2024-01-30; City Council; Resolution 2024-014 — Carlsbad City Council, January 30, 2024 (part 2 of 7)

Several of the rezone sites are within master or specific plans. These plans provide a comprehensive set of guidelines, regulations, and implementation programs for ensuring development of a specific site or area in accordance with the city’s General Plan, CMC, and other applicable planning documents. Often, master and specific plans provide more tailored objectives and standards than possible through city-wide documents such as the Zoning Ordinance. Examples of such plans include the Bressi Ranch Master Plan, Village and Barrio Master Plan, and Westfield Carlsbad Specific Plan. Rezone sites 1, 2, 7, 10, 11, 14, 15 and 19 are all within master or specific plans. This includes:
 Site 1 – North County Plaza Specific Plan
 Site 2 – Westfield Carlsbad Specific Plan
 Site 7 – Fenton Carlsbad Center Specific Plan
 Site 10 – Bressi Ranch Master Plan
 Site 11 – Bressi Ranch Master Plan
 Site 14 – Village and Barrio Master Plan
 Site 15 – Village and Barrio Master Plan
 Site 19 – Green Valley Master Plan
These plans require amendment as necessary to ensure consistency with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance and Map as proposed by this project. The plans that would be amended with the proposed project include the following (no changes to the Village and Barrio Master Plan are proposed as part of the project):

1. Bressi Ranch Master Plan

2. Green Valley Master Plan

3. Fenton Carlsbad Center Speciﬁc Plan

4. North County Plaza Speciﬁc Plan

5. Wes�ield Carlsbad Speciﬁc Plan
Revisions to the Draft SEIR

Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 3-11
Section 3, Environmental Setting
Table 3-1 on pages 3-1 to 3-3 have been revised as follows:

Table 3-1 Rezone Site Characteristics
Site # Location
Approximate
Site Size Existing Use and Site Features
Site 1 North County Plaza 19 acres The site includes a shopping center (North County Plaza) developed with stores, restaurants and other businesses. The site is east of Buena Vista Lagoon and partially includes Buena Vista Creek. An application to develop a portion of the site with residential and new commercial uses has been submitted to the city. This site is within the North County Plaza Specific Plan area.

Most of the site is also in the Coastal Zone.

Site 2 The Shoppes at
Carlsbad parking lot
57 acres The site is owned by the city and encompasses the parking lots for The Shoppes at Carlsbad mall and a North County Transit District transit station. The northwest corner of the site includes Buena Vista Creek and its associated riparian habitat and floodplain area.

This site is within the Westfield Carlsbad Specific Plan area.

Site 3 Chestnut at El Camino
Real

2.5 acres The site consists of three vacant properties. The site contains slopes and potential biological resources.

Site 4 Zone 15 Cluster 27.7 acres The site includes two separate properties currently used for an RV storage lot, a house, and outbuildings. The site is mostly undeveloped. The northern portion of the site includes a Proposed Hardline and a Standards Area, which are designated for future conservation in the Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan. The Proposed Hardline has been approved as a biological mitigation site for the future extension of College Blvd and is designated as Open Space. This site is within a Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone.

Site 5 Avenida Encinas Car
Storage Lot
2 acres The site is currently occupied with a car storage lot. The site is almost entirely developed with paved surfaces. The site is in proximity of I-5 and the railway. It is also within 0.5-mile walking distance of the beach. This site is within the Coastal Zone.

Site 6 Crossings Golf Course
Lot 5

11.4 acres The site is a vacant and undeveloped City-owned property that was graded as part of the Carlsbad Golf Course development. A portion of the site is steeply sloped, and the developable portion of the site is approximately 6.8 acres. This site is partially within the Coastal Zone.

Site 7 Salk Avenue 9.8 acres The site has been graded but is currently vacant and undeveloped.

The site contains manufactured slopes and vegetation. This site is within the Fenton Carlsbad Center Specific Plan area.

Site 8 Cottage Row
Apartments

11.9 acres The site is developed with 24 duplex apartments. Portions of the site are undeveloped. The project site is in the Coastal Zone and undeveloped portions contain potential biological resources. The site includes a relatively flat area bordered by steep slopes. This site is within the Coastal Zone.

Site 9 West Oaks Industrial 10.8 acres The site consists of nine separate but adjacent parcels, some of which have been graded, but are undeveloped. The westernmost parcel is an Existing Hardline, and a portion of the remaining lots north of West Oaks Way are a Proposed Hardline in the Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan. A powerline easement and Encinas Creek traverse the site. In 2021, the city approved “West Oaks,” a City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

3-12
Site # Location
Approximate
Site Size Existing Use and Site Features
192-unit apartment project on this site. Most of the site is within the Coastal Zone.

Site 10 Bressi Ranch Colt
Place

2.6 acres The site is a previously graded but vacant lot located between residential developments. Approximately 0.6 acres of the site is restricted by McClellan-Palomar Airport Safety Zone 2. This site is within the Bressi Ranch Master Plan area.

Site 11 Bressi Ranch Gateway
Road

5.3 acres The site consists of two vacant and undeveloped parcels adjacent to industrial and commercial uses. This site is within the Bressi Ranch Master Plan area.

Site 12 Industrial Sites East of
Melrose

14.1 acres The site consists of two separate but adjacent properties north of Palomar Airport Road. One of the sites is undeveloped but has been previously graded. The other site is developed with a parking lot.

Site 14 Carlsbad Village
COASTER Station

7.8 acres The site is developed with a parking lot that serves the Carlsbad Village Coaster Station and also features vacant, graded land north of the parking lot. The site lies between the Carlsbad Boulevard bridge to a point approximately 200 feet north of the station. It is owned by North County Transit District. This site is within the Village and Bario Master Plan area.

Site 15 City's Oak Yard 1.3 acres The site is owned by the city and is currently developed with a public works maintenance and operations yard. The site is bordered by existing commercial and industrial development and, to the west, railroad tracks. It is three blocks south of the Carlsbad Village Train Station. This site is within the Village and Bario Master Plan area.

Site 16 Caltrans Maintenance
Station and Pacific
Sales

6.9 acres The site consists of two adjacent parcels. The northern parcel is developed with a Caltrans maintenance station and the southern, privately-owned parcel is occupied by commercial use. The eastern portion of the southern parcel is undeveloped and both sites are generally flat. This site is within the Coastal Zone.

Site 17 Poinsettia COASTER
Station

5.8 acres The site is developed with transit facilities and 341 parking spaces for transit riders and is owned by the North County Transit District.

The site is bordered by railroad tracks to the west and mixed-use development to the east. This site is within the Coastal Zone.

Site 18 North Ponto Parcels 5.95.8 acres The site consists of eight vacant properties which include self- storage and undeveloped areas. The site is generally flat and is bounded by railroad on the eastern side. The city approved 86 apartments on the north three parcels of Site 18 in May 20222023.

