be subject to the applicable NPDES Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit which requires measures to reduce and eliminate stormwater pollutants, installation of appropriate BMPs to control stormwater runoff from construction sites, and that grading and drainage permits be obtained prior to construction. Enforcement of these permit requirements would reduce soil erosion impacts.
As discussed above, pursuant to CMC Chapter 15.16, grading permits obtained for new development require a stormwater maintenance program, construction stormwater pollution prevention plan, and other such documentation and information that may be necessary to demonstrate that grading work will be carried out in substantial compliance with all city codes and standards, and the requirements of the city’s Landscape Manual. CMC Chapter 15.16 also requires preparation of a SWPPP compliant with NPDES permit requirements and implementation of construction stormwater BMPs. Compliance with provisions of CMC Chapter 15.16, along with general CBC requirements under Title 18, would reduce potential impacts related to soil erosion and loss of topsoil of individual development projects facilitated by the project. Additionally, the updated Public Safety Element would include policy 6-P.28 (included under Impact GEO-2), which would encourage regulation of development to ensure adequate mitigation of safety hazards such as erosion.
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.5-22
Adherence to the requirements of the NPDES Construction General Permit and Municipal Regional Stormwater Permit, including installation of appropriate BMPs to control stormwater runoff, and compliance with CMC would reduce the potential for development facilitated by the project to cause erosion or the loss of topsoil. Impacts would remain less than significant, as concluded in the 2015 General Plan EIR.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required because, like under the 2015 General Plan EIR, impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
Threshold 6: Would the project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? Threshold 7: Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property?
Impact GEO-4 SIMILAR TO THE DEVELOPMENT ANALYZED IN THE 2015 GENERAL PLAN EIR,
DEVELOPMENT FACILITATED BY THE PROJECT COULD BE LOCATED ON A GEOLOGIC UNIT OR SOIL THAT IS
UNSTABLE OR COULD BECOME UNSTABLE RESULTING IN ON OR OFF-SITE LANDSLIDE, LATERAL SPREADING, SUBSIDENCE, LIQUEFACTION, EXPANSION, OR COLLAPSE. COMPLIANCE WITH THE CALIFORNIA BUILDING
CODE AND CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE WOULD REDUCE HAZARDS RESULTING FROM EXPANSIVE SOILS AND IMPACTS WOULD REMAIN LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.
As identified in the proposed Public Safety Element Update, liquefaction and landslide hazard potential zones are located in portions of Carlsbad (Figures 4.5-3 and 4.5.4). The project could accommodate development within some of these areas. Of the 18 housing sites, Sites 1, 2, and 4 are located within or nearby areas identified as liquefaction hazard potential zones, and most of the housing sites are located within or nearby to areas with varying landslide risk. These areas could potentially accommodate future development that could be subject to liquefaction, landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, or collapse.
Impacts from these types of soil hazards would be reduced to less than significant levels by the standard development review process for individual projects. Standard building and grading procedures would mitigate most soil hazards. Geotechnical engineering of any landslide areas would be necessary to ensure that slopes would not become destabilized during grading activities. Onsite soil investigations would identify local hazard conditions, which are then mitigated through implementation of appropriate engineering designs as required by the CBC and CMC, and construction techniques and through proper site improvements.
Development facilitated by the project on expansive soils could be subject to damage or could become unstable when the underlying soil shrinks or swells (see Section 4.5.1, Setting). As discussed above, some the 18 rezone sites that would be rezoned have mixed landslide susceptibility and some are located in potential liquefaction zones. The adverse effects of expansive soils can be avoided through proper subsoil preparation, drainage, and foundation design. To design an adequate foundation, it must be determined if the site contains expansive soils through appropriate soil sampling and laboratory soils testing. Expansive soils are identified through expansion tests of samples of soil or rock, or by means of the interpretation of a standard soils testing procedure. The Environmental Impact Analysis
Geology and Soils
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.5-23
CBC includes requirements to address soil-related hazards, including testing to identify expansive soils and design specifications where structures are to be constructed on expansive soils. Typical measures to treat expansive soil conditions involve removal, proper fill selection, and compaction.
In cases where soil remediation is not feasible, the CBC requires structural reinforcement of foundations to resist the forces of expansive soils. As discussed above, pursuant to CMC Chapter
15.16, the city would require preparation of an engineering geologist’s investigation and soils report prior to approval of a grading permit. Geotechnical recommendations within the report would be incorporated into project design, as required by the CBC. Compliance with provisions of CMC and CBC would reduce potential impacts related to locating future development on expansive soils.
Additionally, policies 6-P.21 through 6-P.27, listed under Impact GEO-2, would further reduce impacts of unstable and expansive soils by maintaining guidelines for geotechnical reports, requiring geotechnical reports for development located in areas with known soil and geologic hazards, and developing mitigation strategies for areas with slope instability and geologic hazards. Overall, compliance with the CBC, CMC, and General Plan policies would reduce hazards related to expansive soils and the impact would remain less-than-significant, as concluded in the 2015 General Plan EIR.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required because, like under the 2015 General Plan EIR, impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
Threshold 8: Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater?
Impact GEO-5 SIMILAR TO THE DEVELOPMENT ANALYZED IN THE 2015 GENERAL PLAN EIR,
DEVELOPMENT FACILITATED BY THE PROJECT WOULD MOSTLY OCCUR ON OR NEAR DEVELOPED SITES THAT WOULD BE SERVED BY EXISTING SANITATION INFRASTRUCTURE. NEW DEVELOPMENT IS NOT ANTICIPATED TO INCLUDE THE USE OF SEPTIC SYSTEMS. THEREFORE, IMPACTS RELATED TO THE USE OF SEPTIC TANKS OR ALTERNATIVE WASTEWATER DISPOSAL SYSTEMS WOULD REMAIN LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.
As discussed in Section 4.14, Utilities and Service Systems, development facilitated by the project would occur in areas where existing wastewater infrastructure exists. New development is not anticipated to include the use of septic systems. Pursuant to Chapter 13.20, septic tanks are permitted only when the public sewer system is not adjacent to development or the city’s utilities director determines that extension of the sewer system is not feasible. In the unforeseen situation whereby a septic system would be required, the system would be required to comply with requirements in Chapter 13.20 and Chapter 3 of Division 8 of Title 6 of San Diego County Code of Regulatory Ordinances. As such, impacts would remain less than significant, as concluded in the 2015 General Plan EIR.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required because, like under the 2015 General Plan EIR, impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.5-24
Threshold 9: Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature?
Impact GEO-6 SIMILAR TO THE DEVELOPMENT ANALYZED IN THE 2015 GENERAL PLAN EIR, DEVELOPMENT FACILITATED BY THE PROJECT HAS THE POTENTIAL TO IMPACT PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES.
HOWEVER, THIS IMPACT IS LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH COMPLIANCE WITH EXISTING CITY GUIDELINES.
As discussed in Section 4.7.1, Setting, Carlsbad is known to contain geological units with moderate or high paleontological sensitivity. Development facilitated by the project would involve excavation and grading, which would encounter paleontological resources in areas with moderate to high sensitivity. For projects located in areas underlain by sensitive geologic units, the Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidelines require a review of primary literature and online databases, a paleontological assessment of the project area (plus a one-mile radius) by the San Diego Museum of Natural History, and a field survey to determine if paleontological resources or potentially fossiliferous sediments are present (if the sensitive sediments are exposed at the surface). The results of these analyses are used to create a Paleontological Assessment Report which will provide recommendations to mitigate impacts to paleontological resources, if necessary. Suggested mitigation measures are provided in the Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidelines (City of Carlsbad 2017). Additionally, as concluded in the 2015 General Plan EIR, policies 7-P.7 through 7-P.11 of the Arts, History, Culture, and Education Element would reduce impacts to paleontological resources by implementing the Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidelines; requiring monitoring of ground-disturbing activities in areas known to contain paleontological resources; and ensuring proper treatment and consultation of paleontological resources discovered during ground-disturbing activities. As concluded in the 2015 General Plan EIR, with compliance with these guidelines and General Plan policies, this impact would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required because, like the 2015 General Plan EIR, this impact would be less than significant without mitigation.
d. Cumulative Impacts
Exposure to geologic hazards is site-specific. For example, development on one property would not increase exposure to hazards such as fault rupture and seismic shaking on another property, and therefore there would be no potential for cumulative impacts. Potential impacts to paleontological resources are also site-specific. Other hazards discussed in this chapter, such as soil erosion or loss of topsoil, are more cumulative in nature. For example, development on multiple properties in a watershed may combine to create a cumulative impact related to increased runoff and erosion from impervious surfaces. As discussed in this impact analysis, development on each of the 18 sites carried out under the project may increase the potential for seismic and soil hazards, but implementation of the policies contained in the project, combined with compliance with existing laws and regulations would reduce project-level impacts to a less than significant level. For all the reasons discussed above, the project would not make a substantial contribution to cumulative geology and soils and impacts would be less than cumulatively significant/cumulatively less than significant, as concluded in the 2015 General Plan EIR.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.6-1
4.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
This section analyzes the potential impacts of the project related to greenhouse gas emissions (GHG) and climate change. The analysis is based on the growth forecasts as described in Section 2, Project Description and Section 4.11, Population and Housing, as well as vehicle miles traveled (VMT) data provided by Fehr & Peers in Section 4.13, Transportation. Air quality impacts are discussed in Section 4.2, Air Quality.
4.6.1 Setting
a. Climate Change and Greenhouse Gases
Gases that absorb and re-emit infrared radiation in the atmosphere are called GHGs. The gases that are widely seen as the principal contributors to human-induced climate change include carbon dioxide (CO2); methane (CH4); nitrous oxides (N2O); fluorinated gases such as hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs) and perfluorocarbons (PFCs); and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6). Water vapor is excluded from the list of GHGs because it is short-lived in the atmosphere and its atmospheric concentrations are largely determined by natural processes, such as oceanic evaporation.
Different types of GHGs have varying global warming potentials (GWP). The GWP of a GHG is the potential of a gas or aerosol to trap heat in the atmosphere over a specified timescale (generally, 100 years). Because GHGs absorb different amounts of heat, a common reference gas (CO 2) is used
to relate the amount of heat absorbed to the amount of the gas emitted, referred to as “carbon dioxide equivalent” (CO
2e), which is the amount of GHG emitted multiplied by its GWP. Carbon dioxide has a 100-year GWP of one. By contrast, methane has a 100-year GWP of 30, meaning its global warming effect is 30 times greater than CO2 on a molecule per molecule basis (United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC] 2021).1 GHGs are emitted by natural processes and human activities. Of these gases, CO2 and CH4 are emitted in the greatest quantities from human activities. Emissions of CO2 are usually by-products of fossil fuel combustion, and CH4 results from off-gassing associated with agricultural practices and landfills. Human-made GHGs, many of which have greater heat-absorption potential than CO2, include fluorinated gases and SF6 (United States Environmental Protection Agency [USEPA] 2022a).
Climate change is the observed increase in the average temperature of the Earth’s atmosphere and oceans along with other substantial changes in climate (such as wind patterns, precipitation, and storms) over an extended period. The term “climate change” is often used interchangeably with the term “global warming,” but climate change is preferred because it conveys that other changes are happening in addition to rising temperatures. The baseline against which these changes are measured originates in historical records that identify temperature changes that occurred in the past, such as during previous ice ages. The global climate is changing continuously, as evidenced in the geologic record, which indicates repeated episodes of substantial warming and cooling. The rate of change has typically been incremental, with warming or cooling trends occurring over the course of thousands of years. The past 10,000 years have been marked by a period of incremental warming, as glaciers have steadily retreated across the globe. However, scientists have observed
1 The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (2021) Sixth Assessment Report determined that methane has a GWP of 30. However, the 2022 Climate Change Scoping Plan published by the California Air Resources Board uses a GWP of 25 for methane, consistent with the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s (2007) Fourth Assessment Report. Therefore, this analysis utilizes a GWP of 25.
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.6-2
acceleration in the rate of warming over the past 150 years. The IPCC expressed in their Sixth Assessment Report that the rise and continued growth of atmospheric CO2 concentrations is unequivocally due to human activities (IPCC 2021). Human influence has warmed the atmosphere, ocean, and land, which has led the climate to warm at an unprecedented rate in the last 2,000 years. It is estimated that between the period of 1850 through 2019, a total of 2,390 gigatons of anthropogenic CO
2 was emitted. It is likely that anthropogenic activities have increased the global surface temperature by approximately 1.07 degrees Celsius between the years 2010 through 2019 (IPCC 2021).
The accumulation of GHGs in the atmosphere regulates the earth’s temperature. Without the natural heat-trapping effect of GHGs, the earth’s surface would be about 33 degrees Celsius (°C) cooler (World Meteorological Organization 2013). However, since 1750, estimated concentrations of CO
2, CH4, and N2O in the atmosphere have increased by 47 percent, 156 percent, and 23 percent, respectively, primarily due to human activity (IPCC 2021). GHG emissions from human activities, particularly the consumption of fossil fuels for electricity production and transportation, are believed to have elevated the concentration of these gases in the atmosphere beyond the level of concentrations that occur naturally.
b. Greenhouse Gas Emissions Inventories
Global Emissions Inventory
Worldwide anthropogenic GHG emissions totaled 47,000 million metric tons (MT) of CO2e in 2015, which is a 43 percent increase from 1990 GHG levels (USEPA 2022a). Specifically, 34,522 million metric tons (MMT) of CO2e of CO2, 8,241 MMT of CO2e of CH4, 2,997 MMT of CO2e of N2O, and 1,001 MMT of CO2e of fluorinated gases were emitted in 2015. The largest source of GHG emissions were energy production and fuel use from vehicles and buildings, which accounted for 75 percent of the global GHG emissions. Agriculture uses and industrial processes contributed 12 percent and six percent, respectively. Waste sources contributed three percent and international transportation sources contributed two percent. These sources account for approximately 98 percent because there was a net sink of two percent from land-use change (including afforestation/reforestation and emissions removals by other land use activities) (USEPA 2022a).
United States Emissions Inventory
United States GHG emissions were 6,347.7 MT of CO2e in 2021 or 5,593.5 MT CO2e after accounting for sequestration. Emissions increased by 6.8 percent from 2020 to 2021. The increase from 2020 to 2021 reflects the was driven by an increase in CO2 emissions from fossil fuel combustion which increased 7 percent relative to previous years and is primarily due to the economic rebounding after the COVID-19 Pandemic. In 2020, the energy sector (including transportation) accounted for 81 percent of nationwide GHG emissions while agriculture, industrial and waste accounted for approximately 10 percent, 6 percent, and 3 percent respectively (USEPA 2023).
California Emissions Inventory
Based on the California Air Resource Board (CARB) California Greenhouse Gas Inventory for 2000- 2020, California produced 369.2 MT of CO
2e in 2020, which is 35.3 MT of CO2e lower than 2019
levels. The 2019 to 2020 decrease in emissions is likely due in large part to the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. The major source of GHG emissions in California is the transportation sector, which comprises 37 percent of the state’s total GHG emissions. The industrial sector is the second Environmental Impact Analysis
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.6-3
largest source, comprising 20 percent of the state’s GHG emissions while electric power accounts for approximately 16 percent. The magnitude of California’s total GHG emissions is due in part to its large size and large population compared to other states. However, a factor that reduces California’s per capita fuel use and GHG emissions as compared to other states is its relatively mild climate. In 2016, the state of California achieved its 2020 GHG emission reduction target of reducing emissions to 1990 levels as emissions fell below 431 MT of CO
2e (CARB 2022a). The annual 2030 statewide
target emissions level is 260 MT of CO2e (CARB 2022a).
Local Emissions Inventory
Based on the City of Carlsbad’s 2012 GHG Emissions Inventory, approximately 977,000 MT of CO2e in 2012 was generated in Carlsbad. Transportation was the major source accounting for 49.9 percent of the total, largely due to passenger vehicles, but also commercial trips and buses.
Electricity was the second largest source of emissions at 30.8 percent. Natural gas usage represented 13.7 percent, and solid waste, off-road transportation, water, and wastewater sectors accounted for the remaining 5.6 percent of emissions (City of Carlsbad 2020a). c. Potential Effects of Climate Change
Globally, climate change has the potential to affect numerous environmental resources through potential impacts related to future air temperatures and precipitation patterns. Scientific modeling predicts that continued GHG emissions at or above current rates would induce more extreme climate changes during the 21
st century than were observed during the 20th century. Each of the past three decades has been warmer than all the previous decades on record, and the decade from 2000 through 2010 has been the warmest. The observed global mean surface temperature from 2015 to 2017 was approximately 1.0°C higher than the average global mean surface temperature over the period from 1880 to 1900 (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration 2020).
Furthermore, several independently analyzed data records of global and regional Land-Surface Air Temperature obtained from station observations jointly indicate that Land-Surface Air Temperature and sea surface temperatures have increased.
According to California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment, statewide temperatures from 1986 to 2016 were approximately 0.6 to 1.1°C higher than those recorded from 1901 to 1960. Potential impacts of climate change in California may include reduced water supply from snowpack, sea level rise, more extreme heat days per year, larger forest fires, and more drought years (State of California 2018). In addition to statewide projections, California’s Fourth Climate Change Assessment includes regional reports that summarize climate impacts and adaptation solutions for nine regions of the state and regionally specific climate change case studies (State of California 2018). However, while there is growing scientific consensus about the possible effects of climate change at a global and statewide level, current scientific modeling tools are unable to predict what local impacts may occur with a similar degree of accuracy. A summary follows of some of the potential effects that could be experienced in California because of climate change.
Air Quality
Scientists project that the annual average maximum daily temperatures in California could rise by
2.4 to 3.2°C in the next 50 years and by 3.1 to 4.9°C in the next century (State of California 2018).
Higher temperatures are conducive to air pollution formation, and rising temperatures could therefore result in worsened air quality in California. As a result, climate change may increase the concentration of ground-level ozone. The magnitude of the effect of the increased concentration of City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.6-4
ground-level ozone, and therefore its indirect effects, are uncertain. In addition, as temperatures have increased in recent years, the area burned by wildfires throughout the state has increased, and wildfires have occurred at higher elevations in the Sierra Nevada Mountains (State of California 2018). If higher temperatures continue to be accompanied by an increase in the incidence and extent of large wildfires, air quality could worsen. Severe heat accompanied by drier conditions and poor air quality could increase the number of heat-related deaths, illnesses, and asthma attacks throughout the state. However, if higher temperatures are accompanied by wetter, rather than drier conditions, the rains could tend to temporarily clear the air of particulate pollution, which would effectively reduce the number of large wildfires and thereby ameliorate the pollution associated with them (California Natural Resources Agency 2009).
Water Supply
Analysis of paleoclimatic data (such as tree-ring reconstructions of stream flow and precipitation) indicates a history of naturally and widely varying hydrologic conditions in California and the west, including a pattern of recurring and extended droughts. Uncertainty remains with respect to the overall impact of climate change on future precipitation trends and water supplies in California.
Year-to-year variability in statewide precipitation levels has increased since 1980, meaning that wet and dry precipitation extremes have become more common (California Department of Water Resources 2018). This uncertainty regarding future precipitation trends complicates the analysis of future water demand, especially where the relationship between climate change and its potential effect on water demand is not well understood. The average early spring snowpack in the western U.S., including the Sierra Nevada Mountains, decreased by about 10 percent during the last century.
During the same period, sea level rose over 0.15 meter along the central and southern California coasts (State of California 2018). The Sierra snowpack provides most of California's water supply as snow that accumulates during wet winters is released slowly during the dry months of spring and summer. A warmer climate is predicted to reduce the fraction of precipitation that falls as snow and the amount of snowfall at lower elevations, thereby reducing the total snowpack (State of California 2018). Projections indicate that average spring snowpack in the Sierra Nevada and other mountain catchments in central and northern California will decline by approximately 66 percent from its historical average by 2050 (State of California 2018).
Hydrology and Sea Level Rise
Climate change could affect the intensity and frequency of storms and flooding (State of California 2018). Furthermore, climate change could induce substantial sea level rise in the coming century.
Rising sea level increases the likelihood of and risk from flooding. The rate of increase of global mean sea levels between 1993 to 2022, observed by satellites, is approximately 3.5 millimeters per year, double the twentieth century trend of 1.6 millimeters per year (World Meteorological Organization 2013; National Aeronautics and Space Administration 2022). Sea levels are rising faster now than in the previous two millennia, and the rise will probably accelerate, even with robust GHG emission control measures. Sea level rise may jeopardize California’s water supply due to saltwater intrusion and induce groundwater flooding and/or exposure of buried infrastructure (State of California 2018).
Agriculture
California has an over $50 billion annual agricultural industry that produces over a third of the country’s vegetables and two-thirds of the country’s fruits and nuts (California Department of Food Environmental Impact Analysis
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.6-5
and Agriculture 2020). Higher CO2 levels can stimulate plant production and increase plant water- use efficiency. However, if temperatures rise and drier conditions prevail, certain regions of agricultural production could experience water shortages of up to 16 percent, which would increase water demand as hotter conditions lead to the loss of soil moisture. In addition, crop yield could be threatened by water-induced stress and extreme heat waves, and plants may be susceptible to new and changing pest and disease outbreaks (State of California 2018). Temperature increases could also change the time of year certain crops, such as wine grapes, bloom or ripen, and thereby affect their quality (California Climate Change Center 2006).
Ecosystems
Climate change and the potential resultant changes in weather patterns could have ecological effects on the global and local scales. Soil moisture is likely to decline in many regions because of higher temperatures, and intense rainstorms are likely to become more frequent. Rising temperatures could have four major impacts on plants and animals: timing of ecological events; geographic distribution and range of species; species composition and the incidence of nonnative species within communities; and ecosystem processes, such as carbon cycling and storage (Parmesan 2006; State of California 2018).
4.6.2 Regulatory Setting
a. Federal
Federal Clean Air Act
On April 2, 2007, in Massachusetts v. EPA (549 U.S. 497 [2007]), the U.S. Supreme Court found GHGs are air pollutants covered by the Clean Air Act (CAA). The Court held the Administrator must determine whether GHG emissions from new motor vehicles cause or contribute to air pollution that may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare, or whether the science is too uncertain to make a reasoned decision. On December 7, 2009, the Administrator signed two distinct findings regarding GHGs under Section 202(a) of the CAA:
Endangerment Finding: The Administrator finds the current and projected concentrations of six GHGs (CO
2, CH4, N2O, HFCs, PFCs, and SF6) in the atmosphere threaten the public health and welfare of current and future generations.
Cause or Contribute Finding: The Administrator finds the combined emissions of these GHGs from new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle engines contribute to GHG pollution, which threatens public health and welfare.
These findings do not themselves impose any requirements on industry or other entities. However, this action was a prerequisite for implementing GHG emission standards for vehicles (USEPA 2022b).
In collaboration with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and CARB, the USEPA developed emission standards for light-duty vehicles and heavy-duty vehicles (NHTSA et al. 2016; U.S. Government Publishing Office 2016).
Federal Fuel Efficiency Standards (CAFE)
Under the CAA, corporate average fuel economy (CAFE) standards have been set for passenger cars and light trucks. The State of California has traditionally had a waiver to set its own more stringent fuel efficiency standards. However, on August 2, 2018, the NHTSA and USEPA, operating under the City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.6-6
direction of the Trump Administration, proposed the Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient Vehicles Rule (SAFE Rule). This rule addresses emissions and fuel economy standards for motor vehicles and is separated in two parts as described below.
Part One, “One National Program” (84 Federal Register 51310), revokes a waiver granted by USEPA to the State of California under Section 209 of the CAA to enforce more stringent emission standards for motor vehicles than those required by USEPA for the explicit purpose of GHG reduction, and indirectly, criteria air pollutants and ozone precursor emission reduction.
This revocation became effective on November 26, 2019, potentially restricting the ability of CARB to enforce more stringent GHG emission standards for new vehicles and set zero emission vehicle mandates in California.
Part Two addresses CAFE standards for passenger cars and light trucks for model years 2021 to 2026. This rulemaking proposed new CAFE standards for model years 2022 through 2026 and would amend existing CAFE standards for model year 2021. The proposal retained the model year 2020 standards (specifically, the footprint target curves for passenger cars and light trucks) through model year 2026. The proposal addressing CAFE standards was jointly developed by NHTSA and USEPA, with USEPA simultaneously proposing tailpipe CO 2 standards for the same
vehicles covered by the same model years.
The USEPA and NTHSA published final rules to amend and establish national CO2 and fuel economy standards on April 30, 2020 (Part Two of the SAFE Vehicles Rule) (85 Federal Register 24174). On April 22, 2021, the Biden Administration formally proposed to roll back portions of the SAFE Rule, restoring California’s right to enforce more stringent fuel efficiency standards (NHTSA 2022). Most recently, on December 21, 2021, the NHTSA finalized rules to repeal the SAFE I Rule. The final rule concludes the SAFE I Rule overstepped the agency’s legal authority and established overly broad prohibitions that did not account for a variety of important state and local interests. The final rule ensures the SAFE I Rule will no longer form an improper barrier to states exploring creative solutions to address their local communities’ environmental and public health challenges (NHTSA 2022). b. State
California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (Assembly Bill 32, Senate Bill 32, and Assembly Bill 1279)
The “California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006,” (AB 32), outlines California’s major legislative initiative for reducing GHG emissions. AB 32 codifies the statewide goal of reducing GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 and requires CARB to prepare a Scoping Plan that outlines the main state strategies for reducing GHG emissions to meet the 2020 deadline. In addition, AB 32 requires CARB to adopt regulations to require reporting and verification of statewide GHG emissions. Based on this guidance, CARB approved a 1990 statewide GHG level and 2020 target of 431 MMT of CO
2e, which was achieved in 2016. CARB approved the Scoping Plan on December 11, 2008, which included GHG emission reduction strategies related to energy efficiency, water use, and recycling and solid waste, among others.
CARB approved the 2013 Scoping Plan update in May 2014. The update defined the CARB’s climate change priorities for the next five years, set the groundwork to reach post-2020 statewide goals, and highlighted California’s progress toward meeting the “near-term” 2020 GHG emission reduction goals defined in the original Scoping Plan.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.6-7
On September 8, 2016, the governor signed Senate Bill (SB) 32 into law, extending the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 by requiring the state to further reduce GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 (the other provisions of AB 32 remain unchanged). On December 14, 2017, CARB adopted the 2017 Scoping Plan, which provides a framework for achieving the 2030 target. The 2017 Scoping Plan relies on the continuation and expansion of existing policies and regulations, such as the Cap-and-Trade Program, and implementation of recently adopted policies and legislation, such as SB 1383 and SB 100 (discussed below). The 2017 Scoping Plan also puts an increased emphasis on innovation, adoption of existing technology, and strategic investment to support its strategies (CARB 2017).
AB 1279, “The California Climate Crisis Act,” was passed on September 16, 2022 and declares the State would achieve net zero greenhouse gas emissions as soon as possible, but no later than 2045, and to achieve and maintain net negative greenhouse gas emissions thereafter. In addition, the bill states that the State would reduce GHG emissions by 85 percent below 1990 levels no later than 2045. The 2022 Scoping Plan lays out a path to achieve AB 1279 targets (CARB 2022a). The actions and outcomes in the 2022 Scoping Plan would achieve significant reductions in fossil fuel combustion by deploying clean technologies and fuels, further reductions in short-lived climate pollutants, support for sustainable development, increased action on natural and working lands to reduce emissions and sequester carbon, and the capture and storage of carbon.
The 2022 Update assesses the progress California is making toward reducing its GHG emissions by at least 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030, as called for in SB 32 and laid out in the 2017 Scoping Plan, addresses recent legislation and direction from Governor Newsom, extends and expands upon these earlier plans, and implements a target of reducing anthropogenic emissions to 85 percent below 1990 levels by 2045, as well as taking an additional step of adding carbon neutrality as a science-based guide for California’s climate work. As stated in the 2022 Update, “The plan outlines how carbon neutrality can be achieved by taking bold steps to reduce GHGs to meet the anthropogenic emissions target and by expanding actions to capture and store carbon through the state’s National Working Lands (NWL) and using a variety of mechanical approaches” (CARB 2022a).
Specifically, the 2022 Update:
Identifies a path to keep California on track to meet its SB 32 GHG reduction target of at least 40 percent below 1990 emissions by 2030.
Identifies a technologically feasible, cost-effective path to achieve carbon neutrality by 2045 and a reduction in anthropogenic emissions by 85 percent below 1990 levels. Focuses on strategies for reducing California’s dependency on petroleum to provide consumers with clean energy options that address climate change, improve air quality, and support economic growth and clean sector jobs.
Integrates equity and protecting California’s most impacted communities as driving principles throughout the document.
Incorporates the contribution of NWL to the state’s GHG emissions, as well as their role in achieving carbon neutrality.
Relies on the most up-to-date science, including the need to deploy all viable tools to address the existential threat that climate change presents, including carbon capture and sequestration, as well as direct air capture.
Evaluates the substantial health and economic benefits of taking action. Identifies key implementation actions to ensure success.
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.6-8
In addition to reducing emissions from transportation, energy, and industrial sectors, the 2022 Update includes emissions and carbon sequestration in NWL and explores how NWL contribute to long-term climate goals. Under the Scoping Plan Scenario, California’s 2030 emissions are anticipated to be 48 percent below 1990 levels, representing an acceleration of the current SB 32 target. Cap-and-Trade regulation continues to play a large factor in the reduction of near-term emissions for meeting the accelerated 2030 reduction target. Every sector of the economy will need to begin to transition in this decade to meet our GHG reduction goals and achieve carbon neutrality no later than 2045. The 2022 Update approaches decarbonization from two perspectives, managing a phasedown of existing energy sources and technologies, as well as increasing, developing, and deploying alternative clean energy sources and technology.
Senate Bill 100 (100 Percent Clean Energy Act)
Adopted on September 10, 2018, SB 100 supports the reduction of GHG emissions from the electricity sector by accelerating the State’s Renewables Portfolio Standard Program, which was last updated by SB 350 in 2015. SB 100 requires electricity providers to increase procurement from eligible renewable energy resources to 33 percent of total retail sales by 2020, 60 percent by 2030, and 100 percent by 2045.
Senate Bill 375 (Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act) SB 375, signed in August 2008, enhances the State’s ability to reach AB 32 goals by directing CARB to develop regional GHG emission reduction targets to be achieved from passenger vehicles by 2020 and 2035. In addition, SB 375 directs each of the state’s 18 major Metropolitan Planning Organizations to prepare a “sustainable communities strategy” (SCS) that contains a growth strategy to meet these emission targets for inclusion in the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP). On March 22, 2018, CARB adopted updated regional targets for reducing GHG emissions from 2005 levels by 2020 and 2035. San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) was assigned targets of a 15 percent reduction in GHGs from passenger vehicles by 2020 and a 19 percent reduction in GHGs from passenger vehicles by 2035 (CARB 2022b).
Executive Order B-55-18
On September 10, 2018, Governor Brown issued Executive Order B-55-18, which established a new statewide goal of achieving carbon neutrality by 2045 and maintaining net negative GHG emissions thereafter. This goal is in addition to the existing statewide GHG reduction targets established by SB 32, SB 100, SB 375, and SB 1383.
CARB Innovative Clean Transit Regulations
In December 2018, CARB adopted the Innovative Clean Transit regulations, requiring all transit agencies to develop a plan to achieve zero emission bus fleets on or before 2040. Starting between 2023 and 2029, transit agencies must begin purchasing only zero-emission bus replacements and must have completed the fleet replacement program prior to 2040.
California Code of Regulations Title 24 (California Building Code) The California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 24 is referred to as the California Building Standards Code. It consists of a compilation of several distinct standards and codes related to building construction including plumbing, electrical, interior acoustics, energy efficiency, and handicap accessibility for persons with physical and sensory disabilities. The current iteration is the 2022 Title Environmental Impact Analysis
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.6-9
24 standards. The California Building Standards Code’s energy-efficiency and green building standards are outlined below.
Part 6 – Building Energy Efficiency Standards
CCR Title 24, Part 6 is the Building Energy Efficiency Standards or California Energy Code. This code, originally enacted in 1978, establishes energy-efficiency standards for residential and non- residential buildings in order to reduce California’s energy demand. New construction and major renovations must demonstrate their compliance with the current Energy Code through submittal and approval of a Title 24 Compliance Report to the local building permit review authority and the California Energy Commission (CEC). The 2022 Title 24 standards are the applicable building energy efficiency standards for the proposed project because they became effective on January 1, 2023.
Part 11 – California Green Building Standards
The California Green Building Standards Code, referred to as CALGreen, was added to Title 24 as Part 11, first in 2009 as a voluntary code, which then became mandatory effective January 1, 2011 (as part of the 2010 California Building Standards Code). The 2022 CALGreen includes mandatory minimum environmental performance standards for all ground-up new construction of residential and non-residential structures. It also includes voluntary tiers with stricter environmental performance standards for these same categories of residential and non-residential buildings. Local jurisdictions must enforce the minimum mandatory CALGreen standards and may adopt additional amendments for stricter requirements.
The mandatory standards require:
20 percent reduction in indoor water use relative to specified baseline levels; 2 Waste Reduction:
Non-residential and multi-family dwellings with five or more units: Provide readily accessible areas identified for the depositing, storage and collection of nonhazardous materials for recycling, including (at a minimum) paper, corrugated cardboard, glass, plastic, organic waste, and metals; and/or
Inspections of energy systems to ensure optimal working efficiency; Low-pollutant emitting exterior and interior finish materials such as paints, carpets, vinyl flooring, and particleboards;
Electric Vehicle (EV) Charging for New Construction:
3 One- and two-family dwellings and town houses with attached private garages: Dedicated circuitry to facilitate installation of electric vehicle (EV) charging; Multi-family dwellings and hotels/motels with less than 20 units/rooms: Designation of at least 10 percent of the total number of parking spaces shall be EV capable and at least 25 percent of the total number of parking spaces shall be EV-ready;
2 Similar to the compliance reporting procedure for demonstrating Energy Code compliance in new buildings and major renovations, compliance with the CALGreen water-reduction requirements must be demonstrated through completion of water use reporting forms.
Buildings must demonstrate a 20 percent reduction in indoor water use by either showing a 20 percent reduction in the overall baseline water use as identified in CALGreen or a reduced per-plumbing-fixture water use rate. 3 EV Capable = a vehicle space with electrical panel space and load capacity to support a branch circuit and necessary raceways to support EV charging; EV-ready = a vehicle space which is provided with a branch circuit and any necessary raceways to accommodate EV charging stations, including a receptacle for future installation of a charger (see 2022 California Green Building Standard Code, Title 24 Part 11 for full explanation of mandatory measures, including exceptions).
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.6-10
Multi-family dwellings and hotels/motels with greater than 20 units/rooms: Designation of at least 10 percent of the total number of parking spaces shall be EV capable, at least 25 percent of the total number of parking spaces shall be EV-ready, and at least 5 percent of the total number of parking spaces shall be equipped with a Level 2 charging station; Hardscape areas: minimum No. 10 container size or equal shall be installed to provide shade of 20 percent of the landscape area within 15 years (unless covered by applicable shade structures and/or solar or the marked area is for organized sports activities).
The voluntary standards require:
Deconstruct existing buildings and reuse applicable salvaged materials; Residential – Cool Roofs: have a thermal mass over the roof membrane, including green roofs weighing a minimum of 25 pounds per square foot or roof areas covered by solar photovoltaic panels and building integrated solar thermal panels;
Residential – Reduce nonroof heat island for 50 percent of sidewalks, patios, driveways or other paved areas;
One- and two-family dwelling units and townhouses with attached garages: install a dedicated 208/250-volt branch circuit for EV charging;
Residential Bicycle Parking:
Surface parking: minimum No. 10 container size or equal shall be installed to provide shade over 50 percent of the parking within 15 years (unless parking area covered by appropriate shade structures and/or solar);
Multi-family/hotel/motel short-term parking: provide permanently anchored bicycle racks within 100 feet of visitor’s entrance for 5 percent of visitor motorized vehicle parking capacity (minimum one 2-bike capacity rack);
Multi-family buildings long-term parking: provide acceptable on-site bicycle parking for at least one bicycle per every two dwelling units; and/or
Hotel/motel long-term parking: provide one acceptable on-site bicycle parking space for every 25,000 square feet but not less than two spaces;
Tier I:
Stricter energy efficiency requirements;
Stricter water conservation requirements for specific fixtures; minimum 65 percent reduction in construction waste with third-party verification, Minimum 10 percent recycled content for building materials;
Minimum 20 percent permeable paving;
Minimum 20 percent cement reduction;
Multi-family developments/hotels/motels: minimum 35 percent of total parking spaces shall be EV ready and for projects with 20 or more dwelling units/rooms a minimum of 10 percent of the total number of parking spaces shall be equipped with EV charging stations. Tier II:
Stricter energy efficiency requirements,
Stricter water conservation requirements for specific fixtures; Minimum 75 percent reduction in construction waste with third-party verification, Minimum 15 percent recycled content for building materials; Environmental Impact Analysis
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.6-11
Minimum 30 percent permeable paving;
Minimum 25 percent cement reduction; and/or
Multi-family developments/hotels/motels: minimum 40 percent of total parking spaces shall be EV ready and for projects with 20 or more dwelling units/rooms, a minimum of 15 percent of the total number of parking spaces shall be equipped with EV charging stations.
Assembly Bill 341/Assembly Bill 1826 (Mandatory Recycling/Composting) The California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989, as modified by AB 341, requires each jurisdiction’s source reduction and recycling element to include an implementation schedule that shows diversion away from landfills of 75 percent of all solid waste by 2020 and annually thereafter.
AB 1826 requires recycling of organic waste (i.e., composting). All businesses and public entities that generate four or more cubic yards of solid waste per week and multi-family residential dwellings that have five or more units are required to recycle and compost.
California Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance
The revised Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance became effective on December 15, 2015.
New development that includes landscaped areas of 500 square feet or more are subject to the following revised ordinance requirements:
More efficient irrigation systems
Incentives for graywater usage
Improvements in on-site stormwater capture
Limiting the portion of landscape that can be planted with high water use plants Reporting requirements for local agencies.
Clean Energy, Jobs, and Affordability Act of 2022 (Senate Bill 1020) Adopted on September 16, 2022, SB 1020 creates clean electricity targets for eligible renewable energy resources and zero -carbon resources to supply 90 percent of retail sale electricity by 2035, 95 percent by 2040, 100 percent by 2045, a nd 100 percent of electricity procured to serve all state agencies by 2035. This bill shall not increase carbon emissions elsewhere in the western grid and shall not allow resource shuffling.
c. Regional and Local
City of Carlsbad Climate Action Plan
The City of Carlsbad Climate Action Plan (CAP) was adopted in September 2015 and amended in May 2020. The plan identified GHG emissions targets for the years 2020 and 2035; established a communitywide emissions inventory and forecasts; and included measures to reduce GHG emissions in the areas of energy efficiency, renewable energy, transportation, and water conservation (City of Carlsbad 2020a). Through implementation of the existing CAP, the city surpassed its 2020 GHG reduction targets established by AB 32. The following 2020 CAP goals and measures would be applicable to GHG impacts resulting from the proposed project (SANDAG 2021):
Measure J: New Construction Residential and Commercial Solar Water Heater Installation.
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.6-12
Goal: Install solar water heaters or heat pumps on all new residential and commercial construction. Retrofit up to 30 percent of existing homes and commercial buildings to include solar water heaters or heat pumps.
Measure L: Promote an Increase in the Amount of Zero-Emissions Vehicle Travel.
Goal: Promote an increase in the amount of ZEV miles traveled from a projected 4.5 percent to 25 percent of total vehicle miles traveled by 2035.
Measure N: Reduce GHG Intensity of Water Utilities Supply Conveyance, Treatment, and Distribution.
Goal: Reduce the intensity of GHG emissions from water utilities (including water supply, wastewater, and recycle water) conveyance, treatment, and distribution by 8 percent by 2035.
The city is currently in the process of updating the CAP to better align with updated state targets and further pursue the community’s goal of promoting a sustainable environment. The updated CAP will include revisions to current GHG reduction measures, evaluation of existing GHG reduction targets and forecasts, and expanded implementation monitoring procedures.
City of Carlsbad Landscape Manual
The City of Carlsbad adopted its Landscape Manual in February 2016 which outlines policies and requirements for landscaping and provides guidance for the implementation of CMC Chapter 18.50, Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. Policies within the Landscape Manual are related to sustainability, water conservation, planting, irrigation, streetscape, fire protection, and soil revegetation or erosion control (City of Carlsbad 2016).
City of Carlsbad Sustainable Mobility Plan
The City of Carlsbad Sustainable Mobility Plan (SMP) presents recommendations for reducing vehicle miles traveled, mitigating the impacts of growth and development, and shifting how residents get around the city away from private automobiles toward modes that are more livable, cleaner and healthier. The SMP outlines programs and treatments designed to make transit more convenient, promote walkways and bikeways for short and routine trips, reduce vehicular congestion, and improve safety and reduce emissions consistent with the city’s CAP. Proposed mobility programs in the SMP include Cycling Education, the Carlsbad Safe Routes to School Program, the Carlsbad Transportation Demand Management Program, and the Carlsbad Active Transportation Monitoring Program (City of Carlsbad 2020b).
Carlsbad General Plan
The City of Carlsbad General Plan Update was adopted in 2015 and contains goals, policies, and actions aimed at guiding future growth within the city. Goals and policies pertaining to reduction of greenhouse gas emissions and included in the General Plan Land Use and Community Design Element; Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation Element; and Sustainability Element are as follows (City of Carlsbad 2015):
Environmental Impact Analysis
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.6-13
Land Use and Community Design Element
Policy 2-G.2 Promote a diversity of compatible land uses throughout the city, to enable people to live close to job locations, adequate and convenient commercial services, and public support systems such as transit, parks, schools, and utilities.
Policy 2-G.3 Promote infill development that makes efficient use of limited land supply, while ensuring compatibility and integration with existing uses. Ensure that infill properties develop with uses and development intensities supporting a cohesive development pattern.
Policy 2-G.6 Allow a range of mixed-use centers in strategic locations that maximize access to commercial services from transit and residential areas.
Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation Element
Policy 4-P.52 Participate in the implementation of transportation demand management programs on a regional basis.
Policy 4-P.54 Provide, whenever possible, incentives for carpooling, flex-time, shortened work weeks, and telecommunications and other means of reducing vehicular miles traveled.
Sustainability Element
Policy 9-G.2 Undertake initiatives to enhance sustainability by reducing the community’s greenhouse gas emissions and fostering green development patterns—including buildings, sites, and landscapes.
Policy 9-G.3 Promote energy efficiency and conservation in the community.
Policy 9-P.1 Enforce the Climate Action Plan as the city’s strategy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Policy 9-P.2 Continue efforts to decrease use of energy and fossil fuel consumption in municipal operations, including transportation, waste reduction and recycling, and efficient building design and use.
Policy 9-P.13 Use the city’s Climate Action Plan as the platform for delineating and implementing measures to improve energy conservation, and increase renewable energy use (such as solar) in existing and new development.
SANDAG 2021 Regional Plan
The 2021 Regional Plan is the most recent plan adopted by SANDAG, and it builds upon the goals, policies, and forecasts of preceding plans. However, the 2021 Regional Plan is currently being amended to not include the regional road usage charge and the draft environmental document is anticipated for release mid-2023. The plan combines the Regional Transportation Plan, SCS, and Regional Comprehensive Plan. As such, the plan demonstrates that the SANDAG region can achieve emissions reductions consistent with targets set forth by SB 375. GHG reductions achieved through development consistent with the 2021 Regional Plan would result in corresponding reductions in energy consumption in the region. The 2021 Regional Plan sets forth a long-term blueprint for the San Diego region that seeks to meet regulatory requirements, address traffic congestion, and create City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.6-14
equal access to jobs, education, healthcare, and other community resources. The 2021 Regional Plan polices are built around three core strategies (SANDAG 2021):
Invest In a Reimagined Transportation System. Build a network and fund services that include multimodal roadways; an expanded network of fast, frequent, and low-cost transit; 21st century technology that manages the entire transportation system and connects people to on-demand services; and zero-emissions options for vehicles and micromobility. Incentivize Sustainable Growth and Development. Collaborate with local jurisdictions and fund programs to accelerate housing production while also addressing equity, climate resilience, and mobility.