This site is within the Coastal Zone.

Site 19 La Costa Glen/Forum 7.8 acres The site is primarily vacant and partially developed with a parking lot. The site has been previously graded. There are no known physical constraints to development as previously present slopes within the project site have been graded. This site is within the Coastal Zone, a Very High Fire Hazards Severity Zone, and within the Green Valley Master Plan area
Note: Site 13 removed from Housing Site Inventory and is not included within this SEIR.

Revisions to the Draft SEIR

Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 3-13
Section 4.1, Aesthetics

Page 4 ends

Specific and Master Plans
The city uses specific plans and master plans 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 Master Plan (described below) guides development in that area. The North County Plaza Specific Plan, Westfield Carlsbad Specific Plan, Fenton Carlsbad Center Specific Plan, Bressi Ranch Master Plan, Village and Barrio Master Plan, and Green Valley Master Plan are described below. There are also many older specific plans and master plans that have been fully implemented.

North County Plaza Specific Plan, 2011
The purpose of this Specific Plan is to amend the previously adopted SP-41 (Ordinance No. 9334) and to provide a comprehensive development plan for the area between Marron Road and Buena Vista Creek, west of Plaza Camino Real. This plan is to ensure that development of this area takes into consideration adjacent and neighboring properties, existing developments, and future development. This Specific Plan is intended to be a tool to implement the goals and policies of the City's General Plan.

Westfield Carlsbad Specific Plan, 2014
The purpose of the Westfield Carlsbad Specific Plan (WCSP) is to provide a comprehensive set of development standards, guidelines, and implementation procedures to facilitate the redevelopment, revitalization and operations of Westfield Carlsbad (WC) consistent with the existing General Plan Designation of Regional Commercial. Westfield Carlsbad is a super regional shopping center with approximately 1,151,100 square feet of gross leasable area (1,348,500 square feet of gross floor area (including common access areas)) featuring major department stores, specialty retail shops and restaurants. The plan allows Westfield Carlsbad the flexibility to meet the progressive and changing commercial, entertainment and service needs of the residents of Carlsbad and coastal north county region. The plans and exhibits provided in this specific plan provide a framework for future development at Westfield Carlsbad. The WCSP provides development and design guidelines. In addition, the WCSP permits residential in a multi-family and mixed use format.

Fenton Carlsbad Center Specific Plan, 2008
The 48.54-acre Fenton Carlsbad Center Specific Plan area is located on Salk Avenue, between El Camino Real and College Boulevard. The purpose of this Fenton Carlsbad Center Specific Plan (FCCSP) is to address the need for a full mix of office and medical facilities within Carlsbad, to serve both residents and the daily workforce. FCCSP only seeks to define the allowable type of land uses and does not provide development standards or design standards above and beyond City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

3-14
those of the Office Zone; the plan does include several implementation measures that future projects will need to comply with in addition to those of the base zone.

Bressi Ranch Master Plan, 2016
The Bressi Ranch Master Plan covers 585.1 acres and is located at the southeast corner of Palomar Airport Road and El Camino Real within the southeast quadrant of the City of Carlsbad.

The purpose of the Bressi Ranch Master Plan (also referred to as Master Plan) is to provide for a comprehensive set of guidelines, regulations and implementation programs for ensuring the development of Bressi Ranch in accordance with the City's General Plan, Municipal Code and other applicable planning documents. The Bressi Ranch Master Plan defines the allowable type and intensity of land uses, provides detailed development and design criteria, and describes how the Master Plan will be implemented.

Carlsbad Village and Barrio Master Plan, 2019
The Carlsbad Village and Barrio Master Plan (City of Carlsbad 2019) replaces the Village Master Plan and Design Manual which was originally approved in 1995 and most recently revised in 2017. The plan establishes the land use, zoning, design, and long-range strategy for the Carlsbad Village and Barrio areas. The Carlsbad Village and Barrio Master Plan, together with other implementing ordinances, also serve as the Local Coastal Program for the Coastal Zone-portions of the Carlsbad Village and Barrio, pursuant to requirements of the California Coastal Act. The Carlsbad Village and Barrio Master Plan articulates a vision for neighborhoods that:
 Serve as the historic heart of the city, honoring Carlsbad’s past and creating a strong sense of community.
 Are connected in place and spirit, yet retain their unique personalities.  Embody the principles of smart growth, with a mix of commercial and residential land uses, a variety of housing choices, walkable neighborhoods and multiple transportation options.  Attract high quality, sustainable development that enhances vitality and local character.

Sites 14 and 15 are within the Carlsbad Village and Barrio Master Plan area.

Green Valley Master Plan, 1996
The Green Valley Master Plan serves as the development and preservation policy and design guidelines for the Green Valley property, which encompasses approximately 281 gross acres in southwestern Carlsbad. The Green Valley site is physically characterized by three distinct areas:
(1) a linear riparian woodland area which is parallel and adjacent to El Camino Real; (2) an area of gently sloping open fields which is located to the west of the riparian woodland area; and (3) an area of moderate to steep slopes which is located in the western portion of the property. The western portion of Green Valley is characterized by moderate to steep slopes with three small canyons draining to the east. The highest elevations on-site are along the western boundary.

Development of Green Valley is subject to all applicable ordinances, regulations, and policies of the City of Carlsbad, except as may be specifically discussed in this Master Plan and/or the Local Coastal Program. An objective of the Master Plan is to “Guide the visual transition from undeveloped to developed lands through the use of building form, color, and materials.” The Master Plan includes general community design standards and specific design directions for each Planning Area.

Revisions to the Draft SEIR

Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 3-15
Section 4.3, Biological Resources
Mitigation Measure BIO-7, HMP Minor Amendments, on Page 4.3-31, has been revised as follows:

BIO-7 HMP Minor Amendments
Prior to project approval at Site 4, 6, 7, 9 and 17, each project shall be analyzed for consistency with the HMP in coordination with responsible agencies including CDFW and USFWS.

Development may not occur within an Existing or Proposed Hardline. Any revisions to the HMP hardline boundary to allow for development on these sites shall require a HMP Minor Amendment, to be processed as an Equivalency Finding. Such boundary revisions must not involve any revisions the HMP operations or implementation, produce any adverse effects on the environment that are new or significantly different from those previously analyzed, result in additional take not previously analyzed, or reduce the acreage or quality of the habitat within the HMP. Any loss of HMP hardline shall be replaced with equal or greater acres of hardline, adjacent to existing hardline elsewhere in the city, and preserved and managed in accordance with the HMP. Any development within the Standards Area portion of Site 4 shall require a HMP Minor Amendment, to be processed as a Consistency Finding, which requires consistency with the HMP Planning Standards for Local Facilities Management Zone 15.

Section 4.4, Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
Table 4.4-2 has been revised as follows:

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 Unknown
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
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

3-16
Site APN Location Construction Date Eligibility Status
7 2120210400 Salk Avenue parcel,
Salk Avenue at Fermi
Court
Vacant N/A
8 2120404700 Cottage Row, 1400
Plame Tree Lane
Circa 1978 Unknown
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 N/A
11 2132631900;
2132632000
Bressi Ranch Gateway
Road industrial
parcels, Gateway
Road at Palomar
Airport Road
Vacant Unknown N/A
12 2210140300;
2210150800
Industrial sites east of
Melrose Drive, 5980
Eagle Dr
Vacant Unknown N/A
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;
North Ponto Parcels,
7200 Ponto Drive
Circa 1964 (2141711100);
circa 1978 (2141602500)
Unknown
Revisions to the Draft SEIR
Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 3-17
Site APN Location Construction Date Eligibility Status
2160100200;
2160100300;
2160100400;
2160100500
19 2550120500 Vacant and parking
lot for La Costa
Glen/Forum, Calle
Barcelona west of El
Camino Real
N/A Vacant
N/A
Source: NETROnline 2022
Notes:
“Vacant” indicates no built environment structures present. “N/A” indicates not available or not applicable. The site is vacant and no built environment structure is present; or, a built environment feature or structure is present but it would not become of-age over the course project. “Unknown” indicates the site has an of-age building or structure for which no eligibility information is available. Therefore, it is unknown if the structure is eligible for listing on a historical resources list.

Pages 4.4-25 through 4.27 have been revised as follows:

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 D EVELOPMENT 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 AND WITH IMPLEMENTATION OF MITIGATION.

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 City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

3-18
Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidelines. No mitigation is required. Nonetheless, this impact is potentially significant.

Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required because, like under the 2015 General Plan EIR, impacts would be less than significant without mitigation. The following mitigation is required:

Mitigation Measure CUL-1 Tribal Cultural Resources
Projects subject to discretionary actions shall comply with the city's Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Resources Guidelines. For ministerial projects, the city shall provide Traditionally and Culturally Affiliated Luiseño tribes (“TCA Tribe”) with early notification and the opportunity to consult on development applications and identify and assess impacts to tribal and cultural resources. Further, before commencement of any ground-disturbing activities, the project developer shall comply with the following requirements to ensure the appropriate response to the presence of any tribal and cultural resources:
b. Retain the services of a qualified archaeologist who shall be on-site for ground-disturbing activities. In the event cultural material is encountered, the archaeologist is empowered to temporarily divert or halt grading to allow for coordination with the Luiseño Native American monitor and to determine the significance of the discovery. The archaeologist shall follow all standard procedures for cultural materials that are not Tribal Cultural Resources.
d. Enter into a Pre-Excavation Agreement, otherwise known as a Tribal Cultural Resources Treatment and Tribal Monitoring Agreement, with a TCA tribe. This agreement will address provision of a Luiseño Native American monitor and contain provisions to address the proper treatment of any tribal cultural resources and/or Luiseño Native American human remains inadvertently discovered during the course of the project. The Agreement will outline the roles and powers of the Luiseño Native American monitors and the archaeologist and may include the following provisions.
i. A Luiseño Native American monitor shall be present during all ground-disturbing activities. Ground disturbing activities may include, but are not limited to, archaeological studies, geotechnical investigations, exploratory geotechnical investigations/borings for contractor bidding purposes, clearing, grubbing, trenching, excavation, preparation for utilities and other infrastructure, and grading activities. ii. Any and all uncovered artifacts of Luiseño Native American cultural importance shall be returned to the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians or other Luiseño Tribe, and/or the Most Likely Descendant, if applicable, and not be curated, unless ordered to do so by a federal agency or a court of competent jurisdiction.
iii. The Luiseño Native American monitor shall be present at the project’s pre-construction meeting to consult with grading and excavation contractors concerning excavation schedules and safety issues, as well as to consult with the archaeologist PI (principal investigator) concerning the proposed archaeologist techniques and/or strategies for the project.
iv. Luiseño Native American monitors and archaeological monitors shall have joint authority to temporarily divert and/or halt construction activities. If tribal cultural Revisions to the Draft SEIR

Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 3-19
resources are discovered during construction, all earthmoving activity within and around the immediate discovery area must be diverted until the Luiseño Native American monitor and the archaeologist can assess the nature and significance of the find.
v. If a significant tribal cultural resource(s) and/or unique archaeological resource(s) are discovered during ground-disturbing activities for this project, the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians or other Luiseño tribe shall be notified and consulted regarding the respectful and dignified treatment of those resources. Pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 21083.2(b) avoidance is the preferred method of preservation for archaeological and tribal cultural resources. If, however, the Applicant is able to demonstrate that avoidance of a significant and/or unique cultural resource is infeasible and a data recovery plan is authorized by the City of Carlsbad as the lead agency, the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians or other Luiseño tribe shall be consulted regarding the drafting and finalization of any such recovery plan. vi. When tribal cultural resources are discovered during the project, if the archaeologist collects such resources, a Luiseño Native American monitor must be present during any testing or cataloging of those resources. If the archaeologist does not collect the tribal cultural resources that are unearthed during the ground disturbing activities, the Luiseño Native American monitor may, at their discretion, collect said resources and provide them to the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians or other Luiseño tribe for dignified and respectful treatment in accordance with their cultural and spiritual traditions.
vii. If suspected Native American human remains are encountered, California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5(b) states that no further disturbance shall occur until the San Diego County Medical Examiner has made the necessary findings as to origin.

Further, pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98(b) remains shall be left in place and free from disturbance until a final decision as to the treatment and disposition has been made. Suspected Native American remains shall be examined in the field and kept in a secure location at the site. A Luiseño Native American monitor shall be present during the examination of the remains. If the San Diego County Medical Examiner determines the remains to be Native American, NAHC must be contacted by the Medical Examiner within 24 hours. The NAHC must then immediately notify the “Most Likely Descendant” about the discovery. The Most Likely Descendant shall then make recommendations within 48 hours and engage in consultation concerning treatment of remains as provided in Public Resources Code 5097.98. viii. In the event that fill material is imported into the project area, the fill shall be clean of tribal cultural resources and documented as such. Commercial sources of fill material are already permitted as appropriate and will be culturally sterile. If fill material is to be utilized and/or exported from areas within the project site, then that fill material shall be analyzed and confirmed by an archaeologist and Luiseño Native American monitor that such fill material does not contain tribal cultural resources. ix. No testing, invasive or non-invasive, shall be permitted on any recovered tribal cultural resources without the written permission of the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians or other Luiseño tribe.