Implement Innovative Demand and System Management. Reduce solo driving and congestion through increased remote work, carsharing, vanpooling, pricing strategies and parking management programs that leverage partnerships and technology.
4.6.3 Impact Analysis
a. Methodology and Significance Thresholds
Significance Thresholds
Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines state that a project may have a significant adverse impact if it would:
Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment; and/or
Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases.
The issue of climate change typically involves an analysis of whether or not a project’s contribution towards an impact is cumulatively considerable. Cumulatively considerable means that the incremental effects of an individual project are significant when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, other current projects, and probable future projects (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064[h][1]).
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.4 recommends that lead agencies quantify GHG emissions and consider several other factors that may be used in the determination of significance of GHG emissions from a project, including the extent to which the project may increase or reduce GHG emissions; whether a project exceeds an applicable significance threshold; and the extent to which the project complies with regulations or requirements adopted to implement a plan for the reduction or mitigation of GHG emissions.
CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.4 does not establish a threshold of significance. Lead agencies have the discretion to establish significance thresholds for their respective jurisdictions, and in establishing those thresholds, a lead agency may appropriately look to thresholds developed by other public agencies, or suggested by other experts, as long as any threshold chosen is supported by substantial evidence (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.7[c]).
According to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5, projects can tier off of a qualified GHG reduction plan, which allows for project-level evaluation of GHG emissions through comparison of the project’s consistency with the GHG reduction policies included in a qualified GHG reduction plan, such as the CAP. This approach is considered by the Association of Environmental Professionals
1. 2.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.6-15
[AEP] (2016) in its white paper, Beyond Newhall and 2020, to be the most defensible approach presently available under CEQA to determine the significance of a project’s GHG emissions.
The City of Carlsbad’s current 2020 CAP is a qualified GHG reduction plan, because it demonstrates achievement of the State’s 2030 target under SB 32. The City of Carlsbad CAP contains a project- level screening threshold of 900 MT CO2e per year; projects that do not exceed this amount would not contribute considerably to cumulative climate change impacts, and therefore would demonstrate consistency with the CAP. Projects that exceed 900 MT CO2e would need be evaluated using the CAP Consistency Checklist to demonstrate consistency with the CAP and determine if the project would result in significant impacts related to GHG emissions. However, given the plan-level nature of the proposed project, the CAP’s screening threshold would not be suitable for this analysis. Therefore, GHG emissions associated with project implementation are discussed qualitatively. In addition, the proposed project is evaluated based on consistency with the 2022 Scoping Plan, SANDAG 2021 Regional Plan, and City of Carlsbad General Plan for the purposes of reducing GHG emissions and mitigating the effects of climate change. GHG emissions from the construction and operation of the proposed project are provided for informational purposes.
Methodology
The focus of this analysis and the estimate of GHG emissions are limited to only those potential emissions that would result from net new buildout of the project, which includes VMT modeling for Carlsbad. While emissions generated in Carlsbad, such as those emissions generated by businesses or individual operations, may contribute to GHG emissions globally, only those emissions that may change under project implementation are included in this SEIR as a reasonable approach to estimate GHG impacts of the project.
To calculate GHG emissions for informational purposes, the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) version 2022.1 was used to estimate GHG emissions associated with the project.
Calculations of CO
2, CH4, and N2O emissions are provided to identify the magnitude of potential project effects related to GHG emissions. The analysis focuses on CO2, CH4, and N2O because these comprise 98 percent of all GHG emissions by volume and are the GHG emissions the proposed project would emit in the largest quantities (IPCC 2021). Emissions of all GHGs are converted into their equivalent GWP in terms of CO2 (i.e., CO2e). Minimal amounts of other GHGs (such as chlorofluorocarbons [CFCs]) would be emitted; however, these other GHG emissions would not substantially add to the total.
Short-term Emissions
The California Air Pollution Control Officer Association (CAPCOA) does not discuss whether any of the suggested threshold approaches adequately address impacts from temporary construction activity. As stated in the CEQA and Climate Change white paper, “more study is needed to make this assessment or to develop separate thresholds for construction activity.” (CAPCOA, 2008). In addition, the City of Carlsbad has not identified any construction-related GHG emissions thresholds.
Construction-related emissions are speculative at the plan level because such emissions are dependent on the characteristics of individual development projects. However, because construction associated with development envisioned by the proposed project would generate temporary GHG emissions (primarily due to the operation of construction equipment and truck trips), a qualitative analysis is provided below.
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.6-16
Long-term Emissions
Long term emissions were analyzed quantitatively using the methodologies and assumptions presented in Section 4.2.2 (c), Air Quality Methodology. In the absence of an applicable quantitative threshold, emissions are presented for informational purposes, and the proposed project’s operational impacts are discussed qualitatively.
b. Prior Environmental Analysis
The 2015 General Plan EIR determined that impacts related to GHG emissions would be less than significant with implementation of the City of Carlsbad CAP. It determined that growth facilitated by the General Plan would generate greenhouse gas emissions both directly and indirectly, however such emissions would result in a less than significant impact. Additionally, the 2015 General Plan EIR found that buildout under the General Plan would not conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases.
The proposed project involves development on sites beyond what was anticipated in the 2015 General Plan EIR and could therefore result in new impacts related to GHG. Therefore, all the CEQA checklist items listed above under Methodology and Significance Thresholds are addressed in this analysis.
c. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Some components associated with the proposed project, including updates to the Local Coastal Plan, Public Safety Element, and Master and Specific Plans for consistency between the city’s planning documents, in and of themselves would not result in physical changes to the environment such that impacts related to GHG would occur. Therefore, this analysis focuses on impacts associated with implementation of the rezone program which would facilitate the development of 18 rezone sites listed in Table 2-4 in Section 2, Project Description.
Threshold 1: Would the project generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment?
Threshold 2: Would the project conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of greenhouse gases? Impact GHG-1 NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT FACILITATED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD GENERATE TEMPORARY AND LONG-TERM INCREASES IN GHG EMISSIONS. BECAUSE THE PROPOSED PROJECT
INCLUDES ADDITIONAL HOUSING NOT INCLUDED IN FORECASTING OR REDUCTION GOALS IN THOSE PLANS, THE
PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD CONFLICT WITH THE GHG EMISSIONS GOALS OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD CLIMATE ACTION PLAN AND 2015 GENERAL PLAN. THIS IMPACT WOULD BE SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE.
Consistency with Applicable Plans and Policies
City of Carlsbad Climate Action Plan
The City of Carlsbad CAP outlines goals, strategies, and actions for reducing emissions and combating climate change. The CAP ensures that Carlsbad does its part to contribute to the goals of AB 32 and its successor legislation, SB 32, to reduce its GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, and to 40 percent below 1990 by 2030. The horizon year for this CAP is 2035, corresponding with the General Plan buildout year. The CAP uses a linear trajectory in emissions reductions between 2030 Environmental Impact Analysis
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.6-17
and 2050 to determine the 2035 target, approximately 52 percent below 2012 baseline. The CAP’s GHG reduction measures describe goals, amount of reduction in 2035, and actions to meet the target levels, and include but are not limited to the following:
Commercial and industrial photovoltaic systems
Single-family, multi-family and commercial efficiency retrofits Solar water heater/heat pump installation
Efficient lighting standards
Increased zero-emissions vehicle travel
Transportation Demand Management (TDM)
Citywide renewable projects
Water delivery and conservation
The proposed project would be consistent with the applicable measures, as stated in the Regulatory Setting section, by complying with existing General Plan policies (such as Policies 9-G.2, 9-G.3, 9-P.1, 9-P.2, and 9-P.13), and the latest Title 24 Green Building Code and Building Efficiency Energy Standards. Such policies would be consistent with requirements contained in the 2022 Title 24 standards, such as installing photovoltaic systems and energy-efficient LED lighting, water-efficient faucets and toilets, water efficient landscaping and irrigation, and recycling. In addition, future projects would be required to install electric vehicle charging stations consistent with the 2022 CALGreen Standards for new residential construction. Development facilitated by the project would be served by San Diego Gas & Electric or Clean Energy Alliance, both of which are required to increase their renewable energy procurement in accordance with SB 100 targets.
However, the proposed project represents an increase in housing units that were not accounted for in the CAP, and thus GHG emissions from the proposed project were not accounted for in the CAP analysis. Therefore, the targets and measures in the existing CAP do not take into account the growth accommodated by the proposed project and thus the proposed project would not be consistent with the existing City of Carlsbad CAP.
Carlsbad General Plan
The 2015 General Plan provides a consistent framework for land use and development decisions consistent with an established community vision. As the equivalent of a local “constitution” for land use and development, the General Plan’s diagrams, goals, and policies form the basis for the city’s zoning, subdivision, and infrastructure decisions. The proposed project would comply with the latest Title 24 Energy Standards that reduce wasteful, expensive, inefficient or unnecessary use of energy.
In addition, Title 24 Energy Standards would increase the indoor water use efficiency and use of indoor water-efficient irrigation systems for the proposed developments. Compliance with Title 24 Energy Standards would ensure that the proposed project is consistent with General Plan Sustainability Element goals 9-G.2 and 9-G.3, in addition to policies 9-P.2 and 9-P.13, which promote energy efficiency, reductions in community GHG emissions, and increased renewable energy use in new development.
Development facilitated by the proposed project would include bicycle and electric vehicle parking consistent with the 2022 CALGreen Standards for new residential construction, which would contribute to a reduction in vehicle use and subsequent mobile source emissions. The proposed project would also accommodate higher density development and aims to pursue an infill development strategy, which would provide connectivity to mixed land uses and support alternative City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.6-18
modes of transportation. The emphasis of the proposed project on infill development and multimodal transportation would reduce GHG emissions per capita and ensure consistency with General Plan policies 2-G.2, 2-G.3, and 2-G.4, which promote strategic infill development and integration with existing land uses.
However, the proposed project represents an increase in housing units that were not accounted for in the 2015 General Plan and GHG emissions from the proposed project were not accounted for in the existing CAP analysis. The exiting CAP was updated with the 2015 General Plan, and the 2015 General Plan EIR found that implementation of the CAP was needed to reduce GHG impacts resulting from implementation of the General Plan. Therefore, because the proposed project was not accounted for in the CAP analysis, the proposed project would not be consistent with the General Plan until the CAP is updated.
2022 Scoping Plan
The principal state plan to monitor and regulate GHGs is AB 32, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, which was followed by SB 32. The quantitative goal of AB 32 was to reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020. According to CARB, California achieved its 2020 GHG emission reduction target in 2016. The goal of SB 32 is to reduce GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030. Pursuant to SB 32, the Scoping Plan was created to outline goals and measures for the state to achieve the reductions, the latest iteration of which is the 2022 Scoping Plan. The 2022 Scoping Plan focuses on outcomes needed to achieve carbon neutrality by assessing paths for clean technology, energy deployment, natural and working lands, and others, and is designed to meet the state’s long-term climate objectives and support a range of economic, environmental, energy security, environmental justice, and public health priorities. The project would be consistent with these goals through project design, which includes complying with the latest Title 24 Green Building Code and Building Efficiency Energy Standards (as applicable).
Therefore, the project would not conflict with the 2022 Scoping Plan.
SANDAG: 2021 Regional Plan
SANDAG adopted the 2021 Regional Plan on December 10, 2021, which serves as the Regional Comprehensive Plan and SCS for the region. The 2021 Regional Plan provides a long-term blueprint for the San Diego region that seeks to meet regulatory requirements, address traffic congestion, and create equal access to jobs, education, healthcare, and other community resources. The plan is the result of years of planning, data analysis, and community engagement to reimagine the San Diego region with a transformative transportation system, a sustainable pattern of growth and development, and innovative demand and management strategies.
One of the main goals of the 2021 Regional Plan is for healthy air and reduced GHG emissions.
According to the 2021 Regional Plan, reducing our reliance on the automobile as a primary mode of transportation requires that safe, affordable, and convenient alternatives are available. It also requires that people can access their jobs and other destinations by taking shorter trips. This can be achieved by focusing growth and development in the region’s urbanized areas, where there are existing and planned transportation options. The 2021 Regional Plan reduces per capita GHG emissions from cars and light-duty trucks to 20 percent below 2005 levels by 2035, exceeding the region’s state-mandated target of 19 percent.
As discussed in Section 4.13, Transportation, the proposed project would result in decreased VMT rates compared to a No Project condition, reflecting the benefits that increased density of residential land uses have on reducing VMT per capita. Additionally, policies 3-P.1 through 3-P.5, 3- Environmental Impact Analysis
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.6-19
P.8, 3-P.16, 3-P.17, 3-P.19, 3-P.20, and 3-P.22 through 3-P.37 from the 2015 General Plan would discourage use of single occupancy vehicles and support multi-modal transportation, similar to the 2015 General Plan EIR. Therefore, compliance with 2015 General Plan policies would result in reduced VMT per capita, further reducing GHG emissions from mobile sources per capita (see Section 4.13, Transportation). Therefore, the project would implement policies and design features which would result in VMT per capita reductions and advance the goals contained in the 2021 Regional Plan. Therefore, the project would not conflict with the 2021 Regional Plan.
GHG Emissions
Total GHG emissions for the 18 sites are provided below for informational purposes. Operation of future development under the proposed project would generate GHG emissions associated with area sources, energy and water usage, vehicle trips, and wastewater and solid waste generation.
Table 4.6-1 shows the estimated operational GHG emissions associated with full buildout of 3,295 units for future development under the proposed project. As shown therein, annual emissions from the proposed project would be approximately 36,735 MT of CO2e per year. The total GHG emissions from the proposed project would represent approximately 0.01 percent and 4 percent of the California and City of Carlsbad 2012 GHG emissions inventories, respectively (inventories are discussed under Section 4.6.1b).
Table 4.6-1 Combined Annual Emissions of Greenhouse Gases Emission Source Annual Emissions (MT CO2e)
Operational
Area 5,015
Energy 3,987
Mobile 26,775
Solid Waste 690
Water, Wastewater 265
Refrigerants 4
Total 36,735
MT CO2e = metric tons of carbon dioxide equivalent
Source: Appendix B CalEEMod worksheets.
Summary
The plan consistency analysis provided above demonstrates that the project generally complies with the plans, policies, regulations and GHG reduction actions/strategies outlined in City of Carlsbad CAP, 2022 Scoping Plan and SANDAG 2021 Regional Plan, and City of Carlsbad General Plan. The project would be largely consistent with the measures in the Carlsbad CAP and the policies related to GHG emissions reductions in the City of Carlsbad General Plan. However, as the project would result in an increase in housing units that were not accounted for in the CAP analysis, which included setting emissions reductions targets and identifying measures to meet the targets, the proposed project would conflict with applicable plans, policies, and measures an agency adopted for the purpose of reducing emissions of GHG emissions. Impacts would be potentially significant.
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.6-20
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measure is required.
GHG-1 Update City of Carlsbad Climate Action Plan
The city shall draft and present to City Council for adoption an updated Climate Action Plan (CAP) within 12-18 months of adoption of this SEIR. An updated CAP shall include targets that reflect those set by SB 32 to reduce GHG emissions by 40 percent below the 1990 levels by 2030 and AB 1279 to reduce GHG emissions by 85 percent below 1990 levels by 2045. Implementation measures in an updated CAP to achieve the 2030 and 2045 targets shall include measures such as, but are not limited to, the following:
Develop and adopt an updated building energy efficiency ordinance, or “reach code,” for existing and proposed structures;
Expand charging infrastructure and parking for electric vehicles; Implement carbon sequestration by expanding the urban forest; and, Implement policies and measures included in the 2022 California Climate Change Scoping Plan, such as mobile source strategies for increasing clean transit options and zero emissions vehicles by providing electric vehicle charging stations.
As part of the updated CAP, the city shall establish CEQA GHG Emissions Thresholds of Significance and an updated CAP Consistency Checklist that are consistent with the updated Carlsbad CAP for use in future CEQA GHG emissions analyses through 2030 and consistent with SB 32. In addition, upon completion of future CAP updates and as necessary, the city shall update the CEQA GHG emissions thresholds of significance and CAP Consistency Checklist to be consistent with each CAP update.
Significance After Mitigation
Implementation of Mitigation Measure GHG-1 would ensure that the updated City of Carlsbad CAP includes the additional housing units included in the proposed project within its forecasts and emissions reduction goals and would ensure that development facilitated by the project after the CAP is updated would be consistent with State emissions goals. However, individual projects that may occur prior to the adoption of the updated CAP would not be guaranteed to be consistent with State emissions goals. Until the updated CAP and any emission thresholds or updated checklists are adopted, implementation of the proposed project would not be consistent with State GHG reduction plans. If and when the city’s CAP is in accordance with statewide emissions targets and accounting for growth under the proposed project, this impact may be reduced to less than significant. Therefore, until the city updates the CAP in accordance with Mitigation Measure GHG-1, the project’s impacts related to GHG emissions would be significant and unavoidable. d. Cumulative Impacts
GHG and climate change are, by definition, cumulative impacts. The geographic scope for considering cumulative impacts related to GHG emissions is the state of California. Although GHG emissions have worldwide repercussions, the contribution of the project to the impact is addressed in light of the goals for reducing statewide emissions.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.6-21
Statewide GHG emissions are an existing significant cumulative impa ct. As such, the state has established the following statewide emissions reductions targets:
By 2020, reduce GHG emissions to 1990 levels.
By 2030, reduce GHG emissions to 40 percent below 1990 levels. By 2045, reduce GHG emissions to 85 percent below 1990 levels.
GHG impacts are assessed in a cumulative context since no single project can cause a discernible change to the climate. Therefore, cumulative significance is based on the same thresholds as the proposed project. In the absence of an adopted numeric threshold for the City of Carlsbad, the significance of the project’s GHG emissions is based on plan compliance with the City of Carlsbad CAP. In addition, consistency with applicable plans, policies, regulations, and requirements adopted to implement a statewide, regional, or local plan for the reduction or mitigation of GHG emissions.
GHG emissions from the construction and operation of the proposed project are provided for informational purposes. For this project, the most directly applicable adopted regulatory plans to reduce GHG emissions are the City of Carlsbad CAP, 2022 Scoping Plan, SANDAG 2021, and City of Carlsbad General Plan. As discussed in Impact GHG-1, the proposed project would implement energy and water conservation measures consistent with the latest Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Part 6) and Green Building Standards (Part 11), aligned with statewide, regional, and local plans. The proposed project’s objectives include development on compact infill sites and higher density development that would improve connectivity of land uses and promote the use of alternative modes of transportation. In addition, the project would implement bicycle and electric vehicle charging parking spaces consistent with the 2022 CALGreen Standards, which would potentially reduce the reliance of single motor vehicles. However, until the updated CAP is adopted, implementation of the project would not be consistent with applicable GHG reduction plans. As such, impacts from the project’s GHG emissions would be significant and unavoidable, and the project would represent a cumulatively considerable impact related to GHG emissions. Therefore, the cumulative impact related to GHG emissions would be significant and unavoidable.
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.6-22
This page intentionally left blank.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.7-1
4.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
This section evaluates the potential impacts relating to hazards and hazardous materials impacts associated with implementation of the proposed project. Potential hazards associated with wildland fires are discussed in Section 4.15, Wildfire.
4.7.1 Setting
a. Hazardous Materials
The term “hazardous material” has different definitions for different regulatory programs. For the purpose of this SEIR, the term “hazardous materials” refers to both hazardous materials and hazardous waste. The California Health and Safety Code Section 25501(n)(1) defines a hazardous material as any material that “because of its quantity, concentrations, or physical or chemical characteristics, poses a significant present or potential hazard to human health and safety or to the environment if released into the workplace or the environment.” Hazardous materials include but are not limited to hazardous substances, hazardous waste, and any material that a handler or the administering agency has a reasonable basis for believing would be injurious to the health and safety of persons or harmful to the environment if released into the workplace or environment.
A material is hazardous if it exhibits one or more of the following characteristics: toxicity, ignitability, corrosivity, and reactivity. These types of hazardous materials are defined below:
Toxic Substances. Toxic substances may cause short-term or long-lasting health effects, ranging from temporary effects to permanent disability, or even death. For example, such substances can cause disorientation, acute allergic reactions, asphyxiation, skin irritation, or other adverse health effects if human exposure exceeds certain levels (the level depends on the substances involved and is chemical-specific). Carcinogens, substances that can cause cancer, are a special class of toxic substances. Examples of toxic substances include benzene (a component of gasoline and suspected carcinogen) and methylene chloride (a common laboratory solvent and a suspected carcinogen).
Ignitable Substances. Ignitable substances are hazardous because of their ability to burn.
Gasoline, hexane, and natural gas are examples of ignitable substances. Corrosive Materials. Corrosive materials can cause severe burns. Corrosives include strong acids and bases such as sodium hydroxide (lye) or sulfuric acid (battery acid). Reactive Materials. Reactive materials may cause explosions or generate toxic gases. Explosives, pure sodium or potassium metals (which react violently with water), and cyanides are examples of reactive materials.
Soil and groundwater can become contaminated by hazardous material releases in a variety of ways, including permitted or illicit use and accidental or intentional disposal or spillage. Before the 1980s, most land disposal of chemicals was unregulated, resulting in numerous industrial properties and public landfills becoming dumping grounds for unwanted chemicals. The largest and most contaminated of these sites became Superfund sites, so named for their eligibility to receive cleanup money from a federal fund established under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). The National Priorities List (NPL) is the list of national priorities among the known releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants throughout the United States and its territories. The NPL is intended primarily to City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.7-2
guide the USEPA in determining which sites warrant further investigation. Sites are added to the NPL following a hazard ranking system.
Numerous smaller properties have been designated as contaminated sites. Often these are gas station sites where leaking underground storage tanks (LUST) were upgraded under a federal requirement in the late 1980s. Another category of sites that may have some overlap with the types already mentioned is “brownfields” – previously used, often abandoned, sites that due to actual or suspected contamination are undeveloped or underused. Both the USEPA and California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) maintain lists of known brownfields sites. These sites are often difficult to inventory due to their owners’ reluctance to publicly label their property as potentially contaminated.
Asbestos Containing Materials
Asbestos is a naturally occurring fibrous material that was widely used in structures built between 1945 and 1978 for its fireproofing and insulating properties. Asbestos-containing materials (ACM) were banned by USEPA between the early 1970s and 1991 under the authority of the CAA and the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) due to their harmful health effects. Exposure to asbestos increases risk of developing lung disease, such as lung cancer, mesothelioma, or asbestosis (USEPA 2023a). Common ACMs include vinyl flooring and associated mastic, wallboard and associate joint compound, plaster, stucco, acoustic ceiling spray, ceiling tiles, heating system components, and roofing materials. Pre-1973 structures are affected by asbestos regulations if damage occurs, or if remodeling, renovation, or demolition activities disturb ACMs.
Lead and Lead-Based Paint
Lead is a naturally occurring metallic element. Because of its toxic properties, lead is regulated as a hazardous material. Excessive exposure to lead can result in the accumulation of lead in the blood, soft tissues, and bones. Children are particularly susceptible to potential lead-related health problems because it is easily absorbed into developing systems and organs. Lead can affect almost every organ and system in the body. In children, lead can cause behavior and learning problems, lower IQ and hyperactivity, hearing problems, and anemia. In adults, lead can cause cardiovascular effects, decreased kidney function, and reproductive problems. In addition, lead can result in serious effects to the developing fetus and infant for pregnant women (USEPA 2023b). Among its numerous uses and sources, lead can be found in paint, water pipes, solder in plumbing systems, and in soils surrounding buildings and structures that are painted with lead-based paint (LBP). LBP was primarily used during the same time period as ACMs. Pre-1978 structures are affected by LBP regulations if the paint is in a deteriorated condition or if remodeling, renovation, or demolition activities disturb LBP surfaces.
Polychlorinated Biphenyls
Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB) belong to a broad family of man-made organic chemicals known as chlorinated hydrocarbons. PCBs were domestically manufactured from 1929 until manufacturing was banned in 1979. They have a range of toxicity and vary in consistency from thin, light-colored liquids to yellow or black waxy solids. Due to their non-flammability, chemical stability, high boiling point and electrical insulating properties, PCBs were used in hundreds of industrial and commercial applications.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.7-3
b. Existing Conditions
Hazardous Materials Sites
The locations where hazardous materials are used, stored, treated and/or disposed of comes to the attention of regulatory agencies through various means, including licensing and permitting, enforcement actions, and anonymous tips. To the extent possible, the locations of these businesses and operations are recorded in database lists maintained by various federal, State, and local regulatory agencies. In addition, federal, State, and local agencies enforce regulations applicable to hazardous waste generators and users, and the San Diego County Environmental Health Services Division tracks and inspects hazardous materials handlers to ensure appropriate reporting and compliance.
Permitted uses of hazardous materials include those facilities that use hazardous materials or handle hazardous wastes in accordance with current hazardous materials and hazardous waste regulations. The use and handling of hazardous materials from these sites is considered low risk, although there can be instances of unintentional chemical releases. In such cases, the site would be tracked in the environmental databases as an environmental case. Permitted sites without documented releases are, nevertheless, potential sources of hazardous materials in the soil and/or groundwater due to accidental spills, incidental leakage, or spillage that may have gone undetected.
Some facilities are permitted for more than one hazardous material use and, therefore, could appear in more than one database.
The potential to encounter hazardous materials in soil and groundwater is generally based on a search of federal, State, and local regulatory databases that identify permitted hazardous materials uses, environmental cases, and spill sites. The DTSC EnviroStor database contains information on properties in California where hazardous substances have been released or where the potential for a release exists. The California State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) GeoTracker database contains information on properties in California for sites that require cleanup, such as LUST sites, which may impact, or have potential impacts, to water quality, with emphasis on groundwater.
According to databases of hazardous material sites maintained by the DTSC (EnviroStor) and the SWRCB (GeoTracker), the sites designated for rezoning in Carlsbad do not have any of the following types of hazardous sites that are still active or need further investigation: underground storage tank (UST), voluntary cleanup, school investigation, tiered permit, or State response sites (DTSC 2023; SWRCB 2023).
According to DTSC and SWRCB, sites 14 and 16 had LUST sites which are now designated as inactive and closed.
Use, Transport, and Abatement of Hazardous Materials
The use of hazardous materials is typically associated with industrial land uses. Activities such as manufacturing, plating, cleaning, refining, and finishing, frequently involve chemicals that are considered hazardous when accidentally released into the environment. Some parcels in the project area are currently used for industrial purposes such as Site 5, Site 9, Site 11, Site 12, Site 15, and Site
16. To a lesser extent, hazardous materials may also be used by various commercial enterprises, as well as residential uses. In particular, dry cleaners use cleaning agents considered to be hazardous materials. Hardware stores typically stock paints and solvents, as well as fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides. Swimming pool supply stores stock acids, algaecides, and caustic agents. Most City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.7-4
commercial businesses occasionally use commonly available cleaning supplies that, when used in accordance with manufacturers’ recommendations, are considered safe by the State of California, but when not handled properly can be considered hazardous. Private residences also use and store commonly available cleaning materials, paints, solvents, swimming pool and spa chemicals, as well as fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides. The project area includes both commercial and residential land uses.
If improperly handled, hazardous materials can result in public health hazards through human contact with contaminated soils or groundwater, or through airborne releases in vapors, fumes, or dust. There is also the potential for accidental or unauthorized releases of hazardous materials that would pose a public health concern. The use, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials and wastes are required to occur in accordance with federal, State, and local regulations. In accordance with such regulations, the transport of hazardous materials and wastes can only occur with transporters who have received training and appropriate licensing. Additionally, hazardous waste transporters are required to complete and carry a hazardous waste manifest, which includes forms, reports, and procedures designed to seamlessly track hazardous waste.
Schools
School locations require consideration because children are particularly sensitive to hazardous materials exposure. Additional protective regulations apply to projects that could use or disturb potentially hazardous products near or at schools. The California Public Resources Code requires projects that would be located within 0.25 mile of a school and might reasonably be expected to emit or handle hazardous materials to consult with the school district regarding potential hazards.
There are schools within 0.25 mile of the 18 rezone sites, as shown on Figure 4.7-1.The Army and Navy Academy is within 0.25-mile of Site 14 and the Discovery Isle Child Development Center is within 0.25-mile of Site 16. Other childcare centers or preschools may also be located within 0.25 mile of the rezone sites.
4.7.2 Regulatory Setting
a. Federal Regulations
Primary Federal agencies with responsibility for hazardous materials management include the USEPA, U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), and the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT). The major laws enforced by these agencies are described below.
Toxic Substances Control Act (1976) and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act of 1976
These acts established a program administered by the USEPA for the regulation of the generation, transportation, treatment, storage, and disposal of hazardous waste. The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) was amended in 1984 by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Act, which affirmed and extended the “cradle to grave” system of regulating hazardous wastes. Among other things, the use of certain techniques for the disposal of some hazardous wastes was specifically prohibited by the Hazardous and Solid Waste Act.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.7-5
Figure 4.7-1 Schools within 0.25-mile of Housing Sites
p
,>
·,{· •••..........
ArmyN
Acad
~ __ J City Limits
Highway
.IBl
Major Street
Planned Street
Railroad
School
0.25-mil e from a Potenti al Housi ng Site
Potential Housing Sites •
D
-D
0 Convert government-own ed prope rty to
allo w h ousi ng
Convert comm ercial prop erty to allow
hou sing
Increase units allowed on propertie s that
alre ady allow hou sing
Convert vacant indu strial property to
allow hou si ng
,. Site 13 was designated as a low priority site
by the City Council and is the refore not
shown on this map
0.75 N
1.5 A
'----M..Jll-1e_s ___ _.l
Imagery provided by Esri and its licensors © 2023 .
Additional data provided by City of Carlsbad, 2022.
.IBl
.IBl
- - - - I
""<;, !
~:~
.IBl
as'P--"',J~
.IBl ,f
/}j
tr
i i
L\
.IBl
City of
San Marcos
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.7-6
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, amended by the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (1986) This law was enacted in 1980 and provides broad federal authority to respond directly to releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances that may endanger public health or the environment.
Among other things, CERCLA established requirements concerning closed and abandoned hazardous waste sites, provided for liability of persons responsible for releases of hazardous waste at these sites, and established a trust fund to provide for cleanup when no responsible party could be identified. CERCLA also enabled revision of the National Contingency Plan, which provided the guidelines and procedures needed to respond to releases and threatened releases of hazardous substances, pollutants, or contaminants. The National Contingency Plan also established the National Priorities List.
Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (Public Law 99 499) This law amends CERCLA to reflect lessons learned by the USEPA during the first six years administering the Superfund program. Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act (SARA) provided new enforcement authorities and settlement tools, increased the focus on human health problems posed by hazardous waste sites, and encouraged greater citizen participation in making decisions on how sites should be cleaned up. The law also increased State involvement in every phase of the Superfund program and required Superfund actions to consider the standards and requirements found in other State and federal environmental laws and regulations.
Lead-Based Paint Elimination Final Rule Title 24 Code of Federal Regulations Governed by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, regulations for LBP are contained in the Lead-Based Paint Elimination Final Rule Title 24 CFR 33, which requires sellers and lessors to disclose known LBP and LBP hazards to perspective purchasers and lessees.
Additionally, all LBP abatement activities must follow California and federal occupational safety and health administrations (California Occupational Safety and Health Administration [Cal/OSHA] and Federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration [OSHA], respectively and with the State of California Department of Health Services requirements. Only LBP trained and certified abatement personnel can perform abatement activities. All lead LBP removed from structures must be hauled and disposed of by a transportation company licensed to transport this type of material at a landfill or receiving facility licensed to accept the waste.
United States Environmental Protection Agency
The USEPA is the agency primarily responsible for enforcement and implementation of federal laws and regulations pertaining to hazardous materials. Applicable federal regulations pertaining to hazardous materials are contained in the CFR Titles 29, 40, and 49. Hazardous materials, as defined in the CFR, are listed in 49 CFR 172.101. The management of hazardous materials is governed by the following laws, which include specific requirements for facilities that generate, use, store, treat, and/or dispose of hazardous materials. USEPA provides oversight and supervision for federal Superfund investigation/remediation projects, evaluates remediation technologies, and develops hazardous materials disposal restrictions and treatment standards.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.7-7
U.S. Department of Transportation Regulations
USDOT prescribes strict regulations for the safe transportation of hazardous materials, including requirements for hazardous waste containers and licensed haulers that transport hazardous waste on public roads. The Secretary of the USDOT receives the authority to regulate the transportation of hazardous materials from the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act (HMTA), as amended and codified in in 49 U.S. Code (U.S.C.) Section 5101 et seq. The Secretary is authorized to issue regulations to implement the requirements of 49 U.S.C. The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA), formerly the Research and Special Provisions Administration, was delegated the responsibility to write the hazardous materials regulations, which are contained in Title 49 of the CFR Parts 100-180. Title 49 of the CFR, which contains the regulations set forth by the HMTA, specifies requirements and regulations with respect to the transport of hazardous materials.
It requires that every employee who transports hazardous materials receive training to recognize and identify hazardous materials and become familiar with hazardous materials requirements.
Under the HMTA, the Secretary "may authorize any officer, employee, or agent to enter upon, inspect, and examine, at reasonable times and in a reasonable manner, the records and properties of persons to the extent such records and properties relate to: (1) the manufacture, fabrication, marking, maintenance, reconditioning, repair, testing, or distribution of packages or containers for use by any 'person' in the transportation of hazardous materials in commerce; or (2) the transportation or shipment by any 'person' of hazardous materials in commerce.
Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970
The U.S. Department of Labor’s OSHA was created to assure safe and healthful working conditions by setting and enforcing standards and by providing training, outreach, education, and assistance.
OSHA provides standards for general industry and construction industry on hazardous waste operations and emergency response. The Occupational Safety and Health Act, which is implemented by OSHA, contains provisions with respect to hazardous materials handling. Federal Occupational Safety and Health Act requirements, as set forth in Title 29 of the CFR Section 1910, et. seq., are designed to promote worker safety, worker training, and a worker’s right-to-know. OSHA has delegated the authority to administer OSHA regulations to the State of California.
Title 49 of the CFR, which contains the regulations set forth by the Hazardous Materials Transportation Act of 1975, specifies additional requirements and regulations with respect to the transport of hazardous materials. Title 49 of the CFR requires that every employee who transports hazardous materials receive training to recognize and identify hazardous materials and become familiar with hazardous materials requirements. Drivers are also required to be trained in function and commodity-specific requirements.
Other Hazardous Materials Regulations
In addition to the USDOT regulations for the safe transportation of hazardous materials, there are other applicable federal laws that also address hazardous materials:
Community Environmental Response Facilitation Act of 1992 Clean Water Act
Clean Air Act
Safe Drinking Water Act
Atomic Energy Act
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.7-8
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) b. State Regulations
California Code of Regulations Title 22
Hazardous substances are regulated by state and federal agencies in order to protect public health and the environment. Hazardous materials have certain chemical, physical, or infectious properties that threaten life, health, property, or environment. The California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 22 provides the following definition:
A hazardous material is a substance or combination of substances which, because of its quantity, concentration or physical, chemical, or infectious characteristics, may either (1) cause or significantly contribute to an increase in mortality or an increase in serious, irreversible or incapacitating irreversible illness; or (2) pose a substantial present or potential hazard to human health and safety, or the environment when improperly treated, stored, transported or disposed of. Hazardous materials include waste that has been abandoned, discarded, or recycled on the property and as a result represents a continuing hazard as the development is proposed. Hazardous materials also include any contaminated soil or groundwater.
California Environmental Protection Agency
The management of hazardous materials and waste within California is under the jurisdiction of the CalEPA, which was created by the State of California to establish a cabinet-level voice for the protection of human health and the environment and to assure the coordinated deployment of state resources.
Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment
The State of California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment oversees implementation of many public health-related environmental regulatory programs within CalEPA, including implementing the provisions of the Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 (Proposition 65). Proposition 65 requires the governor to publish, at least annually, a list of chemicals known to the state to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity. The proposition was intended by its authors to protect California citizens and the state’s drinking water sources from chemicals known to cause cancer, birth defects, or other reproductive harm and to inform citizens about exposures to such chemicals.
Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC)
As a department of the California Environmental Protection Agency, DTSC is the primary agency in California that regulates hazardous waste, cleans up existing contamination, and looks for ways to reduce the hazardous waste produced in California. DTSC regulates hazardous waste in California primarily under the authority of RCRA and the California Health and Safety Code.
DTSC also administers the California Hazardous Waste Control Law (HWCL) to regulate hazardous wastes which is implemented by regulations described in California Code of Regulations Title 26.
While the HWCL is generally more stringent than RCRA, until the USEPA approves the California program, both state and federal laws apply in California. The HWCL lists 791 chemicals and approximately 300 common materials that may be hazardous; establishes criteria for identifying, packaging, and labeling hazardous wastes; prescribes management controls; establishes permit Environmental Impact Analysis
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.7-9
requirements for treatment, storage, disposal, and transportation; and identifies some wastes that cannot be disposed of in landfills. Environmental health standards for management of hazardous waste are contained in California Code of Regulations Title 22, Division 4.5.
Government Code Section 65962.5 requires the DTSC, the State Department of Health Services, the SWRCB, and CalRecycle to compile and annually update lists of hazardous waste sites and land designated as hazardous waste sites throughout the State, collectively known as the Cortese List.
The Secretary for Environmental Protection consolidates the information submitted by these agencies and distributes it to each city and county where sites on the lists are located. Before the lead agency accepts an application for any development project as complete, the applicant must consult these lists to determine if the site at issue is included.
If any soil is excavated from a site containing hazardous materials, it would be considered hazardous waste if it exceeded specific criteria in Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations. Remediation of hazardous wastes found at a site may be required if excavation of these materials is performed, or if certain other soil disturbing activities would occur. Even if soil or groundwater at a contaminated site does not have the characteristics required to be defined as hazardous waste, remediation of the site may be required by regulatory agencies subject to jurisdictional authority. Cleanup requirements are determined on a case-by-case basis by the agency taking jurisdiction.
California Fire Code
Part 9 of the California Building Standards Code includes the California Fire Code (last updated in 2022) which establishes the minimum requirements consistent with nationally recognized good practices to safeguard the public health, safety, and general welfare for the hazards of fire, explosion, or dangerous conditions in new and existing buildings, structures and premises, and to provide safety and assistance to firefighters and emergency responders during emergency operations. The provisions of this code apply to the construction, alteration, movement enlargement, replacement, repair, equipment, use and occupancy, location, maintenance, removal, and demolition of every building or structure or any appurtenances connected or attached to such building structures throughout the State of California. c. Local Regulations
Carlsbad General Plan
The current Carlsbad General Plan, adopted in 2015, lists some policies related to hazards and hazardous materials in its Public Safety Element and Land Use and Community Design Element. The following policies are applicable to the proposed project (City of Carlsbad 2015a; City of Carlsbad 2015b): 1
Land Use and Community Design Element
Policy 2-P.37 Require new development located in the Airport Influence Area (AIA) to comply with applicable land use compatibility provisions of the McClellan–Palomar Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) through review and approval of a site
1 The current Carlsbad General Plan, adopted in 2015, lists several policies related to hazards and hazardous materials in the Public Safety Element. The existing Public Safety Element policies would be replaced by the updated Public Safety Element policies as part of this project; therefore, policies from the 2015 General Plan that are being removed as part of the Public Safety Element Update are not included in this section.
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.7-10
development plan, or other development permit. Unless otherwise approved by City Council, development proposals must be consistent or conditionally consistent with applicable land use compatibility policies with respect to noise, safety, airspace protection, and overflight notification, as contained in the McClellan-Palomar ALUCP. Additionally, development proposals must meet Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requirements with respect to building height as well as the provision of obstruction lighting when appurtenances are permitted to penetrate the transitional surface (a 7:1 slope from the runway primary surface.) Consider the San Diego County Airport Land Use Commission recommendations in the review of development proposals.
Policy 2-P.38 Coordinate with the San Diego County Airport Land Use Commission and the FAA to protect public health, safety and welfare by ensuring the orderly operation of the airport and the adoption of land use measures that minimize the public’s exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within areas around the airport.
Policy 2-P.39 Prohibit the geographic expansion of McClellan-Palomar Airport unless approved by a majority vote of the Carlsbad electorate. (Section 21.53.015, Carlsbad Municipal Code.).
Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation Element
Policy 4-P.51 Prior to the approval of new development within an existing or former agricultural area in Carlsbad, require a detailed soils testing and analysis report be prepared by a registered soils engineer and submitted to the city and the county health department for review and approval. This report shall evaluate the potential for soil contamination due to historic use, handling, or storage of agricultural chemicals restricted by the San Diego County Department of Health Services. If hazardous chemicals are detected at concentrations in the soil that would have a significantly adverse effect on human health, the report shall identify a range of possible mitigation measures to remediate the significant public health impacts.
County of San Diego Department of Environmental Health and Quality (DEHQ) The Hazardous Materials Division (HMD) of DEHA regulates hazardous waste and tiered permitting, USTs, aboveground petroleum storage and risk management plans, hazardous materials business plans and chemical inventory, risk management plans, and medical waste. The HMD’s goal is “to protect human health and the environment by ensuring that hazardous materials, hazardous waste, medical waste, and USTs are properly managed.
California Environmental Protection Agency’s Unified Program In 1993, Senate Bill 1082 gave CalEPA the authority and responsibility to establish a unified hazardous waste and hazardous materials management and regulatory program, commonly referred to as the Unified Program. The purpose of this program is to consolidate and coordinate six different hazardous materials and hazardous waste programs, and to ensure that they are consistently implemented throughout the state. The Unified Program is overseen by CalEPA with support from the DTSC, RWQCBs, the OES, and the State Fire Marshal.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.7-11
State law requires county and local agencies to implement the Unified Program. The agency in charge of implementing the program is called the Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA). The County of San Diego DEH, Hazardous Materials Division is the designated CUPA for the county. In addition to the CUPA, other local agencies help to implement the Unified Program. These agencies are called Participatory Agencies. The Hazardous Materials Division is the Participatory Agency for Carlsbad.
San Diego County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan Long-term prevention, mitigation efforts and risk-based preparedness for specific hazards within the city are addressed as a part of the San Diego County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP). The 2023 San Diego County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP) was approved by the San Diego County Board of Supervisors in February 2023 as an update to the 2018 MJHMP. However, the 2023 MJHMP is still pending final approval from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The MJHMP identifies specific risks for San Diego County and provides methods to help minimize damage caused by natural and man-made disasters. The final list of hazards profiled for San Diego County was determined as wildfire/structure fire, flood, coastal storms/erosion/tsunami, earthquake/liquefaction, rain-induced landslide, dam failure, hazardous materials incidents, nuclear materials release, and terrorism. Currently, the city is in the process of updating its mitigation strategies and action programs within the MJHMP. The San Diego County OES is responsible for coordinating with local jurisdictions and participating agencies to monitor, evaluate, and update the MJHMP as necessary.
McClellan–Palomar Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) The McClellan–Palomar ALUCP was prepared by the San Diego County Regional Airport Authority to protect the safety of the public (adopted in 2010 and amended in 2010 and 2011). ALUCPs are intended to promote compatibility between airports and the land uses that surround them by addressing noise, overflight, safety, and airspace protection concerns. Each ALUCP prevents exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within an airport influence area over a 20-year horizon. The McClellan–Palomar ALUCP provides for the orderly growth of the airport and the area surrounding the airport and safeguards the general welfare of the inhabitants within the vicinity of the airport and the public in general. According to Exhibit III-2 (Compatibility Policy Map: Safety) of the ALUCP and as shown in Figure 4.7-2, a portion of site 10 is within Zone 2 - Inner Approach/Departure Zone, and a portion of Site 9 is within Zone 3 - Inner Turning Zone. In addition, the remaining portions of Sites 9 and 10 as well as Sites 4, 6, 7, 8, and 11 are within Zone 6 - Traffic Pattern Zone. According to Exhibit III-5 (Compatibility Policy Map: Airport Influence Area) of the ALUCP and as shown in Figure 4.7-3, Sites 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and a portion of 16 are within Airport Influence Area - Review Area 1 and Sites 5, 12, 17, and a portion of Sites 16 and 18 are within Airport Influence Area - Review Area 2.