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

3-20
x. Prior to the completion of project construction, a monitoring report and/or evaluation report, if appropriate, which describes the results, analysis, and conclusions of the monitoring program shall be submitted by the Project Archaeologist, along with the Luiseño Native American monitor’s notes and comments, to the City of Carlsbad for approval, and shall be submitted to the South Coastal Information Center. Said report shall be subject to confidentiality as an exception to the Public Records Act and will not be available for public distribution.
e. Furthermore, the Agreement may include additional measures mutually agreed upon by the project developer, city, and TCA Tribe such as evaluation of the project site’s pre- construction conditions for the presence or potential presence of TCRs as well as other measures tailored to and deemed necessary for the specific project.

Significance after Mitigation
Implementation of Mitigation Measure CUI-1 would reduce potential impacts to tribal cultural resources from development facilitated by the proposed project to less than significant levels.

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 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 c. Cumulative Impacts
Revisions to the Draft SEIR

Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 3-21
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, and with implementation of project specific mitigation, cumulative impacts would be less than significant, and the proposed project would not result in a considerable contribution to this cumulative impact.

Section 4.8, Hydrology and Water Quality
Figure 4.8-4 on Page 4.8-7 (Section 4.8.1d, Hydrologic Hazards – Flood Hazards) has been updated to the following map:

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

3-22
Figure 4.8-1 Tsunami Hazard Areas in Carlsbad

:_ . . J City Limit s
Highway
~
-D
-
Majo r Street
Planned St reet
Railroad
Maximum Tsunami
Projected Runup
Tsunam i Hazard Zone
Tsunam i Design Zone
Potential Housing Sites •
* Site 13 was desigllated as a low priority sire
by the Ciry Councll and is therefore not
shown on this mop
0 0.75 N 1.5 J\
'-----,M,-,+ilte- ,----'I ~
Imagery provided by Esri cmcl its liceosors © 2023.

Additional dora provided by City of Carlsbad, 2011 ; CG5, 1022; AS Cf Tsunami Hazard Tool, 2012 .

Revisions to the Draft SEIR

Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 3-23
Section 4.9, Land Use and Planning

Page 4 ends

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. The North County Plaza Specific Plan, Westfield Carlsbad Specific Plan, Fenton Carlsbad Center Specific Plan, Bressi Ranch Master Plan, Village and Barrio Master Plan, and Green Valley Master Plan are described below.

Westfield Carlsbad Specific Plan, 2014
The purpose of the Westfield Carlsbad Specific Plan (WCSP) is to provide a comprehensive set of development standards, guidelines, and implementation procedures to facilitate the redevelopment, revitalization and operations of Westfield Carlsbad (WC) consistent with the existing General Plan Designation of Regional Commercial. Westfield Carlsbad is a super regional shopping center with approximately 1,151,100 square feet of gross leasable area (1,348,500 square feet of gross floor area (including common access areas)) featuring major department stores, specialty retail shops and restaurants. The plan allows Westfield Carlsbad the flexibility to meet the progressive and changing commercial, entertainment and service needs of the residents of Carlsbad and coastal north county region. The plans and exhibits provided in this specific plan provide a framework for future development at Westfield Carlsbad. The WCSP defines allowable types and intensity of land uses. In addition, the WCSP permits residential in a multi-family and mixed use format.

Fenton Carlsbad Center Specific Plan, 2008
The 48.54-acre Fenton Carlsbad Center Specific Plan area is located on Salk Avenue, between El Camino Real and College Boulevard. The purpose of this Fenton Carlsbad Center Specific Plan (FCCSP) is to address the need for a full mix of office and medical facilities within Carlsbad, to serve both residents and the daily workforce. FCCSP only seeks to define the allowable type of City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

3-24
land uses and does not provide development standards or design standards above and beyond those of the Office Zone; the plan does include several implementation measures that future projects will need to comply with in addition to those of the base zone. The plan provides for a mix of office uses and proportional amount of medical office uses within the city’s central employment area and also within close proximity to residentially zoned areas.

The purpose of the Bressi Ranch Master Plan is to provide for a comprehensive set of guidelines, regulations and implementation programs for ensuring the development of Bressi Ranch in accordance with the City’s General Plan, Municipal Code and other applicable planning documents. The Bressi Ranch Master Plan defines the allowable type and intensity of land uses, provides detailed development and design criteria, and describes how the Master Plan will be implemented. A primary goal of the Bressi Ranch Master Plan is to create a pedestrian oriented community where the use of the automobile can be minimized. The Master Plan has a strong mixed-use component that includes residential, commercial and office/industrial uses in close proximity.

Sites 14 and 15 are within the Carlsbad Village and Barrio Master Plan area.

Green Valley Master Plan, 1996
The Green Valley Master Plan serves as the development and preservation policy and design guidelines for the Green Valley property, which encompasses approximately 281 gross acres in southwestern Carlsbad. Development of Green Valley is subject to all applicable ordinances, regulations, and policies of the City of Carlsbad, except as may be specifically discussed in this Master Plan and/or the Local Coastal Program. An objective of the Master Plan is to “Guide the visual transition from undeveloped to developed lands through the use of building form, color, and materials.” The Master Plan includes general community design standards and specific design directions for each Planning Area. The goal of this Master Plan is to ensure a high quality Revisions to the Draft SEIR

Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 3-25
development which will preserve the Existing environmental resources, to the greatest extent possible, and to provide commercial retail and housing opportunities for area residents.

Section 4.10, Noise

Page 4 ends

revised as follows:

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), such as Policy

2.11.1b(3) which states that residential infill development shall not be allowed where the dwellings would be exposed to noise levels of more than 70 dB CNEL; and Policy 3.3.3(b), which states that the maximum airport-related noise level considered compatible for new residential development in the environs of the Airport is 65 dB CNEL. 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.

Section 4.13, Transportation

Page 4 ends

NCTD fixed-route bus service is referred to as their BREEZE service. BREEZE NCTD currently operates approximately nine twelve BREEZE bus routes within the city, including routes 101, 302, 304, 309, 315, 323, 315/325, 444, 445, 604, 609, and 632 623. Buses generally operate on 3020-minute to 60-minute headways depending on the day of the week. NCTD also offers LIFT, a curb-to-curb service for disabled persons with disabilities who are unable to utilize the BREEZE serve fixed-route services and are certified as eligible to use the service, as required by the ADA.

Page 4 ends

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 headway times that vary from 20 minutes to 80 minutes from Monday to Friday with shorter headway times during busiest hours approximately 60-minute headways between 5:15 AM and 8:40 PM Monday through Friday. It operates northbound on headway times that vary from 20 minutes to 140 minutes from Monday to Friday with shorter headway times during busiest hours approximately 60-minute headways between 6:40AM and 10:20 PM.