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.7-12
Figure 4.7-2 Mc-Clellan-Palomar Airport Safety Zone and Housing Sites
< I<
:.._ __ J City Limits
Highway
M ajor Street
Planned Street
Ra ilroad
- Potential Housing Sites•
McClellan-Palomar - Safety
-
Safety Zone 1
-
Safety Zone 2
-
Safety Zone 3
-
Safety Zone 4
D Safety Zone 5
-
Safet y Zone 6
* Site 13 was designated as a low priority site
by the City Council and is therefore not
shown on this map
0 0.75 1.5
M iles
N
A
Imagery provided by Esri and its licensors © 2023.
\\ ..... ~~-..
'\ ••
\
Additional data provided by City of Carlsbad, 2022; Son Diego County Airport Authority.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.7-13
Figure 4.7-3 Mc-Clellan-Palomar Airport Airport Influence Area and Housing Sites
:._ __ J City Limits
Highway
Major Street
Planned Street
Railroad
I'
- Potential Housing Sites •
McClellan-Palomar - Airport Influence
Area (AIA)
- AIAl
AIA 2
* Site 13 was designated as a low priority site
by the City Council and is therefore not
shown on this map
0 0 .75 N
1.5 " '---~M-,Jl\-1e_s ___ ... l f"-
fmagery provided by Esri and its licensors © 2023.
Addirionaf data provided by City of Carlsbad, 2022; Son Diego County Airport Authority.
City of
Encinitas
City of
j San Marcos
I
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.7-14
Carlsbad Municipal Code
Chapter 6.03 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code requires the disclosure of hazardous materials and regulates the establishment of hazardous waste. The city has adopted the County of San Diego regulations requiring the disclosure of hazardous materials (San Diego County Code of Regulatory Ordinances, Title 6, Division 8, Chapters 9 and 11), unless local modifications are enacted by the City of Carlsbad, pursuant to law.
4.7.3 Impact Analysis
a. Methodology and Thresholds of Significance
The following thresholds are based on CEQA Guidelines Appendix G. For purposes of this SEIR, impacts related to hazards and hazardous materials are considered significant if implementation of the proposed project would:
Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials;
Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment;
Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school; Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment;
For a project 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, result in a safety hazard or excessive noise 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; or
Expose people or structures, either directly or indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires.
As described at the beginning of this section, an analysis of the risk of exposure to wildland fires resulting from implementation of the proposed HEU is contained in Section 4.15, Wildfire.
Therefore, threshold 7 is addressed in Section 4.15, Wildfire. b. Prior Environmental Analysis
The 2015 General Plan EIR determined that impacts related to transport, use, and disposal of hazardous materials; upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment; emissions or handling of hazardous materials within 0.25 mile of a school; location of development projects on hazardous materials sites such that the new use would create a hazard to the public or the environment; consistency with the policies in the McClellan-Palomar Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan; interference with an adopted emergency response or evacuation plan; and risk from wildland fire in lands adjacent to urbanized or residential areas would be less than
1. 2.
3. 4.
5. 6.
7. Environmental Impact Analysis
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.7-15
significant (Section 3.6, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Airport Safety, and Wildfires: 3.6-27 through 3.6-37). It further stated that individual development projects would be subject to project- specific development and planning review, including adherence to standards for hazards, airport, and wildfire safety.
The proposed project involves land use changes to encourage development on 18 sites beyond what was anticipated in the 2015 General Plan EIR and could therefore result in new impacts related to land use and planning. Therefore, all the CEQA checklist items listed above under Methodology and Significance Thresholds are addressed in this analysis, with the exception of Threshold 7 which is addressed in Section 4.15, Wildfire.
c. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Some components associated with the proposed project, including updates to the Local Coastal Plan and Master and Specific Plans for consistency between the City’s planning documents, in and of themselves would not result in physical changes to the environment such that impacts from hazards and hazardous materials would occur. Therefore, this analysis focuses on impacts associated with implementation of the rezone program which would facilitate the development of 18 sites listed in Table 2-4 in Section 2, Project Description, as well as updates to the Public Safety Element which includes policies related to hazards and hazardous materials.
Threshold 1: Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Threshold 2: Would the project create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment?
Impact HAZ-1 IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD FACILITATE NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ON 18 REZONE SITES. PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL USES WOULD NOT INVOLVE THE ROUTINE TRANSPORTATION, USE, OR DISPOSAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. HOWEVER, CONSTRUCTION OF NEW
RESIDENCES COULD RESULT IN AN INCREASE IN THE OVERALL ROUTINE, TRANSPORT, USE AND DISPOSAL OF HAZARDOUS MATERIALS IN CARLSBAD FOR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES. NONETHELESS, REQUIRED
COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE REGULATIONS RELATED TO HAZARDOUS MATERIALS AND COMPLIANCE WITH GENERAL PLAN POLICIES WOULD MINIMIZE THE RISK OF RELEASES AND EXPOSURE TO THESE MATERIALS.
IMPACTS WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.
Hazardous materials are typically utilized by most land uses such as industrial, retail/office, commercial, residential, agriculture, medical, and recreational uses, among other activities.
Residential uses do not typically use hazardous materials other than small amounts for cleaning and landscaping. These materials would not be different from household chemicals and solvents already in wide use throughout Carlsbad. Residents and workers are anticipated to use limited quantities of products routinely for periodic cleaning, repair, and maintenance or for landscape maintenance/pest control that could contain hazardous materials. Those using such products would be required to comply with all applicable regulations regarding the disposal of household waste.
Therefore, operation of new residential uses poses little risk of exposing the public to hazardous materials.
The proposed project would involve rezoning to accommodate additional housing. The proposed project would not facilitate the establishment of new industrial, warehouse, auto-service, or manufacturing uses. Therefore, the proposed project would not introduce new manufacturing, City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.7-16
warehouse, or industrial uses that would sell, use, store, transport, or release substantial quantities of hazardous materials.
Future construction activities associated with buildout of the project may generate hazardous materials and waste, such as fuels and oils from construction equipment and vehicles. The routine use, transportation, and disposal of hazardous materials and waste within and through Carlsbad is an aspect of modern society and not unique to the proposed project.
Some of the sites, including Site 5, Site 9, Site 11, Site 12, Site 15, and Site 16 are within or near industrial areas. Federal and state regulations require adherence to specific guidelines regarding the use, transportation, disposal, and accidental release of hazardous materials would reduce impacts related to exposure of new residents to hazards associated with existing industrial uses.
Regulations associated with using, transporting, or disposing of hazardous materials include 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 will continue to maintain permitting requirements, as administered by the County of San Diego’s DEHQ requirements, for the handling, storage, or generation of hazardous waste. Disclosure laws will continue to be enforced by the city to identify business users and the materials they handle to facilitate notification of appropriate agencies in the event of a violation. Additionally, the proposed project includes updates to the Public Safety Element, including the following policies which would further reduce hazardous wastes and materials impacts to a less than significant level:
Policy 6-P.35 Limit hazards associated with the manufacture, use, transfer, storage and disposal of hazardous materials and hazardous wastes through enforcement of applicable local, county, state and federal regulations.
Policy 6-P.36 Coordinate with the County of San Diego and use the San Diego County Multi - Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP) as a guide for implementing actions to reduce hazardous waste impacts.
Policy 6-P.37 Regulate locations for the manufacture, storage, and use of hazardous materials within the city through implementation of Carlsbad Municipal Code Title 21 (Zoning Ordinance).
Policy 6-P.38 Regulate development on sites with known contamination of soil and groundwater to ensure that construction workers, future occupants, and the environment as a whole, are adequately protected from hazards associated with contamination, and encourage cleanup of such sites. Provide documentation that development sites are not impacted by former/current site uses, including but not limited to, agricultural chemicals, aerially deposited lead, common railroad contaminants, and hazardous material storage and/or use.
Policy 6-P.39 Provide hazardous materials emergency incident responses. Coordinate such responses with applicable federal, state and county agencies.
Policy 6-P.40 Maintain regulations that require proper storage and disposal of hazardous materials to reduce the likelihood of leakage, explosions, or fire, and to properly contain potential spills from leaving the site.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.7-17
Policy 6-P.41 Enhance and expand the use of desilting/pollutant basins to function as hazardous material spill control facilities to prevent the spread of contaminants to downstream areas.
Policy 6-P.42 Support public awareness and participation in household hazardous waste management, solid waste, and recycling programs.
Overall, policies 6-P.35 through 6-P.42 would require the enforcement of federal, State, county, and local regulations associated with the manufacture, use, transfer, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials and wastes and also provide for response in the case of accident or upset conditions.
Through these regulatory actions, along with the ongoing public education efforts of the city, and the identification of risks, the city can continue to maintain safe conditions. With the implementation of federal, State, and local regulations and policies the risk of death, injury and/or property loss is reduced.
As was found in the 2015 General Plan EIR, compliance with General Plan policies would further reduce impacts. Therefore, compliance with the General Plan policies and federal, State and local regulations will ensure the impact of routine use, transport, and disposal of hazardous materials associated with implementation of the project would be less than significant. Impacts associated with development on sites that may contain soil or groundwater contamination are further discussed under Impact HAZ-3.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required because, like under the 2015 General Plan EIR, impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
Threshold 3: Would the project emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within 0.25 mile of an existing or proposed school?
Impact HAZ-2 SIMILAR TO THE DEVELOPMENT ANALYZED IN THE 2015 GENERAL PLAN EIR,
DEVELOPMENT FACILITATED BY THE PROJECT WOULD NOT EMIT HAZARDOUS EMISSIONS OR HANDLE
HAZARDOUS OR ACUTELY HAZARDOUS MATERIALS, SUBSTANCES, OR WASTE WITHIN ONE-QUARTER MILE OF AN EXISTING OR PROPOSED SCHOOL. THIS IMPACT WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.
The proposed project would facilitate residential development at a higher density in the vicinity of some schools. As shown in Figure 4.7-1, there are schools within 0.25 miles of the rezone sites. The Army and Navy Academy is within 0.25-mile of Site 14, and the Discovery Isle Child Development Center is within 0.25-mile of Site 16. However, residential uses do not typically emit hazardous materials or substances other than small amounts for cleaning and landscaping. Therefore, operation of new residential uses would not emit or handle hazardous materials within 0.25 mile of a school.
As mentioned in Impact HAZ-1, construction facilitated by the proposed project may include the temporary transport, storage, and use of potentially hazardous materials including fuels, lubricating fluids, cleaners, or solvents. Specifically, demolition, grading, and excavation activities associated with new construction on the 18 rezone sites may result in emissions and transport of hazardous materials. Further, the rezone sites may have unrecorded pre-existing contamination that could be exposed during grading or construction activities. However, adherence to applicable policies City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.7-18
regarding emission and transport of hazardous materials such as the Toxic Substances Control Act, the Resource Conversation and Recovery Act, and the Hazardous Waste Control Act, as listed the Regulatory Setting and under Impact HAZ-1, would ensure potential impacts would be reduced.
Additionally, as was found in the 2015 General Plan EIR, compliance with General Plan Public Safety Element policies would further reduce impacts. Therefore, potential impacts associated with hazardous materials, substances, or wastes within 0.25 mile of an existing or proposed school would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required because, like under the 2015 General Plan EIR, impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
Threshold 4: Would the project be located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous material sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? Impact HAZ-3 SIMILAR TO THE DEVELOPMENT ANALYZED IN THE 2015 GENERAL PLAN EIR,
DEVELOPMENT FACILITATED BY THE PROJECT COULD RESULT IN DEVELOPMENT ON SITES CONTAMINATED WITH HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. HOWEVER, COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE REGULATIONS RELATING TO SITE
REMEDIATION WOULD MINIMIZE IMPACTS FROM DEVELOPMENT ON CONTAMINATED SITES, RESULTING IN A LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.
Most of the rezone sites do not have any active or open LUST cleanup sites or other active or open hazardous materials sites pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 (SWRCB 2023). Sites 14 and 16 each had one LUST which has now been designated inactive and case closed. Sites 2, 4, 8, and 15 are located adjacent to parcels which have former LUST cleanup sites or Cleanup Program sites. Several housing sites are near the McClellan-Palomar Airport, major roadways, or rail and aerially-deposited lead or other contaminants could be present. California Supreme Court in a December 2015 opinion (BIA v. BAAQMD) confirmed CEQA is concerned with the impacts of a project on the environment, not the effects the existing environment may have on a project; therefore, potential hazards impacts to future new residents on the rezone sites would not be an impact under CEQA.
However, redevelopment of sites with existing soil or groundwater contamination could potentially pose a significant hazard to the public or the environment through releases of hazardous materials into the environment. The extent to which soil or groundwater may be affected by LUST, metals, lead, or other potential contamination source, if at all, depends on the type of contaminant, the amount released, the duration of the release, distance from source, and depth to groundwater. If groundwater contamination is identified, characterization of the vertical and lateral extent of the contamination and remediation activities would be required by the Regional Water Quality Control Board prior to the commencement of any new construction activities that would disturb the subsurface. If contamination exceeds regulatory action levels, the developer would be required to undertake remediation procedures prior to grading and development under the supervision of the Regional Water Quality Control Board, depending upon the nature of any identified contamination.
Further, the General Plan contains policies designed to lessen the impact of sites contaminated with hazardous materials. For example, General Plan Policy 4-P.51 would require a detailed soils testing and analysis report to be prepared if development is located within an existing or former agricultural area and require mitigation measures to remediate significant public health impacts.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.7-19
Similarly, the Public Safety Element Update includes Policy 6-P.38 (listed under Impact HAZ-1) which would regulate development on sites with known soil and groundwater contamination to ensure protection of construction workers, future occupants, and the environment, as well as encourage cleanup of contaminated sites.
As was found in the 2015 General Plan EIR, compliance with General Plan Policies would further reduce potential impacts associated with development on a hazardous materials site. Compliance with existing State and local regulations would reduce impacts. Therefore, the impact of posing a significant hazard to the public or environment through the release of hazardous materials associated with the implementation of the proposed project would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required because, like under the 2015 General Plan EIR, impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
Threshold 5: For a project 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, would the project result in a safety hazard or excessive noise for people residing or working in the project area?
Impact HAZ-4 SIMILAR TO THE DEVELOPMENT ANALYZED IN THE 2015 GENERAL PLAN EIR,
DEVELOPMENT FACILITATED BY THE PROJECT WOULD NOT RESULT IN A SAFETY HAZARD FOR PEOPLE RESIDING OR WORKING IN THE PROJECT AREA. COMPLIANCE WITH POLICIES AND REVIEW PROCEDURES OF THE AIRPORT LAND USE COMPATIBILITY PLAN WOULD RESULT IN LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS.
The McClellan–Palomar Airport has an ALUCP developed and adopted by the San Diego County Airport Land Use Commission in 2010 and last amended in 2011 (San Diego County Regional Airport Authority 2011). San Diego County manages the operation of the airport. The city reviews all proposed development projects within the Airport Influence Area for compatibility with the ALUCP.
According to Exhibit III-5 (Compatibility Policy Map: Airport Influence Area) of the ALUCP and as shown in Figure 4.7-3, Sites 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and a portion of Site 16 are within Airport Influence Area - Review Area 1. Review Area 1 encompasses locations exposed to aircraft noise levels of 60 dB CNEL or greater together with all of the safety zones depicted. Therefore, this area depicts locations where noise and/or safety concerns may necessitate limitations on the types of land use actions.
Sites 5, 12, 17, and a portion of Sites 16 and 18 are within Airport Influence Area - Review Area 2.
Review Area 2 consists of locations beyond Review Area 1 but within the airspace protection and/or overflight notification areas shown in the ALUCP. The only land use restrictions in Review Area 2 are for the heights of structures, particularly in areas of high terrain. Recordation of overflight notification documents is also required for projects in Review Area 2.
According to Exhibit III-2 (Compatibility Policy Map: Safety) of the ALUCP and as shown in Figure 4.7-2, a portion of site 10 is within Zone 2 - Inner Approach/Departure Zone, and a portion of Site 9 is within Zone 3 - Inner Turning Zone. In addition, the remaining portions of Sites 9 and 10 as well as Sites 4, 6, 7, 8, and 11 are within Zone 6 - Traffic Pattern Zone.
For future development within the Review Areas, new development proposals must process a site development plan or other development permit and be found consistent or conditionally consistent with applicable land use compatibility policies with respect to noise, safety airspace protection, and overflight, as contained in the ALUCP. The project would be subject to the land use compatibility City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.7-20
policies 2.6, 3.5, and 3.6 in the McClellan–Palomar ALUCP, directing the Airport Land Use Commission to review land use actions which may have noise or safety concerns and real estate disclosures regarding overflight compatibility for sites in the Airport Influence Area. Additionally, future development would be required to comply with Policy 6-P.32 of the Public Safety Element Update, and Policy 2-P.37 of the Land Use and Community Design Element Update, which state the following:
Policy 6-P.32 Ensure that development in the McClellan-Palomar Airport Influence Area is consistent with the land use compatibility policies contained in the McClellan- Palomar Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan.
Policy 2-P.37 Require new development located in the Airport Influence Area (AIA) to comply with applicable land use compatibility provisions of the McClellan–Palomar Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) through review and approval of a site development plan or other development permit. Unless otherwise approved by City Council, development proposals must be consistent or conditionally consistent with applicable land use compatibility policies with respect to noise, safety, airspace protection, and overflight notification, as contained in the McClellan-Palomar ALUCP. Additionally, development proposals must meet Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) requirements with respect to building height as well as the provision of obstruction lighting when appurtenances are permitted to penetrate the transitional surface (a 7:1 slope from the runway primary surface). Consider San Diego County Regional Airport Authority Airport Land Use Commission recommendations.
Table 4.7-1 includes a discussion of project consistency with the land use policies and restrictions set forth in the ALUCP. As shown, the proposed project would not conflict with the development policies. Therefore, the proposed project would not cause a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area.
Table 4.7-1 Project Consistency with McClellan-Palomar Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan
Safety Zone Rezone Sites ACLUP Policies Project Consistency Zone 2 - Inner
Approach/Departure
Zone
Site 10 New residential development at
a density greater than 4 dwelling
units per gross acre is
“incompatible.”
Consistent: Approximately .60 acre
of Site 10 along Palomar Airport
Road is restricted to only develop
at under 4 units per acre. During
site design for future development
on the site, the portion in Zone 2
would not be developed beyond
what is allowed in the ALUCP.
Zone 3 - Inner Turning
Zone
Site 9 New residential development at
a density greater than 16
dwelling units per gross acre is
“incompatible.”
New residential development at
a density of more than 4 dwelling
units per gross acre but not more
than 13 dwelling units per gross
acre is “conditionally
compatible” provided that the
Consistent: Approximately 1.72
acres of this site is within Zone 3.
A project has been approved at
this site for 192 units that
included its own project-level
CEQA review and was found to
not conflict with the ALUCP. The
portion of the project in Zone 3
would include approximately 7
units per acre and would include
Environmental Impact Analysis
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.7-21
Safety Zone Rezone Sites ACLUP Policies Project Consistency development complies with the
clustering requirements.
development that would comply
with the clustering requirements
set forth in the ALUCP.
Zone 6 - Traffic Pattern
Zone
Remaining
portions of Sites
9 and 10
Sites 4, 6, 7, 8,
and 11
New residential development is
“compatible.”
Consistent: Residential
development on these sites
would not conflict with the
ALUCP.
Source: San Diego County Regional Airport Authority 2011; City of Carlsbad 2020 Please refer to Impact NOI-4 under Section 4.10, Noise, of this SEIR, for an analysis of noise impacts from the McClellan-Palomar Airport.
As was found in the 2015 General Plan EIR, compliance with General Plan policies and the procedures in the ALUCP would reduce potential impacts related to airport hazards. This impact would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required because, like under the 2015 General Plan EIR, impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
Threshold 6: Would the project impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
Impact HAZ-5 SIMILAR TO THE DEVELOPMENT ANALYZED IN THE 2015 GENERAL PLAN EIR,
DEVELOPMENT FACILITATED BY THE PROJECT WOULD NOT IMPAIR IMPLEMENTATION OF OR PHYSICALLY INTERFERE WITH AN ADOPTED EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN OR EMERGENCY EVACUATION PLAN. THIS IMPACT WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.
Implementation of the project 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” prepared in conjunction with the Unified San Diego County Emergency Services Organization. This plan addresses the city’s planned response to extraordinary emergency situations associated with any type of natural disaster, technological incident, or state of war emergency (Unified San Diego County Emergency Services Organization and County of San Diego 2022). The plan includes the city as part of the Statewide Emergency Management System. Further, the proposed project includes updates to the Public Safety Element, including the following proposed policies:
Policy 6-P.70 Implement and maintain the City of Carlsbad Emergency Operations Plan, the Multi- jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan, and other relevant emergency plans, policies, and procedures.
Policy 6-P.71 Promote public awareness of potential natural and man-made hazards, measures that can be taken to protect lives and property.
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.7-22
Policy 6-P.72 Inform the public and contractors of the danger involved and the necessary precautions that must be taken when working on or near pipelines or utility transmission lines.
Policy 6-P.73 Ensure all new development complies with all applicable regulations regarding the provision of public utilities and facilities.
Policy 6-P.74 Maintain roadways that are likely to function as key evacuation routes.
Policy 6-P.75 Provide resources to City of Carlsbad staff regarding appropriate emergency preparedness and response activities as well as designed roles and responsibilities as Disaster Service Workers. Conduct routine trainings for all-hazards emergency preparedness and response.
Policy 6-P.76 Facilitate restriction of parking, construction permits or right-of-way encroachment permits on high fire days in neighborhoods in and near fire hazard zones and along critical evacuation routes.
Policy 6-P.77 Facilitate restriction of parking, construction permits or right-of-way encroachment on days with potential storm surges, atmospheric rivers, and king tide days in neighborhoods in and near flood hazard zones and along critical evacuation routes.
Policy 6-P.78 Develop and maintain emergency evacuation capabilities in conjunction with regional partners and regional plans such as the San Diego County Emergency Operations Plan.
Policy 6-P.79 Continue to communicate to the public on essential resources and procedures through a variety of communication tools and in multiple languages on topics including:
Education on the California Standard Statewide Evacuation Terminology. Emergency evacuation checklists for residents.
Creation and education of the public on evacuation maps. Available transportation services.
Evacuation shelter and support service options.
With the compliance of the emergency plan and updated Public Safety Element policies above, the potential to impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required because, like under the 2015 General Plan EIR, impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
d. Cumulative Impacts
The geographic scope for cumulative hazardous materials impacts is limited to projects within 0.25 mile of the sites. This geographic scope is appropriate for hazardous materials because risks associated with hazards and hazardous materials occur largely in a site-specific and localized context as adverse impacts from a hazardous materials release or spill diminish in magnitude with distance.
Cumulative residential development in the vicinity of any identified hazardous materials sites would gradually increase the population exposed to the use and transport of hazardous materials; the Environmental Impact Analysis
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.7-23
routine use, storage, and disposal of hazardous materials; listed hazardous materials sites; and subject to emergency response and evacuation plans. The magnitude of hazards for individual projects would depend upon the location, type, and size of development and the specific hazards associated with individual sites. Implementation of existing laws and regulations, including remedial action on contaminated sites, as discussed with regard to the project under Impacts HAZ-1 through HAZ-5, would avoid potential hazard impacts.
Overall, hazards and hazardous materials impacts associated with individual developments are site specific in nature and must be addressed on a case-by-case basis. Since hazards and hazardous materials are required to be examined as part of the permit application and review process, potential impacts associated with individual projects would be adequately addressed prior to permit approval. With adherence to existing regulatory standards for hazardous materials, no significant cumulative human health impacts would occur, and the project would not have a cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact related to hazards and hazardous materials.
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.7-24
This page intentionally left blank.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Hydrology and Water Quality
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.8-1
4.8 Hydrology and Water Quality
This section addresses impacts related to drainage infrastructure and surface water quality.
Information regarding potable water and topography was obtained from the Carlsbad Municipal Water District’s (CMWD) Potable Water Master Plan (2019), while data regarding groundwater and water quality was obtained from the CMWD’s 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (2021).
4.8.1 Setting
The San Diego Region is divided into 11 hydrologic units that flow from elevated regions in the east toward coastal lagoons, estuaries, or bays in the west. Carlsbad is located within the Carlsbad Hydrologic Unit (HU), also referred to as the Carlsbad Watershed Management Area, which is approximately 210 square miles in area, extending from the headwaters above Lake Wohlford in the east to the Pacific Ocean in the west, and from Vista and Oceanside in the north to Solana Beach, Encinitas, and the community of Rancho Santa Fe to the south. There are numerous important surface hydrologic features within the Carlsbad HU including four unique coastal lagoons, three major creeks, and two large water storage reservoirs (City of Carlsbad 2023). Figure 4.8-1 shows watersheds and surface water features in Carlsbad.
a. Watershed and Surface Water
Surface water resources in Carlsbad include coastal waters, reservoirs, and lake resources, as well as streams and rivers. Most of the surface flow in the streams and rivers of the San Diego region comes from precipitation runoff and storm events. Precipitation occurs predominantly during the winter and spring months and streamflows are highest during this period. Surface flows during summer and fall months are typically low, and consist of urban runoff, agricultural runoff, and surfacing groundwater.
Surface water features in the San Diego Basin include Buena Vista Creek, Buena Vista Lagoon, Agua Hedionda Creek, Agua Hedionda Lagoon, San Marcos Creek, and Batiquitos Lagoon. Buena Vista Creek originates on the western slopes in the San Marcos Mountains northeast of Carlsbad and discharges into the Pacific Ocean via the Buena Vista Lagoon. Agua Hedionda Creek flows towards the ocean from the southern edge of the San Marcos Mountains, east of Vista, into the Agua Hedionda Lagoon. The San Marcos Creek originates near Twin Oaks and San Marcos and flows towards the ocean into the Batiquitos Lagoon, on the southern edge of the city (City of Carlsbad 2023).
As identified in the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board’s (RWQCBs) Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (Basin Plan), Buena Vista Creek, Agua Hedionda Creek, San Marcos Creek, and San Luis Rey River all have designated beneficial uses including the following:
Municipal and domestic water supply
Agricultural water supply
Industrial service water supply
Contact water recreation
Non-contact water recreation
Warm freshwater habitat
Cold freshwater habitat
Wildlife habitat
Rare, threatened, and endangered
species habitat
Hydropower generation
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.8-2
Figure 4.8-1 Watershed and Surface Waters in Carlsbad
, '
:... .. J City Limit s
Highway
Major Street
Planned Street
Railroad
Stream/River
c:::J . Lagoon/Reservoi r
Hydrologic Area
D Agua Hedionda
D Buena Vista Creek
D Encinas
D Escondido Creek
San Marco s
0 0 .75 1.5 N
' A Mil es
Imagery provided by f sri and its I/censors © 2023.
Additional data provided by City of Carlsbad, 2022; USGS, 2022; California Department of Water Resources, 2021.
City of
Encinitas
Environmental Impact Analysis
Hydrology and Water Quality
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.8-3
b. Topography
The topographical conditions in Carlsbad are varied, consisting of 39 square miles of rolling hills, beaches, and bluffs along the northern coast of San Diego County. In addition to the Pacific Ocean coastline along its western boundary, the communities surrounding Carlsbad include the city of Oceanside to the north, the city of Encinitas to the south, and the cities of Vista and San Marcos and unincorporated areas of San Diego County to the east.
Along Carlsbad’s northern edge, urban development abuts Highway 78, with the highway and Buena Vista Lagoon acting as a boundary between Carlsbad and Oceanside. Similarly, Batiquitos Lagoon along the city’s southern edge defines the boundary between Carlsbad and Encinitas. To the east, city boundaries are less distinctive, as a mix of hillsides and urban development are located adjacent to the cities of Oceanside, Vista and San Marcos and unincorporated lands. The topography ranges from sea level along the western coastline to nearly 700 feet above mean sea level (MSL) along the eastern boundary (CMWD 2019).
c. Groundwater
Groundwater consists of water within underground aquifers that is recharged from the land surface.
The rate of groundwater recharge is affected by the permeability of the ground surface. Carlsbad is located within the semi-arid San Diego region, which experiences a slow rate of groundwater recharge by rainfall (San Diego County Water Authority 2023).
The Batiquitos Lagoon Valley Groundwater Basin partially underlies Carlsbad; however, most of the city is not within a designated groundwater basin. This basin consists of 741 acres. The basin is bounded on the northeast by impermeable crystalline rocks, on the west by Batiquitos Lagoon, and otherwise by semipermeable rocks on the La Jolla Formation. The overall groundwater storage capacity and storage levels are currently unknown. 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 (California Department of Water Resources 2004). d. Hydrologic Hazards
Flood Hazards
Floodplains are areas of land located adjacent to rivers or streams that are subject to recurring inundation or flooding. Preserving or restoring natural floodplains helps with flood loss reduction benefits and improves water quality and habitat. Floods are typically described in terms of their statistical frequency. For example, a 100-year floodplain describes an area within which there is a one percent probability of a flood occurring in any given year. Flooding can cause widespread damage to affected areas. Buildings and vehicles can be damaged or destroyed, while smaller objects can be buried in flood-deposited sediments. Floods can also cause drowning or isolation of people or animals. In addition, floodwaters can break utility lines, interrupting services and potentially affecting health and safety, particularly in the case of broken sewer or gas lines.
The secondary effects of flooding are due to standing water, which can result in crop damage, septic tank failure, mosquito breeding habitat, and well water contamination. Standing water can also damage roads, foundations, and electrical circuits.
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.8-4
FEMA 100-Year Flood Hazard
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) prepares Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs), which identify 100-year and 500- year flood zones. The 100-year flood, or “base flood”, refers to the flood resulting from a storm event that has a one percent chance of occurring in any given year.
Areas mapped in the 100-year floodplain area are subject to inundation during a 100-year storm event. Flood zones in Carlsbad are shown on Figure 4.8-2. The potential flood hazard areas identified on the FIRM maps include the entire coastline and the following major drainage basins:
Buena Vista Creek and Buena Vista Lagoon
Agua Hedionda Creek, its northern tributary, and the Agua Hedionda Lagoon San Marcos Creek and its northern tributary
Batiquitos Lagoon
Encinitas Creek
A portion of Site 4 contains designated 100-year floodplain areas near Agua Hedionda Creek.
Portions of Sites 1 and 2 contain designated floodplain areas near Buena Vista Creek (FEMA 2019).
Most jurisdictions within San Diego County, including the City of Carlsbad, participate in the National Flood Insurance Program. Pursuant to the City of Carlsbad’s Local Coastal Program (LCP) and Carlsbad Municipal Code (CMC) Title 21 (Zoning), development is restricted within 100-year floodplain areas.
Dam Inundation
Dam inundation is caused by the sudden release of impounded water from structural failure or overtopping of a dam. The San Diego County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (MJHMP) identifies dam failure risk levels based on dam inundation map data. There are five dams located within or adjacent to Carlsbad: Calavera, Maerkle, Melrose Avenue, San Marcos, and Bressi. The Stanley A Mahr reservoir is also located in the southeast portion of the city. The Calavera, Melrose Avenue and Stanley A. Mahr reservoir dams have been assigned high hazard ratings, Maerkle dam has an extremely high hazard rating, San Marcos dam has a significant hazard rating, and the Bressi dam has a low hazard rating. The California Division of Safety of Dams also classifies jurisdictional dams by downstream hazard potential. Calavera, Melrose Avenue, San Marcos and Stanley A. Mahr dams are classified as high and the Maerkle dam is classified as extremely high. Bressi dam is not a state jurisdictional dam. These dams are periodically inspected by the State of California Division of Safety of Dams. The Dam Inundation Zones within Carlsbad are shown on Figure 4.8-3. Housing site 4 is within a Dam Inundation Zone.
Tsunami and Seiche Hazards
Tsunamis are long wavelength ocean waves generated by sudden movements of the ocean floor, such as earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, or landslides. As shown in Figure 4.8-4, the immediate vicinity of Buena Vista, Agua Hedionda, and Batiquitos Lagoons are at risk for tsunami run-up. Of the 18 rezone sites, Sites 1 and 2 are within or adjacent to the maximum tsunami run-up area. Seiches are wave-like oscillatory movements that occur in enclosed water bodies such as lakes or reservoirs due to winds or seismic activity. Potential effects of seiches include flooding and related hazards from spilling or overflowing water. Areas at risk of seiche typically overlap with dam inundation zones, as shown in Figure 4.8-3. Of the 18 rezone sites, Site 4 could be subject to a seiche.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Hydrology and Water Quality
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.8-5
Figure 4.8-2 FEMA Flood Hazard Zones in Carlsbad
t• I Flood Hazards 6 1• Poten ,a figure - ·
Ill If
d Z onC! ( I 00 YC!ar I Chance! Floo
1% Annua. h R isk Areas)
Flood • Hig I Flood Zone
!%Annual an H' h Risk Coasta Ch ce Coasta I
(I00 Year Flood . ,g
Areas)
-~ Highways
_ Major Street
Planned Street
Railroad
, - • • City limit s :.... .. J
05 Miles
FEMA 2019 . • City of Cw lsbl!ld, 2012 ; . Sou rce:.
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.8-6
Figure 4.8-3 Dam Inundation Zones in Carlsbad
- -·- ·1-. ___ (J--.f'·-,,, ____________ ,
e .. , r----r- ·· '
'_,.;
0 C "" Q 1
I
'---·1
R::r~ il I
i
I
I !
_________ j
i
\
Inundation i
Zone i
I .... _____ J
Figure 6-2: Dam Inundation Areas
~ Dams & Reservoirs
* Dam Inundation Points
~ Dam Inundation Areas
= Highw:iys
= MajorStreet
===== Planned Street
~- ~ Railroad
[_~~~] City limits
("' The~ is no inundation zone associated with Bressi Dam) 500ACRES
100
ACRES
Source: City of Carlsbad, 20 13; SAN DAG, 20 I J; DUDEK, 20 13; Dyett&Bhatia,20 13.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Hydrology and Water Quality
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.8-7
Figure 4.8-4 Tsunami Hazard Areas in Carlsbad
p D C ( I C
(.) C D n
'
··-··-··-:
0 ,..._~
'\::
¼ '\ \'i
'r\
,, ,, :,
! i
r·-··-··.J
I i i
_______ r LJ
Figure 6-3: Maximum Tsuna • • m, Pro1ected Run-up
,A.. Histor T ~ ic sunamiEff ect Felt
:;;;:, >:) FEMA VE - Zen, (High Risk)
Maximum T sunami Pro· 1ected Runup
-~ Highways
= MajorStreet
Planned Street
,,,~ , C' " "' ' , ,tyofCarl $bad,20 13;SANOAG, 2012· D ' yett &Bh aUa, 201).
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.8-8
e. Water Quality
The primary sources of pollution to surface and groundwater resources include stormwater runoff from paved areas, which can contain hydrocarbons, sediments, pesticides, herbicides, toxic metals, and coliform bacteria. Improperly placed septic tank leach fields and properly placed septic tanks that do not have proper residence time or are not properly maintained or have improperly disposed of household cleaners and other materials can cause similar types of contamination. Illegal waste dumping can introduce contaminants such as gasoline, pesticides, herbicides and other harmful chemicals (City of Carlsbad 2023).
As discussed above, the Batiquitos Lagoon Valley Groundwater Basin is located within Carlsbad. The overall groundwater storage capacity and storage levels are currently unknown. 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.
4.8.2 Regulatory Setting
Development in Carlsbad is subject to various local, State, and federal regulations and permits regarding the use of water resources.
a. Federal
Clean Water Act
The Federal Clean Water Act, enacted by Congress in 1972 and amended several times since, is the primary federal law regulating water quality in the United States and forms the basis for several State and local laws throughout the country. The Act established the basic structure for regulating discharges of pollutants into the waters of the United States. The Clean Water Act gave the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) authority to implement federal pollution control programs, such as setting water quality standards for contaminants in surface water, establishing wastewater and effluent discharge limits for various industry contaminants in surface water, establishing wastewater and effluent discharge limits for various industry categories, and imposing requirements for controlling nonpoint-source pollution. At the federal level, the Clean Water Act is administered by the USEPA and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE). At the State and regional levels in California, the act is administered and enforced by the State Water Resources Board (SWRCB) and the nine regional water quality control boards (RWQCBs).
Clean Water Act Section 401
Under Section 401 of the Clean Water Act, the RWQCBs have regulatory authority over actions in waters of the United States and/or the State of California through the issuance of water quality certifications, which are issued in conjunction with any federal permit (e.g., permits issued by the USACE under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, described above). Section 401 of the Clean Water Act provides the SWRCB and the RWQCBs with the regulatory authority to waive, certify, or deny any proposed activity that could result in a discharge to surface waters of the State. To waive or certify an activity, these agencies must find that the proposed discharge would comply with State water quality standards, including those protecting beneficial uses and water quality. If these agencies deny the proposed activity, the federal permit cannot be issued. This water quality certification is generally required for projects requiring Section 404 authorization involving the discharge of dredged or fill material to wetlands or other waters of the United States.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Hydrology and Water Quality
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.8-9
Clean Water Act Section 402
Section 402 of the Clean Water Act requires that all construction sites on an acre or greater of land, as well as municipal, industrial and commercial facilities discharging wastewater or stormwater directly from a point source (e.g., pipe, ditch, or channel) into a surface water of the United States must obtain permission under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit.
All NPDES permits are written to ensure that the surface water receiving discharges will achieve specified water quality standards.
According to federal regulations, NPDES permit coverage for stormwater discharges associated with construction activity can be obtained through individual State permits or general permits. Individual permitting involves the submittal of specific data on a single construction project to the appropriate permitting agency that will issue a site-specific NPDES permit to a project. NPDES coverage under a general permit involves the submittal of a Notice of Intent by the regulated construction project that they intend to comply with a general permit to be developed by USEPA or a state with delegated permitting authority.
Clean Water Act Section 404
Under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, proposed discharges of dredged or fill material into waters of the United States require USACE authorization. Waters of the United States generally include tidal waters, lakes, ponds, rivers, streams (including intermittent streams), and wetlands (with the exception of isolated wetlands). Federal regulations are currently pending that would revise the definition of “waters of the United States” subject to Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, as further discussed in Section 4.3, Biological Resources.
National Flood Insurance Act/Flood Disaster Protection Act The National Flood Insurance Act of 1968 made flood insurance available for the first time. The Flood Disaster Protection Act of 1973 made the purchase of flood insurance mandatory for the protection of property located in Special Flood Hazard Areas. These laws are relevant because they led to mapping of regulatory floodplains and to local management of floodplain areas according to guidelines that include prohibiting or restricting development in flood hazard zones.
Federal Emergency Management Agency
FEMA administers the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) to provide subsidized flood insurance to communities that comply with FEMA regulations limiting development in floodplains.
FEMA also issues Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRMs) that identify which land areas are subject to flooding. These maps provide flood information and identify flood hazard zones in the community.
The design standard for flood protection is established by FEMA. FEMA’s minimum level of flood protection for new development is the 100-year flood event, also described as a flood that has a one percent chance of occurring in any given year.
FEMA has also developed requirements and procedures for evaluating earthen levee systems and mapping the areas affected by those systems. Levee systems are evaluated for their ability to provide protection from 100-year flood events and the results of this evaluation are documented in the FEMA Levee Inventory System (FLIS). Levee systems must meet minimum freeboard standards and must be maintained according to an officially adopted maintenance plan. Other FEMA levee system evaluation criteria include structural design and interior drainage.
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.8-10
b. State
Clean Water Act Section 402
In California, the NPDES program is administered by the SWRCB through the RWQCBs and requires municipalities to obtain permits that outline programs and activities to control wastewater and stormwater pollution. The Federal Clean Water Act prohibits discharge of stormwater from construction projects unless the discharge is in compliance with an NPDES permit. The SWRCB is the permitting authority in California, and adopted an NPDES General Permit for Stormwater Discharges Associated with Construction and Land Disturbance Activities (Construction General Permit) (Order 2009-0009, as amended by Orders 2010-0014-DWQ and 2012-006-DWQ). Containment and spill cleanup are also encompassed in the Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP). This includes inspections for spills, a requirement that chemicals be stored in watertight containers with secondary containment to prevent spillage or leakage, procedures for addresses hazardous and non-hazardous spills, including a spill response and implementation procedure, include on-site equipment for cleanup and spills, and spill training for construction personnel. 1 The order applies to construction sites that include one or more acre of soil disturbance.
Construction activities include clearing, grading, grubbing, excavation, stockpiling, and reconstruction of existing facilities involving removal or replacement. The Construction General Permit requires that the landowner and/or contractor file permit registration documents prior to commencing construction and then pay a fee annually through the duration of construction. These documents include a notice of intent, risk assessment, site map, stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP), and signed certification statement. The SWPPP must include measures to ensure that: all pollutants and their sources are controlled; non-stormwater discharges are identified and eliminated, controlled, or treated; site best management practices (BMPs) are effective and result in the reduction or elimination of pollutants in stormwater discharges and authorized non-stormwater discharges; and BMPs installed to reduce or eliminate pollutants after construction are completed and maintained. The Construction General Permit specifies minimum BMP requirements for stormwater control based on the risk level of the site.
Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act
The Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Division 7 of the California Water Code) is the primary statute covering the quality of waters in California. Under the act, SWRCB has the ultimate authority over the State’s water quality policy. SWRCB administers water rights, water pollution control, and water quality functions throughout the state, while the nine RWQCBs conduct planning, permitting, and enforcement activities. The RWQCBs also regulate water quality under this act through the regulatory standards and objectives set forth in Water Quality Control Plans (also referred to as Basin Plans) prepared for each region.
California Toxics Rule
Because California had not established a complete list of acceptable water quality criteria for toxic pollutants, EPA Region IX established numeric water quality criteria for toxic constituents in the form of the California Toxics Rule (CTR). The CTR provides water quality criteria for certain potentially toxic compounds for inland surface waters, enclosed bays, estuaries, and waters designated for human health or aquatic life uses. The CTR is often used by the RWQCBs when
1 See https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/water_issues/programs/stormwater/docs/constpermits/wqo_2009_0009_complete.pdf Environmental Impact Analysis
Hydrology and Water Quality
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.8-11
establishing water quality objectives and TMDLs. Although the CTR criteria do not apply directly to discharges of storm water runoff, they are utilized as benchmarks for toxics in urban runoff. The CTR is used as a benchmark to evaluate the potential ecological impacts of storm water runoff to receiving waters. The CTR establishes acute and chronic surface water quality standards for certain water bodies. Acute criteria provide benchmarks for the highest permissible concentration below which aquatic life can be exposed for short periods of time without deleterious effects. Chronic criteria provide benchmarks for an extended period of time (i.e., 4 days or more) without deleterious effects. The acute CTR criteria have a shorter relevant averaging period (less than 4 days) and provide a more appropriate benchmark for comparison for storm water flows.
CTR criteria apply to the receiving water body and are calculated based on the probable hardness values of the receiving waters. At higher hardness values for receiving waters, certain constituents (including copper, lead, and zinc) are more likely to be complexed (bound with) components in the water column. This in turn reduces the bioavailability and resulting potential toxicity of these metals.
California General Plan Law, Government Code Section 65302 Government Code Section 65302(a) requires cities and counties located within the state to review the Land Use, Conservation, and Safety elements of the general plan "for the consideration of flood hazards, flooding, and floodplains" to address flood risks. The code also requires cities and counties in the state to annually review the land use element with respect "those areas covered by the plan that are subject to flooding identified by floodplain mapping prepared by FEMA or the California DWR."
Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA)
Effective in 2015, SGMA creates a framework for sustainable, local groundwater management in California. SGMA allows local agencies to customize groundwater sustainability plans to their regional economic and environmental needs. This act requires local regions to create a GSA and to adopt groundwater management plans for groundwater basins or subbasins that are designated as medium or high priority. High-priority and medium-priority basins or subbasins must adopt groundwater management plans by 2020 or 2022, depending upon whether the basin is in critical overdraft. GSAs will have until 2040 or 2042 to achieve groundwater sustainability.
California Coastal Act
The California Coastal Act of 1976 (Coastal Act) and the California Coastal Commission (CCC), the state’s coastal protection and planning agency, were established by voter initiative in 1972 to plan for and regulate new development, and to protect public access to and along the shoreline. The Coastal Act considers water quality and water-related public safety concerns as issues of public importance. To provide maximum public access to the coast and public recreation areas, the Coastal Act directs each local government located within the coastal zone to prepare a Local Coastal Program consistent with Section 30501 of the Coastal Act, in consultation with the Coastal Commission and with public participation.
California Ocean Plan
The Ocean Plan is one of five statewide water quality control plans established by the SWRCB to preserve and enhance California’s territorial ocean waters for the use and enjoyment of the public.
The Ocean Plan provides control for the discharge of waste to ocean waters and ensures the City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.8-12
protection of beneficial uses of ocean waters. Discharge of waste can include stormwater runoff, municipally-treated sewage outflow, and other discharges by industry under RWQCB and SWRCB permits. The Ocean Plan sets forth water quality objectives for protection of marine aquatic life as well as objectives for bacterial, physical, chemical, and biological characteristics for ocean waters.
The Ocean Plan is reviewed every three years to guarantee its water quality objectives are adequate to prevent degradation of marine species and protect public health. The Ocean Plan was first adopted by the SWRCB on July 6, 1972 and has been amended several times. The most recent amendment to the Ocean Plan was in 2019 to incorporate revised statewide bacteria water quality objectives and implementation options to protect recreational users from the effects of pathogens. c. Regional and Local
San Diego Basin – Region 9, Water Quality Control Plan
In accordance with the criteria in the California Porter–Cologne Water Quality Control Act, and other pertinent state and federal rules and regulations, each RWQCB is responsible for water quality control planning within their region, often in the form of a basin plan. San Diego County falls within the jurisdiction of Region 9 of the RWQCB. The San Diego Basin—Region 9, Water Quality Control Plan establishes standards for compliance in the San Diego Basin. The RWQCB is also responsible for implementing the provisions of the General Permit, including reviewing Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plans and monitoring reports, conducting compliance inspections, and taking enforcement actions.
San Diego Region Municipal Stormwater Permit (MS4 Permit) The Clean Water Act amendments of 1987 established a framework for regulating stormwater discharges from municipal, industrial, and construction activities under the NPDES program. The NPDES permit program, as authorized by Section 402 of the Clean Water Act, was established to control water pollution by regulating point sources that discharge pollutants into waters of the United States. In California, the SWRCB administers the NPDES municipal stormwater permitting program through the nine regional boards. Pursuant to the Municipal Stormwater Permit (Order No.
R9-2013-0001, as amended by Orders R9-2015-0001 and R9-2015-0100; NPDES Permit No.
CAS0109266) issued by the San Diego RWQCB, co-permittees are required to develop and implement construction and permanent stormwater BMP regulations addressing stormwater pollution associated with private and public development projects. Development projects are also required to include BMPs to reduce pollutant discharges from the project site in the permanent design. The Municipal Stormwater Permit outlines the individual responsibilities of the co- permittees including, but not limited to, the implementation of management programs, BMPs, and monitoring programs, within their jurisdiction and their watershed(s). BMPs associated with the final design are described in the Model Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan. The County of San Diego requires a stormwater management plan to describe potential construction and post- construction pollutants and identify BMPs to protect water resources.
In addition, the RWQCB’s Municipal Stormwater Permit requires control of hydromodification, or changes in the natural flow pattern (surface flow or groundwater) of an area due to development.
Hydromodification can be managed by reducing runoff flow and volume, along with including BMPs that reduce volume.
S
upplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.8-13
E
nvironmental Impact Analysis
Hydrology and Water Quality
Jurisdictional Runoff Management Program
The city has developed a Jurisdictional Runoff Management Program (JRMP) to comply with Municipal Permit Order No. R9-2013-0001, as amended by Order Nos. R9-2015-0001 and R9-2015-0100, NPDES Permit No. CAS0109266, issued by the State of California San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board. The permit was issued on May 8, 2013 and amended on April 1, 2015 and on January 7, 2016. The JRMP helps to implement programs to reduce pollution in urban runoff, including programs to regulate new public and private land development during each of the three major phases of urban development, i.e., the planning, construction, and existing development (or use) phases (City of Carlsbad 2021).
Carlsbad Gen
eral Plan
T
he current Carlsbad General Plan, adopted in 2015, lists several policies related to water supply and infrastructure in i
ts Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation Element a
nd Sustainability
Element. The following policies are applicable to the p roposed project (
City of Carlsbad 2015):
Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation Element
Policy 4
-P.57 W
ork with the stakeholders in the community and region, such as but not limited to the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), California Fish and Wildlife, US Fish and Wildlife, Coastal Commission, Army Corps of Engineers, Environmental Protection Agency, neighboring cities, counties, businesses, residents, and non-profit groups, to comply with applicable federal, state and local regulations related to water quality in our region, consistent with the city’s current NPDES Municipal Storm Water Permit issued by the RWQCB or other related regulations. Prepare and implement any applicable plans such as a Water Quality Improvement Plan, Integrated Regional Water Management Plan, Load Reduction Plan, or others as needed to comply with applicable regulations.
Policy 4
-P.58 R
equire developments to incorporate structural and non-structural best management practices (BMPs) to mitigate or reduce the projected increases in pollutant loads. Do not allow post-development runoff from a site that would cause or contribute to an exceedance of receiving water quality objectives or has n ot been
reduced to the maximum extent practicable.
Policy 4
-P.59 I
mplement water pollution prevention methods to the maximum extent practicable, supplemented by pollutant source controls and treatment. Use small collection strategies located at, or as close as possible to, the source (i.e., the point where water initially meets the ground or source of potential pollution) to minimize the transport of urban runoff and pollutants offsite and into a municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4).
Policy 4
-P.60 M
ake any necessary structural control changes to the storm water conveyance system to remove or reduce storm water pollutant levels.
Policy 4
-P.61 C
onduct analysis of the effectiveness of the overall pollution prevention programs in Carlsbad consistent with the city’s NPDES Municipal St orm Water Permit issued
by the RWQCB or other related regulations.
Policy 4
-P.62 C
ontinue to implement a program to detect and eliminate illicit connections to storm drains and ille
gal d
ischarges of non-storm water wastes into storm water
conveyance systems.
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.8-14
Policy 4-P.63 Continue to implement a program for the testing and monitoring of storm water and/or non-storm water flows consistent with the city’s NPDES Municipal Storm Water Permit issued by the RWQCB or other related regulations.
Policy 4-P.64 Preserve, where possible, natural watercourses or provide naturalized drainage channels within the city. Where feasible, implement restoration and rehabilitation opportunities.
Policy 4-P.65 Coordinate the needs of storm water pollution management with habitat management, flood management, capital improvement projects, development, aesthetics and other open space needs.
Sustainability Element
Policy 9-P.3 Develop and implement a water sub-metering ordinance for new multi-family rental and mixed-use buildings.
Policy 9-P.6 Promote the use of on-site gray water and rainwater collection systems through education, expedited permitting review, fee exemptions and other measures.
The General Plan has policies related to flooding hazards, which would be replaced by policies within the proposed Public Safety Element update.
City of Carlsbad Grading and Drainage Ordinance
CMC Title 15 is the city’s Grading and Drainage Ordinances. The Grading and Drainage Ordinances establish minimum requirements for grading associated with development under CMC Titles 20 (Subdivisions) and 21 (Zoning). The Grading Ordinance requires that a grading permit be obtained prior to grading, including the clearing and grubbing of vegetation. The permit requires a stormwater maintenance program, construction SWPPP, and other such documentation and information as may be necessary to demonstrate that the grading work will be carried out in substantial compliance with all city codes and standards, and the requirements of the city’s Landscape Manual.
Chapters 15.08 and 15.12 of the Grading Ordinance address drainage and stormwater management and discharge. The purpose of these chapters is to ensure the completion of drainage facilities, and to protect and enhance the water quality of receiving waters and wetlands in a manner pursuant to and consistent with the Clean Water Act and municipal permit. The city’s efforts include prohibiting non-stormwater discharges to the stormwater conveyance system; eliminating discharges to the stormwater conveyance system from spills, dumping, or disposal of materials other than stormwater or permitted or exempted discharges; reducing pollutants in stormwater discharges to the maximum extent practicable; and reducing pollutants in stormwater discharges to achieve
applicable water quality objectives for receiving waters within Carlsbad.
Chapter 15.16 of the CMC establishes minimum requirements for grading and dictates that a grading permit is required for any grading. The Grading Ordinance is intended to facilitate appropriate planning, design, and construction of development within the city, while ensuring compatibility with associated physical conditions, environmental resources, and legal/regulatory requirements. The grading permit requires a stormwater maintenance program, construction stormwater pollution prevention plan, and other such documentation and information as may be necessary to demonstrate that the grading work will be carried out in substantial compliance with all city codes and standards, and the requirements of the city’s Landscape Manual.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Hydrology and Water Quality
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.8-15
City of Carlsbad Coastal Shoreline Development Overlay Zone The City of Carlsbad addresses coastal shoreline development in CMC Chapter 21.204. The land use regulations included in the Municipal Code provide for control over development and land use along the coastline so that the public’s interest in maintaining the shoreline as a unique recreational and scenic resource, promoting public safety and access, and avoiding adverse geologic and economic effect of bluff erosion, is adequately protected. Geotechnical reports are required for all development within the overlay zone and must include the potential for flooding due to sea surface super elevation, wave run-up, tsunami, and river flows. Mitigation measures and alternative solutions are required for any potential impact identified in a geotechnical report.
City of Carlsbad Floodplain Management Regulations
The City of Carlsbad addresses flood hazards areas in its Floodplain Management Regulations (CMC Chapter 21.110), which requires a special use permit for any development proposed in areas of special flood hazards and areas of flood-related erosion hazards. The Floodplain Management Regulations restrict or prohibit land uses considered unsafe in a floodplain. They address standards of construction such as anchoring of structures, construction materials and methods, elevations and flood proofing. 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.
4.8.3 Impact Analysis
a. Methodology and Significance Thresholds
In accordance with Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, impacts would be considered significant if the proposed project would:
Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements (WDR’s) or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality;
Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin; 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:
a. result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site, b. substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or offsite,
c. 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, or
d. impede or redirect flood flows;
In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation; Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan.
1. 2.
3. 4.
5. City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.8-16
b. Prior Environmental Analysis
The 2015 General Plan EIR determined that impacts to hydrology, flooding, and water quality would be less than significant, including for water quality standards and waste discharge requirements, depletion of ground water, erosion, siltation, and on-site or off-site flooding (Section 3.8, Hydrology and Flooding/Water Quality: 3.8-20 through 3.8-32). It also found that new development under the General Plan would not create runoff beyond existing storm drain system capacities or substantially degrade water quality, and impacts would be less than significant. It further stated that individual development projects would be subject to project-specific development and planning review to conform to zoning, design standards, and other regulations concerning hydrology, flooding, and water quality.
The proposed project involves land use changes to encourage development on 18 rezone sites beyond what was anticipated in the 2015 General Plan EIR and could therefore result in new impacts related to hydrology and water quality. Therefore, all the CEQA checklist items listed above under Methodology and Significance Thresholds are addressed in this analysis. c. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Some components associated with the proposed project, including updates to the Local Coastal Plan, Public Safety Element, and Master and Specific Plans for consistency between the city’s planning documents, in and of themselves would not result in physical changes to the environment such that impacts to hydrology or water quality would occur. Therefore, this analysis focuses on impacts associated with implementation of the rezone program which would facilitate the development of 18 rezone sites listed in Table 2-4 in Section 2, Project Description.
Threshold 1: Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality? Impact HYD-1 SIMILAR TO THE DEVELOPMENT ANALYZED IN THE 2015 GENERAL PLAN EIR,
DEVELOPMENT UNDER THE PROJECT WOULD NOT VIOLATE WATER QUALITY STANDARDS OR WATER DISCHARGE
REQUIREMENTS, OR OTHERWISE SUBSTANTIALLY DEGRADE SURFACE OR GROUNDWATER QUALITY DUE TO
ADHERENCE TO EXISTING COMPLIANCE WITH STATE AND LOCAL REGULATIONS AND PERMIT REQUIREMENTS WHICH REQUIRE USE OF BMPS. THIS IMPACT WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.
Construction
Construction activities associated with future development under the proposed project on the 18 rezone sites could result in soil erosion due to earth-moving activities such as excavation, grading, soil compaction and moving, and soil stockpiling. Specific development associated with the project would be required to comply with State and local water quality regulations designed to control erosion and protect water quality during construction. This includes compliance with the requirements of the SWRCB Construction General Permit, which requires preparation and implementation of a SWPPP for projects that disturb one acre or more of land. Future development built under the project greater than one acre in size would be subject to the SWRCB Construction General Permit and would be required to develop a SWPPP. The SWPPP must include erosion and sediment control BMPs that would meet or exceed measures required by the Construction General Permit. BMPs to reduce potential construction impacts may include measures such as the installation of silt fences to trap sediments, slope stabilization, and regular sweeping of construction sites to control dust. Post-construction stormwater performance standards are also required to Environmental Impact Analysis
Hydrology and Water Quality
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.8-17
specifically address water quality and channel protection events. Implementation of the required SWPPP and applicable City ordinances would reduce the potential for eroded soil and any contaminants attached to that soil to contaminate a waterbody following a storm event.
Additionally, as was found in the 2015 General Plan EIR, policies 4-P.57 through 4-P.65 of the Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation Element would reduce impacts to water quality by requiring construction BMPs and implementing water pollution prevention methods. Construction impacts to surface and groundwater quality would be less than significant.
Operation
The proposed project would facilitate development of 3,280 units on the 18 rezone sites. The City of Carlsbad is a permittee under the Waste Discharge Requirements for Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Discharges within San Diego County. Specific project development would be required to adhere to all requirements under the San Diego County Municipal Stormwater Permit.
Future developments under the project would employ low-impact development (LID) techniques and stormwater control measures as outlined under CMC Chapter 15.12.080. The city’s LID control measures aim to conserve natural areas, protect slopes and channels, provide storm drain system stenciling and signage, divert roof runoff to vegetated areas before discharge unless the diversion would result in slope instability, and direct surface flow to vegetated areas before discharge unless the diversion would result in slope instability. Furthermore, development under the project would be required to comply with CMC Chapter 15.12 Stormwater Management and Discharge Control and Chapter 18.48, Stormwater Pollution Prevention. These chapters of the CMC outline requirements and BMPs for both construction and operation of projects to reduce the discharge of sediment and other particulate matter into the city’s groundwater system.
Compliance with the regulations, permit requirements, and BMPs, described above would prevent or minimize impacts related to water quality by reducing pollutants of concern in stormwater runoff and ensuring that construction and operation of all future development under the project would not cause or contribute to the degradation of water quality in receiving waters. As was found in the 2015 General Plan EIR, compliance with policies 4-P.57 to 4-P.65 would reduce impacts.
Construction and operation of specific developments built under the project would not violate any water quality standards or WDRs or otherwise substantially degrade water quality, and water quality impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required because, like under the 2015 General Plan EIR, impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
Threshold 2: Would the project substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that the project may impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin?
Impact HYD-2 SIMILAR TO THE DEVELOPMENT ANALYZED IN THE 2015 GENERAL PLAN EIR,
DEVELOPMENT UNDER THE PROJECT WOULD NOT INTERFERE SUBSTANTIALLY WITH GROUNDWATER RECHARGE
SUCH THAT THE PROJECT MAY IMPEDE SUSTAINABLE GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT OF THE BATIQUITOS LAGOON VALLEY GROUNDWATER BASIN. IMPACTS WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.
As described in the Environmental Setting section above, the only groundwater basin within the city is the Batiquitos Lagoon Valley Groundwater Basin. The groundwater in this basin is not considered City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.8-18
a good source of irrigation or municipal use due to the high content of chloride, sulfate, and total dissolved solids. The project would allow for additional development within Carlsbad that could increase demands for water; however, this increase in water demand would not impact local groundwater supplies as 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.
Development facilitated by the project would incrementally increase the amount of impervious surface in the project area, which could incrementally reduce the potential for groundwater recharge from infiltration of precipitation. Development under the project would primarily be infill development in previously disturbed and/or paved areas and increase in impervious surface area introduced by new housing development would be marginal. In addition, the city requires new construction and redevelopment to use LID techniques. These techniques would ensure that pervious surfaces are incorporated into development that would be facilitated by the project.
Therefore, impacts of impervious surfaces on groundwater recharge would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required because, like under the 2015 General Plan EIR, impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
Threshold 3a: Would the project 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?
Threshold 3b: Would the project 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 substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site?
Threshold 3c: Would the project 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 that would 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? Impact HYD-3 SIMILAR TO THE DEVELOPMENT ANALYZED IN THE 2015 GENERAL PLAN EIR,
DEVELOPMENT UNDER THE PROJECT MAY ALTER DRAINAGE PATTERNS AND INCREASE RUNOFF IN THE PROJECT
AREA, BUT WOULD NOT RESULT IN SUBSTANTIAL EROSION OR SILTATION, RESULT IN INCREASED FLOODING,
EXCEED THE CAPACITY OF EXISTING OR PLANNED STORMWATER DRAINAGE SYSTEMS, OR RESULT IN SUBSTANTIAL ADDITIONAL POLLUTED RUNOFF. IMPACTS WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.
Construction
Construction activities associated with development of the 18 rezone sites would involve stockpiling, grading, excavation, dredging, paving, and other earth-disturbing activities resulting in the alteration of existing drainage patterns. As described under Impact HYD-1 above, compliance with SWRCB’s NPDES Construction General Permit, and the CMC would reduce the risk of short- Environmental Impact Analysis
Hydrology and Water Quality
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.8-19
term erosion and increased runoff resulting from drainage alterations during construction.
Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.
Operation
The project would facilitate development at the 18 rezone sites, most of which are already developed and include impervious surfaces. Drainage patterns at those sites could be altered through the introduction of new impervious surfaces and infrastructure. However, future development on already developed sites would not have a substantial effect on drainage patterns or stormwater runoff volumes due to the relatively minor change in impervious surface area compared with development on vegetated vacant sites.
Sites 3, 4, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, and 12 are largely vacant and generally do not contain impervious surfaces. changes in impervious surfaces associated with development facilitated by the project would increase the rate and/or amount of surface runoff, redirect runoff to different discharge locations, or concentrate runoff from sheet flow to channelized flow. Surface water runoff rate and amount is determined by multiple factors, including the amount and intensity of precipitation, amount of other imported water that enters a watershed, and amount of precipitation and imported water that infiltrates to the groundwater. Infiltration is also determined by several factors, including soil type, antecedent soil moisture, rainfall intensity, the amount of impervious surfaces in a watershed, and topography. The rate of surface runoff is largely determined by topography. Runoff that does not infiltrate would be captured in the city’s storm drain system and ultimately discharged to the Pacific Ocean.
Development at the 18 rezone sites facilitated by the project would adhere to existing regulatory requirements that instruct stormwater management, including management of rainfall at the source by infiltrating stormwater as close to the source as practicable. Per NPDES requirements, post-construction peak runoff must be maintained at or below pre-project levels. Impact HYD-1 discusses applicable regulations that would limit pollutant discharges, including sediment and silt, from development under the project. As discussed above for Impact HYD-1, the CMC requires BMPs to control the volume, rate, and potential pollutant load of stormwater runoff from new development and redevelopment projects as a requirement of the Municipal Stormwater Permit.
The CMC also sets forth requirements and BMPs pertaining to the mitigation of erosion, sediment control and runoff as outlined in CMC Chapter 15.12 and Chapter 15.16. The city incorporates such requirements in any land use entitlement and construction or building-related permit to be issued relative to such development or redevelopment. Furthermore, the city’s LID ordinance in Chapter
15.12.080 aims to specifically reduce the amount of surface runoff and aid in groundwater recharge through techniques such as infiltration, evapotranspiration, bioretention and/or rainfall harvest and additional uses in accordance with the requirements set forth in the MS4 permit and the LID standards manual.
As was found in the 2015 General Plan EIR, compliance with 2015 General Plan policies would further reduce impacts. Given compliance with the above regulations and requirements, the project would not alter the existing drainage patterns or contribute runoff water in a manner which would result in substantial erosion, siltation, or flooding, nor would it exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems. Impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required because, like under the 2015 General Plan EIR, impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.8-20
Threshold 3d: Would the project 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 impede or redirect flood flows?
Threshold 4: In flood hazard, tsunami, or seiche zones, would the project risk release of pollutants due to project inundation?
Impact HYD-4 SIMILAR TO THE DEVELOPMENT ANALYZED IN THE 2015 GENERAL PLAN EIR,
DEVELOPMENT UNDER THE PROJECT MAY INCREASE IMPERVIOUS SURFACES ON INDIVIDUAL PROJECT SITES DUE
TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF NEW DEVELOPMENT BUT WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY ALTER DRAINAGE PATTERNS TO SUCH A DEGREE THAT IT WOULD IMPEDE OR REDIRECT FLOOD FLOWS. IMPACTS WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.
As stated in Section 4.8.1, Setting, a small portion of the city is located within a 100-year floodplain area. These areas are located along the Buena Vista, Agua Hedionda, and San Marcos Creeks and the Buena Vista, Agua Hedionda, and Batiquitos Lagoons. A portion of site 4 contains designated floodplain areas near Agua Hedionda Creek. Development on this site would be required to comply with CMC Chapter 21.110, Floodplain Management Regulations, which sets forth design requirements in flood-prone areas such as elevating all residential structures at least two feet above the base flood elevation and constructed with materials that can resist strong hydrostatic and hydrodynamic loads.
Housing Sites 1 and 2 are within or proximate to tsunami hazard zones, and Site 4 could be impacted by a seiche or dam failure. Inundation of development within these sites could risk release of pollutants due to project inundation. However, all specific project development under the project would be required to comply with all regulations and requirements set forth by FEMA and the CMC.
With compliance to the above regulations and measures, impacts to flood flows and the release of pollutants in flood-prone areas would be reduced. Additionally, the Public Safety Element Update would include policies 6-P.1 through 6-P.12, which would implement and develop flood control programs and require installation of protective structures to minimize impacts of flooding. Impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required because, like under the 2015 General Plan EIR, impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Hydrology and Water Quality
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.8-21
Threshold 5: Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
Impact HYD-5 SIMILAR TO THE DEVELOPMENT ANALYZED IN THE 2015 GENERAL PLAN EIR,
DEVELOPMENT UNDER THE PROJECT WOULD NOT SUBSTANTIALLY IMPEDE RECHARGE IN CARLSBAD AND WOULD BE SERVED BY CMWD’S EXISTING AND PLANNED POTABLE WATER SUPPLIES. DEVELOPMENT UNDER THE
PROJECT MAY AFFECT WATER QUALITY AND GROUNDWATER SUPPLY THROUGH CONSTRUCTION AND
OPERATIONAL ACTIVITIES BUT WOULD NOT CONFLICT WITH OR OBSTRUCT IMPLEMENTATION OF A WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLAN OR SUSTAINABLE GROUNDWATER MANAGEMENT PLAN. IMPACTS WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.
As discussed under HYD-2, housing developments facilitated by the project would be served by the CMWD. The CMWD provides potable water, wastewater treatment, recycled water to about 92,000 residents in the city (CMWD 2021). CMWD supply is purchased the San Diego County Water Authority, which receives its water supply from the Colorado River, Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta, and the Carlsbad desalination plant. Groundwater is not extracted for potable supply, and a Groundwater Sustainability Plan for the Batiquitos Lagoon Valley Groundwater Basin has not been prepared. Therefore, the project would not obstruct a sustainable groundwater management plan.
The project area is in the San Diego RWQCB Basin Plan area. Development under the proposed project may affect water quality and groundwater supply through construction and operational activities. As discussed in Impact HYD-1, compliance with relevant water quality regulations, BMPs, and policies would reduce the risk of water degradation from soil erosion and other pollutants related to construction and operational activities of development under the project. The requirements of the San Diego County Municipal Stormwater permit, Construction General Permit, and applicable CMC ordinances are intended to protect water quality and support attainment of water quality standards in downstream receiving water bodies. With incorporation of the BMPs described above under Impacts HYD-1 and HYD-3 in accordance with the San Diego County Municipal Stormwater permit, Construction General Permit, and CMC requirements, future development built under the project would not impair existing or potential beneficial uses of nearby or downstream water bodies and would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the Basin Plan. Impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required because, like under the 2015 General Plan EIR, impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
d. Cumulative Impacts
The geographic scope for cumulative hydrology and water quality impacts is the Carlsbad Watershed Management Area. This geographic scope is appropriate for hydrology and water quality because water quality impacts are localized in the watershed where the impact occurs.
Cumulative development would generally increase impermeable surface area in Carlsbad’s watersheds. Development would potentially increase peak flood flows, alter drainage patterns, reduce groundwater recharge, and increase pollutants in the regional stormwater. However, all cumulative development would also be required to adhere to all applicable State and local regulations designed to control erosion and protect water quality, including the CMC, NPDES Construction General Permit and the Municipal Stormwater Permit. All construction sites larger than one acre in size would be required to prepare and submit a SWPPP, thereby reducing the risk of City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.8-22
water degradation on- and off-site from soil erosion and other pollutants. This would reduce the quantity of stormwater runoff that enters the storm drainage system and discharges to the Pacific Ocean.
Implementation of NPDES and CMC requirements would also reduce the potential for increased pollutants in stormwater and groundwater. The Construction General Permit requires the implementation of BMPs on all construction sites to limit erosion and sedimentation, thereby minimizing water quality impacts. The requirements of the CMC and the Municipal Stormwater Permit would also decrease operational effects of cumulative development because each development proposal would be required to reduce the on-site post-development peak discharges at or below pre-development peak discharge rates by implementing on-site LID features and other groundwater recharge design elements. Compliance with mandatory Clean Water Act (NPDES Construction General Permit and MS4 General Permit) and CMC requirements would further reduce the potential for water quality degradation and violations of water quality standards as a result of cumulative development. Therefore, cumulative impacts would be less than significant.
As discussed under Impacts HYD-1 and HYD-3, development under the project would increase impervious surface at the 18 rezone sites and may alter drainage patterns. Cumulative development in the Carlsbad watershed may also increase impervious surfaces resulting in localized impacts.
However, projects would be analyzed and mitigated on a case-by-case basis and would be designed to avoid or mitigate potential impacts related to runoff and groundwater recharge in compliance with the jurisdiction’s Municipal Code, relevant water quality regulations, BMPs, and policies which would help reduce the risk of water degradation from soil erosion and other pollutants related to project construction and operational activities. Construction and operation of all cumulative development would be required to comply with the City’s LID ordinance as outlined in CMC Chapter 15.12.080 which aims to specifically reduce the amount of surface runoff and aid in groundwater recharge through techniques such as infiltration, evapotranspiration, bioretention and/or rainfall harvest. Compliance with the City’s LID ordinance and the County’s MS4 permit would reduce impacts to water quality and groundwater recharge. Impacts from the project on water quality and groundwater recharge would be less than significant.
As discussed under Impact HYD-4, portions of Carlsbad are located within a 100-year flood hazard area; however, only site 4 (and only a portion of the site) is in a flood zone. Cumulative development in other areas in the Carlsbad watershed that are subject to inundation may have localized impacts.
However, projects would be analyzed and mitigated on a case-by-case basis and would be designed to avoid or mitigate potential impacts related to flooding in compliance with the jurisdiction’s Municipal Code. Cumulative impacts related to flooding, seiche, and tsunami would therefore be less than significant. The project would not impede or redirect flood flows or risk release of pollutants due to inundation. Impacts from implementation of the project related to flood flows and inundation would be less than significant. Because flooding is localized and site-specific, the project would not have a cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact related to flood hazard or inundation risks.
As discussed under Impacts HYD-2 and HYD-5, the project would increase the demand for water in the CMWD service area. Cumulative development in the CMWD service area would increase the demand for water from CMWD. However, groundwater is not a component of CMWD water supply and would not be affected by the increased population resulting from cumulative development.
Therefore, development facilitated by the project would not result in a significant cumulative impact.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Land Use and Planning
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.9-1
4.9 Land Use and Planning
This section analyzes the consistency of the proposed project with applicable land use plans, policies, and regulations, and identifies environmental effects that would arise from any inconsistencies.
4.9.1 Setting
Carlsbad occupies approximately 39 square miles of rolling hills, beaches and bluffs along the northern coast of San Diego County. The city is located about 30 miles north of San Diego and about 90 miles south of Los Angeles.
The geographically dominant land use in Carlsbad is residential, with neighborhoods distributed throughout the city. The 2015 General Plan includes a Land Use Map identifying types of uses and densities/intensities of each use permitted in the city. Table 2-2 in Section 2, Project Description, describes the extent of existing land use designations showing open space, planned communities, and single-family residential development with the largest shares, respectively. Other designations include Office, General Commercial, Industrial, Planned Industrial, and Residential Density – Multiple.
Table 4.9-1 shows the current land use designations for the 18 rezone sites. The sites are currently designated for low-density residential, commercial, industrial, or public land use.
Table 4.9-1 Existing Land Use Designations
Site # Location APN
Current Land
Use Designation
Site 1 North County Plaza 156-301-16 R - Regional Commercial/OS - Open Space
Site 2 The Shoppes at Carlsbad
parking lot
156-301-11 R - Regional Commercial/OS - Open
Space
156-302-35 R – Regional Commercial
156-301-06 R – Regional Commercial
156-301-10 R – Regional Commercial
156-302-23 R – Regional Commercial
Site 3 Chestnut at El Camino Real 167-080-33, 34, 41 and 42 R-4 – Residential 0-4 du/ac Site 4 Zone 15 Cluster 209-060-72 R-4 – Residential 0-4 du/ac OS – Open Space
209-090-11 R-15- Residential 8-15 du/ac
L-Local Shopping Center
Site 5 Avenida Encinas Car
Storage Lot
210-090-24 PI – Planned Industrial
Site 6 Crossings Golf Course Lot 5 212-270-05 PI – Planned Industrial O – Office
Site 7 Salk Avenue 212-021-04 O – Office
Site 8 Cottage Row Apartments 212-040-47 R-4 – Residential 0-4 du/ac Site 9 West Oaks Industrial 212-040-26 and 212-110-01 to -08 PI and OS – Open Space Site 10 Bressi Ranch Colt Place 213-262-17 PI – Planned Industrial City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.9-2
Site # Location APN
Current Land
Use Designation
Site 11 Bressi Ranch Gateway Road 213-263-19, 213-263-20 PI – Planned Industrial Site 12 Industrial Sites East of
Melrose
221-015-08, 221-014-03 PI – Planned Industrial
Site 14 Carlsbad Village COASTER
Station
155-200-11 and 12, 760-166-37,
203-296-12
V-B Village-Barrio
Site 15 City's Oak Yard 204-010-05, 204-010-06 V-B Village-Barrio Site 16 Caltrans Maintenance
Station/Pacific Sales
211-050-08, 09 GC – General Commercial
P – Public
Site 17 Poinsettia COASTER Station 214-150-08, 214-150-20, 214-150- 11 P – Public
TC – Transportation Corridor
Site 18 North Ponto Parcels 216-010-01, 02, 03, 04, 05; 214-160- 25 and 28; 214-171-11
R-15 - Residential 8-15 du/ac
VC - Visitor Commercial
GC – General Commercial
Site 19 La Costa Glen/Forum 255-012-05 R - Regional Commercial/OS - Open Space
4.9.2 Regulatory Setting
a. Federal
There are no federal regulations that directly pertain to land use and planning. Federal regulations that indirectly affect land use and planning pertaining to air quality, energy, GHGs, noise, and transportation and the impacts of those regulations are discussed in their respective sections of this SEIR.
b. State
General Plan Law (California Government Code Section 65300) California Government Code Section 65300 regulates the substantive and topical requirements of general plans. State law requires that each city and county adopt a general plan “for the physical development of the county or city, and any land outside its boundaries which bears relation to its planning.” The California Supreme Court has called the general plan the “constitution for future development.” The general plan expresses the community’s development goals and embodies public policy relative to the distribution of future land uses, both public and private.
California Coastal Act
The California Coastal Act (Public Resources Code Section 30000 et seq.) authorizes the State of California to regulate development within the Coastal Zone, defined as the area between the seaward limits of the state’s jurisdiction and generally 1,000 yards landward from the mean high tide line of the sea. In Carlsbad, the Coastal Zone boundary generally encompasses the area east of the Pacific Ocean to El Camino Real, as shown in Figure 4.9-1.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Land Use and Planning
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.9-3
Figure 4.9-1 Carlsbad Coastal Zone Boundary
PACIFIC
OCEAN
1Miles 0
Source: City of Carlsbad.
N
A
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.9-4
The basic goals of the Coastal Act, per Public Resources Code Section 30001.5, are:
a. Protect, maintain, and, where feasible, enhance and restore the overall quality of the coastal zone environment and its natural and artificial resources. b. Assure orderly, balanced utilization and conservation of coastal zone resources taking into account the social and economic needs of the people of the state. c. Maximize public access to and along the coast and maximize public recreational opportunities in the coastal zone consistent with sound resources conservation principles and constitutionally protected rights of property owners.
d. Assure priority for coastal-dependent and coastal related development over other development on the coast.
e. Encourage state and local initiatives and cooperation in preparing procedures to implement coordinated planning and development for mutually beneficial uses, including educational uses, in the coastal zone.
The Coastal Act’s coastal resources planning and management policies cover six areas: public access, recreation, the marine environment, land resources, development, and industry. The policies articulate requirements for public access and for protection of marine resources and environmentally sensitive habitat areas. They lay out clear priorities for concentrating development in urbanized areas, preserving agriculture and open space, protecting fishing and coastal-dependent industry, promoting recreational use of the coast, and giving priority to visitor-serving commercial uses over general commercial or residential development.
The Coastal Act requires that individual jurisdictions adopt local coastal programs (LCP) to implement the Coastal Act. Carlsbad’s LCP consists of a land use plan document (separate from the General Plan) containing land use policies and an implementation plan. The implementation plan consists of ordinances, including the city’s Zoning Ordinance and Municipal Code chapters on stormwater management and discharge control and grading and erosion control. It also includes various master and specific plans and the city’s Habitat management Plan and Drainage Master Plan. Development in the city’s Coastal Zone must comply with the LCP in addition to the General Plan.
California Government Code Section 65301
Section 65301 of the California Government Code requires a general plan to address the geographic territory of the local jurisdiction and any other territory outside its boundaries that bears relation to the planning of the jurisdiction. The jurisdiction may exercise its own judgment in determining what areas outside of its boundaries to include in the planning area. The State of California General Plan Guidelines denotes that the planning area for a city should include (at minimum) all land within the city limits and all land within the city’s Sphere of Influence (SOI).
California Government Code Section 65860(a)
State law requires that general law city or town zoning ordinances be consistent with the general plan. A zoning ordinance is consistent with an adopted general plan only if the various land uses authorized by the zoning ordinance "are compatible with the objectives, policies, general land uses, and programs specified in such a plan" (Government Code Section 65860(a)). State law also provides that in the event a zoning ordinance becomes inconsistent with a general plan by reason of Environmental Impact Analysis
Land Use and Planning
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.9-5
amendment to such a plan, the zoning ordinance must be amended within a reasonable time so that it is consistent with the general plan as amended [Government Code Section 65860(a)].
Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act (SB 375) The Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act (SB 375) supports the State's climate goals by helping reduce greenhouse gas emissions through coordinated transportation, housing, and land use planning. Under SB 375, the California Air Resources Board (CARB) set targets for 2020 and 2035 for each of the 18 metropolitan planning organization regions in 2010 and updated them in 2018.
Each of the regions must prepare a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS), as an integral part of its regional transportation plan, that contains land use, housing, and transportation strategies that, if implemented, would allow the region to meet CARB’s targets. SB 375 establishes some incentives to encourage implementation of the development patterns and strategies included in an SCS.
Developers can get relief from certain environmental review requirements under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) if their new residential and mixed-use projects are consistent with a regions SCS that meets the targets (see Public Resources Code Sections 21155, 21155.1, 21155.2, and 21159.28).
c. Regional and Local
SANDAG 2021 Regional Plan
The 2021 Regional Plan is the most recent plan adopted by SANDAG, and it builds upon the goals, policies, and forecasts of preceding plans. However, the 2021 Regional Plan is currently being amended to not include the regional road usage charge and the draft environmental document is anticipated for release mid-2023. The plan combines the Regional Transportation Plan, Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS), and Regional Comprehensive Plan. As such, the plan demonstrates that the SANDAG region can achieve emissions reductions consistent with targets set forth by SB 375.
GHG reductions achieved through development consistent with the 2021 Regional Plan would result in corresponding reductions in energy consumption in the region. The 2021 Regional Plan sets forth a long-term blueprint for the San Diego region that seeks to meet regulatory requirements, address traffic congestion, and create equal access to jobs, education, healthcare, and other community resources. The 2021 Regional Plan polices are built around three core strategies (SANDAG 2021):
Invest In a Reimagined Transportation System. Build a network and fund services that include multimodal roadways; an expanded network of fast, frequent, and low-cost transit; 21 st century
technology that manages the entire transportation system and connects people to on-demand services; and zero-emissions options for vehicles and micromobility. Incentivize Sustainable Growth and Development. Collaborate with local jurisdictions and fund programs to accelerate housing production while also addressing equity, climate resilience, and mobility.
Implement Innovative Demand and System Management. Reduce solo driving and congestion through increased remote work, carsharing, vanpooling, pricing strategies and parking management programs that leverage partnerships and technology.
McClellan–Palomar Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) The McClellan–Palomar ALUCP was prepared by the San Diego County Regional Airport Authority to protect the safety of the public (adopted in 2010 and amended in 2010 and 2011). ALUCPs are intended to promote compatibility between airports and the land uses that surround them by City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.9-6
addressing noise, overflight, safety, and airspace protection concerns. Each ALUCP prevents exposure to excessive noise and safety hazards within an airport influence area over a 20-year horizon. The McClellan–Palomar ALUCP provides for the orderly growth of the airport and the area surrounding the airport and safeguards the general welfare of the inhabitants within the vicinity of the airport and the public in general. According to Exhibit III-1 (Compatibility Policy Map: Noise) of the ALUCP, and shown in Figure 4.10-5 of Section 4.10, Noise, of this SEIR, Sites 6, 8, 9, and 16 are located within the 60 to 65 dB CNEL noise contour of the McClellan-Palomar Airport, and none of the sites are located within the noise contours above 65 dB CNEL except for a small portion of Site 9 which is within the 65-70 dB CNEL noise contour. According to Exhibit III-2 (Compatibility Policy Map: Safety) of the ALUCP, and shown in 4.7-2 of Section 4.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of this SEIR, a portion of site 10 is within Zone 2 - Inner Approach/Departure Zone, and a portion of Site 9 is within Zone 3 - Inner Turning Zone. In addition, the remaining portions of Sites 9 and 10 as well as Sites 4, 6, 7, 8, and 11 are within Zone 6 - Traffic Pattern Zone. According to Exhibit III-5 (Compatibility Policy Map: Airport Influence Area) of the ALUCP, and shown in Figure 4.7-3 of Section 4.7, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of this SEIR, Sites 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and a portion of 16 are within Airport Influence Area - Review Area 1 and Sites 5, 12, 17, and a portion of Sites 16 and 18 are within Airport Influence Area - Review Area 2.
City of Carlsbad General Plan
The current General Plan was last comprehensively updated in 2015. The General Plan functions as a guide for future development and city land use decisions. The General Plan is a "constitution" for local decision making that addresses the range of immediate, mid-, and long-term issues with which the community is concerned, including but not limited to environmental sensitivity and preservation, public services, public safety, local transportation needs, sustainability, housing, and economic vitality. The 2015 General Plan is intended to allow land use and policy determinations to be made within a comprehensive framework that incorporates public health, safety, and "quality of life" considerations in a manner that recognizes the resource limitations and the fragility of the community's natural environment. Policies from the Land Use and Community Design Element, as updated under the proposed project for consistency with the 2021-2029 Housing Element would apply to future development under the proposed project. Further, the policies from Mobility Element and Housing Element would be applicable to the proposed project.
Mobility Element
Policy 3-P.32 Require developers to improve pedestrian and bicycle connectivity consistent with the city’s bicycle and pedestrian master plans and trails master planning efforts. In addition, new residential developments should demonstrate that a safe route to school and transit is provided to nearby schools and transit stations within a half mile walking distance.
Housing Element
Policy 10-P.1 Ensure the availability of sufficient developable acreage in all residential densities to accommodate varied housing types and income levels as required to meet Carlsbad’s 2021-2029 RHNA, as discussed in Section 10.3 (Resources Available).
Policy 10-P.3 Provide alternative housing opportunities by encouraging adaptive reuse of older commercial or industrial buildings.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Land Use and Planning
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.9-7
Policy 10-P.7 Encourage distribution of development of affordable housing throughout the city to avoid over concentration in a particular area, excluding areas lacking necessary infrastructure or services.
Policy 10-P.8 Develop and adopt objective design standards that will be used for all mixed use and multi-family housing projects.
Policy 10-P.13 Pursuant to the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, require affordability for lower- income households of a minimum of 15 percent of all residential projects. For projects that are required to include 10 or more units affordable to lower-income households, at least 10 percent of the lower-income units should have three or more bedrooms (lower-income senior housing projects exempt).
Policy 10-P.15 Work with the community to modify or replace Measure E (Growth Management Plan) relative to the residential growth caps and development moratorium to be in compliance with SB 330.
Policy 10-P.16 Address the unmet housing needs of the community through new development and housing that is set aside for lower- and moderate income households consistent with priorities set by the Housing Services Division, in collaboration with the Planning Division, and as set forth in the city’s Consolidated Plan.
Policy 10-P.17 Encourage the development of an adequate number of housing units suitably sized to meet the needs of lower- and moderate income larger households.
Policy 10-P.30 Support ongoing efforts of federal, State, regional, and local efforts to affirmatively further fair housing
Policy 10-P.42 Consider potential adverse health and safety impacts associated with land use decisions to reduce negative impacts upon residents from hazardous materials, industrial activities, agricultural operations using pesticides applied by spray techniques, facility locations, design features, and other aspects that may negatively impact health or quality of life for affected residents.
City of Carlsbad Municipal Code
Carlsbad’s codes governing development applicable to the land use and planning analysis include the Zoning Ordinance, Environment Ordinance, and Subdivisions Ordinance. These codes regulate development as described below.
Building Code
The City Building Code (Carlsbad Municipal Code [CMC] Title 18) is intended to regulate the construction of applicable facilities and encompasses (and formally adopts) associated elements of the CBC (Title 24, Part 2, Volumes 1 and 2) and the California Building Standards Code. Specifically, this includes guidelines related to “regulating the erection, construction, enlargement, alteration, repair, moving, removal, demolition, conversion, occupancy, equipment, use, height, area, and maintenance of all buildings or structures in the city of Carlsbad…” Zoning Ordinance (Carlsbad Municipal Code, Title 21)
This ordinance implements the General Plan by regulating the distribution and intensity of land uses in such categories as residential, commercial, and industrial. Regulations establish standards for minimum lot size; building height and setback limits; fence heights; parking; and other development City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.9-8
parameters within each land use. In the event of an inconsistency between the Zoning Ordinance and the General Plan, the General Plan shall prevail. Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 21.95 (Hillside Development Regulations) governs hillside protection and establishes regulations for development on hillsides.
Environment Ordinance (Carlsbad Municipal Code, Title 19) This ordinance provides for enhancement and protection of the environment within the city by establishing principles, criteria, and procedures for evaluating the environmental impacts of development, consistent with the General Plan, and ensures compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
Subdivisions Ordinance (Carlsbad Municipal Code, Title 20) This ordinance implements Title 7, Division 2 of the California Government Code (Subdivision Map Act), and sets procedures to regulate the division of land. The General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and the Carlsbad Subdivision Ordinance govern the design of a subdivision, the size of its lots, and the types of improvements that will be required as conditions of approval.
Grading and Drainage Ordinance
CMC Title 15 is the city’s Grading and Drainage Ordinances. The Grading and Drainage Ordinances establish minimum requirements for grading associated with development under CMC Titles 20 (Subdivisions) and 21 (Zoning). The Grading Ordinance requires that a grading permit be obtained prior to grading, including the clearing and grubbing of vegetation. The permit requires a stormwater maintenance program, construction stormwater pollution prevention plan, and other such documentation and information as may be necessary to demonstrate that the grading work will be carried out in substantial compliance with all city codes and standards, and the requirements of the city’s Landscape Manual.
Chapters 15.08 and 15.12 of the Grading Ordinance address drainage and stormwater management and discharge. The purpose of these chapters is to ensure the completion of drainage facilities and to protect and enhance the water quality of receiving waters and wetlands in a manner pursuant to and consistent with the Clean Water Act and municipal permit. The city’s efforts include prohibiting non-stormwater discharges to the stormwater conveyance system; eliminating discharges to the stormwater conveyance system from spills, dumping, or disposal of materials other than stormwater or permitted or exempted discharges; reducing pollutants in stormwater discharges to the maximum extent practicable; and reducing pollutants in stormwater discharges in order to
achieve applicable water quality objectives for receiving waters within Carlsbad.
Chapter 15.16 of the CMC establishes minimum requirements for grading and dictates that a grading permit is required for any grading. The Grading Ordinance is intended to facilitate appropriate planning, design, and construction of development within the city, while ensuring compatibility with associated physical conditions, environmental resources and legal/regulatory requirements. The grading permit requires a stormwater maintenance program, construction stormwater pollution prevention plan, and other such documentation and information as may be necessary to demonstrate that the grading work will be carried out in substantial compliance with all city codes and standards, and the requirements of the city’s Landscape Manual.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Land Use and Planning
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.9-9
City of Carlsbad Growth Management Plan (Proposition E) The City adopted the Growth Management Plan (GMP) in July 1986 to address the concerns of rapid growth and its impacts on quality of life, which was ratified by voter approval of Proposition E in November 1986.
The GMP requires adequate public facilities be provided concurrent with new growth. To ensure this, the GMP identifies performance standards for 11 public facilities – city administration, library, wastewater treatment, parks, drainage, circulation, fire, open space, schools, sewer collection, and water distribution. The facility performance standards were based on the city’s residential dwelling unit capacity (existing and future units), which in 1986 was estimated to be 54,599 dwelling units.
Through Proposition E, voters limited the maximum number of dwelling units that can be constructed citywide to 54,599 units, spread out between the Northwest Quadrant (15,370 units), Northeast Quadrant (9,042 units), Southwest Quadrant (12,859 units), and Southeast Quadrant (17,328 units). Pursuant to Proposition E, the city cannot approve any General Plan amendment, zone change, subdivision map or other discretionary permit that could result in residential development that exceeds the dwelling unit limit in each quadrant. To increase the Proposition E dwelling unit limit in any city quadrant requires approval by Carlsbad voters (City of Carlsbad 2015).
However, recent State housing laws have preempted the city’s ability to require compliance with the dwelling caps or to stop development due to noncompliance, as acknowledged in adopted City Council Resolution 2021-074 (City of Carlsbad 2023). The city is currently developing a new approach to managing growth.
Specific and Master Plans
The city uses specific plans and master plans extensively to coordinate development and infrastructure improvements on large sites or series of parcels. Specific plans and master plans must be consistent with the general plan and are typically used to establish development plans and standards to achieve the design and development objectives for a particular area. Much of the residential areas in the southern and northeastern portions of the Carlsbad were developed as part of a master plan (e.g., Aviara, Bressi Ranch, Calavera Hills, Rancho Carrillo, Robertson Ranch, and Villages of La Costa). In addition to the large residential master plan areas, the city has several smaller residential specific plans and specific plans for commercial and industrial areas. The Village and Barrio Master Plan was recently amended in 2021 and will continue to guide development in that area. There are also many older specific plans and master plans that have been fully implemented.
City of Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan
The Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan (HMP) is a long-range plan for conserving wildlife habitat in the city. The HMP is an adopted subarea plan within the proposed North County Multiple Habitat Conservation Plan. The Carlsbad HMP outlines specific conservation, management, facility siting, land use, and other measures that the city will take to preserve the diversity of the habitat and protect sensitive biological resources in the city while also allowing for additional development and growth under the city’s General Plan. The city’s HMP preserve contains natural habitats that are necessary to sustain threatened, listed or sensitive species, and to maintain biological value.
According to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and California Department of Fish and Wildlife requirements, the HMP is required to establish a preserve of 6,478 acres of natural habitat (within the city’s jurisdictional boundary), as well as an additional 308 acres of “core area” habitat for the City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.9-10
coastal California gnatcatcher (outside of the city’s jurisdiction). See Section 4.3, Biological Resources for a more detailed discussion of biological resources and the HMP.
4.9.3 Impact Analysis
a. Methodology and Significance Thresholds
The analysis in this section focuses on the compatibility of land uses identified in the project with existing and planned land uses within Carlsbad, as well as consistency with any applicable land use plans, policies, or regulations. The following thresholds of significance are based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. For purposes of this SEIR, implementation of the project may have a significant adverse impact if it would do any of the following:
Physically divide an established community
Cause a significant 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 The plan consistency analysis describes existing regional and local plans and policies and is intended to fulfill the requirements of CEQA Guidelines Section 15125(d). The emphasis of the analysis is on plan inconsistency and potential conflicts between the project and existing applicable land use plans, and whether any inconsistencies are significant environmental effects. The project is considered consistent with the provisions of the identified regional and local plans if it meets the general intent of the applicable plans and does not conflict with any directly applicable policies. A given project need not be in perfect conformity with each and every policy nor does state law require precise conformity of a project with every policy or land use designation. Courts have also acknowledged that general and specific plans attempt to balance a range of competing interests, and that it is nearly, if not absolutely, impossible for a project to be in perfect conformity with each and every policy set forth in the applicable plan. Additionally, in reaching such consistency conclusions, the city may also consider the consequences of denial of a project, which can also result in other policy inconsistencies. For example, Government Code Section 65589.5 explains that the potential consequences of limiting the approval of housing are reduced mobility, urban sprawl, excessive commuting, and air quality deterioration.
For an impact to be considered significant, any inconsistency would also have to result in a significant adverse change in the environment not already addressed in the other resource chapters of this SEIR. The analysis below provides a brief overview of the most relevant policies from the various planning documents. However, the city’s consistency conclusions are based upon the planning documents as a whole.
b. Prior Environmental Analysis
The 2015 General Plan EIR determined that impacts to land use would be less than significant as they pertain to conflicts with applicable land use plans (Section 3.9, Land Use Planning, Housing, and Population: 3.9-11 through 3.9-22). It found that General Plan implementation would not physically divide an established community and would, in fact, beneficially increase connectivity locally and regionally. The General Plan EIR further stated that individual development projects would be subject to project-specific development and planning review, including adherence to standards for land use planning.
1. 2.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Land Use and Planning
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.9-11
The proposed project involves land use changes to encourage development on 18 rezone sites beyond what was anticipated in the 2015 General Plan EIR and could therefore result in new impacts related to land use and planning. Further, the proposed project involves updates to several land use plans including the LCP, Zoning Ordinance, master and specific plans, and the Public Safety Element of the General Plan. Therefore, all the CEQA checklist items listed above under Methodology and Significance Thresholds are addressed in this analysis. c. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Threshold 1: W ould the project physically divide an established community? Impact LU-1 THE PROPOSED PROJECT INVOLVES IMPLEMENTING A REZONING PROGRAM ON 18 SITES,
MAINLY IN DEVELOPED AREAS OF THE CITY, AND WOULD NOT PHYSICALLY DIVIDE AN ESTABLISHED COMMUNITY. NO IMPACT WOULD OCCUR.
The proposed project would involve a rezoning program that would allow for development of 3,280 new residential units. In general, the project aims to rezone parcels that are within infill areas and are surrounded by existing developed parcels. The development of these sites would not result in the construction of barriers, such as new roads, that would divide the existing communities surrounding the sites.
Short-term construction impacts would be constrained within the sites themselves; however, off- site improvements for utilities or transportation infrastructure would likely be required (refer to Section 4.13, Transportation, and Section 4.14, Utilities and Service Systems) for some of the sites.
Potential off-site improvements would be constructed within roadway rights-of-way and would not block access between existing communities. Therefore, existing roadways would not be blocked, and construction would not limit access to a community or restrict movement within a community.
The proposed project is designed to implement the Housing Element to meet the city’s RHNA and would promote the development of existing vacant, underdeveloped or underutilized properties, thereby locating people closer to existing employment, goods and services within an established community. Furthermore, the proposed project includes Housing Programs with requirements for Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) that puts a great emphasis on anti-displacement and tenant protection. Specifically, Goal 10-G.1 of the Housing Element encourages development of a diversity of new housing to meet the demand of anticipated city and regional growth and to meet or exceed the city’s RHNA; and Policy 10-P.7 encourages dispersion of affordable housing throughout the city. Additionally, the proposed project does not include any new infrastructure, or alteration of existing infrastructure or thoroughfares, that may create physical divisions or boundaries.
Updates to the Public Safety Element include policy updates ensuring evacuation routes and other safety measures are implemented in accordance with State law but would not create structures that could physically divide an established community. Further, updates to the Local Coastal Plan and master and specific plans that are being proposed as part of the project for consistency between the city’s planning documents and in and of themselves would not result in physical changes to the environment such that impacts would occur. Therefore, no impact related to dividing an established community would occur.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required because, like under the 2015 General Plan EIR, impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
C
ity of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4. 9-12
T
hreshold 2: Would the project cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with a
ny land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or m
itigating an environmental effect?
Im
pact LU-2 TH
E PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD NOT RESULT IN A SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT DUE TO A CONFLICT WITH ANY LAND USE PLAN AND POLICY. TH
EREFORE, T
HIS IMPACT WOULD BE LESS THAN
SIGNIFICANT.
Sinc
e the p
roposed p
roject i
nvolves changes to l
and u
se d
esignations a
t 18 r
ezone s
ites to facilitate
housing development, by its nature it m
ay b
e inconsistent with existing local r
egulations, such as
the L
CP a
nd Zoning Ordinance. R
egionally and locally adopted land use plans, policies, and regulations, including SA
NDAG’s 2
021 Regional Plan and t
he City’s 2
015 G
eneral Plan, apply t
o the
project. I
n addition to t
he 2021 Regional Plan and Carlsbad’s 2
015 G
eneral Plan, the City of Carlsbad
maintains specific and master plans for some a
reas within the city to tailor appropriate
development standards and policies to individual n
eighborhoods, as described in the Regulatory
Setting section above. By state law, t
hese p
lans m
ust be consistent with the General Plan. T
he
proposed project is
designed to address potential inconsistencies by including u pdates to the LCP,
Zoning Ordinance, and m
aster and s
pecific pl
ans t
o ensure that the city’s land use planning
documents are consistent with the proposed rezone program. Impacts associated with c hanges to
these land use plans, policies, and regulations are analyzed throughout this SEIR.
As discussed in Section 4.6, G
reenhouse Gas Emissions, the proposed project would be consistent with SA
NDAG’s 2
021 Regional Plan s
ince it would result in decreased v
ehicle miles traveled (VMT)
rates compared to a No Project condition, reflecting the benefits that increased d ensity of
residential land uses have on reducing VMT per capita. The proposed project would also place more residents in proximity to jobs, services, and transit, which would reduce the use of single-occupancy vehicles and thereby VMT and air pollutants a
nd encourage the use of alternative modes of
transportation. T
his would meet the 2021 Regional Plan’s core strategies including accelerating housing production in Carlsbad while also addressing equity, climate resilience, and mobility (Incentivize Sustainable Growth and Development) and reducing solo driving and congestion in Carlsbad (Implement Innovative Demand and System Management).
Additionally, as discussed in Section 4.11, P
opulation and Housing, although the proposed project
would exceed the GMP limit of 54,599 units, t
he State requires that all local governments
adequately plan to meet the housing needs of their communities (HCD 2023). Given that the State is currently in an ongoing housing crisis due to an insufficient housing supply, the additional units under the proposed project would further assist in addressing the existing crisis and meeting the housing needs of the city’s communities. Therefore, the objectives of this project are to implement the city’s Housing Element (which was certified by HCD) in order to meet projected population and housing growth. The Housing Element is designed to accommodate regional growth anticipated by SANDAG’s RHNA projections. Therefore, the proposed project is intended to plan for anticipated population growth. The proposed project would not constitute unplanned growth because it would be consistent with the City’s RHNA and is being planned for and analyzed in this SEIR. F urther, as
recent State law and State mandated housing goals preempt voter approved housing limits such as those under the GMP, the city is developing a new approach to managing growth. The preemption of implementing residential GMP caps, residential quadrant limits, and residential control points is acknowledged in adopted City Council Resolution 2021-074 (City of Carlsbad 2023b). T herefore, the
proposed project would constitute as planned population growth. The city is also developing a new Environmental Impact Analysis
Land Use and Planning
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.9-13
approach to manage growth since recent State law and State mandated housing goals preempt voter approved housing limits such as those under the GMP.
To ensure consistency between the project and LCP, amendments to the LCP land use map are being processed concurrent with the project. Within the Coastal Zone, no discretionary permit shall be issued by the city unless found to be consistent with the General Plan and the LCP. In the event of conflict between the provisions of the General Plan and the LCP Land Use Plan, the terms of the LCP Land Use Plan shall prevail. Future development located within the Coastal Zone would be required to comply with land use policies within the LCP. Further, updates to the LCP and Master and Specific Plans that are being proposed as part of the project for consistency between the city’s planning documents in and of themselves would not result in physical changes to the environment such that impacts would occur. Additionally, the proposed project would facilitate infill development on vacant or underutilized sites and therefore would not interfere with pedestrian coastal access or coastal trails.
According to the updated Public Safety Element, pursuant to the LCP and Carlsbad Municipal Code Title 21 (Zoning), development is restricted within 100-year floodplain areas. As discussed in Section
4.8, Hydrology and Water Quality, of this SEIR, a small portion of the city is located within a 100- year floodplain area. These areas are located along the Buena Vista, Agua Hedionda, and San Marcos Creeks and the Buena Vista, Agua Hedionda, and Batiquitos Lagoons. A portion of site 4 contains designated floodplain areas near Agua Hedionda Creek. However, development on site 4 would be required to comply with CMC Chapter 21.110, Floodplain Management Regulations, which sets forth design requirements in flood-prone areas such as elevating all residential structures at least two feet above the base flood elevation and constructed with materials that can resist strong hydrostatic and hydrodynamic loads, reducing impacts to a less than significant level. Additionally, future development would be required to comply with the applicable policies within the updated Public Safety Element to ensure reduced risks related to flooding and sea level rise hazards, specifically policies 6-P.1 through 6-P.19, which would ensure consistency with the LCP.
Inconsistency with the city’s HMP is discussed in Section 4.3, Biological Resources.
The Planning Division has primary responsibility for administering the laws, regulations and requirements that pertain to the physical development of the city. Specific duties relating to implementation of the project would include preparing zoning ordinance amendments, reviewing development applications, conducting investigations, and making reports and recommendations on planning and land use, zoning, subdivisions, development plans, and environmental regulations.
Future development on the rezone sites will be required to demonstrate consistency with applicable local regulations (such as the city’s Zoning Ordinance and 2015 General Plan) as well as applicable state and federal regulations. Given that the proposed project does not conflict with any other agencies’ applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect, impacts would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required because, like under the 2015 General Plan EIR, impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.9-14
d. Cumulative Impacts
Division of an Established Community
The cumulative setting for land use and planning impacts is the City of Carlsbad. Cumulative land use and planning impacts, such as the potential for conflicts with adjacent land uses and consistency with adopted plans and regulations, are typically site- and project-specific. Subsequent projects allowed by the project may result in site-specific land use conflicts. However, because the exact size and nature of future developments and associated infrastructure improvements are not known at this time, it would be speculative to predict when impacts may occur. The project would not include any features that would physically divide an established community, and as such, would not contribute to cumulative impacts.
Consistency with Land Use Plans/Policies
As discussed under Impact LU-2, the General Plan Update would be consistent with applicable land use plans, policies, or regulations, including SANDAG’s 2021 Regional Plan, the city’s 2015 General Plan, the GMP, the LCP, Zoning Code and Ordinance, and master and specific plans in the city, and as such, would not contribute to cumulative impacts.
Table of Contents
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.10-1
4.10 Noise
This section evaluates noise and groundborne vibration impacts resulting from the construction and operation of new development accommodated by the project. Topics addressed consist of short- term construction and long-term operational noise and vibration, including the exposure of noise- sensitive receivers to substantial or incompatible noise levels. Noise modeling results and the vibration calculations associated with the analysis herein are included in Appendix D to this SEIR.
4.10.1 Setting
a. Fundamentals of Noise
Sound is a vibratory disturbance created by a moving or vibrating source, which is capable of being detected by the hearing organs (e.g., the human ear). Noise is defined as sound that is loud, unpleasant, unexpected, or undesired and may therefore be classified as a more specific group of sounds. The effects of noise on people can include general annoyance, interference with speech communication, sleep disturbance, and, in the extreme, hearing impairment (California Department of Transportation [Caltrans] 2013).
Noise levels are commonly measured in decibels (dB) using the A-weighted sound pressure level (dBA). The A-weighting scale is an adjustment to the actual sound pressure levels so that they are consistent with the human hearing response, which is most sensitive to frequencies around 4,000 Hertz (Hz) and less sensitive to frequencies around and below 100 Hz. Decibels are measured on a logarithmic scale that quantifies sound intensity in a manner similar to the Richter scale used to measure earthquake magnitudes. A doubling of the energy of a noise source, such as a doubling of traffic volume, would increase the noise level by 3 dB; similarly, dividing the energy in half would result in a decrease of 3 dB. Common outdoor and indoor noise sources and their typical corresponding A-weighted noise levels are shown in Figure 4.10-1.
Human perception of noise has no simple correlation with sound energy. The perception of sound is not linear in terms of dBA or in terms of sound energy. Two sources do not “sound twice as loud” as one source. It is widely accepted that the average healthy ear can barely perceive an increase (or decrease) of up to 3 dBA in noise levels (i.e., twice [or half] the sound energy); that a change of 5 dBA is readily perceptible (8 times the sound energy); and that an increase (or decrease) of 10 dBA sounds twice (or half) as loud (10.5 times the sound energy) (Caltrans 2013).
Sound changes in both level and frequency spectrum as it travels from the source to the receiver.
The most obvious change is the decrease in sound level as the distance from the source increases.
The manner by which noise declines with distance depends on factors such as the type of sources (e.g., point or line), the path the sound will travel, site conditions, and obstructions. Noise levels from a point source (e.g., construction, industrial machinery, ventilation units) typically attenuate, or drop off, at a rate of 6 dBA per doubling of distance. Noise from a line source (e.g., roadway, pipeline, railroad) typically attenuates at about 3 dBA per doubling of distance (Caltrans 2013). The propagation of noise is also affected by the intervening ground, known as ground absorption. A hard site, such as a parking lot or smooth body of water, receives no additional ground attenuation and the changes in noise levels with distance (drop-off rate) result simply from the geometric spreading of the source. An additional ground attenuation value of 1.5 dBA per doubling of distance typically applies to a soft site (e.g., soft dirt, grass, or scattered bushes and trees) (Caltrans 2013).
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.10-2
Figure 4.10-1 Examples of Typical Noise Levels
Source: Caltrans 2013
Noise Level
(dBA)
Common Indoor
Noise Levels
Common Outdoor
Noise Levels
Rock band
Inside subway train
Food blender at 3 ft.
Garbage disposal at 3 ft.
Shouting at 3 ft.
Vacuum cleaner at 10 ft.
Normal speech at 3 ft.
Large business office
Dishwasher next room
Small theater, conference
room (background)
Library
Bedroom at night
Concert hall (background)
Broadcast and
recording studio
Threshold of hearing
Jet flyover at 1,000 ft.
Gas lawnmower at 3 ft.
Diesel truck at 50 ft.
Noisy urban daytime
Gas lawnmower at 100 ft.
Commercial area
Heavy traffic 300 ft.
Quiet urban daytime
Quiet urban nighttime
Quiet suburban nighttime
Quiet rural nighttime
110
100
90 80
70 60
50 40
30 20
10 0
Table of Contents
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.10-3
Noise levels may also be reduced by intervening structures. The amount of attenuation provided by this “shielding” depends on the size of the object and the frequencies of the noise levels. Natural terrain features, such as hills and dense woods, and man-made features, such as buildings and walls, can alter noise levels. Generally, any large structure blocking the line of sight will provide at least a 5 dBA reduction in source noise levels at the receiver (Federal Highway Administration [FHWA] 2011).
Structures can substantially reduce occupants’ exposure to noise as well. The FHWA’s guidelines indicate that modern building construction generally provides an exterior-to-interior noise level reduction of 20 to 35 dBA with closed windows.
Descriptors
The impact of noise is not a function of loudness alone. The time of day when noise occurs, its frequency, and the duration of the noise are also important. In addition, most noise that lasts for more than a few seconds is variable in its intensity. Consequently, a variety of noise descriptors have been developed.
One of the most frequently used noise metrics that considers both duration and intensity is the equivalent noise level (L
eq). The Leq is defined as the single steady A-weighted level that is equivalent to the same amount of energy as that contained in the actual fluctuating levels over a period of time. Typically, Leq is equivalent to a one-hour period, even when measured for shorter durations as the noise level of a 10- to 30-minute period would be the same as the hour if the noise source is relatively steady. Lmax is the highest Root Mean Squared (RMS) sound pressure level within the sampling period, and Lmin is the lowest RMS sound pressure level within the measuring period (Crocker 2007). Normal conversational levels at three feet are in the 60- to 65-dBA Leq range and ambient noise levels greater than 65 dBA Leq can interrupt conversations (Federal Transit Administration [FTA] 2018).
Noise that occurs at night tends to be more disturbing than that which occurs during the day.
Community noise is usually measured using Day-Night Average Level (Ldn or DNL), which is a 24-hour average noise level with a +10 dBA penalty for noise occurring during nighttime (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) hours, or Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL), which is the 24-hour average noise level with a +5 dBA penalty for noise occurring from 7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m. and a +10 dBA penalty for noise occurring from 10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. (Caltrans 2013). Noise levels described by DNL and CNEL usually differ by about 0.5 dBA. Quiet suburban areas typically have a CNEL in the range of 40 to 50 dBA, while areas near arterial streets are typically in the 50 to 70+ CNEL range. b. Fundamentals of Vibration
Groundborne vibration of concern in environmental analysis consists of the oscillatory waves that move from a source through the ground to adjacent structures. The number of cycles per second of oscillation makes up the vibration frequency, described in terms of hertz (Hz). The frequency of a vibrating object describes how rapidly it oscillates. While people have varying sensitivities to vibrations at different frequencies, in general they are most sensitive to low-frequency vibration.
Vibration in buildings, such as from nearby construction activities, may cause windows, items on shelves, and pictures on walls to rattle. Vibration of building components can also take the form of an audible low-frequency rumbling noise, referred to as groundborne noise. Groundborne noise is usually only a problem when the originating vibration spectrum is dominated by frequencies in the upper end of the range (60 to 200 Hz), or when foundations or utilities, such as sewer and water pipes, physically connect the structure and the vibration source (FTA 2018). Although groundborne vibration is sometimes noticeable in outdoor environments, it is almost never annoying to people City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.10-4
who are outdoors. The primary concern from vibration is that it can be intrusive and annoying to building occupants and vibration-sensitive land uses.
Vibration energy spreads out as it travels through the ground, causing the vibration level to diminish with distance away from the source. High-frequency vibrations diminish much more rapidly than low frequencies, so low frequencies tend to dominate the spectrum at large distances from the source. Variability in the soil strata can also cause diffractions or channeling effects that affect the propagation of vibration over long distances (Caltrans 2020). When a building is exposed to vibration, a ground-to-foundation coupling loss (the loss that occurs when energy is transferred from one medium to another) will usually reduce the overall vibration level. However, under rare circumstances, the ground-to-foundation coupling may amplify the vibration level due to structural resonances of the floors and walls.
Descriptors
Vibration amplitudes are usually expressed in peak particle velocity (PPV) or RMS vibration velocity.
The PPV and RMS velocity are normally described in inches per second (in./sec.). PPV is defined as the maximum instantaneous positive or negative peak of a vibration signal. PPV is often used in monitoring of vibration because it is related to the stresses that are experienced by buildings (Caltrans 2020).
Response to Vibration
Vibration associated with construction has the potential to be an annoyance to nearby land uses.
Caltrans has developed limits for the assessment of vibrations from transportation and construction sources. The Caltrans vibration limits are reflective of standard practice for analyzing vibration impacts. As shown in Table 4.10-1 and Table 4.10-2, the Caltrans Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual (2020) identifies guideline impact criteria for damage to buildings and additional impact criteria for annoyance to humans from transient and continuous/frequent sources.
Table 4.10-1 Building Vibration Damage Potential
Maximum PPV (in./sec.)
Structure and Condition Transient Sources
Continuous/Frequent
Intermittent Sources
Extremely fragile historic buildings, ruins, ancient mountains 0.12 0.08 Fragile buildings 0.20 0.10
Historic and similar old buildings 0.50 0.25
Older residential structures 0.50 0.30
New residential structures 1.00 0.50
Modern industrial/commercial buildings 2.00 0.50
Notes: Transient sources create a single isolated vibration event, such as blasting or drop balls (i.e., a loose steel ball that is dropped onto structures or rock to reduce them to a manageable size). Continuous/frequent intermittent sources include impact pile drivers, pogo-stick compactors, crack-and-seat equipment, vibratory pile drivers, and vibratory compaction equipment.
PPV = peak particle velocity; in./sec. = inches per second Source: Caltrans 2020
Table of Contents
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.10-5
Table 4.10-2 Vibration Annoyance Potential
Maximum PPV (in./sec.)
Human Response Transient Sources Continuous/Frequent Intermittent Sources Barely perceptible 0.04 0.01
Distinctly perceptible 0.25 0.04
Strongly perceptible 0.90 0.10
Severe 2.00 0.40
Notes: Transient sources create a single isolated vibration event, such as blasting or drop balls (i.e., a loose steel ball that is dropped onto structures or rock to reduce them to a manageable size). Continuous/frequent intermittent sources include impact pile drivers, pogo-stick compactors, crack-and-seat equipment, vibratory pile drivers, and vibratory compaction equipment.
PPV = peak particle velocity; in./sec. = inches per second Source: Caltrans 2020
c. Sensitive Receivers
Noise exposure goals for various types of land uses reflect the varying noise sensitivities associated with those uses. The Noise Element of the General Plan identifies residences, schools, churches, and hospitals as the most sensitive land uses (City of Carlsbad 2015).
Vibration-sensitive receivers, which are similar to noise-sensitive receivers, include residences and institutional uses, such as hospitals, schools, and churches. However, vibration-sensitive receivers also include buildings where vibrations may interfere with vibration-sensitive equipment that is affected by vibration levels that may be well below those associated with human annoyance (e.g., recording studies or medical facilities with sensitive equipment). Other uses that may have particular sensitivity to groundborne vibration include historic sites and structures.
According to Section 2, Project Description, the city encompasses approximately 39 square miles, and is comprised primarily of single family residential uses, with neighborhoods distributed throughout the city. As discussed in Section 2, Project Description, 38 percent of the city is currently comprised of residential land uses. Therefore, residential uses comprise most of the sensitive receivers in the city. Other sensitive receivers located in the city include institutional uses (e.g., schools, hospitals, and churches). In addition, refer to Section 4.4, Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources, for a discussion of historic properties in the city that may be particularly sensitive to increases in groundborne vibration levels.
d. Existing Conditions
Noise Sources
Carlsbad is affected by a variety of noise sources, including mobile and stationary sources. The predominant noise sources are transportation sources such as vehicles, aircraft, and rail noise.
According to the General Plan Noise Element, the most prevalent noise source in the city is traffic on the freeways and arterials, with the most dominant noise source being Interstate-5 (I-5). Other major streets with high levels of noise include Highway 78 and arterial streets such as El Camino Real, Palomar Airport Road, Rancho Santa Fe Road, Melrose Drive, and Carlsbad Boulevard. The North County Transit District (NCTD) owns a north-to-south rail line and two passenger rail stations located within the city: Carlsbad Village and Carlsbad Poinsettia stations. NCTD operates the Coaster commuter rail service on this rail line; the Atchison, Topeka & Santa Fe freight line and the Amtrak passenger
service also use the rail line through the city. McClellan-Palomar Airport is presently City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.10-6
operating as a commercial service facility and is located west of El Camino Real, just north of Palomar Airport Road.
To characterize ambient sound levels at and near the 18 rezone sites under the proposed project, 10-minute sound level measurements were conducted on Tuesday, June 7, 2022, and Wednesday, June 8, 2022. Table 4.10-3 summarizes the results of the noise measurements, and Figure 4.10-2 shows the locations of the measurements relative to the housing sites. As shown in the results, measured noise levels ranged from 44 dBA L
eq to 66 dBA Leq. The dominant noise source was
roadway traffic; higher noise levels were observed near the busier roadways.
Table 4.10-3 Project Site Vicinity Sound Level Monitoring Results Measurement
Representative
Housing Sites Date Sample Times
Leq
(dBA)
L95
(dBA)
Lmax
(dBA)
1 1 6/8/2022 9:48 a.m. – 10:48 a.m. 60 52 74
2 2 6/8/2022 10:05 a.m. – 10:15 a.m. 64 46 76
3 3 6/8/2022 9:27 a.m. – 9:37 a.m. 64 40 76
4 4 6/8/2022 8:22 a.m. – 8:32 a.m. 51 40 67
5 5 6/7/2022 9:48 a.m. – 9:58 a.m. 55 51 68
6 6 6/8/2022 7:45 a.m. – 7:55 a.m. 66 39 76
7 7 6/8/2022 8:03 a.m. – 8:13 a.m. 54 40 69
8 8 6/7/2022 10:08 a.m. – 10:18 a.m. 63 49 72
9 9 6/7/2022 10:28 a.m. – 10:38 a.m. 66 51 77
10 10, 11, 12 6/7/2022 7:37 a.m. – 7:47 a.m. 55 49 63
11 14, 15 6/8/2022 10:28 a.m. – 10:38 a.m. 44 43 51
12 16 6/7/2022 9:28 a.m. – 9:38 a.m. 60 55 71
13 17 6/7/2022 9:06 a.m. – 9:16 a.m. 60 42 71
14 18 6/7/2022 8:40 a.m. – 8:50 a.m. 54 41 69
15 19 6/7/2022 8:12 a.m. – 8:22 a.m. 65 45 75
dBA = A-weighted decibel; Leq = average noise level equivalent; L95 = sound level exceeded 95 percent of the time; Lmax = maximum instantaneous noise level
See Appendix D for measurement data.
Table of Contents
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.10-7
Figure 4.10-2 Noise Measurement Locations and Housing Sites
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.10-8
The General Plan Noise Element includes noise contours that have been estimated using information about both current and projected future land uses and traffic volumes throughout the city.1 Figure 4.10-3 shows the existing noise contours and Figure 4.10-4 displays anticipated changes in noise levels associated with future growth accompanied by an increase in citywide traffic volumes for the General Plan’s horizon year of 2035. The contour lines follow the highest volume traffic arteries in narrow bands. Contours in the range of 70 dBA L dn and greater run along the I-5, Palomar
Airport Road, and El Camino Real. Contours in the range of 65 to 70 dBA Ldn run along Poinsettia Lane and Faraday Avenue. An area with ambient noise levels in the vicinity of 60 to 65 dBA Ldn exists along Carlsbad Village Drive and La Costa Avenue. Elsewhere in Carlsbad, ambient noise levels are generally below 60 dBA L
dn. Noise levels diminish away from major streets. This is due to both the normal reduction in noise level with distance from the source and the absorption of noise by homes and trees adjacent to these streets. The hilly terrain and wooded character of the city provide additional noise shielding. Major changes in the noise environment are not anticipated during the timeframe of this General Plan. Roadway segments anticipated to experience a slight increase in noise levels consist of College Boulevard and Poinsettia Lane.
Furthermore, McClellan-Palomar Airport is presently operating as a commercial service facility and is located west of El Camino Real, just north of Palomar Airport Road. The current McClellan- Palomar Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) modeled exposure levels based on approximately 289,100 annual aircraft operations, which is the aviation forecast in the current 2021 Airport Master Plan. Figure 4.10-5 displays the noise contours for the McClellan-Palomar Airport.
Vibration Sources
Sources of vibration in the city, similar to that of the noise environment, are also primarily motor vehicles along roadways. Like mobile-source noises, vibration by vehicular movement generally affects numerous receivers along lengths of roadways and depends on pavement and type and weight of the vehicle. Vibration may also be generated by construction equipment (e.g., earth- moving equipment and pile driving); however, these sources are temporary and vary on a project- by-project basis. In addition, commercial or industrial activities may generate vibration from the use of heavy equipment (e.g., businesses that recycle construction debris).
1 Noise contours consist of modeled areas of similar noise exposure that do not consider the presence of structures (e.g., buildings and solid walls) and natural topography (e.g., hills and berms) that obstruct the line-of-sight between a noise source and a receiver and further reduce noise levels.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Noise
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.10-9
Figure 4.10-3 City Noise Contours – Existing
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.10-10
Figure 4.10-4 City Noise Contours – Future
Environmental Impact Analysis
Noise
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.10-11
Figure 4.10-5 Airport Noise Contours
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.10-12
4.10.2 Regulatory Setting
a. Federal
Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970
Under the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has adopted regulations designed to protect workers against the effects of occupational noise exposure. These regulations list permissible noise level exposure as a function of the amount of time during which the worker is exposed. The regulations further specify a hearing conservation program that involves monitoring noise to which workers are exposed, ensuring that workers are made aware of overexposure to noise, and periodically testing the workers’ hearing to detect any degradation.
b. State
California Building Code, Title 24, Part 2, Section 1206.4 According to the 2022 California Building Code (CBC), Title 24, Part 2, Section 1206.4 (Allowable Interior Noise Levels) of the California Code of Regulations, interior noise levels attributable to exterior sources shall not exceed 45 CNEL in any habitable room. A habitable room is typically a residential room used for living, sleeping, eating, or cooking. Bathrooms, closets, hallways, utility spaces, and similar areas are not considered habitable rooms for this regulation.
California Department of Transportation
As discussed in the Environmental Setting of this section, Caltrans has developed limits for the assessment of vibration from transportation and construction sources, which are reflective of standard practice for analyzing vibration impacts. Table 4.10-1 presents the impact criteria for structural damage to buildings and Table 4.10-2 presents the criteria for annoyance to humans. The State noise and vibration guidelines are to be used as guidance with respect to planning for noise, not standards and/or regulations to which the City of Carlsbad must adhere. c. Local
City of Carlsbad Noise Guidelines Manual
The City of Carlsbad Noise Guidelines Manual is primarily intended to address community noise issues related to land use. Carlsbad’s Noise Element policies are summarized, the science of noise is summarized, procedures for the processing of a project are explained, preferred methods for the mitigation of noise are listed, and a preferred noise report format is presented. Additionally, typical conditions of approval are listed. The Noise Guidelines Manual does not address noise issues such as animal noise, noise from parties and loud gatherings, motor vehicle noise or general nuisance noise, for which the best resource is the Carlsbad Municipal Code (CMC) Noise Ordinance (CMC Chapter
8.48).
City of Carlsbad Municipal Code
CMC Chapter 8.48 outlines regulations for limitation of hours for construction (i.e., the erection, demolition, alteration, or repair of any building or structure or the grading or excavation of land) Environmental Impact Analysis
Noise
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.10-13
that creates disturbing, excessive, or offensive noise. Construction can occur Monday through Friday from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. and Saturday 8 a.m. to 6 p.m.; no work shall be conducted on Sundays and any federal holiday. CMC Chapter 8.48 also outlines exceptions that may be granted by the city for circumstances such as emergency repairs required to protect the health and safety of the community. The CMC does not contain quantitative noise standards for construction or for stationary sources from residential uses.
City of Carlsbad 2015 General Plan
The evaluation of noise in the Carlsbad General Plan focuses on motor vehicles, aircraft, construction activities, and commercial/industrial operations. The General Plan Noise Element incorporates policies and development standards intended to provide construction- and operational-phase noise control to reduce noise conflicts in the Planning Area. Applicable goals and policies in the General Plan Noise Element include:
Goals
Goal 5-G.1. Protect public health and welfare by eliminating existing noise problems where feasible, maintaining an acceptable indoor and outdoor acoustic environment, and preventing significant degradation of the acoustic environment.
Goal 5-G.2. Ensure that new development is compatible with the noise environment, by continuing to use potential noise exposure as a criterion in land use planning.
Goal 5-G.3. Guide the location and design of transportation facilities, industrial uses and other potential noise generators to minimize the effects of noise on adjacent land uses.
Goal 5-G.4. Ensure long-term compatibility between the airport and surrounding land use.
Goal 5-G.5. Foster healthy and productive work environments that do not cause hearing damage or other adverse noise related health impacts to workers in Carlsbad.
Policies
L
AND USE AND NOISE COMPATIBILITY
Policy 5-P.1 Acceptability of Use Location. Use the noise and land use compatibility matrix (Table 4.10-4) and Future Noise Contours map (Figure 4.10-4) as criteria to determine acceptability of a land use, including the improvement/construction of streets, railroads, freeways and highways. Do not permit new noise-sensitive uses— including schools, hospitals, places of worship, and homes—where noise levels are “normally unacceptable” or higher, if alternative locations are available for the uses in the city.
Policy 5-P.2 Required Noise Analysis. Require a noise analysis be conducted for all discretionary development proposals (except for developments of single family homes with four units or fewer) located where projected noise exposure would be other than “normally acceptable”. A required noise analysis should: a. Be prepared by a certified noise consultant or acoustical engineer; b. Be funded by the applicant; c.
Include a representative, on-site day and night sound level measurement; d. Include a delineation of current (measured) and projected (General Plan or 10 years in future, whichever horizon extends further out) noise contours; e. Identify noise levels with and without the proposed project, ranging from 55 to 75 dBA (L dn) within
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.10-14
the proposed development site; and f. If noise levels exceed the standards in Table 4.10-4, include a description of adequate and appropriate noise abatement measures to mitigate the noise to allowable levels for the proposed use.
Policy 5-P.3 Noise-Attenuation. For all projects that require discretionary review and have noise exposure levels that exceed the standards in Table 4.10-4, require site planning and architecture to incorporate noise attenuating features. With mitigation, development should meet the allowable outdoor and indoor noise exposure standards in Table 4.10-5. When a building’s openings to the exterior are required to be closed to meet the interior noise standard, then mechanical ventilation shall be provided.
Policy 5-P.4 Exterior Noise Levels Exceeding Acceptable Level. If the noise analysis shows that exterior noise levels cannot be mitigated to an acceptable level as identified in Table 4.10-5, the development should not be approved without one or more of the following findings:
Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project that avoid or substantially lessen the noise.
Changes or alterations to avoid or substantially lessen noise are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the City of Carlsbad. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency.
Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives to avoid or substantially lessen noise. If a project is approved with exterior noise levels exceeding the acceptable noise level, all purchasers of the impacted property shall be notified in writing prior to purchase, and by deed disclosure in writing, that the property they are purchasing is, or will be, impacted by noise and does not meet City of Carlsbad noise standards for residential property.
Policy 5-P.5 Noise Generation. As part of development project approval, require that noise generated by a project does not exceed standards established in Table 4.10-6.
Policy 5-P.6 Berms and Sound Walls. Discourage the use of berms and sound walls for noise mitigation; rather, encourage the use of project design techniques such as increasing the distance between the noise source and the noise sensitive receiver and use non-noise sensitive structures (e.g., a garage) to shield noise sensitive areas. If a berm or wall is determined necessary to mitigate noise, discourage exclusive use of walls in excess of six feet in height and encourage use of natural barriers such as site topography or constructed earthen berms. When walls are determined to be the only feasible solution to noise mitigation, then the walls shall be designed to limit aesthetic impacts. When walls over six feet in height are necessary to mitigate noise, a berm/wall combination with heavy landscaping, a terraced wall heavily landscaped, or other similar innovative wall design technique shall be used to minimize visual impacts.
Policy 5-P.7 Mitigation Cost. The City of Carlsbad shall not fund mitigation of existing or future noise impacts from streets, railroad, airport or any other source for existing or future private development within the city.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Noise
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.10-15
Policy 5-P.8 Noise Guidelines Manual. Update the Noise Guidelines Manual to ensure consistency with General Plan standards and policies, and contemporary practices.
MOTOR VEHICLE/ROADWAY NOISE
Policy 5-P.9 Continue to enforce the California Motor Vehicle Code as it applies to excessive noise. The Carlsbad Police Department should continue to reduce the number of excessively noisy vehicles on city streets and deter persons from operating their motor vehicles in a noisy manner.
Policy 5-P.10 Consider noise impacts in the design of road systems and give special consideration to noise sensitive areas; to the greatest extent possible, the design of roads should minimize roadway noise to levels acceptable to surrounding areas.
Policy 5-P.11 Review traffic flow systems and, wherever possible, synchronize signalization and/or implement other traffic flow improvements to avoid traffic stops and starts, and adjust traffic flow to achieve noise levels acceptable to surrounding areas.
A
IRPORT NOISE
Policy 5-P.12 Use the noise policies in the McClellan-Palomar Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) to determine acceptability of a land use within the airport’s influence area (AIA) as depicted in the ALUCP. Additional disclosure actions for new development in the AIA, such as avigation easements, deed restrictions, recorded notice, etc., are required of developers/sellers of noise impacted residential units.
Policy 5-P.13 For projects within the Airport Influence Area, utilize the noise standards contained in the McClellan-Palomar ALUCP, as well as the noise standards contained in this element. However, reserve the right to overrule the ALUCP as provided for in State Public Utilities Code Section 21676.
Policy 5-P.14 Recognize that procedures for the abatement of aircraft noise have been identified in the Fly Friendly Program for McClellan-Palomar Airport. The city expects the widespread dissemination of, and pilot adherence to, the adopted procedures.
Policy 5-P.15 Expect the airport to control noise (to the extent of its limited authority granted by the Federal Aviation Administration to indirectly regulate aircraft noise through airport design and scheduling) while the city shall control land-use thus sharing responsibility for achieving and maintaining long-term noise/land-use compatibility in the vicinity of McClellan-Palomar Airport.
Policy 5-P.16 Require new nonresidential development to comply with the noise compatibility criteria in the ALUCP. Require dedication of avigation easements for new developments designated as conditionally compatible for noise in the ALUCP, and which are located within the 65 dB CNEL noise contour.
R
AILROAD NOISE
Policy 5-P.17 Coordinate with other agencies and private entities to investigate methods of implementing a railroad quiet zone and other methods of reducing railroad noise impacts on surrounding uses; such as through development of a grade separated rail corridor.
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.10-16
WORK-RELATED NOISE
Policy 5-P.18 Participate in noise control and hearing conservation programs in all appropriate work environments owned, operated, or otherwise under the control of the City of Carlsbad.