COASTER service is extended into the evening hours during weekends and holidays. It operates on reduced service hours on weekends and holidays with longer headways.

A footnote has been added to the text of Page 4.13-5 (Section 4.13.2b, SB 743) as follows:

This legislation also established that aesthetic and parking effects of residential, mixed-use residential, or employment center projects on an infill site1 within a TPA are not significant impacts on the environment.
*Footnote 1: An infill site refers to a site with a building within unused and underutilized lands within existing development patterns.

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

3-26
Section 4.14, Utilities and Service Systems

Page 4 ends

In 2021, California’s in-state electricity generation totaled 277,764 gigawatt-hours (California Energy Commission [CEC] 2023a). Primary fuel sources for the state’s electricity generation in 2021 included natural gas, hydroelectric, solar photovoltaic, wind, nuclear, geothermal, biomass, and solar thermal. Electricity imports accounted for approximately 30 percent of total system electric generation in 2021 (CEC 2023a).

Pages 4.14-13 – 4.14-14 (Section 4.14.2a, Regulatory Setting - Water) have been revised as follows:

Carlsbad CMWD Recycled Water Master Plan Update
The Carlsbad Recycled Water Master Plan Update was adopted on July 15, 2019, as an update to the 2012 Recycled Water Master Plan. The Recycled Water Master Plan Update provides a system evaluation and capacity assessment of the recycled water system and recommends a capital improvement program to provide for continued reliable recycled water service through buildout conditions, which are projected to occur by 2040 (Carlsbad Municipal Water District 2019a).

Carlsbad’s service areas for recycled water do not coincide with the City’s municipal boundary.

The potable and recycled water service areas are governed by the Carlsbad Municipal Water District (CMWD), a subsidiary district of the City of Carlsbad operating under the Municipal Water District Act of 1911. CMWD covers an area of 20,682 acres, approximately 32 square miles, and provides potable and recycled water supply to most of the City of Carlsbad. CMWD supplies potable water within its service area and currently receives 100 percent of its potable water supply from SDCWA. The potable water distribution system consists of 450 miles of pipeline, 71 pressure regulating stations, three pump stations, eight storage tanks, and one reservoir.

CMWD supplies recycled water through two recycled water distribution systems, which include 77 miles of pipeline, six pressure zones, three storage tanks, three booster pumping stations, three supply sources with pumping stations, and five pressure regulating stations. Land uses within the service area are primarily residential with a mix of agricultural, light industrial and commercial (CMWD 2019a).

CMWD receives recycled water from reclamation plants within the Encina Wastewater Authority (EWA) service area. CMWD receives recycled water from three two reclamation plants: Carlsbad Water Recycling Facility (CWRF), and Meadowlark Water Reclamation Facility (WRF) and Gafner Water Reclamation Plant (WRP). CWRF has a permitted capacity of 7 mgd, and Meadowlark WRF has a permitted capacity of 5 mgd, and the Gafner WRP has a permitted capacity of 1 mgd, for a total capacity of 1312 mgd. Using the baseline year of 2014, the recycled water system demand for the Recycled Water Master Plan Update is approximately 4,650 AFY or 4.1 mgd. Assuming a peaking factor of 1.7 for maximum month, required WRF supplies would be approximately 7 mgd. CMWD is currently operating at about two-thirds capacity of their potential recycled water supplies. CMWD has sufficient available supply capacities, under its current agreements and assuming CMWD continues to purchase up to 3 mgd from VWD, to reliably meet existing and future demands of the recycled water system (CMWD 2019b).

Revisions to the Draft SEIR

Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 3-27
Pages 4.4-26 through 4.14-27 under Impact UTIL-1 have been revised as follows:

Wastewater
Carlsbad is served by existing city wastewater conveyance facilities, including local sewer collection lines and trunk sewer lines. Development facilitated by the project may require increasing the size of existing facilities, installation of additional sewer mains, and new lateral connections on or adjacent to the rezone sites. Future development on the rezone sites would be required to prepare sewer studies based on the demand generated by the proposed number of units. Potential hydraulic impacts to the existing sewer collection system are required to be assessed by the developer and subject to reviewed by the city’s Public Works Utilities Department, who would determine what upgrades would be needed. Future projects would be required to complete improvements as determined by Public Works staff the Utilities Department. Particular attention is brought to, but not limited to, the development sites listed below:

Sites 1 (North County Plaza) and 2 (The Shoppes at Carlsbad): These sites would be served by the Vista/Carlsbad Interceptor Sewer in which Carlsbad has capacity rights of approximately 10% of pipe-full capacity. The sewer pipe segment located west of El Camino Real is identified as deficient in capacity for future city of Vista sewer flows and is planned for upsizing in Carlsbad and Vista sewer master plans. The proposed housing unit yield and associated sewer demands will require evaluation for potential hydraulic impacts and the need for additional sewer capacity.

Site 6 – Crossings Golf Course Lot 5: The site is adjacent to an abandoned collector sewer.

Sewer service to this site will require recommissioning of the abandoned sewer and the flow must be conveyed to either the Buena Interceptor Sewer or the Vallecitos Interceptor Sewer via a new connection. The addition of sewer demand to these interceptor sewers is subject to available capacity and requires the approval of the Buena Sanitation District or the Vallecitos Water District. These agencies may reserve existing available capacity for their future sewer demands.

Site 8 – Cottage Row Apartments: The proposed unit yield represents a 354% increase in the existing permitted unit yield. Sewer flows from this site must be conveyed to either the Buena Interceptor Sewer or the Vallecitos Interceptor Sewer. The addition of sewer demand to these interceptor sewers is subject to available capacity and may require the approval of the Buena Sanitation District or the Vallecitos Water District. These agencies may reserve existing available capacity for their future sewer demands.

Site 9 – West Oaks Industrial. Sewer flows from this site must be conveyed to either the Buena Interceptor Sewer or the Vallecitos Interceptor Sewer. The addition of sewer demand to these interceptor sewers is subject to available capacity and requires the approval of the Buena Sanitation District or the Vallecitos Water District. These agencies may reserve existing available capacity for their future sewer demands.

Site 16 – Caltrans Maintenance Station/Pacific Sales: The proposed net increase of 182 units and associated sewer demand requires evaluation of potential hydraulic impacts in the sewer collection system. Sewer flows from this site must be conveyed to either the Buena Interceptor Sewer or the Vallecitos Interceptor Sewer. The addition of sewer demand to these interceptor sewers is subject to available capacity and may require the approval of the Buena Sanitation City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

3-28
District or the Vallecitos Water District. These agencies may reserve existing available capacity for their future sewer demands.

Site 18 – North Ponto Parcels: This site is not currently served by a public sewer collection system and new sewer collection facilities must be constructed.