Policy 5-P.19 Promote that all persons responsible for operation of noise-producing equipment or processes, exercise reasonable care to minimize casual noise exposure to unprotected workers or passers-by to reduce risk of hearing damage.
Policy 5-P.20 Encourage and assist its employees in identifying and abating potential noise hazards on city-owned or controlled property.
Table 4.10-4 Noise and Land Use Compatibility Matrix
Land Use Category
Normally
Acceptable1
Conditionally
Acceptable2
Normally
Unacceptable3
Clearly
Unacceptable4
Residential – Single Family 50-60 55-70 70-75 75-85
Residential – Multiple Family 50-65 60-70 70-75 75-85
Transient Lodging – Motels, Hotels 50-65 60-70 70-80 80-85 Schools, Libraries, Churches, Hospitals, Nursing
Homes
50-70 60-70 70-80 80-85
Auditoriums, Concert N/A 50-70 65-85 N/A
Sports Arena, Outdoor N/A 50-75 70-85 N/A
Playgrounds, Parks 50-70 N/A 67.5-75 72.5-85
Golf Courses, Riding Stables, Water Recreation,
Cemetaries
50-75 N/A 70-80 80-85
Office Buildings, Business Commercial and
Professional,
50-70 67.5-77.5 75-85 N/A
Industrial, Manufacturing, Utilities, Agriculture 50-75 70-80 75-85 N/A 1 Normally Acceptable: Specified land use is satisfactory, based upon the assumption that any buildings involved are of normal conventional construction, without any special noise insulation requirements. 2 Conditionally Acceptable: New construction or development should be undertaken only after a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements is made and needed noise insulation features included in the design. 3 Normally Unacceptable: New construction or development should generally be discouraged. If new construction or development does proceed, a detailed analysis of the noise reduction requirements must be made and needed noise insulation features included in the design.
4 Clearly Unacceptable: New construction or development clearly should not be undertaken.
Source: Adapted from Table 5-1, City of Carlsbad 2015
While Table 4.10-4 establishes standards to help the city determine the appropriateness of locating specific uses in noise-prone environments, Table 4.10-5 provides standards that development shall attain through noise attenuation measures. Table 4.10-6 provides standards for noise from non- transportation noise sources such as, but not limited to, industrial facilities, automotive servicing, car washes, equipment yards, nightclubs, hotels, and shopping centers. These standards apply to the noise sources themselves, as measured at the edge of the property line; noise caused by motor vehicles traveling to and from the site is exempt from this standard.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Noise
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.10-17
Table 4.10-5 Allowable Noise Exposure1
Type of Use
Maximum Exterior Allowable
Noise Level (dBA Leq)2,3
Maximum Interior Allowable
Noise Level (dBA Leq)
Residential 604 45
Motels, Hotels 65 45
Hospitals, Residential Care Facilities, Schools,
Libraries, Museums, Churches, Day Care Facilities
65 45
Playgrounds, Parks, Recreation Uses 65 50
Commercial and Office Uses 65 50
Industrial Uses 70 65
dBA = A-weighted decibel; CNEL = Community Noise Equivalent Level; Leq = average noise level equivalent 1 Development proposed within the McClellan-Palomar Airport Area of Influence shall also be subject to the noise compatibility policies contained in the ALUCP.
2 For non-residential uses, where an outdoor activity area is not proposed, the standard does not apply. Where the location of outdoor activity areas is unknown, the exterior noise level standard shall be applied to the property line of the receiving use 3 Where it is not possible to reduce noise in outdoor activity areas to the allowable maximum, levels up to 5 dB higher may be allowed provided that available exterior noise level reduction measures have been implemented and interior noise levels are in compliance with this table.
4 An exterior noise exposure level of 65 dBA CNEL is allowable for residential uses in a mixed-use project and for residential uses within the McClellan-Palomar Airport Area of Influence, pursuant to the noise compatibility policies contained in the ALUCP.
Source: Adapted from Table 5-2, City of Carlsbad 2015
Table 4.10-6 Performance Standards for Non- Transportation Sources (As Measured at Property Line of Source/Sensitive Use)
Land Use Designation
Daytime
(7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.)1
Nighttime
(10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.)1
Hourly Leq, dB 55 45
Maximum Level, dB 75 65
dBA = A-weighted decibel; CNEL = Community Noise Equivalent Level; Leq = average noise level equivalent 1 Each of the noise levels specified above shall be lowered by 5 dB for simple tone noises, noises consisting primarily of speech or music, or for recurring impulsive noises.
Source: Adapted from Table 5-3, City of Carlsbad 2015
4.10.3 Impact Analysis
a. Methodology and Significance Thresholds
Significance Thresholds
In accordance with Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, the project’s noise and vibration impacts would be significant if it would:
1. Generate a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies
2. Generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels
3. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or 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, expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.10-18
The following discussion identifies specific thresholds used to analyze the general CEQA thresholds listed above.
Construction Noise
As described under Section 4.10.2, Regulatory Framework, CMC Chapter 8.48 outlines regulations for limitation of hours for construction (i.e., the erection, demolition, alteration, or repair of any building or structure or the grading or excavation of land) that creates disturbing, excessive, or offensive noise. Construction can occur Monday through Friday from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. and Saturday 8 a.m. to 6 p.m.; no work shall be conducted on Sundays and any federal holiday. CMC Chapter 8.48 also outlines exceptions that may be granted by the city for circumstances such as emergency repairs required to protect the health and safety of the community. However, the CMC does not provide a quantitative construction noise threshold.
In the absence of applicable local noise level limits, this analysis references guidance from the Federal Transit Administration’s (FTA) Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual to establish a quantified threshold against which to assess the impact of construction noise (FTA 2018); FTA recommends that reasonable noise criteria may include those shown in Table 4.10-7.
Construction noise would be significant if it exceeded this noise criteria.
Table 4.10-7 Construction Noise Criteria
Land Use
Daytime
Leq (8-hour)
Nighttime
Leq (8-hour)
Residential 80 70
Commercial 85 85
Industrial 90 90
Source: FTA 2018
Operational Noise
Stationary noise would be subject to the city noise limits in Table 4.10-6.
Roadway noise would result in a significant impact if development accommodated under the project would cause the ambient noise level measured at the property line of affected uses to increase by 3 dBA, which would be a barely perceptible increase in traffic noise.
Groundborne Vibration
The city has not adopted a significance threshold to assess vibration impacts during construction and operation. Therefore, the Caltrans Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual (2020) is used to evaluate potential construction vibration impacts related to both potential building damage and human annoyance. Construction vibration impacts from development would be significant if vibration levels exceed the Caltrans criteria shown in Table 4.10-1 and Table 4.10-2. For example, impacts would be significant if vibration levels exceed 0.5 in./sec. PPV for residential structures and 2.0 in./sec. PPV for commercial structures, which is the limit where minor cosmetic (i.e., non-structural) damage may occur to these buildings. Construction vibration impacts would also be significant if vibration levels exceed 0.12 in./sec. PPV for extremely fragile historic buildings, as shown in Table 4.10-1. In addition, construction vibration impacts would cause significant human annoyance at nearby receivers if vibration levels exceed 0.25 in./sec. PPV, which is the limit where vibration becomes distinctly perceptible from barely perceptible.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Noise
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.10-19
Airport Noise
Exposure to airport noise would be significant if new development is located within the noise contours of the McClellan-Palomar Airport that exceed the city’s land use compatibility standards shown in Table 4.10-4.
Methodology
As discussed in Section 2, Project Description, the project is a plan to accommodate forecasted growth and existing and future need for housing that would result in land use and zoning changes that could allow up to 3,280 housing units on 18 rezone sites in the city. The following discussion describes the methodology, including models, used to evaluate the significance of potential noise and vibration impacts related to the forecasted construction and operation of 3,280 housing units accommodated by the project.
Construction Noise
The primary source of temporary noise associated with the project would be construction activities associated with proposed development. Construction equipment can be considered to operate in two modes: stationary and mobile. Stationary equipment operates in a single location for one or more days at a time, with either fixed-power operation (e.g., pumps, generators, and compressors) or variable-power operation (e.g., pile drivers, rock drills, and pavement breakers). Mobile equipment moves around a construction site with power applied in cyclic fashion, such as bulldozers, graders, and loaders (FTA 2018). Each phase of construction has its own noise characteristics due to specific equipment mixes; some will have higher continuous noise levels than others and some may have high-impact intermittent noise levels (FTA 2018). Therefore, construction noise levels may fluctuate depending on the type of equipment being used, construction phase, or equipment location. In typical construction projects on vacant sites, grading activities typically generate the highest noise levels because grading involves the largest equipment and covers the greatest area. Foundation excavation and construction is often the second loudest phase, followed by paving and building construction.
Variation in power imposes additional complexity in characterizing the noise source level from construction equipment. Power variation is accounted for by describing the noise at a reference distance from the equipment operating at full power and adjusting it based on the duty cycle, or percent of operational time, of the activity to determine the L eq of the operation (FTA 2018).
For assessment purposes, noise levels for common construction equipment provided in the FTA Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment (2018) guidance document were used to analyze potential noise levels associated with future development under the project. The FTA provides typical noise levels at 50 feet from various types of equipment. Construction noise was also estimated using the FHWA’s Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM) (2006). RCNM predicts construction noise levels for a variety of construction operations based on empirical data and the application of acoustical propagation formulas. Using RCNM, construction noise levels were estimated at a distance of 50 feet from future development.
In general, smaller developments on urban infill sites are not likely to result in substantial construction noise impacts because construction activities at these sites are inherently limited by the size of the site. The size of urban infill project sites typically limits the use of the largest (i.e., noisiest) pieces of heavy-duty equipment. The size of a project site also typically limits the size of the development and the related duration of construction activities. Although some individuals may City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.10-20
find construction noise of any kind or of any duration very disturbing, as a general matter, typical construction (including with the implementation of mitigation measures described in further detail in the following subsection) does not result in and would not be considered a significant impact.
Therefore, while urban infill developments that meet the following criteria could result in disturbance to residents and employees at adjacent properties, resulting noise levels typically would not result in significant construction noise impacts:
One subterranean level or less (generally 20,000 cubic yards or less of excavated soil material); Construction durations of less than 18 months (excluding interior finishing); Use of equipment rated less than 300 horsepower, typically small and medium backhoes, bulldozers, etc.; and
No potential for pile driving.
Larger projects that require extended construction or heavy-duty equipment could expose sensitive uses to more continuous and/or louder noise impacts and result in significant short-term noise exposure. When noise-sensitive land uses (e.g., residences, schools, libraries, hospitals) are located within 500 feet of a project site, projects that meet one or more of the characteristics below may have the potential to result in significant impacts:
Two subterranean levels or more (generally more than 20,000 cubic yards of excavated soil material);
Construction durations of 18 months or more (excluding interior finishing); Use of large, heavy-duty equipment rated 300 horsepower or greater; or The potential for pile driving.
On-site Operational Noise
The primary on-site noise sources associated with operation of project developments would include noise from stationary heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) equipment, on-site vehicle movement (e.g., delivery and trash hauling), and outdoor activities. Analysis of outdoor activity considers the existing noise environment and refers to regulations included in the city’s municipal code (i.e., Title 8 and 21) and the Noise Element. Specification for a typical to larger-sized residential condenser was used to determine project HVAC noise; the unit used for this analysis is a Carrier 38HDR060 split system condenser. The manufacturer’s noise data lists the unit as having a sound power level of 72 dBA (Carrier 2011).
Off-site Operational Noise
Development accommodated under the project would generate motor vehicle trips, thereby increasing off-site traffic on area roadways. The project’s off-site traffic noise impacts are analyzed based on data from the Transportation Modeling Considerations and Results Memorandum completed by Fehr & Peers dated April 2023, which is included as Appendix E. The overall increase in traffic noise was estimated using vehicle miles traveled (VMT) data from the Memorandum for existing conditions (Year 2016), future without project conditions (i.e., Year 2035 without the project), and future with project conditions (i.e., Year 2035 with the project).
Groundborne Vibration
Operation of development accommodated by the project would not include substantial vibration sources (e.g., use of heavy equipment). Rather, construction activities would have the greatest Environmental Impact Analysis
Noise
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.10-21
potential to generate groundborne vibration affecting sensitive receivers and/or structures adjacent to a construction site, especially during grading and when a site is located near a historic site or structure. As discussed in Section 4.4, Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources, the City of Carlsbad possesses four known individual historical resources on or immediately adjacent to one of the rezone sites.
A quantitative assessment of potential vibration impacts from construction activities was conducted using equations developed by Caltrans (Caltrans 2020). Table 4.10-8 shows typical vibration levels for various pieces of construction equipment used in the construction vibration assessment.
Table 4.10-8 Typical Vibration Levels for Construction Equipment Equipment PPV (in./sec.) at 25 Feet
Pile Driver (Impact) 0.644
Pile Driver (Sonic) 0.170
Vibratory Roller 0.210
Hoe Ram 0.089
Large Bulldozer 0.089
Caisson Drilling 0.089
Loaded Truck 0.076
Jackhammer 0.035
Small Bulldozer 0.003
Sources: FTA 2018; Caltrans 2020
Because groundborne vibration could cause physical damage to structures and is measured in an instantaneous period, vibration impacts are typically modeled based on the distance from the location of vibration-intensive construction activities, which is conservatively assumed to be edge of a project site, to the edge of the nearest off-site structures. For assessment purposes, vibration levels for the construction equipment shown in Table 4.10-8 were modeled at various incremental distances between 25 feet and 100 feet to analyze potential vibration levels associated with future development under the project. Vibration calculations are included in Appendix D. b. Prior Environmental Analysis
The 2015 General Plan EIR measured noise conditions at sites throughout Carlsbad and developed noise contours that show noise levels are highest along I-5 and arterial roadways (See Figure 3.10-1 and Figure 3.10-2 of the 2015 General Plan for noise measurement locations and noise contours).
The 2015 General Plan EIR determined that temporary impacts to noise from construction would be less than significant (Section 3.10, Noise: 3.10-21 through 3.10-38). The General Plan also establishes policies that would mitigate operational impacts to less than significant. Vibration and increase in noise near sensitive land uses were also found to have less than significant impacts for General Plan implementation. The 2015 General Plan EIR further stated that individual development projects would be subject to project-specific development and planning review, including adherence to standards for noise and vibration reduction.
The proposed project involves land use changes to encourage development on 18 rezone sites beyond what was anticipated in the 2015 General Plan EIR and could therefore result in new City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.10-22
impacts related to noise. Therefore, all the CEQA checklist items listed above under Significance Criteria are addressed in this analysis.
c. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Some components associated with the proposed project, including updates to the Local Coastal Plan, Public Safety Element, and Master and Specific Plans for consistency between the city’s planning documents, in and of themselves would not result in physical changes to the environment such that impacts to noise would occur. Therefore, this analysis focuses on impacts associated with implementation of the rezone program which would facilitate the development of 18 rezone sites listed in Table 2-4 in Section 2, Project Description.
Threshold 1: Would the project result in generation of a substantial temporary increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
Impact NOI-1 CONSTRUCTION WOULD BE REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH THE ALLOWED DAYTIME
CONSTRUCTION HOURS REGULATED BY THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE AND, THEREFORE, WOULD NOT OCCUR DURING NIGHTTIME HOURS WHEN PEOPLE ARE MORE SENSITIVE TO NOISE. IMPLEMENTATION OF MITIGATION MEASURE NOI-1 WOULD REDUCE CONSTRUCTION NOISE LEVELS FOR LARGER DEVELOPMENTS;
HOWEVER, CONSTRUCTION NOISE MAY STILL EXCEED THRESHOLDS AND THIS IMPACT WOULD BE SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE.
Future construction activity would require the use of a variety of noise-generating equipment that would result in temporary increases in ambient noise levels on an intermittent basis. Typical noise levels at 50 feet from various types of equipment that may be used during construction are listed in Table 4.10-9. The loudest noise levels are typically generated by impact equipment (e.g., pile drivers) and heavy-duty equipment (e.g., cranes, scrapers, and graders). Construction noise would occur intermittently throughout construction, and in some instances, multiple pieces of equipment may operate simultaneously, generating overall noise levels that are incrementally higher than what is shown in Table 4.10-9.
Table 4.10-9 Construction Equipment Noise Levels
Equipment Typical Noise Level (dBA) at 50 Feet from Source Air Compressor 80
Backhoe 80
Compactor 82
Concrete Mixer 85
Concrete Pump 82
Concrete Vibrator 76
Crane, Derrick 88
Crane, Mobile 83
Dozer 85
Generator 82
Grader 85
Jackhammer 88
Environmental Impact Analysis
Noise
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.10-23
Equipment Typical Noise Level (dBA) at 50 Feet from Source Loader 80
Paver 85
Pile-driver (Impact) 101
Pile-driver (Sonic) 95
Pneumatic Tool 85
Pump 77
Roller 85
Saw 76
Scarifier 83
Scraper 85
Shovel 82
Truck 84
Sources: FTA 2018
Sensitive receivers are located throughout the city and could be exposed to noise associated with construction activities from reasonably foreseeable development under the project. As discussed in Section 4.10.1, Environmental Setting, sensitive receivers in the city consist of residences, schools, churches, and hospitals. This analysis assumes that construction activities would occur within 50 feet from sensitive receivers throughout the course of a typical construction day. As shown in Table 4.10-9, sensitive receivers would be exposed to instantaneous noise levels ranging from 76 to 88 dBA at 50 feet from typical construction equipment and could reach as high as 101 dBA through the use of pile drivers. However, a typical construction day includes the operation of multiple pieces of equipment at once with noise levels averaged over the construction day. For assessment purposes, a construction noise level at 50 feet from the source was estimated using RCNM and was based on an excavator, dozer, and jackhammer operating simultaneously. These pieces of equipment generate some of the highest noise levels during demolition and grading phases of construction. As shown in Table 4.10-10, the combined noise level (dBA L eq) from these pieces of
equipment is estimated at 84 dBA Leq at 50 feet.
Table 4.10-10 Typical Construction Noise Level at 50 Feet Equipment dBA Leq (8-hour) at 50 Feet
Excavator, Dozer, Jackhammer 84
See Appendix D for RCNM results.
Construction noise levels would vary depending on the type of equipment, the duration of use, the distance to receivers, and the potential for pile driving. Engine noise reduction technology, including silencers, continues to improve, but heavy construction equipment would still generate noise exceeding ambient levels that could cause intermittent annoyance to nearby receivers. Noise associated with construction of development under the project would be typical of residential construction, but as shown in Table 4.10-10, could exceed the 80 dBA L eq (8-hour) daytime
significance threshold at residences.
The city has adopted specific limitations in CMC Chapter 8.48 for construction activities that requires compliance with the provisions of the Noise Ordinance for all construction activities City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.10-24
occurring outside the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on weekdays and 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. on Saturdays; no work shall be conducted on Sundays and any federal holiday. CMC Chapter 8.48 also outlines exceptions that may be granted by the city for circumstances such as emergency repairs required to protect the health and safety of the community. These standards would ensure that construction noise impacts do not occur during noise-sensitive hours of sleep.
As previously discussed in Methodology of this section, development accommodated under the project that could result in construction noise would tend to include larger projects with the following components within 500 feet of a noise-sensitive land uses (e.g., residences, schools, libraries, hospitals):
Two subterranean levels or more (generally more than 20,000 cubic yards of excavated soil material);
Construction durations of 18 months or more (excluding interior finishing); Use of large, heavy-duty equipment rated 300 horsepower or greater; or The potential for pile driving.
While these larger projects are not considered typical, they could potentially result in significant noise impacts, particularly upon potentially adjacent residential zones or other nearby sensitive receivers, and temporarily increase ambient noise levels above FTA noise limits. The type of construction equipment, proximity of sensitive receivers to the site, and the overall duration of construction are key factors in determining whether construction-related noise would be significant at the project-level as opposed to determining construction noise impacts at the programmatic level. Based on typical construction equipment noise levels, the anticipated duration of construction activities, and type of equipment used for larger developments, the project could result in potentially significant construction noise impacts on a project-specific basis at nearby sensitive receivers. This impact is potentially significant.
Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measure is required to reduce construction-related noise impacts to sensitive receivers near subsequent development projects that include one or more of the following components within 500 feet of a noise-sensitive land uses (e.g., residences, schools, libraries, hospitals):
Two subterranean levels or more (generally more than 20,000 cubic yards of excavated soil material);
Construction durations of 18 months or more (excluding interior finishing); Use of large, heavy-duty equipment rated 300 horsepower or greater; or The potential for pile driving.
If a project is not within 500 feet of a noise-sensitive or does not include one of more of the components listed above, construction noise impacts would be less than significant and the following mitigation measure is not required.
NOI-1 Construction Noise Reduction Measures
The following construction noise reduction measures shall be implemented during project construction:
Environmental Impact Analysis
Noise
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.10-25
Shielding and Silencing. Power construction equipment (including combustion engines), fixed or mobile, shall be equipped with noise shielding and silencing devices consistent with manufacturer’s standards or the Best Available Control Technology. Equipment shall be properly maintained, and the project applicant or owner shall require construction contractors to keep documentation on-site during earthwork or construction activities demonstrating that the equipment has been maintained in accordance with manufacturer’s specifications. Enclosures and Screening. Outdoor fixed mechanical equipment shall be enclosed or screened from off-site noise-sensitive uses to the extent feasible. The equipment enclosure or screen shall be impermeable (i.e., solid material with minimum weight of 2 pounds per square feet) and break the line-of-sight from the equipment and off-site noise-sensitive uses. Construction Staging Areas. Construction staging areas shall be located as far from noise- sensitive uses as reasonably feasible in consideration of site boundaries, topography, intervening roads and uses, and operational constraints. Smart Back-Up Alarms. Mobile construction equipment shall have smart back-up alarms that automatically adjust the sound level of the alarm in response to ambient noise levels.
Alternatively, back-up alarms shall be disabled and replaced with human spotters to ensure safety when mobile construction equipment is moving in the reverse direction. Equipment Idling. Construction vehicles and equipment shall not be left idling for longer than five minutes when not in use.
Workers’ Radios. All noise from workers’ radios, including any on-site music, shall be controlled to a point that they are not audible at off-site noise-sensitive uses. Use of Driven Pile Systems. Driven (impact), sonic, or vibratory pile drivers shall not be used, except in locations where the underlying geology renders alternative methods infeasible, as determined by a soils or geotechnical engineer and documented in a soils report. Temporary Sound Barriers. Temporary sound barriers, such as walls or sound blankets, shall be positioned between construction activities and noise-sensitive uses when construction equipment is located within a line-of-sight to and within 500 feet of the ground-floor exterior use areas of off-site noise-sensitive uses. Sound barriers shall break the line-of-sight between the construction noise source and the ground-floor exterior use area receiver where modeled levels exceed applicable standards. Placement, orientation, size, and density of acoustical barriers shall be specified by a qualified acoustical consultant. Noise Complaint Response. Project applicants shall designate an on-site construction project manager who shall be responsible for responding to any complaints about construction noise.
This person shall be responsible for responding to concerns of neighboring properties about construction noise disturbance and shall be available for responding to any construction noise complaints during the hours that construction is to take place. They shall also be responsible for determining the cause of the noise complaint (e.g., bad silencer) and shall require that reasonable measures be implemented to correct the problem. A toll-free telephone number and email address shall be posted in a highly visible manner on the construction site at all times and provided in all notices (mailed, online website, and construction site postings) for receiving questions or complaints during construction and shall also include procedures requiring that the on-site construction manager to respond to callers and email messages. The on-site construction project manager shall be required to track complaints pertaining to construction noise, ongoing throughout demolition, grading, and/or construction and shall notify the city’s Community Development Director of each complaint occurrence.
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.10-26
Project-Specific Construction Noise Study. A Construction Noise Study shall be prepared by a qualified noise expert. The Construction Noise Study shall characterize sources of construction noise, quantify noise levels at noise-sensitive uses (e.g., residences, schools, churches, and hospitals) and identify measures to reduce noise exposure. The Construction Noise Study shall identify reasonably available noise reduction devices or techniques to reduce noise levels to acceptable levels and/or durations including through reliance on any relevant federal, state or local standards or guidelines or accepted industry practices. Noise reduction devices or techniques may include but not be limited to silencers, enclosures, sound barriers, and/or placement of restrictions on equipment or construction techniques (e.g., alternative installation methods to pile driving such as cast-in-place systems or pile cushioning). Each measure in the Construction Noise Study shall identify anticipated noise reductions at noise-sensitive land uses.
Project applicants shall be required to comply with all requirements listed above in addition to any additional requirements identified and recommended by the Construction Noise Study and shall maintain proof that notice of, as well as compliance with, the identified measures have been included in contractor agreements.
Significance After Mitigation
Mitigation Measure NOI-1 would reduce construction noise impacts whenever a development project is located within 500 feet of a noise-sensitive land use. For example, measures such as a temporary noise barrier can reduce noise levels from 5 dBA to 15 dBA, which would reduce construction noise levels from typical development to below 80 dBA L eq during an 8-hour period.
However, given that exact details of future construction projects are unknown at this time, it is conservatively assumed that construction noise may exceed applicable thresholds, even with implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-1, and this impact would be significant and unavoidable.
Threshold 1: Would the project result in generation of a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies?
Impact NOI-2 OPERATIONAL ACTIVITIES (E.G., HVAC UNITS, DELIVERY AND TRASH TRUCKS) WOULD BE
TYPICAL OF THE URBAN ENVIRONMENT AND WOULD BE REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH APPLICABLE NOISE STANDARDS IN THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE. FURTHERMORE, WHILE DEVELOPMENT WOULD GENERATE VEHICLE TRIPS IN THE CITY, THE INCREASE IN MOBILE NOISE WOULD NOT RESULT IN A PERCEPTIBLE 3-DBA INCREASE. THEREFORE, NOISE INCREASES DUE TO PROJECT OPERATION WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.
Development accommodated under the project would include residential development at increased intensity and density throughout the city that would generate on-site operational noise from stationary sources and off-site operational noise from vehicle trips. Typical noise sources associated with residential uses include stationary HVAC equipment, on-site vehicle movement (e.g., delivery and trash hauling), outdoor activities, and off-site traffic.
On-site Operational Noise
HVAC EQUIPMENT
Future development would place HVAC units on ground-level or rooftops of residences. With typical setbacks from nearby properties, HVAC units would typically be located at a distance of 30 feet or Environmental Impact Analysis
Noise
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.10-27
more from adjacent sensitive uses. Based on manufacturer’s specifications, a Carrier 38HDR060 split-system with a sound power level of 72 dBA would generate a noise level of approximately 45 dBA at a distance of 30 feet. This would not exceed the city’s performance standard for non- transportation sources of 55 dBA Leq (one-hour) during the daytime hours or 45 dBA Leq (one-hour) during the nighttime hours and would be well below the maximum allowable noise level of 65 dBA.
Therefore, operation of HVAC equipment would have a less than significant noise impact.
VEHICLE ACTIVITY (DELIVERY AND TRASH HAULING)
Future residential development would increase the number of delivery and trash hauling trucks traveling through the city to individual development sites. Increased delivery and trash hauling trucks could intermittently expose various sensitive receivers to increased truck noise. Section 23130 of the California Motor Vehicle Code establishes maximum sound levels of 86 dBA L eq at
50 feet for trucks operating at speeds less than 35 miles per hour. While individual delivery truck and/or loading or trash pick-up operations would likely be audible at properties adjacent to individual development, such operations are already a common occurrence in the urban environment. In addition, solid waste pick-up operations are typically scheduled during daytime hours when people tend to be less sensitive to noise. Furthermore, these noise events from trucks are typically transient and intermittent, and do not occur for a sustained period of time. Therefore, the project would not result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels from trash and delivery trucks due their prevalence in the city and the existing ambient noise environment, resulting in a less than significant impact.
O
UTDOOR ACTIVITY AREAS
Housing developments would generate noise from conversations, music, television, or other outdoor sound-generating equipment (e.g., leaf blowers), particularly in the event future residents maintain open windows or such activities take place on balconies. However, these noise-generating activities would be similar to those of the existing urban environment. Moreover, Section 8.48.020 of the CMC permits an owner or tenant of residential property to engage in a home improvement or home construction project between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. on Sundays and holidays, subject to modification by subsection B of this section, provided such project is for the benefit of said residential property and is personally carried out by said owner/occupant or resident/tenant.
Required compliance with code enforcement would reduce operational noise impacts related to conversations and sound-generating equipment to a less than significant level.
Off-site Operational Noise
The overall increase in traffic noise from the project was estimated using VMT data from the Transportation Modeling Considerations and Results Memorandum prepared by Fehr & Peers (Appendix E) for future without Project and future with Project conditions. These scenarios are shown in Table 4.10-11.
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.10-28
Table 4.10-11 Daily VMT Summary
Total VMT
Future without project, with adopted General Plan (2035) 3,661,216 Future with project (2035) 3,733,018
Change in VMT +71,802
Percent Change in VMT (%) 2%
Source: Fehr & Peers 2023
As shown in Table 4.10-11, daily VMT under the future with project scenario would increase by approximately 2 percent over the future without project scenario. A 2 percent increase in VMT on a roadway would equate to an increase of approximately 0.1 dBA. Therefore, the project would not double the existing mobile noise source and would not increase noise levels by even the most conservative threshold of 3 dBA, which is considered a barely perceptible noise increase. Although a 2 percent or more increase in VMT may occur at local level in areas where substantial new housing is proposed, a doubling of VMT is still not anticipated to occur based on the citywide increase of 2 percent. Therefore, off-site traffic noise impacts would be less than significant.
Land Use Compatibility
Agencies subject to CEQA generally are not required to analyze the impact of existing environmental conditions on a project’s future users or residents. In California Building Industry Association v. Bay Area Air Quality Management District (2015) 62 Cal. 4th 369, the California Supreme Court explained that an agency is only required to analyze the potential impacts to future residents if the project would exacerbate those existing environmental hazards or conditions. CEQA analysis is therefore concerned with a project’s impact on the environment, rather than with the environment’s impact on a project and its users or residents. Therefore, bringing a population into an area where noise currently exists is not a significant environmental impact under CEQA unless doing so would exacerbate noise conditions. Nonetheless, the following analysis of potential exposure to excessive noise is provided for informational purposes.
Implementation of the project would expose future housing development to ambient noise levels that characterize the city, predominantly associated with vehicular traffic. Figure 4.10-3 and Figure 4.104 display land uses along major arterial roadways exposed to noise levels of 65 CNEL.
Based on the city’s land use compatibility standards shown in Table 4.10-5, noise up to 60 CNEL is allowable for outdoor activity areas of residential uses and 45 CNEL is allowable for interior spaces of residential uses. Sites that may be within these noise contours for the roadways include Sites 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 9, 10, 11, 12, 16, and 17. In addition, sites located adjacent to the rail line, such as Sites 5, 14, 15, 17, and 18, could be exposed to high noise levels. Therefore, new housing development could be exposed to noise levels above the allowable range for residences. This would potentially be in conflict with Policy 5-P.1, which states to not permit new noise-sensitive uses—including schools, homes—where noise levels are “normally unacceptable” or higher, if alternative locations are available for the uses in the city. The 18 sites that are a part of the proposed project did consider alternative locations; the subset of sites chosen are the ones that met City criteria for the updates.
Even though several sites would be in the “normally unacceptable” criteria, they meet the other required criteria for rezoning and including in the sites inventory and thus were retained. In addition, these sites would be subject Policies 5-P.2, 5-P.3, and 5-P.4, that would require noise analysis, noise attenuation to meet standards, and if noise levels cannot be reduced to below Environmental Impact Analysis
Noise
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.10-29
acceptable levels, the city would not approve the project unless one or more of the findings under Policy 5-P.4 are determined.
The city also has an interior noise standard of 45 CNEL for residences, which is consistent with the State’s interior noise standard. According to the CBC, Title 24, Part 2, Section 1206.4, the proposed multi-family residences must be constructed and designed such that interior noise levels do not exceed 45 CNEL. Generally, any large structure blocking the line of sight (e.g., a concrete block wall on a property’s boundary) will provide at least a 5-dBA reduction in source noise levels at the receiver (FHWA 2011). Building materials can also substantially reduce occupants’ exposure to noise. The FHWA’s guidelines indicate that modern building construction generally provides an exterior-to-interior noise level reduction of 20 to 35 dBA with closed windows (FHWA 2011).
Modern residential buildings in California are typically constructed with storm windows, single- or double-glazed, that achieve the required energy saving on heating and cooling, which also provide an exterior-to-interior noise level reduction of at least 20 dBA. Based on a noise exposure level of approximately 70 CNEL and a noise attenuation of at least 20 dBA, the interior noise level within new housing development could be up to 50 CNEL. Nonetheless, housing development would be required to comply with the General Plan Environmental Hazards Element policies and CBC, Title 24, Part 2, Section 1206.4, which would collectively govern excessive noise exposure and require that sensitive uses achieve an interior noise level of 45 dBA or less in any habitable room through appropriate sound insulation (e.g., dual-paned windows, exterior doors with solid core and perimeter weather stripping).
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required because, like under the 2015 General Plan EIR, impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
Threshold 2: Would the project result in generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
Impact NOI-3 PROJECT DEVELOPMENT WOULD NOT INVOLVE OPERATIONAL ACTIVITIES THAT WOULD RESULT IN SUBSTANTIAL VIBRATION LEVELS. HOWEVER, USE OF PILE DRIVING OR A VIBRATORY ROLLER COULD
POTENTIALLY GENERATE VIBRATION EXCEEDING THRESHOLDS FOR BUILDINGS OR STRUCTURES SUSCEPTIBLE TO DAMAGE (E.G., HISTORIC STRUCTURES). THIS IMPACT WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION.
Project development would not involve activities that would result in substantial vibration levels, such as use of heavy equipment. Operational groundborne vibration in the vicinity of development associated with the project would be primarily generated by vehicular travel on the local roadways.
According to the FTA Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment (2018) guidance document, rubber tires and suspension systems dampen vibration levels from trucks to a level that is rarely perceptible. Therefore, traffic vibration levels associated with the expected additional trips from the project would not be perceptible by sensitive receivers. Impacts related to operational groundborne vibration would be less than significant. The remainder of this analysis focuses on impacts related to construction activities associated with future housing development.
Construction activities associated with housing development accommodated by the project would result in varying degrees of groundborne vibration depending on the equipment and methods employed. Operation of construction equipment causes vibration that spreads through the ground and diminishes in strength with distance. Buildings with foundations in the soil in the vicinity of a construction site respond to these vibrations with varying results ranging from no perceptible City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.10-30
effects at the lowest levels, low rumbling sounds and perceptible vibrations at moderate levels, and slight damage at the highest levels. Construction vibration is a localized event and is typically only perceptible to a receiver that is in close proximity to the vibration source. Construction for housing development would require heavy equipment, particularly development with certain geologic conditions that may require pile driving. Such heavy equipment could potentially operate within 25 feet of nearby buildings when accounting for equipment setbacks. As shown in Table 4.10-12, general construction equipment such as a vibratory roller would generate vibration levels up to 0.21 in./sec. PPV at 25 feet, while more intensive equipment such as pile driving could generate a vibration level of approximately 0.64 in./sec. PPV at 25 feet. Vibration levels shown in bolded and underlined text exceed one or more of the Caltrans criteria shown in Table 4.10-1 and Table 4.10-2.
Table 4.10-12 Construction Equipment Noise Levels
Equipment
PPV (in./sec.)
25 Feet 50 Feet 75 Feet 100 Feet 125 Feet
Pile Driver (Impact) 0.6441,2,3,5 0.3001,5 0.1921 0.1401 0.1101 Pile Driver (Sonic) 0.1701 0.079 0.051 0.037 0.029
Vibratory Roller 0.2101 0.098 0.063 0.046 0.036
Hoe Ram 0.089 0.042 0.027 0.019 0.015
Large Bulldozer 0.089 0.042 0.027 0.019 0.015
Caisson Drilling 0.089 0.042 0.027 0.019 0.015
Loaded Truck 0.076 0.036 0.023 0.017 0.013
Jackhammer 0.035 0.016 0.011 0.008 0.006
Small Bulldozer 0.003 0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
Notes: Vibration levels shown in bolded and underlined text exceed one or more of the Caltrans criteria shown in Table 4. 10-1 and Table 4.10-2. Superscripts specify the threshold exceeded by each piece of equipment. 1 Exceeds the 0.1 in./sec. Caltrans damage threshold for historic sites (and other critical locations). 2 Exceeds the 0.5 in./sec. Caltrans damage threshold for historic and other/similar old buildings. 3 Exceeds the 0.5 in./sec. Caltrans damage threshold for older residential structures. 4 Exceeds the 1.0 in./sec. Caltrans damage threshold for newer residential structures. 5 Exceeds the 0.25 in./sec. Caltrans human annoyance threshold.
Sources: FTA 2018; Caltrans 2020
According to Caltrans impact criteria shown in Table 4.10-1, the damage threshold for historic sites (which are most sensitive to impacts from groundborne vibration) is 0.12 in./sec. PPV. Groundborne vibration from hoe rams, bulldozers, caisson drilling, loaded trucks, and jackhammers would not exceed the 0.1 in./sec. PPV threshold for sensitive historic sites. While groundborne vibration from vibratory rollers would only exceed the threshold for building damage for historic sites at 25 feet from the source, vibration levels from pile driving would exceed one or more of the building damage thresholds shown in Table 4.10-1 for historic sites, general old buildings, and older and newer residential structures. Furthermore, vibration levels associated with pile driving would also exceed the threshold of 0.25 in./sec. PPV for human annoyance at various distances up to 75 feet, as shown in Table 4.10-12.
As discussed in Section 4.4, Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources, a review of National Register of Historic Places, California Office of Historic Preservation (OHP) website, the Built Environment Resources Directory, City of Carlsbad historic property list, and previous historical resources documentation prepared in or for the City of Carlsbad identified four known individual historical Environmental Impact Analysis
Noise
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.10-31
resources on or immediately adjacent to one of the 18 sites making up the project area. All buildings would be subject to potential impacts from construction vibration; buildings with historic significance would each have varying degrees of susceptibility to groundborne vibration damage depending on the structural integrity of said buildings. Therefore, new development accommodated under the project could result in a potentially significant impact related to construction vibration.
Mitigation Measure
The following mitigation measure is required.
NOI-2 Vibration Control Plan
For construction activities involving vibratory rollers within 50 feet of a structure or pile drivers (impact or sonic) within 140 feet of a structure, the applicant shall prepare a Vibration Control Plan prior to the commencement of construction activities. The Vibration Control Plan shall be prepared by a licensed structural engineer and shall include methods required to minimize vibration, including, but not limited to:
Alternative installation methods for pile driving (e.g., pile cushioning, drilled piles, cast-in-place systems) within 140 feet of a building to reduce impacts associated with seating the pile Vibration monitoring prior to and during pile driving operations occurring within 140 feet of a building
Use of rubber-tired equipment rather than metal-tracked equipment Avoiding the use of vibrating equipment when allowed by best engineering practices The Vibration Control Plan shall include a pre-construction survey letter establishing baseline conditions at potentially affected extremely fragile buildings/historical resources and/or residential structures. The survey letter shall determine conditions that exist prior to the commencement of construction activities for use in evaluating potential damages caused by construction. Fixtures and finishes susceptible to damage shall be documented photographically and in writing prior to construction. The survey letter shall provide a shoring design to protect such buildings and structures from potential damage. At the conclusion of vibration causing activities, the qualified structural engineer shall issue a follow-up letter describing damage, if any, to impacted buildings and structures. The letter shall include recommendations for any repair, as may be necessary, in conformance with the Secretary of the Interior Standards. Repairs shall be undertaken and completed by the contractor and monitored by a qualified structural engineer in conformance with all applicable codes including the California Historical Building Code (Part 8 of Title 24).
A Statement of Compliance signed by the applicant and owner shall be submitted to the city’ Building and Safety Division at plan check and prior to the issuance of any permit. The Vibration Control Plan, prepared as outlined above shall be documented by a qualified structural engineer, and shall be provided to the city upon request.
Significance After Mitigation
Through a Vibration Control Plan, Mitigation Measure NOI-2 would reduce vibration impacts associated with construction activities involving vibratory rollers within 50 feet of a structure or pile drivers (impact or sonic) within 140 feet of a structure. Therefore, vibration impacts from construction activities would be less than significant with mitigation.
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.10-32
Threshold 3: For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or 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, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
Impact NOI-4 FUTURE DEVELOPMENT UNDER THE PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD NOT BE EXPOSED TO
EXCESSIVE NOISE LEVELS FROM OVERHEAD FLIGHT PATTERNS FROM THE MCCLELLAN-PALOMAR AIRPORT DUE
TO THE DISTANCE OF THE DEVELOPMENT FROM THE AIRPORT OR WITH IMPLEMENTATION OF AIRPORT LAND USE COMPATIBILITY PLAN AND GENERAL PLAN POLICIES. IMPACTS WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.
The McClellan-Palomar Airport is located in the central portion of the city. Sites 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10, 11, 12 and 16 are within two miles of the airport. As shown on Figure 4.10-5, Sites 6, 8, 9, and 16 are located within the 60 to 65 dB CNEL noise contour of the McClellan-Palomar Airport. None of the sites are located within the noise contours above 65 dB CNEL except for a small portion of northern corner of Site 9 which is within the 65-70 dB CNEL noise contour. The McClellan-Palomar ALUCP includes development policies regarding the compatibility of development areas and exposure to noise (e.g., residential infill development shall not be allowed where exposure to noise levels of more than 65 dBA CNEL may occur). Although a small portion of Site 9 is within the 65-70 dB CNEL noise contour, a project has been approved at this site for 192 units that included its own project- level CEQA review. The portion of the project site in the 65-70 dB CNEL noise contour is also within Safety Zone 3 and would include low density units to comply with ALUCP policies. The project was found not to conflict with ALUCP policies related to safety or noise.
Therefore, overall, except for a small portion of Site 9, none of the sites would be exposed to noise levels of more than 65 dBA CNEL due to airport noise. At Site 9, future development would not be exposed to excessive noise levels. Furthermore, policies 5-P.12 through 5-P.16 in the city’s current General Plan Noise Element (listed above under Regulatory Setting) serve to guide new development projects located near the McClellan-Palomar Airport. Compliance with the McClellan- Palomar Airport ALUCP development policies would maintain acceptable noise levels for the appropriate land uses discussed above in Table 4.10-4 and would not exceed the interior or exterior noise levels displayed in Table 4.10-5.
Therefore, except for Site 9, none of the sites would be subject to airport noise levels greater than 65 dBA CNEL. For Site 9, with compliance with the ALUCP and the General Plan Policies, the proposed project would not expose people residing or working in the plan area to excessive noise levels. This impact would be less than significant.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required because, like under the 2015 General Plan EIR, impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
d. Cumulative Impacts
The geographic area to analyze cumulatively considerable noise impacts includes the city and immediately adjacent areas that could be indirectly affected by noise generated in the city.
Construction Noise
Construction of future development projects in the city would produce temporary noise impacts that would be localized to a project site and sensitive receivers within the immediate vicinity.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Noise
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.10-33
Therefore, only sensitive receivers located in close proximity to each construction site would be potentially affected by each activity. Nonetheless, construction activities associated with individual housing development projects accommodated under the project may overlap for some time with construction activities for other development projects. Typically, if a development site is 500 feet or more away from another site then noise levels would have attenuated to a point that they would not combine to produce a cumulative noise impact. Therefore, construction noise levels would typically become cumulative only if two development sites were to have construction occurring within 500 feet of each other. However, under a worst-case scenario, noise from construction activities for two projects within 1,000 feet of each other could contribute to a cumulative noise impact for sensitive receivers located equidistant between the two construction sites with concurrent on-site activities.
Construction activities associated with future development would comply with Chapter 8.48 of the CMC and would occur Monday through Friday from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. and Saturday 8 a.m. to 6 p.m.; no work shall be conducted on Sundays and any federal holiday. It is anticipated that, with implementation of Mitigation Measure NOI-1, construction noise levels associated with housing development could be reduced below the applicable FTA noise limits for construction noise on a case-by-case basis. Nonetheless, larger development projects could combine together, or combine with smaller development projects, to substantially increase noise levels at specific neighboring noise-sensitive receivers. Mitigation Measure NOI-1 would reduce construction noise impacts from developments to the extent feasible. However, as exact construction details are unknown at this time, even with mitigation the project’s contribution to a cumulative noise impact could be considerable.
On-site Operational Noise
On-site operational noise impacts are localized to an individual development site and sensitive receivers within the immediate vicinity. Future development in the city would include mechanical equipment, loading, trash pick-up, and other noise-generating activities. However, such activities would be typical of the urban environment in the city and on-site activities would be required to comply with applicable provisions of the CMC. The incremental effect of the project with respect to on-site operational noise would not be cumulatively considerable and cumulative impacts would be less than significant.
Off-site Operational Noise
Cumulative development through the year 2035 would generate vehicle trips, thereby increasing VMT on area roadways. As shown in Table 4.10-11, daily VMT from the future with project scenario, which accounts for cumulative residential development in the city, would not double existing trip levels or increase mobile noise by more than 3 dBA over the future without project scenario.
Therefore, the effect of the project on off-site traffic noise would not be cumulatively considerable and cumulative impacts would be less than significant.
Groundborne Vibration
New residential development within the city would not include substantial sources of operational ground-borne vibration. Therefore, impacts related to operational groundborne vibration would not be cumulatively considerable and cumulative impacts would be less than significant.
Construction of future development projects in the city would produce temporary vibration impacts that would be localized to a project site and sensitive receivers in the immediate vicinity. Therefore, City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.10-34
only sensitive receivers located in close proximity to each construction site would be potentially affected by each individual activity. Nonetheless, construction activities associated with individual housing development projects from the project may overlap for some time with construction activities for other development projects. For the combined vibration impact from simultaneous construction projects to reach cumulatively significant levels, intense construction from these projects would have to occur simultaneously in close proximity to a sensitive receiver, which would be unlikely. In addition, potential construction vibration that would exceed thresholds would be mitigated to less than significant through Mitigation Measure NOI-2; therefore, construction vibration from the project would not be cumulatively considerable.
Airport Noise
Aircraft-related noise impacts occur only in the vicinity of airports or airstrips. Although citywide growth could increase the number of people who are exposed to aircraft-related noise impacts, such impacts would be localized in nature. In addition, new residential development would not result in a direct increase to aircraft operations that would increase noise exposure to aircraft overflight patterns within and outside the city. The project would have no contribution to a cumulative impact related to airport hazards or noise. Impacts related to airport or airstrip noise would not be cumulatively considerable and cumulative impacts would be less than significant.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Population and Housing
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.11-1
4.11 Population and Housing
This section evaluates the impacts on the regional housing supply and population growth associated with implementation of the proposed project.
4.11.1 Setting
a. Existing and Forecasted Population, Housing, and Employment Based on information collected by the City of Carlsbad, as of January 1, 2023, Carlsbad had 47,003 housing units, excluding accessory dwelling units, and as of June 30, 2022, Carlsbad had a population of 117,800 residents. According to the city’s 2021 to 2029 Housing Element Update, as of 2018, the city contains a total of 57,491 jobs (City of Carlsbad 2021).
The City of Carlsbad’s Fiscal Year (FY) 2021-22 GMP Report estimates the number of dwelling units that will exist at buildout based on the 2015 General Plan land use designations. According to the FY 2021-22 GMP Report, by the year 2035, Carlsbad would have 52,263 dwelling units and a population of 133,515 people. The buildout population discussed in the FY 2021-22 GMP Report does not take into account future residential density increases that would result from development projects and Housing Element programs (City of Carlsbad 2023a).
The FY 2021-22 GMP Report does not analyze employment. Therefore, data from the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) is used to forecast employment. SANDAG’s most recent Series 14 Regional Growth Forecast (RGF) has a horizon year of 2050, and takes into account the adopted general plans and policies from the 18 incorporated cities and the unincorporated County, including the City of Carlsbad. The Series 14 RGF is used to support regional planning efforts such as the 2021 Regional Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy as well as local planning such as the development of general plans and long-range plans. The Series 14 RGF predicts that employment is predicted to increase from 75,912 jobs in 2016 to 103,979 jobs in 2050 (approximately 37 percent increase) (SANDAG 2019).
4.11.2 Regulatory Setting
a. State
California Housing Law
California Housing Element law (Government Code Sections 65580 to 65589.8) requires that local jurisdictions outline the housing needs of their community, the barriers or constraints to providing that housing, and actions proposed to address these concerns over an eight-year planning period. In addition, Housing Element law requires each city and county to accommodate its “fair share” of the region’s projected housing need over the Element planning period. Cities and counties must demonstrate that adequate sites are available to accommodate this need, and that the jurisdiction allows for development of a variety of housing types. This housing need requirement is known as the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) and apportions to each jurisdiction’s projected need.
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.11-2
The Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008 (SB 375, Steinberg)
Senate Bill (SB) 375 focuses on aligning transportation, housing, and other land uses to achieve regional greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction targets established under the California Global Warming Solutions Act, also known as Assembly Bill (AB) 32. SB 375 requires Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO) to develop a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) as part of the Regional Transportation Plan (RTP), with the purpose of identifying policies and strategies to reduce per capita passenger vehicle-generated GHG emissions. As set forth in SB 375, the SCS must: (1) identify the general location of land uses, residential densities, and building intensities within the region; (2) identify areas within the region sufficient to house all the population of the region, including all economic segments of the population, over the course of the planning period; (3) identify areas within the region sufficient to house an eight-year projection of the regional housing need; (4) identify a transportation network to service the regional transportation needs; (5) gather and consider the best practically available scientific information regarding resource areas and farmland in the region; (6) consider the state housing goals; (7) establish the land use development pattern for the region that, when integrated with the transportation network and other transportation measures and policies, will reduce GHG emissions from automobiles and light-duty trucks to achieve GHG emission reduction targets set by the California Air Resources Board (CARB), if there is a feasible way to do so; and (8) comply with air quality requirements established under the Clean Air Act.
The City of Carlsbad is located in the jurisdiction of SANDAG, a Joint Powers Agency established under California Government Code Section 6502 et seq. Pursuant to federal and State law, SANDAG serves as a Council of Governments, a Regional Transportation Planning Agency, and the MPO for San Diego County. SANDAG is responsible for preparing the RTP/SCS and RHNA in coordination with other State and local agencies. These documents include population, employment, and housing projections for the region.
Existing law requires local governments to adopt a housing element as part of their general plan and update the housing element every four to eight years. SB 375 requires the RHNA to allocate housing units within the region in a manner consistent with the development pattern adopted by the SCS.
AB 1763
AB 1763, effective January 1, 2020, amends the State Density Bonus Law (Section 65915) to allow for taller and denser 100 percent affordable housing developments, especially those near transit, through the creation of an enhanced affordable housing density bonus.
California Housing Accountability Act
This State law, originally enacted in 1982 and last amended in 2017, prevents localities from disapproving proposed developments that comply with “all applicable, objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision standards and criteria,” unless they find that the development would have an unavoidable impact on public health or safety that can only be mitigated by rejecting the project or reducing its size (Hernandez and Golub 2017). Compliance with objective standards and criteria is defined as “substantial evidence that would allow a reasonable person to conclude” that a project complies. The Housing Accountability Act also prevents localities from disapproving or reducing the size of developments that have a minimum amount of affordable housing (either 20 percent of units for lower-income households or 100 percent of units for moderate-income households), except Environmental Impact Analysis
Population and Housing
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.11-3
under specific circumstances. Mixed-use developments with at least two-thirds of their square footage devoted to residential use also qualify for this protection.
Senate Bill 35
In 2017, California enacted SB 35 to streamline the approval of affordable housing projects. This law applies in localities that are not meeting their RHNA goals for construction of above-moderate income housing units or units for households below 80 percent of the area median income (AMI).
These thresholds under SB 35 apply to the City of Carlsbad. Applicable localities are required to streamline the approval of eligible housing projects by providing a ministerial approval process. To qualify for streamlining, a project must meet all of a range of criteria related to affordability, including but not limited to the number of units, residential zoning, floor area dedicated to residential uses, environmental constraints, demolition of residential units, historic buildings, and consistency with objective zoning standards (California Legislative Information 2017). CEQA review is not required for eligible projects because they are subject to a ministerial approval process.
Housing Crisis Act
The Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (SB 330) seeks to speed up housing production in the next half decade by eliminating some of the most common entitlement impediments to the creation of new housing, including delays in the local permitting process and cities enacting new requirements after an application is complete and undergoing local review—both of which can exacerbate the cost and uncertainty that sponsors of housing projects face. In addition to speeding up the timeline to obtain building permits, the bill prohibits local governments from reducing the number of homes that can be built through down-planning or down-zoning or the introduction of new discretionary design guidelines. The bill is in effect as of January 1, 2020, and expires on January 1, 2030.
SB 330 also regulates demolition of existing housing. It prohibits urbanized jurisdictions from approving a housing development that requires demolition of residential units unless the project creates at least as many units as would be demolished (California Legislative Information 2019).
Local jurisdictions also are prohibited from approving a project that would demolish occupied or vacant “protected units,” unless the project meets several criteria (e.g., replacing all protected units, providing relocation benefits, and giving a right of first refusal to displaced residents for comparable units in the new development). Protected units are defined as subject to a covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rent to levels affordable to affordable to persons and families of lower or very low income; subject to rent control; or occupied by low or very low-income households; among other factors. These requirements for demolition do not supersede local demolition controls that are more protective of lower income households.
b. Regional and Local
Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA)
SANDAG prepares the RHNA mandated by State law so that local jurisdictions can use this information during their periodic updates of the General Plan Housing Element. The RHNA identifies the housing needs for very low income, low income, moderate income, and above moderate- income groups, and allocates these targets among the local jurisdictions that comprise SANDAG.
The RHNA addresses existing and future housing needs based on the most recent U.S. Census, data on forecasted household growth, historical growth patterns, job creation, household formation rates, and other factors. The need for new housing is distributed among the four income groups so City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.11-4
that each community moves closer to the regional average income distribution, referred to as a “social equity adjustment.” During the most recent RHNA allocation, SANDAG and its member agencies were required to plan for a total of 171,685 housing units through the 2021-2029 planning period to address the region’s housing needs. The City of Carlsbad was assigned a RHNA of 3,873 units for the 2021-2029 planning period. Local jurisdictions are required by State law to update their General Plan Housing Elements based on the most recently adopted RHNA allocation.
SANDAG’s 2021 Regional Plan
SANDAG’s Final 2021 Regional Plan was adopted on December 10, 2021, and provides a long-term blueprint for the San Diego region that seeks to meet regulatory requirements, address traffic congestion, and create equal access to jobs, education, healthcare, and other community resources. The 2021 Regional Plan includes a SCS, as required by SB 375. The SCS describes coordinated transportation and land use planning that exceeds the State’s target for reducing per capita GHG emissions set by the CARB. The State-mandated target is a 19 percent reduction compared to 2005 levels in per capita GHG emissions from cars and light-duty trucks by 2035, and the 2021 Regional Plan aims to achieve a 20 percent reduction by then (SANDAG 2021).
City of Carlsbad 2021-2029 Housing Element
The City of Carlsbad 2021-2029 Housing Element contains the following applicable policies aimed at protecting existing and facilitating development of affordable housing.
Policy 10-P.1 Ensure the availability of sufficient developable acreage in all residential densities to accommodate varied housing types and income levels as required to meet Carlsbad’s 2021-2029 RHNA, as discussed in Section 10.3.
Policy 10-P.7 Encourage distribution of development of affordable housing throughout the city to avoid over concentration in a particular area, excluding areas lacking necessary infrastructure or services.
Policy 10-P.13 Pursuant to the Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, require affordability for lower- income households of a minimum of 15 percent of all residential projects. For projects that are required to include 10 or more units affordable to lower-income households, at least 10 percent of the lower-income units should have three or more bedrooms (lower-income senior housing projects exempt).
Policy 10-P.15 Work with the community to modify or replace Measure E (Growth Management Plan) relative to the residential growth caps and development moratorium to be in compliance with SB 330.
Policy 10-P.17 Encourage the development of an adequate number of housing units suitably sized to meet the needs of lower- and moderate-income larger households.
Policy 10-P.29 Support ongoing efforts by federal and State agencies and continue city efforts, in the enforcement of fair housing laws prohibiting discrimination in the development, financing, rental, or sale of housing.
Policy 10-P.30 Support ongoing efforts of federal, State, regional, and local efforts to affirmatively further fair housing.
Policy 10-P.32 Contract with a fair housing service provider to monitor and respond to complaints of discrimination in housing.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Population and Housing
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.11-5
City of Carlsbad Growth Management Plan (Proposition E) The City adopted the Growth Management Plan (GMP) in July 1986 to address the concerns of rapid growth and its impacts on quality of life, which was ratified by voter approval of Proposition E in November 1986.
The GMP requires adequate public facilities be provided concurrent with new growth. To ensure this, the GMP identifies performance standards for 11 public facilities – city administration, library, wastewater treatment, parks, drainage, circulation, fire, open space, schools, sewer collection, and water distribution. The facility performance standards were based on the city’s residential dwelling unit capacity (existing and future units), which in 1986 was estimated to be 54,599 dwelling units.
Through Proposition E, voters limited the maximum number of dwelling units that can be constructed citywide to 54,599 units, spread out between the Northwest Quadrant (15,370 units), Northeast Quadrant (9,042 units), Southwest Quadrant (12,859 units), and Southeast Quadrant (17,328 units). However, recent State housing laws have preempted the city’s ability to require compliance with the dwelling caps or to stop development due to noncompliance. In April 2021, the Carlsbad City Council adopted Resolution No. 2021-074, which states “Consistent with Updated Housing Element Program 2.2, the City Council finds that Government Code Sections 65583(a)(3) and 65863(a) (SB 166 [2017]) and Government Code Section 66300(b)(1)(D) (SB 330 [2019]) preempt the city from implementing residential growth management plan caps, residential quadrant limits, and residential control points. Consequently, the City finds that it cannot and will not enforce these residential caps, quadrant limits, and control points, including but not limited to those contained in the General Plan (including, but not limited to the Land Use and Community Design Element Table 2-3, Section 2.6, Policy 2-P.8(a) and (b), Policy 2- P.16(d), and Policy 2-P.57), Growth Management Plan (Proposition E); City Council Policy Statement No. 43, Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 21.90 including but not limited to CMC §§ 21.90.030 (b), 21.90.045 and 21.90.185.”
4.11.3 Impact Analysis
a. Methodology and Significance Thresholds
Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines identifies the following criteria for determining whether a project’s impacts would have a significant impact to population and housing:
Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure); and/or
Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere.
b. Prior Environmental Analysis
The 2015 General Plan EIR addressed potential population and housing impacts in Section 3.9, Land Use, Housing, and Population. The 2015 General Plan EIR found that the General Plan would not directly or indirectly induce substantial population growth in excess of the GMP and would not displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. Rather, the 2015 General Plan EIR found that the General Plan would improve connectivity within and between existing neighborhoods and provide more linkages within the city and the region, resulting in beneficial impacts. Population and Housing impacts were found to be less than significant.
1)
2)
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.11-6
The proposed project involves land use changes to encourage development on 18 rezone sites beyond what was anticipated in the 2015 General Plan EIR and could therefore result in new impacts related to population and housing. Therefore, all the CEQA checklist items listed above under Methodology and Significance Thresholds are addressed in this analysis. c. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Some components associated with the proposed project, including updates to the Local Coastal Plan, Public Safety Element, and Master and Specific Plans for consistency between the city’s planning documents, in and of themselves would not result in physical changes to the environment such that impacts to population and housing would occur. Therefore, this analysis focuses on impacts associated with implementation of the rezone program which would facilitate the development of 18 rezone sites listed in Table 2-4 in Section 2, Project Description.
Threshold: Would the project induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? Impact PH-1 THIS SEIR ASSUMES A FULL BUILDOUT OF 3,295 RESIDENTIAL UNITS IN CARLSBAD
ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED PROJECT, WHICH EQUATES TO A POPULATION INCREASE OF AN ESTIMATED 8,260 RESIDENTS COMPARED TO THE EXISTING POPULATION. HOWEVER, GROWTH RESULTING FROM THE PROJECT IS ANTICIPATED AND WOULD NOT CONSTITUTE SUBSTANTIAL UNPLANNED POPULATION GROWTH. THIS IMPACT WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.
Based on information collected by the City of Carlsbad, as of January 1, 2023, Carlsbad had 47,003 housing units, excluding accessory dwelling units, and as of June 30, 2022, Carlsbad had a population of 117,800 residents. As discussed in Section 2, Project Description, the proposed project would facilitate the development of 18 rezone sites to accommodate residential development.
Future development under the project would add approximately 3,295 new residential units and 8,2601 new residents to the city. Therefore, the addition of the proposed project compared to existing population and housing estimates would result in 50,298 housing units and a population of 126,060.
According to the 2015 General Plan EIR, by the General Plan horizon year 2035 (buildout), Carlsbad was estimated to have approximately 52,320 units. Since the 2015 General Plan EIR, the city has approved residential development that has resulted in a net increase in the projected housing units to 53,221 at buildout (City of Carlsbad 2023a). Therefore, as of release of this SEIR, the city had an available housing unit capacity of 6,218 (53,221 – 47,003) units through buildout under the existing General Plan. With implementation of the proposed project, Carlsbad would have 56,516 housing units at buildout (47,003 [current housing units] + 6,218 [housing units remaining to be built under the existing General Plan] + 3,295 [housing units under the proposed project]). The proposed project involves land use changes and rezoning to add additional housing capacity compared to what was analyzed in the 2015 General Plan EIR; therefore, it would exceed the housing units at buildout assumed in the 2015 General Plan EIR.
However, the State requires that all local governments adequately plan to meet the housing needs of their communities (HCD 2023). Given that the State is currently in an ongoing housing crisis due
1 The population determined for the 3,295 new residential units are based on calculations developed by the city for the 2015 General Plan EIR to estimate population at buildout. The estimate assumes 2.63 persons per household, with a 5.5 percent vacancy rat e, and 0.86 percent of residents as group quarters (3,295 * 2.63 * 0.945 *1.0086 = 8,260).
Environmental Impact Analysis
Population and Housing
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.11-7
to an insufficient housing supply, the additional units under the proposed project would further assist in addressing the existing crisis and meeting the housing needs of the city’s communities.
Therefore, the objectives of this project include implementing the city’s Housing Element (which was certified by HCD) in order to meet projected population and housing growth. The Housing Element is designed to accommodate regional growth anticipated by SANDAG’s RHNA projections.
Therefore, the proposed project is intended to plan for anticipated population growth. The proposed project would not constitute unplanned growth because it would be consistent with the City’s RHNA and is being planned for and analyzed in this SEIR.
It should be noted that under the GMP set by Proposition E, the city’s residential dwelling unit capacity was limited to 54,599 units. Development under the proposed project would exceed the GMP limit of 54,599 units. As recent State law and State mandated housing goals preempt voter approved housing limits such as those under the GMP, the city is developing a new approach to managing growth. The preemption of implementing residential GMP caps, residential quadrant limits, and residential control points is acknowledged in adopted City Council Resolution 2021-074 (City of Carlsbad 2023b).
Further, the proposed project itself does not involve project components that would extend roads or other infrastructure that could indirectly lead to population growth. Therefore, the project would not result in substantial unplanned population growth, either directly or indirectly. This impact would be less than significant, as concluded in the 2015 General Plan EIR.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required because, like under the 2015 General Plan EIR, impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
Threshold: Would the project displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Impact PH-2 IMPLEMENTATION OF PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD NOT RESULT IN THE DISPLACEMENT OF SUBSTANTIAL NUMBERS OF PEOPLE OR HOUSING. THE PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD FACILITATE THE DEVELOPMENT OF NEW HOUSING IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE AND LOCAL HOUSING REQUIREMENTS. THIS IMPACT WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.
“Substantial” displacement would occur if the proposed project would displace more residences than would be accommodated through growth facilitated by the project. A goal of the proposed project includes facilitating the development of 18 rezone sites and adding the R-35 and R-40 land use designations to accommodate higher density housing as identified in the Housing Element. The proposed project addresses the need for future housing development beyond that required by the RHNA to account for a reasonable sites buffer. This buffer of additional units, which is considered in the inventory of housing sites analyzed in this SEIR, is intended to help the city address future “no net loss.” Therefore, overall, the proposed project would add to the city’s housing stock to meet housing goals.
On an individual site basis, it is possible that some redevelopment projects could result in displacement of current housing. Currently, Site 4, which consists of two properties, has one existing unit and Site 8 has 24 existing units. However, the proposed project includes land use changes to City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.11-8
facilitate development of 154 units on Site 4 (on the property containing the unit)2 and 150 units on Site 8 which would provide additional housing opportunities for any displaced residents.
Additionally, future development would be required to comply with goals and policies under Section
10.7.4 of the 2021-2029 Housing Element which aims to affirmatively further fair housing and ensure all housing opportunities are offered in conformance with open housing policies and free of discriminatory practices (City of Carlsbad 2021). Furthermore, Program 4.3 and other programs of the 2021-2029 Housing Element ensures the minimization of the occurrence of displacement, especially within groups facing disproportionate housing needs, including but not limited to those with lower incomes (City of Carlsbad 2021).
In summary, the proposed project would facilitate the development of up to 3,295 additional dwelling units throughout Carlsbad. Proposed residential units would provide additional housing opportunities for residents if residents are displaced during buildout of the proposed project.
Therefore, the proposed project would not result in the net loss or displacement of housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. This impact would be less than significant, as concluded in the 2015 General Plan EIR.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required because, like under the 2015 General Plan EIR, impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
d. Cumulative Impacts
Inducement of Substantial Population Growth
The impact analysis under Impact PH-1 takes into account cumulative population and housing growth in Carlsbad through 2035 (project growth plus other growth under the 2015 General Plan).
However, as discussed in Section 3, Environmental Setting, the topic of population and housing has cumulative implications on the entire San Diego region, not just on the City of Carlsbad.
Nonetheless, the proposed project would accommodate projected citywide population and housing growth through 2035. The Housing Element is designed to accommodate regional growth anticipated by SANDAG’s RHNA projections. Therefore, the proposed project is intended to plan for anticipated population growth, including growth in the region. By its nature, the impact analysis under Impact PH-1 considers cumulative impacts associated with population growth throughout the city and consistent with the city’s RHNA. The proposed project would not considerably contribute to a significant impact associated with unplanned population growth.
Displacement of People and Housing
Implementation of the proposed project would accommodate the city’s forecasted population and housing demand. The proposed project would result in an overall net increase of housing units in the city, including affordable housing, and would not result in substantial displacement of people or housing. Similar to Carlsbad, other jurisdictions in the region have updated their respective Housing Elements to increase the region’s overall housing stock to accommodate growth and substantial cumulative displacement in the region would not occur. For individual displacements that may occur on redevelopment of sites with existing residences, similar to Carlsbad, other jurisdictions have
2 The property containing the single unit is within a floodplain. While land use changes proposed for that property could yield 154 units, the proposed project recognizes no unit yield for the property because of the floodplain constraint. The other Site 4 property could yield another 212 units beyond its current designation. See Table 2-4 in Section 2, Project Description, for further details.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Population and Housing
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.11-9
policies and programs to assist those at risk of displacement. As a result, implementation of the proposed project would not considerably contribute to a significant cumulative impact from the displacement of substantial numbers of existing housing units or people.
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.11-10
This page intentionally left blank.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Public Services and Recreation
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.12-1
4.12 Public Services and Recreation
This section evaluates the impacts on public services and recreational facilities associated with implementation of the proposed project.
4.12.1 Setting
a. Fire Protection Services
The Carlsbad Fire Department (CFD) serves the approximately 117,800 Carlsbad residents in a 39- square mile service area within Carlsbad. The CFD is divided into two bureaus: Emergency Operations and Community Risk Reduction. Emergency Operations is the largest bureau within CFD and is responsible for fire suppression, rescue, emergency medical service (EMS) delivery, lifeguard service/marine safety and disaster mitigation. The Emergency Operations Bureau is led by the assistant fire chief, with three shift battalion chiefs leading A, B and C platoons, one training battalion chief who supervises training and safety and an EMS division chief who oversees training and EMS. Approximately 32 personnel make up each shift who are housed within six permanent and one temporary fire stations located throughout the city. Emergency Operations personnel are a highly trained, professional workforce that respond annually to more than 14,000 calls for service.
The City of Carlsbad maintains a fleet of emergency vehicles that respond to emergency incidents. In addition to the front-line apparatus, the city has reserve apparatus which can immediately be placed in service when additional staffing is needed or when front-line apparatus experience mechanical issues (City of Carlsbad 2023a).
The CFD recently completed a “Standards of Cover” evaluation, looking at current and future emergency response needs based on Carlsbad’s size, demographics and other factors. The evaluation found that to meet industry standards, the Fire Department needed a seventh fire station, ideally west of I-5, as well as more ambulances and personnel. In January 2023, the city completed construction of temporary Fire Station 7 on part of the old Encina power plant site as part of a City Council goal to improve emergency response times and ensure fire and emergency medical services are ready to meet the community’s needs as the city’s demographics and population change. The CFD also has a goal to establish a permanent Fire Station 7 in the area of Cannon Road west of Interstate 5 (I-5) by 2026 to 2028 (City of Carlsbad 2023b). Since July 1, 2021, the city has also placed two additional ambulances in service to increase the total number of city ambulances in service from three to five; and reconstructed Fire Station 2 in La Costa to accommodate larger crews and more equipment (City of Carlsbad 2023c).
Response Times and Standards
The performance standard established by the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan in the City’s Growth Management Plan (GMP) requires that no more than 1,500 dwelling units be located outside of a 5-minute response time (City of Carlsbad 1986). The CFD currently has one fire station per district and the construction of Fire Station 7 would ensure compliance with the GMP standard.
Additionally, according to the Fiscal Year (FY) 2021-22 GMP Monitoring Report, fire services were adequate and met the GMP performance standard (City of Carlsbad 2021). In the CFD’s 2021 Annual Performance Report, the city lists a benchmark standard of 6 minutes from dispatch to arrival. The city’s annual average time from dispatch to arrival in 2021 was 8 minutes and 23 seconds (City of Carlsbad 2023e). This increase in response time can be attributed to population increase in Carlsbad and neighboring jurisdictions, increased call volume, drive time, and delays at hospitals and in City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.12-2
traffic. The CFD continues to monitor response times to emergency incidents to determine any additional significant contributing factors to changes in response times. b. Police Protection Services
The Carlsbad Police Department (CPD) conducts its safety services primarily out of the Carlsbad Police and Fire Headquarters, a 53,600-square-foot facility built in 1986, located on Orion Way. The CPD currently employs 187 full-time personnel. Of the 187 authorized full-time positions, 132 are sworn and 55 are civilian. The CPD is made up of services that include: patrol, investigations, traffic enforcement, family services unit with school resource officers, property crimes unit, vice narcotics unit, violent crimes unit, crime suppression team, homeless outreach team, rangers and dispatch.
The patrol division is the core of the CPD’s law enforcement services, responding to more than 100,000 calls for service annually. Although street patrols are the majority of the division’s activity, other special details and services include canine units, Special Weapons and Tactics (SWAT), bicycle patrol, crisis negotiations, bilingual services, and mental health assistance teams (City of Carlsbad 2023f). The CPD has a response time for priority one calls that is lower than the national average of six minutes. There is currently no GMP standard for police services. c. Schools
Carlsbad is served by four school districts: Carlsbad Unified School District (CUSD), San Marcos Unified School District (SMUSD), Encinitas Union Elementary School District (EUESD) and San Dieguito Union High School District (SDUHSD). Although the Vista Unified School District overlaps with two small areas of Carlsbad, these areas do not contain any residential uses (City of Carlsbad 2015a). Most of Carlsbad (approximately 62 percent) is served by CUSD, which comprises nine elementary schools (Aviara Oaks Elementary, Buena Vista Elementary, Calavera Hills Elementary, Hope Elementary, Jefferson Elementary, Kelly Elementary, Magnolia Elementary, Pacific Rim Elementary, and Poinsettia Elementary) that feed into three middle schools (Aviara Oaks Middle, Calavera Hills Middle, and Valley Middle) and two high schools (Carlsbad High, Sage Creek High), and accommodates more than 11,000 students (CUSD 2023). Carlsbad Seaside Academy and Carlsbad Village Academy are also within CUSD and provide alternative schooling options for students.
Carlsbad Seaside Academy has a grade range of 9th to 12th grade and offers an Independent Study program. Carlsbad Village Academy has a grade range of 10th to 12th grade and is a continuation high school serving students 16 years or older (Carlsbad Village Academy 2023). The CUSD’s overall enrollment for the 2021-2022 school year was 11,027 students, which was a 1.5 percent increase from the overall enrollment for the 2020-2021 school year of 10,863 students (California Department of Education 2023a; 2023b).
Other schools serving Carlsbad within the SMUSD include the La Costa Meadows Elementary, Carillo Elementary, San Elijo Middle, and San Marcos High; within the EUESD include La Costa Heights Elementary, El Camino Creek Elementary, Capri Elementary, Mission Estancia Elementary, Olivenhain Pioneer Elementary; and within the SDUHSD include Oak Crest Middle, Diegueno Middle, and La Costa Canyon High (City of Carlsbad 2015a).
The performance standard established by the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan in the city’s GMP requires school capacity to meet projected enrollment within the Local Facility Management Zone (LFMZ) as determined by the appropriate school district must be provided prior to projected occupancy. All new residential development is required to verify that school capacity can meet the projected enrollment from the school district serving the development. To date, all school districts Environmental Impact Analysis
Public Services and Recreation
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.12-3
serving Carlsbad have verified they have capacity to serve development in the city (City of Carlsbad 2023d).
d. Parks and Recreational Facilities
Park Classifications
The city’s General Plan and Park and Recreation Master Plan establishes three park classifications:
community parks, special use areas, and special resource areas.
Community Parks
Community parks are typically 20-50 acres in size (though there are several smaller parks “grandfathered” into this classification) and designed to serve the recreational needs of several neighborhoods, with a focus on serving families from the vicinity with daily frequency. Community parks generally provide active and passive use amenities; however, they are not limited to the exclusive use of either (City of Carlsbad 2015b). Minimum facilities should include:
Family-oriented picnic areas
Group picnic areas
Turfed open space areas for free play
Multi-purpose playfield(s) (lighted when appropriate) Playground areas
Structures for lectures, meetings, skills, instructions, etc. Buffer areas
Special use facilities such as community gardens, swimming pools, tennis courts, basketball courts, horseshoes, handball and racquetball courts, pickleball courts, bicycle paths, skate parks, dog parks, etc. as per specific community demand may be located within these parks if appropriate to the interests and needs of the community in which the park is located (City of Carlsbad 2015b).
Special Use Areas
Special use areas are typically between one and five acres in size, with only one or two basic uses, which can be either active or passive in orientation. Examples include, but are not limited to, swim facilities, skate parks, dog parks, tennis courts or picnic areas. School sites that operate under a joint-use facility agreement between the City of Carlsbad and a school district are also included as special use areas. Adequate access should be a primary siting criteria utilized in determining the location of special use areas (City of Carlsbad 2015b).
Special Resource Areas
Special resource areas have citywide and potentially regional significance related to the quality of the site or service that it provides. This quality may be a natural feature (geological, ecological, hydrological), historical resource (architectural, archaeological), or some combination thereof.
Special resource areas are typically larger than community parks (City of Carlsbad 2015b).
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.12-4
Existing Park and Recreation Areas
Carlsbad currently has 14 community parks: Alga Norte Community Park, Aviara Community Park, Calavera Hills Community Park, Hidden Canyon Community Park, Holiday Park, Hosp Grove Park, La Costa Canyon Park, Laguna Rivera Park, Leo Carrillo Ranch Historic Park, Magee Park, Pine Avenue Community Park, Poinsettia Community Park, Stagecoach Park, and Veterans Memorial Park (City of Carlsbad 2023g). The city also has 28 special use areas (84.2 acres) and five special resource areas (more than 1,300 acres). The28 special use areas include: Aviara Oaks School Field, Buena Vista Elementary School Field, Buena Vista Reservoir Park, Business Park Recreational Facility (Zone 5 Park), Cadencia Park, Calavera Hills Trailhead, Cannon Lake Park, Car Country Park, Carlsbad High School Tennis Courts, Chase Field, Harding Community Center, Harold E. Smerdu Community Garden, Hope Elementary School Field, Hosp Grove Trailheads, Jefferson Elementary School Field, Kelly Elementary School Field, La Costa Meadows Elementary/El Fuerte Park, La Costa Heights Elementary School Field, Magnolia Elementary School Field, Maxton Brown Park, Monroe Street Swim Complex, Oak Park, Ocean Street Sculpture Park and Tamarack Picnic Facilities, Pio Pico Park, Senior Center Complex, Skate Park, Terramar Northern Bluff, and Valley Junior High School Field.
The five special resource areas include: Agua Hedionda Lagoon, Batiquitos Lagoon, Beaches, Buena Vista Lagoon, and Lake Calavera. Special resource areas do not count towards the GMP (City of Carlsbad 2015b) in terms of helping to meet the park facility standard. Figure 4.12-1 shows parks and recreational areas in relation to the 18 rezone sites.
Parks and Recreation Standards
The GMP Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan outlines a park facility standard of three acres of community parks or special use areas per 1,000 population within the park district. There are four park districts within Carlsbad, which correspond to the city’s four quadrants. Parks and special use areas must be scheduled for construction within a five-year period beginning at the time the need is first identified but beginning no sooner than August 22, 2017. According to City Council Resolution No. 97-435, “scheduled for construction” means that the improvements have been designed, a park site has been selected, and a financing plan for construction of the facility has been approved (City of Carlsbad 2015b). Carlsbad has a total of 432.4 acres of community parks and special use areas. As shown in Table 4.12-1, based on the June 30, 2022 population estimate in each park district (quadrant) and as discussed in the city’s FY 2021-22 GMP Monitoring report, the parkland in each park district exceeds the parkland required by the city’s park standard.
Table 4.12-1 Parkland Acreage by Park District
Park District
Quadrant Current Population Current Park Acreage Required1 Current Park Acreage NW 31,778 95.3 131.7
NE 19,355 58.0 68.7
SW 26,483 79.4 93.6
SE 40,183 120.5 138.3
Total 117,800 353.2 432.4
1 Assuming a goal of 3 acres per 1,0000 residents within the park district Source: City of Carlsbad 2023d
Environmental Impact Analysis
Public Services and Recreation
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.12-5
Figure 4.12-1 Rezone Sites Proximity to Parks and Recreational Areas
/'
:._ . . J City Limit s
Highway
Major Street
Planned Street
Railroad
- Existing Community Park
c::::J Future Community Park
- Existing Special Use Area
- Existing Golf Course
Other Open Space
Potential Hou sing Sites *
D Convert government-owned
property to allow hou sing
-CJ
Convert comm ercia l prop erty to
allow housing
Increase unit s a II owed on
properti es that already allow
housi ng
Convert vacant indu stria l prop erty
to allow housing
* Site 13 was designated as a low priority site
by the City Council and is therefo re not
shown on this map
N
o'----~o~.1_s ___ ~1.s A
M lles
Imagery provided by Esri and its licensors © 2023.
Additional data provided by City of Carlsbad, 2022.
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.12-6
e. Libraries
Three library facilities are located within the City of Carlsbad: Carlsbad City Library, Georgina Cole Library, and Carlsbad City Library Learning Center. In addition to its diverse collection of resource materials, the municipal library system offers services and programs for all ages. It also houses the William D. Cannon Art Gallery, the Ruby G. Schulman Auditorium, and the George and Patricia Gowland Meeting Room.
Under the GMP, the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan establishes a performance standard for library space equal to 800 square feet per 1,000 population, which must be scheduled for construction within a five-year period or prior to construction of 6,250 dwelling units, beginning at the time the need is first identified. According to the City’s FY 2021-22 GMP Monitoring Report, based on the June 30, 2022 population estimate of 117,800, the GMP standard requires 94,240 square feet of public library space. The city currently has 99,993 square feet of library facilities, or 849 square feet per 1,000 residents,
1 which meets the GMP standard of 800 square feet per 1,000 population.
4.12.2 Regulatory Setting
a. State
California Fire and Building Code
The State of California provides minimum standards for building design through the California Building Code (CBC, Part 2 of Title 24, and the California Fire Code (CFC, Part 9 of Title 24) of the California Building Standards Code, of the CCR. The CBC and CFC are based on the International Building and Fire Codes, but have been amended for California conditions. It is generally adopted on a jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction basis, subject to further modification based on local conditions.
Commercial and residential buildings are plan-checked by local building and fire officials for compliance with the CBC and CFC. Typical fire safety requirements of the CBC and CFC include: the installation of sprinklers in all high-rise buildings; the establishment of fire resistance standards for fire doors, building materials, and particular types of construction; and the clearance of debris and vegetation within a prescribed distance from occupied structures in wildfire hazard areas.
California Code of Regulations
The California Code of Regulations, Title 5 Education Code, governs all aspects of education within the State. California State Assembly Bill 2926 (AB 2926) – School Facilities Act of 1986 – was enacted by the State of California in 1986 and added to the California Government Code (Section 65995). It authorizes school districts to collect development fees, based on demonstrated need, and generate revenue for school districts for capital acquisitions and improvements. It also established that the maximum fees which may be collected under this and any other school fee authorization are $1.50 per square foot ($1.50/ft
2) for residential development and $0.25/ft2 for commercial and industrial development. AB 2926 was expanded and revised in 1987 through the passage of AB 1600, which added Section 66000 et seq. of the Government code. Under this statute, payment of statutory fees by developers serves as total mitigation under CEQA to satisfy the impact of development on school
1 99,993 square feet x 1,000 / 117,800 residents = 849 square feet per 1,000 residents Environmental Impact Analysis
Public Services and Recreation
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.12-7
facilities. However, subsequent legislative actions have alternatively expanded and contracted the limits placed on school fees by AB 2926.
California Senate Bill 50
As part of the further refinement of the legislation enacted under AB 2926, the passage of SB 50 in 1998 defined the Needs Analysis process in government Code Sections 65995.5-65998. Under the provisions of SB 50, school districts may collect fees to offset the costs associated with increasing school capacity as a result of development. SB 50 generally provides for a 50/50 State and local school facilities match. SB 50 also provides for three levels of statutory impact fees. The application level depends on whether State funding is available; whether the school district is eligible for State funding; and whether the school district meets certain additional criteria involving bonding capacity, year-round schools, and the percentage of moveable classrooms in use.
California Government Code sections 65995-65998 sets forth provisions to implement SB 50.
Specifically, in accordance with section 65995(h), the payment of statutory fees is “deemed to be full and complete mitigation of the impacts of any legislative or adjudicative act, or both, involving, but not limited to, the planning, use, or development of real property, or any change in governmental organization or reorganization…on the provision of adequate school facilities.” The school district is responsible for implementing the specific methods for mitigating school impacts under the Government Code.
Pursuant to Government Code section 65995(i), “A State or local agency may not deny or refuse to approve a legislative or adjudicative act, or both, involving, but not limited to, the planning, use, or development of real property, or any change in governmental organization or reorganization as defined in section 56021 or 56073 on the basis of a person's refusal to provide school facilities mitigation that exceeds the amounts authorized pursuant to this section or pursuant to section 65995.5 or 65995.7, as applicable.”
California Education Code section 17620(a)(1) states that the governing board of any school district is authorized to levy a fee, charge, dedication, or other requirement against any construction within the boundaries of the district, for the purpose of funding the construction or reconstruction of school facilities.
State Public Park Preservation Act (California Public Resource Code Section 5400 – 5409)
The State Public Park Preservation Act is the primary instrument for protecting and preserving parkland in California. Under the Act, cities and counties may not acquire any real property that is in use as a public park for any non-park use unless compensation or land, or both, are provided to replace the parkland acquired. This ensures a no net loss of parkland and facilities.
Quimby Act (California Government Code Section 66477)
The Quimby Act allows cities and counties to adopt park dedication standards/ordinances requiring developers to set aside land, donate conservation easements, or pay fees towards parkland only when property is subdivided. This does not apply to development of apartments. Residential development projects not involving a subdivision or parcel map are not subject to the Quimby Act but may instead be required to pay impact fees for park land acquisition as governed by the Mitigation Fee Act.
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.12-8
b. Local Regulations
City of Carlsbad Growth Management Plan (Proposition E) The City adopted the GMP in July 1986 to address the concerns of rapid growth and its impacts on quality of life, which was ratified by voter approval of Proposition E in November 1986.
The GMP requires adequate public facilities be provided concurrent with new growth. To ensure this, the GMP identifies performance standards for 11 public facilities – city administration, library, wastewater treatment, parks, drainage, circulation, fire, open space, schools, sewer collection, and water distribution. The facility performance standards were based on the city’s residential dwelling unit capacity (existing and future units), which in 1986 was estimated to be 54,599 dwelling units.
Through Proposition E, voters limited the maximum number of dwelling units that can be constructed citywide to 54,599 units, spread out between the Northwest Quadrant (15,370 units), Northeast Quadrant (9,042 units), Southwest Quadrant (12,859 units), and Southeast Quadrant (17,328 units). Pursuant to Proposition E, the city cannot approve any General Plan amendment, zone change, subdivision map or other discretionary permit that could result in residential development that exceeds the dwelling unit limit in each quadrant. To increase the Proposition E dwelling unit limit in any city quadrant requires approval by Carlsbad voters (City of Carlsbad 2015a). However, recent State housing laws have preempted the city’s ability to require compliance with the dwelling caps or to stop development due to noncompliance, as acknowledged in adopted City Council Resolution 2021-074 (City of Carlsbad 2023d). The city is currently developing a new approach to managing growth.
Carlsbad General Plan
Fire and Police Protection
The current Carlsbad General Plan, adopted in 2015, lists several policies related to fire and police protection in the Public Safety Element. The existing Public Safety Element policies would be replaced by the updated Public Safety Element policies as part of this project; therefore, policies from the 2015 General Plan that are being removed as part of the Public Safety Element Update are not included in this section but are discussed in the Impact Analysis.
Schools
The Arts, History, Culture, and Education of the City’s General Plan has the following policies and actions related to schools (City of Carlsbad 2015d):
Policy 7-G.10. Work with school districts to ensure educational facilities with sufficient permanent capacity are available to meet the needs of current and future projected enrollment. Consult with the school districts on policies and projects that affect the provision of educational facilities and services.
Policy 7-P.28. Support efforts by the Carlsbad Unified School District, other school districts that serve Carlsbad residents, and childcare service providers to establish, maintain, and improve educational facilities and services.
Policy 7-P.29. Coordinate with the school districts to ensure that school facilities have adequate capacity to accommodate projected enrollment resulting from the city’s population growth and development.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Public Services and Recreation
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.12-9
Policy 7-P.30. Continue to partner with local school districts to optimize the joint-use of school facilities for community use.
Parks and Recreation
The Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation Element of the City’s General Plan contain the following policies related to parks and recreation (City of Carlsbad 2015b):
Policy 4-G.6. Offer a wide variety of recreational activities and park facilities designed to encourage educational benefits and active or passive participation by users of all ages and interests.
Policy 4-G.7. Operate a financially self-supportive system of recreational facilities and programs.
Policy 4-G.8. Coordinate the planning of park facilities and trails with other recreation-oriented land uses such as open space.
Policy 4-G.9. Improve and maintain high quality beaches for residents and visitors.
Policy 4-G.10. Increase public access to and use of the Cannon Road Open Space, Farming and Public Use Corridor (see Figure 4-5) primarily through the incorporation of public trails and active and passive recreation.