Site 19 – La Costa Glen/Forum: This site is served by the Leucadia Wastewater District. The addition of sewer demand is subject to available capacity and the approval of the Leucadia Wastewater District.

As with water facilities, sewer line extensions necessary to serve the future development would generally be installed within the already disturbed rights-of-way of existing roads or within the disturbance footprints of such projects. As such, the construction of these infrastructure improvements would not substantially increase the project’s disturbance area or otherwise cause significant environmental effects beyond those identified throughout this SEIR.

The project would result in an increase in wastewater generation relative to existing conditions.

Wastewater generated by future development would be treated at the Encina Wastewater Authority in Carlsbad, which has a design total treatment capacity of 40.5 mgd, and a remaining available capacity of 17.5 mgd. The City of Carlsbad owns 25.33 percent (10.26 mgd) of the total treatment capacity of the plant. Carlsbad’s annual average daily flow for Fiscal year 2022-23 was recorded at 6.22 mgd, providing 4.04 mgd of available capacity. Based on a wastewater generation rate of 200 gallons per equivalent dwelling unit per day (City of Carlsbad 2023a), development under the project would generate a gross increase of approximately 659,000 gallons, or 0.66 mgd, average daily flow of wastewater (200 gallons per residential unit per day x 3,295 units). This analysis conservatively assumes all project-generated wastewater would be new wastewater generation and does not account for wastewater generation associated with existing development that would be demolished to accommodate new residential units.

Table 4.14-2 summarizes the Carlsbad’s available capacity at the Encina Wastewater Authority and the percentage used by anticipated project wastewater generation based on average daily flow conditions. As shown therein, the project’s gross increase in wastewater generation would comprise approximately 4 percent of the Encina Wastewater Authority’s total remaining available wastewater treatment capacity and approximately 16 percent of Carlsbad’s remaining capacity rights.1 Even during peak flow conditions, where wastewater generation associated with development on the rezone sites could be up to 1.7 mgd (based on calculations from the City’s Public Works Department), this could be accommodated within the 17.5 mgd of remaining available capacity.

1 0.4 mgd / 17.5 mgd x 100 = 4percent
Revisions to the Draft SEIR

Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 3-29
Table 4.14-2 Wastewater Treatment Plant Capacity
Encina Wastewater Authority
Total Treatment Plant Capacity
Total Average Daily Treatment 23 MGD
Total Capacity1 40.5 MGD
Total Remaining Available Capacity 17.5 MGD
Project Wastewater Generation - Average Flow2 0.7 MGD
Percent of Total Remaining Available Capacity Used by Project – Average Flow
4%
City of Carlsbad Treatment Plant Capacity
City of Carlsbad Daily Treatment Capacity Ownership 10.26 MGD (25.33%) City of Carlsbad Average Annual Daily Flow FY 22-23 6.22 MGD City of Carlsbad Remaining Capacity Available – Average Flow 4.04 MGD Project Wastewater Generation - Average Flow2 0.7 MGD
City of Carlsbad Percentage of Remaining Capacity Used by Project – Average Flow
16%
mgd = million gallons per day
1 The current design treatment capacity of the Encina Wastewater Authority is 40.5 mgd. 2 Reasonably foreseeable development under the project would generate a net increase in average daily flow of approximately 659,000 gallons, or 0.7 mgd (200 gallons per residential unit per day x 3295 units).

Sources: Encina Wastewater Authority 2021
Therefore, the Encina Wastewater Authority would have adequate capacity to serve development under the project. In addition, development would be responsible for constructing on and offsite improvements to wastewater conveyance systems and paying standard sewer connection fees, as necessary. Individual developments would be required to prepare site specific sewer studies to reflect actual development conditions which would be reviewed by the city and the applicable wastewater providers to determine if sufficient sewer capacity exists to serve the additional population that would be generated by the future projects. The city will continue to coordinate with the wastewater districts to ensure that new development, when proposed, would not exceed the capacity of wastewater conveyance and treatment facilities, and that new development would pay development fees to increase capacity of those facilities.

Furthermore, as was found in the 2015 General Plan EIR, development would be subject to 2015 General Plan policies related to the provision of adequate wastewater services and facilities.

Therefore, although the project may involve some infrastructure improvements to serve individual rezone sites, the project would not result in the relocation or construction of new or expanded wastewater facilities such that significant environmental effects beyond those already identified throughout this SEIR would occur. Impacts to wastewater would be less than significant.

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

3-30
Section 6, Alternatives

Page 6 ends

d. Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
Implementation of Alternative 2 would involve less ground disturbance than would occur under the proposed project due to the removal of rezone sites 3, 8, and 15. Under this alternative, density at rezone sites 14 and 17 would be increased and result in a net increase of 43 units compared to the proposed project, but ground disturbance would not change substantially as compared to the proposed project. Therefore, the potential to impact known and unknown cultural resources would be the same as compared to the proposed project. Because this alternative would include fewer development sites than the proposed project and would exclude site 15 located within the Carlsbad Village Historic District, potential impacts to historic structures would also be slightly decreased. However, since Alternative 2 would continue to develop site 14 which is located within the Carlsbad Village Historic District and in proximity to locally significant properties, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. The potential to disturb tribal cultural resources, including ancestral remains and sacred sites, would be similar under this alternative as compared to the proposed project as ground disturbance would not change substantially compared to the proposed project. Similarly, impacts related to unknown tribal cultural resources would remain less than significant with incorporation of Mitigation Measure CUL-1. Alternative 2, like the proposed project, would result in greater levels of ground disturbance compared to the 2015 General Plan EIR due to the inclusion of the rezoning sites than that analyzed in the 2015 General Plan EIR. However, overall, impacts related to cultural and tribal cultural resources would be similar under this alternative than what could occur as a result of proposed project but would be greater than the impacts analyzed in the 2015 General Plan EIR.

CEQA Implications for Changes to the Proposed Project

Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4-1
CEQA Implications for Changes to the
Proposed Project
This chapter provides a discussion of the CEQA implications of potential changes to the project that have been made after circulation of the Draft SEIR.

4.1 Project Changes and Clarifications
Proposed project changes include adding two parcels to Site 2: Assessor Parcel Number (APN) 156- 302-14 and 156-302-17. Site 2 encompasses the parking lots for The Shoppes at Carlsbad mall and a North County Transit District transit station. APN 156-302-14 is part of The Shoppes parking lot, located southwest of loading dock for the Macy’s and is approximately 0.23 acres in size. APN 156- 302-17 is located south of Marron Road, is currently developed with surface parking (parking associated with Escape to VR), is approximately 0.1 acre in size. Overall, Site 2 would remain approximately 57 acres in size. These added parcels are within the boundaries of the Westfield Carlsbad Specific Plan area. Incorporating these parcels is not intended to increase housing capacity but simply to more accurately reflect parcels involved in Site 2.