Policy 4-P.5b. Require compliance with the Growth Management Plan open space performance standard specified in the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan, and maintain appropriate criteria, standards, and classifications. The following open space areas shall not be utilized to meet the open space performance standard: Parks, public or private; however, credit may be granted for private parks if the granting of the open space credit will not adversely impact the city’s ability to obtain all of the applicable open space priorities identified for the local facilities management zone (LFMZ) by the Open Space and Conservation Resource Management Plan (OSCRMP).
Policy 4-P.20. Implement and periodically update the Parks and Recreation Needs Assessment and Comprehensive Action Plan that identifies appropriate programming for the city’s parklands, prioritizes future parkland development, reflects the needs of residents at the neighborhood and citywide level and of an increasingly diverse and aging population, and in concert with the citywide trails program, creates new linkages to neighborhoods.
Policy 4-P.21. Acquire and develop park areas in accordance with the Growth Management Plan park standard of 3.0 acres of community park or special use area per 1,000 residents within each of the four city quadrants. Park acreage requirements shall be determined on a quadrant basis.
Policy 4-P.22. Maintain appropriate recreational standards (e.g., payment of park mitigation fees) for employment areas.
Policy 4-P.23. Utilize the provisions of the Quimby Act, Growth Management Plan and Planned Community Zone to ensure the timely construction of parks so that they are provided concurrent with need.
Policy 4-P.24. Prefer in-lieu fees to dedication of parkland, unless sites offered for dedication provide features and accessibility similar in comparison.
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.12-10
Policy 4-P.25. Consider accessibility, housing density, proximity to schools, general public access, local resident access, adjacent residential area traffic impacts, safe pedestrian access, and compatible use with the surrounding environment when determining park locations. Wherever possible, park sites should be located near schools or natural areas.
Policy 4-P.26. Locate new public or private parks, plazas, or alternative parks (such as greenways) in existing infill neighborhoods—the Village and Barrio—where new residential development is contemplated, within Growth Management Program requirements and city budgetary limitations.
Policy 4-P.27. Provide for joint-use facility agreements with local school districts to meet neighborhood and community recreational needs.
Policy 4-P.28. Require, where possible, developers of master planned communities to provide pocket parks and active recreational facilities unique to each development.
Maintenance of pocket parks shall be accomplished through homeowners’ association dues. Pocket parks shall remain in private ownership.
Policy 4-P.29. Require that any development of recreational facilities on public land by developers, service clubs, civic groups, individual donors or organizations be consistent with the goals and policies of this element.
Policy 4-P.30. Consider the following during the development/re-development of parkland:
protection and enhancement of sensitive natural habitat by expanding minimum buffers around sensitive resources; utilizing native plant species in park projects; incorporating plant species that provide food such as seeds, nuts and berries for wildlife and bird species; protecting and buffering drinking water sources such as small ponds and wetland areas; and limiting turf grass use to recreational areas. Use the Carlsbad Landscape Manual in landscape refurbishment and new park development projects.
Policy 4-P.31. Design parks to protect public safety by ensuring adequate lighting, signage, and maintenance.
Policy 4-P.34. Promote expansion of recreational and educational use opportunities in areas of significant ecological value, such as lagoons, where discretionary use of the resource allows. Consider partnering with private foundations for the conservation of such lands and the development of educational programming.
Combine historically significant sites with recreational learning opportunities, where possible.
Utilize community parks in support of historical and cultural programs and facilities when feasible and appropriate.
Coordinate the efforts of the Historic Preservation Commission on the siting and care of historic ruins within parks.
Policy 4-P.35. Seek funding opportunities from state, federal, and local agencies to provide additional access points or improve the recreational and educational potential of the city’s three lagoons and other special resource areas.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Public Services and Recreation
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.12-11
Policy 4-P.37. Explore ways to increase access to the beach and lagoons from the city’s eastern neighborhoods.
Policy 4-P.38. Work cooperatively with state officials on a development plan for South Carlsbad State Beach so as to maximize public recreational opportunities.
Libraries
The Arts, History, Culture, and Education of the City’s General Plan has the following policies and actions related to libraries (City of Carlsbad 2015d):
Policy 7-G.8. Ensure the city’s library facilities, services and programs are adequate and appropriate to meet the community’s needs for education and lifelong learning services, as well as the demands of an increasingly digital world.
Policy 7-P.23. Ensure that Carlsbad library facilities and programs are expanded commensurate with the city’s population growth in order to maintain compliance with the Growth Management Plan.
Policy 7-P.24. Provide adequate library facilities and programs that align with the community’s learning needs, abilities and demographics, and changes in technology, such as through facility design, services and service delivery methods, and partnerships with educational and learning institutions.
Policy 7-P.26. Renovate or replace the Cole Library to provide a facility that effectively serves the community’s need for library services.
Carlsbad Municipal Code
Fire Prevention Code (Carlsbad Municipal Code Title 17) The purpose of this code is to establish the minimum requirements consistent with nationally recognized good practices to safeguard the public health, safety and general welfare from the hazards of fire, explosion or dangerous conditions in new and existing buildings, structures and premises, and to provide safety and assistance to fire fighters and emergency responders during emergency operations. This code incorporates by reference the California Fire Code, which is developed and updated every three years by the California Building Standards Commission. The city’s Fire Prevention Code also incorporates a number of local amendments necessary to respond to local climatic, geographical, or topographic conditions.
4.12.3 Impact Analysis
a. Methodology and Significance Thresholds
Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines identifies the following criteria for determining whether a project’s impacts would have a significant impact to public services and recreation:
Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered fire protection facilities, or the need for new or physically altered fire protection facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives; and/or Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered police protection facilities, or the need for new or physically altered police protection 1)
2)
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.12-12
facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives; and/or Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered schools, or the need for new or physically altered schools, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives; and/or
Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered parks, or the need for new or physically altered parks, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives; and/or
Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated; and/or Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment; and/or Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered public facilities, or the need for new or physically altered public facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives. b. Prior Environmental Analysis
The 2015 General Plan EIR addressed potential parks and recreational facilities impacts in Chapter 11, Public Facilities and Services. The 2015 General Plan EIR found that although the General Plan would increase demand for fire service, police service, schools, and libraries, implementation of the General Plan would not result in the need for construction of new or physically altered public service facilities in order to maintain acceptable standards. The 2015 General Plan EIR also found that the General Plan would result in an additional demand of 393.5 acres of parkland citywide at buildout. However, development of planned parks under the General Plan would increase the city’s parkland by 443.9 acres, resulting in a surplus distributed among all four of the city’s quadrants.
Therefore, public services and recreational facilities under the General Plan would be sufficient to accommodate an increase in demand from future residents. Public services and parks and recreational impacts were found to be less than significant.
The proposed project involves land use changes on 18 rezone sites that would facilitate development beyond what was anticipated in the 2015 General Plan EIR and could therefore result in new impacts related to public services and recreation. Therefore, all the CEQA checklist items listed above under Significance Criteria are addressed in this analysis. c. Project Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Some components associated with the proposed project, including updates to the Local Coastal Plan and master and specific plans for consistency between the city’s planning documents, in and of themselves would not result in physical changes to the environment such that impacts to public services and recreation would occur. Therefore, this analysis focuses on impacts associated with implementation of the rezone program which would facilitate the development of 18 rezone sites listed in Table 2-4 in Section 2, Project Description, as well as updates to the Public Safety Element which includes policies related to fire and police protection services. 3)
4)
5)
6)
7)
Environmental Impact Analysis
Public Services and Recreation
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.12-13
Threshold 1: Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered fire protection facilities, or the need for new or physically altered fire protection facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives?
Impact PS-1 DEVELOPMENT FACILITATED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD RESULT IN AN INCREASE IN POPULATION WITHIN CARLSBAD. THE PROJECTED POPULATION INCREASE WOULD INCREASE DEMAND FOR FIRE PROTECTION SERVICES AND POTENTIALLY CREATE THE NEED FOR A NEW OR ALTERED FIRE STATION. HOWEVER,
COMPLIANCE WITH POLICIES IN THE GENERAL PLAN WOULD REDUCE IMPACTS RELATED TO FIRE SERVICE FACILITIES TO A LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVEL.
The proposed project would facilitate development of up to 3,295 housing units would result in approximately 8,260 additional persons in Carlsbad and the CFD districts (see Section 4.11, Population and Housing, for population estimation methodology). The increase in residents associated with the project could increase demand for fire protection and emergency medical services such that additional staff, equipment or facilities would be needed to meet response time goals. The proposed project would not expand the CFD service area but would result in an increased population within the existing service area.
As shown below in Figure 4.12-2, similar to the analysis in the 2015 General Plan EIR, all new development on the proposed 18 rezone sites except for Site 19 would be located within one mile of an existing fire station. Although Site 19 would be located approximately 1.5 miles south of Fire Station 2, the site would be well served by fire services as it is accessible via El Camino Real. The CFD has expressed the need to upgrade a number of its existing fire stations in order to meet increased service demands, changes in staffing, and the increased size of fire apparatus, and indicated that three out of six of the fire stations are only minimally meeting the needs of the city. Since adoption of the 2015 General Plan, the CFD has rebuilt Fire Station 2 to accommodate a larger crew, modern firefighting equipment, and a larger number emergency response vehicles (City of Carlsbad 2023h).
The City has also completed temporary Fire Station 7 on part of the old Encina power plant site in order to improve emergency response times and ensure fire and emergency medical services are ready to meet the community’s needs as the city’s demographics and population change. The CFD also has a goal to establish a permanent Fire Station 7 in the area of Cannon Road west of Interstate 5 (I-5) by 2026 to 2028, which would further ensure the adequacy of fire protection facilities and services (City of Carlsbad 2023c).
The proposed project also includes an update to the city’s Public Safety Element. The following policies are proposed in the Public Safety Element Update:
Policy 6-P.43 Maintain adequate Police and Fire Department staff to provide adequate and timely response to all emergencies according to department standards, as well as continuous community outreach providing education for emergency situations.
Policy 6-P.44 Encourage physical planning and community design practices that deter crime and promote safety.
Policy 6-P.45 Maintain close coordination between planned improvements to the circulation system within the city and the location of fire stations to assure adequate levels of service and response times to all areas of the community.
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.12-14
Policy 6-P.46 Consider site constraints in terms of hazards and current levels of emergency service delivery capabilities when making land use decisions. In areas where population or building densities may be inappropriate to the hazards present, take measures to mitigate the risk of life and property loss.
Policy 6-P.47 Coordinate the delivery of fire protection services through auto aid and mutual aid agreements with other agencies when appropriate.
Policy 6-P.48 Enforce the most current California Building and Fire codes, adopted by the city, to provide fire protection standards for all existing and proposed structures.
Policy 6-P.49 When future development is proposed to be intermixed with fire hazard severity zones and/or adjacent to fire hazard severity zones, require applicants to comply with the city’s adopted Landscape Manual, which includes requirements related to fire protection, and calls for preparation of a fire protection plan when a proposed project contains or is bounded by hazardous vegetation or is within an area bounded by a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone, or as determined by the Fire Code official or his representative. Wildfires
Policy 6-P.50 Coordinate with Carlsbad Municipal Water District, Olivenhain Municipal Water District, and Vallecitos Water District to ensure that water pressure for existing developed areas is adequate for firefighting purposes during the season and time of day when domestic water demand on a water system is at its peak.
Policy 6-P.51 Permit development only within areas that have adequate water resources available, to include water pressure, onsite water storage, or fire flows.
Policy 6-P.52 Maintain and implement Wildland/Urban Interface Guidelines for new and existing development within neighborhoods that are proximal to existing fire severity zones. Decrease the extent and amount of edge or wildland urban interface where development is adjacent to fire hazard severity zones.
Policy 6-P.53 Use strategies, such as community organization volunteer partnerships and environmentally friendly fuel reduction and weed abatement approaches, as prevention measures to minimize the risk of fires. Engage in fire hazard reduction projects, including community fire breaks and private road and public road clearance.
Policy 6-P.54 To increase resistance of structures to heat, flames, and embers, review current building code standards and other applicable statutes, regulations, requirements, and guidelines regarding construction, and specifically the use and maintenance of non-flammable materials (both residential and commercial). Promote the use of building materials and installation techniques beyond current building code requirements, to minimize wildfire impacts as well as fire protection plans for all development.
These policies would require the continuation of fire prevention practices and ensure circulation improvements account for the location of fire stations to assure adequate levels of service and response times to all areas of the community. Additionally, future development at the 18 rezone sites would be required to comply with Chapter 17.04 of the CMC, which outlines requirements under the city’s Fire Prevention Code.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Public Services and Recreation
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.12-15
Figure 4.12-2 Rezone Sites Proximity to Fire Stations
a
,,
I'
:..._ __ J City Limits
Highway
Major Street
Planned Street
Railroad
Fire Station
1-mile from a Potential Housing Site
Potential Housing Sites •
D
-D
Convert governm ent-own ed property to
allow hou sing
Convert commercial proper ty to allow
housing
Increase units allowe d on propertie s t hat
already allow hou si ng
Convert vacant industrial property to
allow hou sing
• Site 13 was designated as a low priority site
by the City Council and is therefore not
shown on this map
N
o'---~o.,i: .. s ___ ..,1.s II
M iles ~
Imagery provided by Esri and its licensors © 2023.
Addirionof data provided by City of Carlsbad, 2022.
- -
\,Ov.e
R c.olO_,efO I
\\
\ ______ l
,' l,\.,,,, --,
1 1 ,
o~·1-o~ ( '/\"v
~-. ' ---•~'& I
\ ~<:;4-t>"'
' \
.--
San Marcos
t4SE.,-;t1,r.,1;."' <?i,~.
~ --------
p.,.:GP-~o
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.12-16
Should the CFD and the city determine that new or expanded facilities are needed to provide fire protection services to Carlsbad; it is not known where such facilities would be located. No location has been identified for a new fire station as part of the proposed project. Nonetheless, when and if the CFD proposes a new station and identifies an appropriate site and funding, the city would be required to conduct a complete evaluation of the station’s environmental impacts under CEQA.
Therefore, this impact would be less than significant, similar to what was analyzed in the 2015 General Plan EIR.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required because, like under the 2015 General Plan EIR, impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
Threshold 2: Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered police protection facilities, or the need for new or physically altered police protection facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives? Impact PS-2 DEVELOPMENT FACILITATED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD RESULT IN AN INCREASE IN THE CITY’S POPULATION. THE PROJECTED POPULATION INCREASE WOULD INCREASE DEMAND FOR POLICE PROTECTION SERVICES AND POTENTIALLY CREATE THE NEED FOR NEW OR ALTERED POLICE SERVICE FACILITIES.
HOWEVER, COMPLIANCE WITH POLICIES IN THE GENERAL PLAN WOULD REDUCE IMPACTS RELATED TO POLICE FACILITIES TO A LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVEL.
Implementation of the proposed project would increase the population served by the CPD. Although CPD does not factor in population increases when determining its staffing needs, population growth in Carlsbad could result in an increase in reported incidents, leading to longer response times unless the CPD increases staffing. Police protection services are not typically “facility-driven,” meaning such services are not as reliant on facilities in order to effectively patrol a beat. An expansion of, or intensification of development within a beat does not necessarily result in the need for additional facilities if police officers and patrol vehicles are equipped with adequate telecommunications equipment in order to communicate with police headquarters. However, if the geographical area of a beat is expanded, population increases, or intensification/redevelopment of an existing beat results in the need for new police officers, new or expanded facilities may be needed.
As discussed in the 2015 General Plan EIR, the CPD has expressed growing the department in order to accommodate increases in demand from a growing population. However, meeting facilities needs for an expanded Police Department would not necessarily require new construction or physically altering an existing facility and would have a limited impact on the city’s built environment. Since adoption of the 2015 General Plan EIR, the City has constructed a Safety Training Center that allows police, fire, utility workers, and other first responders to have access to important emergency training (Carlsbad Chamber of Commerce 2023).
Further, policies included in the Public Safety Element Update, including Policy 6-P.43 included under Impact PS-1, would ensure that there is adequate staffing to meet existing service demands.
Police protection service levels would continue to be evaluated and maintained by CPD accordance with existing policies, procedures and practices as development occurs over the lifetime of the project. Should the CPD and the city determine that new or expanded facilities are needed to provide police protection services to Carlsbad; it is not known where such facilities would be Environmental Impact Analysis
Public Services and Recreation
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.12-17
located. No location has been identified for a new police station as part of the proposed project.
Nonetheless, when and if the CPD proposes a new station and identifies an appropriate site and funding, the City would be required to conduct a complete evaluation of the station’s environmental impacts under CEQA. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant, similar to what was analyzed in the 2015 General Plan EIR.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required because, like under the 2015 General Plan EIR, impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
Threshold 3: Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered schools, or the need for new or physically altered schools, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives?
Impact PS-3 DEVELOPMENT FACILITATED UNDER THE PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD RESULT IN AN INCREASE IN POPULATION IN CARLSBAD, RESULTING IN THE NEED FOR ADDITIONAL OR EXPANDED SCHOOL FACILITIES.
HOWEVER, GOVERNMENT CODE 65995 (B) WOULD REQUIRE FUNDING FOR THE PROVISION OR EXPANSION OF NEW SCHOOL FACILITIES TO OFFSET IMPACTS FROM NEW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. THIS IMPACT WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.
The proposed project would not directly affect local schools but would generate new students entering the CUSD, SMUSD, EUESD, and SDUHSD. These students would be distributed throughout the schools that serve Carlsbad depending on their grade level and on their location. As discussed in Section 2, Project Description, the proposed project could result in 3,295 new dwelling units and 8,260 additional persons in Carlsbad by 2035. As of 2021, approximately 22.8 percent of Carlsbad’s population is 18 years old or younger (US Census Bureau 2023). Applying this ratio to the maximum addition of residents facilitated by the proposed project, the project would add approximately 1,883 school-aged residents to Carlsbad in a maximum population increase scenario. 2 As discussed in the FY 2021-22 GMP Report, the CUSD would be able to accommodate current enrollment levels and expected future growth under the 2015 General Plan through renovating and replacing a variety of school facilities, outlined in their Long Range Facility Master Plan (CUSD 2018); the SMUSD although currently at maximum capacity would issue will-serve letters for proposed developments that would be served by SMUSD schools, and would be able to accommodate expected future growth in the area; the EUESD would have sufficient capacity for future growth; and the SDUHSD would also have sufficient capacity of future growth (City of Carlsbad 2023d). In order to offset a project’s potential impact on schools, Government Code 65995(b) establishes the base amount of allowable developer fees a school district can collect from development projects located within its boundaries. The fees obtained by CUSD, SMUSD, EUESD, and SDUHSD are used to maintain the desired school capacity and the maintenance and/or development of new school facilities.
Future development facilitated by proposed project would be required to pay school impact fees which, pursuant to Section 65995 (3) (h) of the California Government Code (Senate Bill 50, chaptered August 27, 1998), are “deemed to be full and complete mitigation of the impacts of any
2 8,260 potential residents multiplied by the current proportion of school-aged students (8,299 x 22.8 percent) is approximately 1,883.
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.12-18
legislative or adjudicative act, or both, involving, but not limited to, the planning, use, or development of real property, or any change in governmental organization or reorganization.” The city would also continue to implement policies 7-G.9 and 7-P.23 of the Arts, Culture, History, and Education Element of the 2015 General Plan, which would facilitate coordination with school districts to ensure school facilities have adequate and permanent capacity to accommodate projected future enrollment. There are no planned improvements to add capacity through expansion. In the event that CUSD, SMUSD, EUESD, or SDUHSD construct a new school or physically alters an existing facility, a project-specific environmental analysis would be required under CEQA to address site-specific environmental concerns. As described above, existing laws and regulations would require funding for the provision or expansion of new school facilities to offset impacts from new residential development. This impact would be less than significant, similar to what was analyzed in the 2015 EIR.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required because, like under the 2015 General Plan EIR, impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
Threshold 4: Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered parks, or the need for new or physically altered parks, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios or other performance objectives? Threshold 5: Would the proposed project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
Threshold 6: Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment?
Impact PS-4 DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD INCREASE THE POPULATION OF CARLSBAD AND THE USE OF EXISTING PARKS AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES. HOWEVER, NO
PLANS FOR THE EXPANSION OR CONSTRUCTION OF NEW PARKS OR RECREATIONAL FACILITIES ARE ANTICIPATED WITH THE PROPOSED PROJECT. THEREFORE, THIS IMPACT WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.
The proposed project would facilitate the development of 3,295 new residential units and add an estimated 8,260 residents to the city’s population. The project does not include recreational facilities. Similar to the analysis in the 2015 General Plan EIR, without the development of new parks, this increase in population would place additional physical demands on existing parks and facilities. An increase in the number of park users would cause parks to be in active use for longer periods of time and/or used more intensively over the course of a typical day. As a result, vital park elements such as vegetation, water resources, built structures, walking/biking paths, sport facilities, and others would face increased wear-and-tear over the course of the planning period and, without proper maintenance, their useful life could be shortened (City of Carlsbad 2015a).
As discussed above under Section 4.12.1d, Carlsbad currently has a sufficient parkland in each park district to meet the city’s GMP standard of three acres of parkland per 1,000 residents in each park district.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Public Services and Recreation
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.12-19
As stated in Section 4.11, Population and Housing, with implementation of the proposed project, Carlsbad would have 56,516 housing units at buildout. This equates to a population of 141,670. 3 With the increased population resulting from the project, the required park acreage compared to the current park acreage is shown in Table 4.12-2. Based on current population estimates at buildout, with the proposed project, two of the park districts, the northeast and southwest districts, would not meet the GMP standard of three acres per 1,000 residents.
Table 4.12-2 Parkland Acreage by Park District with the Proposed Project Park District
Quadrant
Population at Project
Buildout
Park Acreage Required at Project
Buildout1 Current Park Acreage
NW 43,086 129.2 131.7
NE 24,065 72.2 68.7
SW 31,229 93.7 93.6
SE 43,291 129.9 138.3
Total 141,670 425.0 432.4
1 Assuming a goal of 3 acres per 1,000 residents within the park district On July 26, 2022, the City Council approved the Veterans Memorial Park Master Plan and the park is funded; therefore, the park is “scheduled for construction.” Because of its size, centralized location, and citywide significance, the park will help fulfill citywide park facility needs. The city’s intention is for the park to be a citywide park facility, and for the total park acreage to be applied equally to all city quadrants dates to the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan approved in 1986 (See Resolution 8797, adopted September 23, 1986, Exhibit A at pp. 33–35). The park acreage in each park district includes 23.425 acres for Veterans Memorial Park. The city also has plans to construct a
11.2-acre Robertson Ranch Community Park located on the northeast corner of El Camino Real and Cannon Road in the future, which would help to accommodate the increase in population in the northeast quadrant. In addition, the future South Carlsbad Coastline Park of approximately 60 acres will help accommodate the increase in population in the southwest quadrant. Overall, with the planned park improvements, the city is projecting that there will be 519.7 acres of parkland and special use areas. The addition of the 11.2-acre Robertson Ranch Community Park in the northeast quadrant would address the deficiency in that district with the proposed project. Further, the addition of South Carlsbad Coastline Park would address the deficiency in the southwest quadrant.
Therefore, with implementation of the project and planned parks and recreational facilities and improvements, the city GMP standard of three acres per 1,000 residents for each park district.
Further, future development involving a subdivision would be required to comply with Chapter
20.44 of the CMC, which requires future project applicants to either dedicate land or pay the applicable parkland dedication in-lieu fee in order to mitigate impacts to parks and recreational facilities. Additionally, future development would be required to comply with policies 4-P.5b and 4- P.20 through 4-P.39 of the Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation Element of the General Plan, which would ensure the city actively seeks to preserve and expand parks to meet the needs of Carlsbad residents as well as meet the park standards outlined in the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan of the GMP.
3 The population is based on calculations developed by the city for the 2015 General Plan EIR to estimate population at buildout. The estimate assumes 2.63 persons per household, with a 5.5 percent vacancy rate, and 0.86 percent of residents as group quarters (56,516 *
2.63 * 0.945 *1.0086 = 141,670).
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.12-20
Therefore, the proposed project would not require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. Impacts would be less than significant, similar to the 2015 General Plan EIR.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required because, like under the 2015 EIR, impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
Threshold 7: Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered public facilities, or the need for new or physically altered public facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives?
Impact PS-5 DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD INCREASE THE POPULATION OF CARLSBAD AND THE USE OF EXISTING LIBRARY FACILITIES. HOWEVER, EXISTING LIBRARY FACILITIES WOULD HAVE SUFFICIENT CAPACITY TO ACCOMMODATE THE INCREASE IN POPULATION.
ADDITIONALLY, COMPLIANCE WITH GENERAL PLAN POLICIES WOULD REDUCE IMPACTS RELATED TO LIBRARY FACILITIES TO A LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT LEVEL.
As discussed above under Section 4.12.1e, the city currently has 99,993 square feet of library facilities, and a ratio of 849 square feet of library space per 1,000 residents which meets the standard of 800 square feet per 1,000 population.
The proposed project would facilitate the development of 8,260 new residents which would increase Carlsbad’s population from a current population of 117,800 people to 141,670 people in 2035, when also including growth that would be realized under the existing General Plan (see calculation under Impact PS-4). Therefore, in 2035 when accounting for project growth plus growth under the existing General Plan, the library ratio would be 705 square feet of library space per 1,000 residents. Under the GMP, the Citywide Facilities and Improvements Plan establishes a performance standard for library space equal to 800 square feet per 1,000 population. Therefore, with the project and expected growth under the 2015 General Plan, Carlsbad would be deficient in meeting the library space performance standard.
Pursuant to policies 7-G.8 and 7-P.23 of the Arts, History, Culture, and Education Element of the General Plan, the City would be required to ensure library facilities are expanded commensurate with the city’s population growth.
As discussed in the GMP FY 2021-22 GMP Monitoring Report, even without implementation of the proposed project, existing library facilities are expected to fall short of the growth management standard at buildout. Complete replacement of the Cole facility is included in the Capital Improvement Program budget between the years 2023 and buildout, as part of the new City Hall project. The City Hall project will most likely inform the timing, design, and opportunities for a new Cole library facility. Therefore, the city is contemplating replacing and modernizing library facilities and this would continue with implementation of the proposed project. At such time as the design and timing is finalized, a project-specific environmental analysis would be required under CEQA to address site-specific environmental concerns.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Public Services and Recreation
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.12-21
Overall, the proposed project itself would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the construction of new library facilities, and impacts would be less than significant, similar to the 2015 EIR.
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required because, like under the 2015 EIR, impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.
d. Cumulative Impacts
For these issue areas, cumulative development involves development under the proposed project in addition to growth projected under the 2015 General Plan.
Fire Protection
The project in combination with growth and buildout under the General Plan could increase population such that there is an increase in reported incidents, leading to longer response times unless the CFD increases staffing. As described above under Impact PS-1, with continued implementation of General Plan policies and Fire Code requirements, it is not anticipated that a new fire station is needed to serve cumulative development in Carlsbad. Therefore, the cumulative impacts related to fire protection facilities would be less than significant, and the proposed project’s contribution to these impacts would not be cumulatively considerable.
Police Protection
The project in combination with growth and buildout under the General Plan could increase population such that there is an increase in reported incidents, leading to longer response times unless the CPD increases staffing. Should additional staffing be needed to serve the areas around the project sites accounting for future cumulative development, staffing is reviewed each budget cycle and considers historical and current year information related to police services. Overall, although additional staffing may be needed, it is not anticipated that additional police department facilities would be needed to serve cumulative growth in the project areas. Therefore, the cumulative impacts related to police protection facilities would be less than significant, and the proposed project’s contribution to these impacts would not be cumulatively considerable.
Schools
Cumulative development would increase the number of children attending CUSD, SMUSD, EUESD, and SDUHSD schools. However, as stated in Impact PS-3, compliance with Senate Bill 50 would require applicants for future development in Carlsbad to pay school impact fees established to offset potential impacts from new development. Therefore, pursuant to CGC Section 65994(h), the cumulative impact relating to school capacity would be less than significant, and the project’s contribution to this impact would not be cumulatively considerable.
Parks and Recreational Facilities
Cumulative projects also would increase demand for park and recreational facilities. As discussed in Impact PS-4, existing parkland in and near Carlsbad is adequate to serve overall demand, and it is not anticipated that population growth from cumulative development would result in substantial deterioration of existing park facilities. The city also has plans to expand parkland and recreational City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.12-22
facilities within the Carlsbad such as the construction of Robertson Ranch Community Park which results in the park inventory for all city quadrants exceeding the projected required acreage at buildout. Additionally, future development involving a subdivision would be required to either dedicate land or pay the applicable parkland dedication in-lieu fee in order to mitigate impacts to parks and recreational facilities pursuant to Chapter 20.44 of the CMC. Therefore, cumulative development would not result in a significant impact related to parks, and the project would not make a considerable contribution to a cumulative impact.
Libraries
Cumulative development would increase the demand for library facilities. However, as discussed in Impact PS-5, the analysis takes into account development under the proposed project and growth under the 2015 General Plan. Although the city anticipates that cumulative growth would result in a deficiency of library space, the city is considering replacing and modernizing library facilities to meet changing community demand. Therefore, cumulative development would not result in a significant impact related to libraries beyond what is discussed under Impact PS-5, and the project would not make a considerable contribution to a cumulative impact.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Transportation
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.13-1
4.13 Transportation
This section builds off the 2015 General Plan EIR and evaluates effects on transportation in the Carlsbad region that would result from implementation of the proposed project. This section is based on the Fehr & Peers Transportation Modeling Considerations and Results memo, which is included in Appendix E.
4.13.1 Setting
a. Existing Road System
Regional accessibility to the city is provided primarily by local freeways (Interstate [I]-5 and State Route [SR]-78) via interchanges with local streets. Sub-regional accessibility is provided by regional arterial streets, such as El Camino Real, College Boulevard, Melrose Drive, Cannon Road, Palomar Airport Road, La Costa Avenue, and Rancho Santa Fe Road. Other key facilities, such as Carlsbad Village Drive, Carlsbad Boulevard, Poinsettia Lane, Aviara Parkway/Alga Road, serve some sub- regional traffic, but are primarily used to access unique areas of the city such as the Village, the lagoons, and the city’s coastline (City of Carlsbad 2014). b. Transit Service
Transit in Carlsbad includes North County Transit District (NCTD) bus service, Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) paratransit service, the COASTER commuter rail, and Amtrak rail service; indirectly, transit service is also provided by the NCTD Sprinter light rail system and Metrolink commuter rail.
Bus Service
NCTD bus service is referred to as their BREEZE service. BREEZE currently operates approximately nine bus routes within the city, including routes 101, 302, 304, 309, 323, 315/325, 444, 445, and 632. Buses generally operate on 30-minute to 60-minute headways depending on the day of the week. NCTD also offers LIFT, a curb-to-curb service for disabled persons who are unable to utilize the BREEZE serve and are certified as eligible to use the service, as required by the ADA.
COASTER Commuter Rail
This is a north-south commuter rail transit service connecting from Oceanside to Santa Fe Depot in San Diego. Carlsbad is served by two COASTER stations, one located north of Poinsettia Lane (just west of I-5) and the other is located in the Village area. The COASTER service primarily operates southbound on approximately 60-minute headways between 5:15 AM and 8:40 PM Monday through Friday. It operates northbound on approximately 60-minute headways between 6:40AM and 10:20 PM. It operates on reduced service hours on weekends and holidays with longer headways.
Sprinter
This is an east-west hybrid rail transit service connecting Oceanside to Escondido and many educational destinations such as Mira Costa College and California State University San Marcos.
Although the Sprinter does not run within the city limits, it runs just north of Carlsbad and connections are provided via the COASTER and Breeze services in addition to bicycle accessibility.
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.13-2
Amtrak
Amtrak is a national passenger rail service connecting San Diego to San Luis Obispo. The nearest Amtrak stop is in Oceanside, approximately 3 miles north of Carlsbad.
Metrolink
Metrolink is a commuter rail service serving Los Angeles, Orange, Riverside, and San Bernardino counties. The Orange County line connects to the COASTER line in Oceanside. c. Bicycle/Pedestrian Facilities
Bike facilities are categorized into four different classifications:
Class I Shared-Use Paths are bikeway facilities designated for exclusive use by bicycles and pedestrians. They are separated from roadways, usually designed for two-way travel, and are designed to minimize cross-flow by motor vehicles. Whenever practical, these paths should be at least 8 feet wide, paved with asphalt concrete, and have two-foot wide, graded shoulders made of aggregate base.
Class II Bike Lanes are areas within paved streets. They usually consist of adjacent one-way lanes on either side of the roadway for exclusive and semi-exclusive use by bicycles. At minimum, Class II bike lane facilities require four-foot wide lanes on both sides of the roadway where shoulders are present and five-foot wide lanes where curb and gutters are present. These facilities are for the exclusive use of bicycles where they are separated from the motor vehicle lane by a six-inch painted white stripe and designated with signs and permanent pavement markings. Shared use by motor vehicles within these facilities is only permissible where indicated by broken or dashed striping.
Class III Bike Routes are located in shared-use travel lanes with sufficient width for both motor vehicle and bicycle usage. Class III bike routes are usually only designated by signs or permanent pavement markings indicating the route.
Class IV Separated Bikeways are on-street facilities reserved for use by bicyclists, with physical separation between the bikeway and travel lanes. Separated bikeways – also known as cycle tracks – can be one-way facilities on both sides of the street or two-way facilities on one side of the street. Physical separation can include concrete curbs, landscaping, parking lanes, bollards, or other vertical elements. They differ from Class I shared-use paths and Class II bike lanes, as they are on-street but physically separated from vehicle traffic.
Bicycle travel in Carlsbad is currently provided via trails, Class I off-street bicycle paths, Class II on- street bicycle lanes, and Class III on-street bicycle routes. New Class IV separated bikeways are planned for in the city’s Sustainable Mobility Plan (discussed in Section 4.13.2, Regulatory Setting).
Class II bike lanes are the most common in Carlsbad and are present on main streets throughout the city. Pedestrian travel within the city is provided via sidewalks, crosswalks, and dedicated pedestrian trails. There are approximately 651 miles of sidewalk and 3.2 miles of multi-use path within the city (City of Carlsbad 2020). In total, 73 miles of roadway throughout the city are without sidewalks or with substandard sidewalks. These areas include small neighborhood streets and wide, high-speed corridors (City of Carlsbad 2020). Additionally, the city’s design criteria have provided sidewalks along most facilities within the city, but some streets that were developed prior to the city’s incorporation lack sidewalks.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Transportation
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.13-3
Additionally, several pedestrian and bicycle barriers exist in Carlsbad that prohibit direct travel in the city. Although some of these barriers are natural in nature (such as the topography of the inland area and the city’s three lagoons), some of the barriers are man-made (such as I-5 and the railroad).
4.13.2 Regulatory Setting
a. Federal
There are no federal regulations that are relevant to the proposed project. b. State
California Department of Transportation Planning Documents Caltrans is responsible for planning, designing, constructing, operating, and maintaining the State highway system. Federal highway standards are implemented in California by Caltrans. Any improvements or modifications to the highway system, including ramps and access points, within the study area would need to be approved by Caltrans. The following Caltrans planning documents emphasize the State of California’s focus on transportation infrastructure that supports mobility choice through multimodal options, smart growth, and efficient development. Smart Mobility 2010: A Call to Action for the New Decade (Smart Mobility Framework) Caltrans Deputy Directive 64-R1
Local Development Intergovernmental Review
Strategic Plan 2020-2024
California Transportation Plan 2050
Smart Mobility Framework
The purpose of the Smart Mobility Framework, published in February 2010, is to address the State mandate to find solutions to climate change, reduce VMT per resident, and create a safe and equitable transportation system (Caltrans 2010). The Smart Mobility Framework includes 10 implementing themes to achieve its purpose, including integration into Caltrans and other transportation agencies’ policy and practice, collection of data and tools to implement the Smart Mobility Framework, undertaking of major cross-functional initiatives, and integration into local government land use and transportation planning.
Caltrans Deputy Directive 64-R1: Complete Streets – Integrating the Transportation System
In 2001, Caltrans adopted Deputy Directive 64; a policy directive related to non-motorized travel throughout the State. In October 2008, Deputy Directive 64 was strengthened to reflect changing priorities and challenges. Deputy Directive 64-R1 states:
The Department views all transportation improvements as opportunities to improve safety, access, and mobility for all travelers in California and recognizes bicycle, pedestrian, and transit modes as integral elements of the transportation system. Providing safe mobility for all users, including motorists, bicyclists, pedestrians and transit riders, contributes to the Department's mission/vision: "Improving Mobility across California.” City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.13-4
Successful long-term implementation of this directive is intended to result in more options for people to go from one place to another, less traffic congestion and greenhouse gas emissions, more walkable communities (with healthier, more active people), and fewer barriers for older adults, children, and people with disabilities.
Local Development Intergovernmental Review (LDIGR) Safety Practitioners In December 2020, Caltrans issued Traffic Safety Bulletin 20-02-R1 announcing the release of the “Interim Local Development Intergovernmental Review Safety Review Practitioners Guidance (LDIGR Safety Review Practitioners Guide).” This new guidance material provides instructions to Caltrans personnel, lead agencies, developers, and consultants for conducting safety impact analysis for proposed land use projects and plans in compliance with CEQA. The guidance sets expectations for Caltrans staff and lead agencies about what information and factors to consider in safety impact analysis with a focus on potential safety impacts affecting the California State Highway System (SHS). Integrating safety in the Caltrans land development and intergovernmental review process helps to solidify a culture of safety in California through the Safe System approach.
Caltrans recommends lead agencies use systemic safety plans, specifically Local Roadway Safety Plans (LRSPs), Systemic Safety Analysis Reports (SSARs), and Vision Zero plans, as models for safety analysis of the local transportation network. These plans can help local jurisdictions obtain resources to improve safety in their communities, and they will now be an input to assessing the potential safety impacts of new land use projects and land use plans.
Strategic Plan 2020-2024
Caltrans’ 2020-2024 Strategic Plan weaved sustainability principles through all of its goals. Goals of the Strategic Plan are related to safety, enhancing and connecting the multimodal transportation network, lead climate action, and advancing equity in all communities (Caltrans 2021a).
California Transportation Plan 2050
Caltrans completed the California Transportation Plan to comply with Title 23, Code of Federal Regulation Section 450.214 and pursuant to California Government Code Title 7 Division 1 Chapter
2.3. The California Transportation Plan provides a roadmap for making effective, equitable, transparent, and transformational transportation decisions in California. The vision of the California Transportation Plan is: “California’s safe, resilient, and universally accessible transportation system supports vibrant communities, advances racial and economic justice, and improves public and environmental health,” which is supported by goals related to safety, climate, equity, accessibility, public health, economy, environment, and infrastructure (Caltrans 2021b).
California Encroachment Permits
Any work within the existing right of way would have to comply with Caltrans permitting requirements. This includes a traffic control plan that adheres to the standards set forth in the California Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD). As part of these requirements, there are provisions for coordination with local emergency services, training for flagmen for emergency vehicles traveling through the work zone, temporary lane separators that have sloping sides to facilitate crossover by emergency vehicles, and vehicle storage and staging areas for emergency vehicles. MUTCD requirements also provide for construction work during off-peak hours and flaggers.
Environmental Impact Analysis
Transportation
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.13-5
AB 1358 – California Complete Streets Act of 2008
Supporting some of the previously referenced regulations/requirements, the California Complete Streets Act of 2008 (AB 1358) requires circulation elements as of January 1, 2011, to accommodate the transportation system from a multi-modal perspective, including public transit, walking and biking, which have traditionally been marginalized in comparison to autos in contemporary American urban planning.
SB 375
The Sustainable Communities Strategy and Climate Protection Act of 2008, SB 375, is a law passed in 2008 by the California legislature that requires each Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) to demonstrate, through the development of a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS), how its region will integrate transportation, housing, and land use planning to meet the GHG reduction targets set by the state. In addition to creating requirements for MPOs, it also creates requirements for the California Transportation Commission and California Air Resources Board (CARB). For Carlsbad, the MPO is San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG).
SB 743
SB 743 resulted in several statewide CEQA changes. It required the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) to establish new metrics for determining the significance of transportation impacts of projects within transit priority areas (TPAs) and allows OPR to extend use of the metrics beyond TPAs. OPR selected VMT as the preferred transportation impact metric and applied their discretion to require its use statewide. This legislation also established that aesthetic and parking effects of residential, mixed-use residential, or employment center projects on an infill site within a TPA are not significant impacts on the environment. The revised CEQA Guidelines that implement this legislation became effective on December 28, 2018, and state that vehicle level of service (LOS) and similar measures related to delay shall not be used as the sole basis for determining the significance of transportation impacts. Finally, the legislation establishes a new CEQA exemption for a residential, mixed-use, and employment center project a) within a TPA, b) consistent with a specific plan for which an EIR has been certified, and c) consistent with an SCS. This exemption requires further review if the project or circumstances change significantly.
To aid in SB 743 implementation, the following state guidance has been produced:
Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (OPR 2018) The 2022 Scoping Plan-Identified VMT Reductions and Relationship to State Climate Goals (CARB 2022)
Interim Land Development and Intergovernmental Review (LDIGR) Safety Review Practitioners Guidance (July 2020)
OPR’s guidance on application of SB 743 indicates that a VMT impact is significant if VMT per resident remains above 15 percent below the existing regional average or the existing citywide average for residential projects consistent with the SCS. The CARB 2022 Scoping Plan for Achieving Carbon Neutrality identified VMT reductions and relationship to state climate goals and is relevant for transportation impact analysis of the project. It provides recommendations for VMT reductions that would be necessary to achieve the state’s GHG reduction goals and acknowledges that the SCS targets alone are not sufficient to meet climate goals.
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update
4.13-6
c. Local
SANDAG Regional Plan
SANDAG is the regional transportation planning agency in San Diego County. As such, they are responsible for planning and funding transportation projects throughout the region. SANDAG adopted its most recent regional plan on December 10, 2021. The following projects have been identified in the Carlsbad area to improve mobility:
Peak period bus rapid transit (BRT) on I-5 and along an east-west corridor somewhere near, on or parallel to, Palomar Airport Road
Managed lanes on I-5 and SR-78 (including upgrades to the I-5/SR-78 interchange) City of Carlsbad Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis Guidelines The City of Carlsbad’s VMT Analysis Guidelines for CEQA were updated on October 3, 2022. The guidelines describe a methodology for compliance with the requirements of SB 743 regarding analysis of VMT for land use projects that are subject to the CEQA. This guidance is intended to provide methodology by which Land Use Projects will be evaluated and assist the City of Carlsbad in its CEQA VMT analyses. It indicates that a VMT impact is significant for a residential project if the project VMT per resident exceeds a level 15 percent below the city average VMT per resident.
Carlsbad General Plan
The current Carlsbad General Plan, adopted in 2015, includes multiple policies related to transportation in the Mobility Element. The following policies are applicable to the proposed project (City of Carlsbad 2015):
Mobility Element
Policy 3-P.1 Implement a comprehensive livable streets network. This network, as outlined in Table 3-1 and shown on Figure 3-1 [of the 2015 General Plan], identifies the transportation modes that shall be accommodated, based on street typology, to ensure accessibility to the city’s street system to persons of all ages and abilities.
Policy 3-P.2 Integrate livable streets in all capital improvement projects, where applicable, as well as new development projects.
Policy 3-P.3 Apply and update the city’s multi-modal level of service (MMLOS) methodology and guidelines that reflect the core values of the Carlsbad Community Vision related to transportation and connectivity. Utilize the MMLOS methodology to evaluate impacts of individual development projects and amendments to the General Plan on the city’s transportation system
Policy 3-P.4 Implement the city’s MMLOS methodology and maintain LOS D or better for each mode of travel for which the MMLOS standard is applicable, as identified in Table 3- 1 and Figure 3-1.