It should also be noted that the Draft SEIR provides a conservative estimate of buildout. The Draft SEIR assumes an increase of 107 units at Site 14 (Village Coaster) and 73 units at Site 17 (Poinsettia Coaster). These unit increases reflect City Council direction to increase the assumed number of units counted at these two sites. Therefore, the total buildout of 3,295 units reported for the project results from counting all sites plus the additional units on the Coaster sites. Table 2-4 acknowledges this in the footnotes for both sites. As explained in footnotes 3 and 4, the City Council has directed the study of two different proposed unit yields for these sites. For Site 14, the analysis assumes 107 units as a conservative estimate and for Site 17, the analysis assumes a total of 100 units (an increase of 73) units as a as a conservative estimate. Further, the proposed project now involves only rezoning a portion of Site 18. A private development application with 86 units (FPC Residential, SDP 2022-0003) has been approved on the portion of Site 18 north of Ponto Drive (APNs 214-160- 25, 214-160-28 and 214-171-11). Accordingly, the rezoning proposed as part of Site 18 would affect only the portion of the site south of Ponto Drive that consists of five vacant parcels (APNs 216-010- 01 to 05) totaling slightly more than one acre. Unit yield from the reduced site area if rezoned would be 22 units instead of 50 units as analyzed in the Draft SEIR. Therefore, the assumed buildout for Site 18 is also conservative. The reduction in density and intensity of the potential development of Site 18 is immaterial to the EIR and does not affect the analysis or conclusions in the EIR.

4.2 Environmental Implications
Because incorporating these parcels is not intended to increase capacity but simply to more accurately reflect parcels involved in the project, the change in boundary for Site 2 would not change the projected overall buildout. With this change, the unit yield for Site 2 is still anticipated to be 993 units and the overall buildout under the project would still be 3,295 units, as shown on Table 2-4 in Chapter 3, Revisions to the Draft SEIR, of this document.

The Draft SEIR determined that the environmental impacts of the proposed project would be less than significant or could be reduced to below a level of significance with proposed mitigation 4 City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

4-2
measures for most of the topical areas studied. Impacts related to air quality, cultural resources, greenhouse gas emissions, construction noise, and VMT, and cumulative impacts for these issue areas, were found to be significant and unavoidable. Overall, the proposed change to add two parcels would not change the objectives and goals of the proposed project, would not change the allowed uses under the proposed project, and would not increase the buildout assumptions analyzed in the Draft SEIR. These parcels are currently developed with surface parking lots and do not contain sensitive habitats or other environmental resources.

Therefore, the proposed project changes provides factual background information and do not raise an environmental issue within the meaning of CEQA and would not affect the findings and conclusions of the Draft SEIR with respect to aesthetics, agriculture and forestry resources, biological resources, cultural and tribal cultural resources, energy, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use and planning, mineral resources, noise, public services, recreation, transportation, or utilities and service systems. Those impacts would remain less than significant, less than significant with mitigation, or in the case of project and cumulative air quality, cultural resources, greenhouse gas emissions, construction noise, and VMT impacts, significant and unavoidable.

The changes do not raise important new issues about significant effects on the environment. Such changes are insignificant as the term is used in Section 15088.5(b) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines. Therefore, no impacts beyond those identified in the SEIR would occur. No substantial revisions to the SEIR are required and therefore, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15088.5 recirculation of the SEIR is not warranted.

Appendix A
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

Explanation of Headings
Type = Project, ongoing, cumulative.

Monitoring Dept. = Department, or Agency, responsible for monitoring a particular mitigation measure.

Shown on Plans = When mitigation measure is shown on plans, this column will be initialed and dated.

Verified Implementation = When mitigation measure has been implemented, this column will be initialed and dated.

Remarks = Area for describing status of ongoing mitigation measure, or for other information.

Legend

PLN Planning Division
ENG Land Development Engineering Division
BLDG Building Division

Page 1 of 22 ends

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program

PROJECT NAME: Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update PROJECT NO: GPA 2022 -0001/ZCA 2022 -0004/ZC 2022 -0001/LCPA 2022 -0015/AMEND 2023 -0008/AMEND 2023- 0009/AMEND 2023-0010/AMEND 2023-0011/AMEND 2023-0012 and EIR 2022-0007 (PUB 2022-0010) APPROVAL DATE/RESOLUTION NUMBER(S):

California Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 requires that, upon certification of an EIR, “the public agency shall adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes made to the project or conditions of project approval, adopted in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment.

The reporting or monitoring program shall be designed to ensure compliance during project implementation.” This chapter contains the mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP) that has been developed for the Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element. This MMRP has been developed in compliance with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 and Section 15097 of the CEQA Guidelines. The City must adopt this MMRP, or an equally effective program, if it approves the proposed project with the mitigation measures that were adopted or made conditions of project approval.

The ability to mitigate significant environmental impacts or lessen the significance of environmental impacts are a key focus of CEQA. According to CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.4(a)(2), “Mitigation measures must be fully enforceable through permit conditions, agreements, or ot her legally binding instruments. In the case of the adoption of a plan, policy, regulation, or other public project, mitigation measures can be incorporated into the plan, policy, regulation, or project design.” Therefore, to be sure that all the environmental commitments identified in this document are executed at the appropriate times for land development projects that implement the Housing Element Rezoning Program , the following mitigation measures would apply to those projects that are reviewed through discretionary process AND projects that are reviewed under a streamlined, ministerial approval process to ensure that the commitments contained in this MMRP are fulfilled.

All mitigation measures included are programmatic in nature. The specific rezone sites each mitigation measure applies to is notes in the “applicable rezone sites” column below. A completed and signed checklist for each mitigation measure indicates that this mitigation measure has been complied with and implemented and fulfills the City’s monitoring requirements with respect to Assembly Bill 3180 (Public Resources Code Section 21081.6).

C cityof
Carlsbad
PROJECT NAME: Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update PROJECT NUMBER: GPA 2022-0001/ZCA 2022-0004/ZC 2022-0001/LCPA 2022-001/AMEND 2023-0008/AMEND 2023-0009/AMEND 2023-0010/AMEND 2023-0011/AMEND 2023-0012/EIR 2022-0007 (PUB2022-0010)

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 2 of 22 MITIGATION MEASURE Applicable Rezone Sites
Monitoring Type
Monitoring
Department
Shown on Plans
Verified
Implementation
Remarks
AQ-1 Housing Forecast Revisions. Prior to the next update of the Regional Housing Needs Assessment and within six months of the certification of the Final SEIR, the City Planner shall provide a revised housing forecast to SANDAG to ensure that any revisions to the population and employment projections used by SDAPCD in updating the RAQS and the SIP will accurately reflect anticipated growth due to the proposed project.

All Rezone Sites Project PLN
AQ-2 Operational Emissions Reductions. During the project design and project- level review phases of development projects at the 18 rezone sites, the city shall require each project to determine operational air quality emissions from the project. For projects that exceed regulatory SDCAPCD thresholds, mitigation shall be implemented to reduce impacts to below the regulatory thresholds or to the maximum extent feasible implementing all feasible mitigation. The following represents some measures aimed at reducing air pollutant emissions from operational sources. This is not an exhaustive list of measures, and individual projects shall incorporate measures that best fit each project design.
 Use architectural coating materials, as defined in SDAPCD Rule 67.0.1, that are zero-emission or have a low-VOC content (below 10 grams per liter). Where such VOC coatings are not available or feasible, the coating with the lowest VOC rating available shall be used. These measures shall be noted on all construction plans, and the city shall perform periodic site inspections during construction to verify compliance.
 Prohibit the installation of woodstoves, hearths, and fireplaces in new construction facilitated by the proposed project.
 Expand and facilitate completion of planned networks of active transportation infrastructure.
 Implement EV charging infrastructure beyond requirements set forth in the 2022 CalGreen mandatory measures. Such requirements would be equivalent to the Tier 2 voluntary measures set forth in the 2022 CalGreen standards.
 Implement traffic demand measures, such as unbundling parking fees from rent/lease options, encouraging/developing a ride-share program for the community, and provide car/bike sharing services, that will reduce daily individual car usage and reduce project VMT All Rezone Sites Project PLN
PROJECT NAME: Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update PROJECT NUMBER: GPA 2022-0001/ZCA 2022-0004/ZC 2022-0001/LCPA 2022-001/AMEND 2023-0008/AMEND 2023-0009/AMEND 2023-0010/AMEND 2023-0011/AMEND 2023-0012/EIR 2022-0007 (PUB2022-0010)

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 3 of 22 MITIGATION MEASURE Applicable Rezone Sites
Monitoring Type
Monitoring
Department
Shown on Plans
Verified
Implementation
Remarks
AQ-3 Construction Health Risk Assessment. For individual projects (excluding ADUs, single-family residences, and duplexes) where construction activities would occur within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors, would last longer than two months, and would not utilize a fleet comprised of strictly EPA rated Tier 4 engines and/or alternative fuel construction equipment, it is required that a construction health risk assessment (HRA) be performed. The construction health risk shall be performed by a qualified air quality consultant coordinated through the City. The HRA shall be conducted following the Office of Environmental Health Hazards Association’s (OEHHA) 2015 Health Risk Guidelines (OEHHA 2015) and SDAPCD guidelines to determine potential risk and compare the risk to the following SDAPCD thresholds:
 Increased cancer risk of > 10.0 in a million;
 Increased non-cancer risk of > 1.0 Hazard Index (Chronic or Acute); or If risk exceeds the thresholds, measures such as requiring the use of Tier 4 and/or alternative fuel construction equipment are recommended to reduce the risk to appropriate levels. The incorporation of Tier 4 and/or alternative fuel construction equipment reduces the emissions of DPM from construction activities and therefore reduces the potential risk to nearby sensitive receptors.

All Rezone Sites where
construction is within
1000 feet of sensitive
receptors, will last
longer than two
months, and would not
use Tier 4 engines.

Project PLN
AQ-4 Operational Health Risk Assessment. Consistent with the provisions contained in the California Air Resources Board Air Quality and Land Use Handbook, future development projects occurring on Site 2, Site 5, or Site 16 under the proposed project should implement the following:

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 4 of 22 MITIGATION MEASURE Applicable Rezone Sites
Monitoring Type
Monitoring
Department
Shown on Plans
Verified
Implementation
Remarks
individual residential unit, that meets the efficiency standard of the minimum efficiency reporting value of 13. The heating and ventilation system should include the following features: installation of a high- efficiency filter and/or carbon filter to minimize particulate and other airborne chemical matter from entering the building. Either high- efficiency particulate absorption filters or American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air-Conditioning Engineers 85 percent supply filters should be used.
 Ensure that positive pressure occurs in the building.  Achieve a performance standard of at least one air exchange per hour of fresh outside filtered air.
 Achieve a performance standard of at least four air exchanges per hour of recirculation.
 Achieve a performance standard of 0.25 air exchanges per hour of unfiltered infiltration if the building is not positively pressurized.

BIO-1 Biological Resources Technical Report. For development projects at Sites 1- 4, 6-9, 17-19 that require vegetation removal, ground disturbance of unpaved areas, parking or staging of equipment or material on unpaved areas, access routes on unpaved areas, or any rehabilitation or construction staging within 100 feet of the property line (except for landscaped developed areas) that contain or have the potential to support special-status species, sensitive habitat, or suitable habitat to support special-status species, prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct a biological resources reconnaissance of the site, consistent with the requirements of General Plan Policy 4-P.9 and the HMP Guidelines for Biological Studies. All future projects shall be consistent with the HMP and the technical report shall include a consistency analysis, including compliance with the narrow endemic standards (MHCP Volume 1, Section 3.7 No. 5, and HMP Section D-6 for TLB, VP species) and special species standards (HMP Section D-6 for LBV and Harb Dun Skipper). The Biological Resources Technical Report shall address the presence/absence of suitable habitat for special-status plant and wildlife species, and any additional protocol surveys that may be needed to determine the potential presence/absence of special status species, sensitive plant communities and wetlands, and other special status biological resources protected under the Sites 1-4, 6-9, and 17-19 Project PLN
PROJECT NAME: Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update PROJECT NUMBER: GPA 2022-0001/ZCA 2022-0004/ZC 2022-0001/LCPA 2022-001/AMEND 2023-0008/AMEND 2023-0009/AMEND 2023-0010/AMEND 2023-0011/AMEND 2023-0012/EIR 2022-0007 (PUB2022-0010)

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 5 of 22 MITIGATION MEASURE Applicable Rezone Sites
Monitoring Type
Monitoring
Department
Shown on Plans
Verified
Implementation
Remarks
HMP. The report will further propose avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures, consistent with HMP requirements, necessary to reduce potential impacts to special-status biological resources to less than significant.

BIO-2 Pre-Construction Bird Surveys, Avoidance, and Notification. If construction activities are initiated during the bird nesting season (February 1 – August 31) involving removal of vegetation or other nesting bird habitat, including abandoned structures and other man-made features, a pre-construction nesting bird survey shall be conducted no more than three days prior to initiation of ground disturbance and vegetation removal activities. The nesting bird pre-construction survey shall be conducted on foot and shall include a 300-foot survey buffer around the construction site. The survey shall be conducted by a biologist familiar with the identification of avian species known to occur in southern California coastal communities (i.e., qualified biologist). If active nests are found, an avoidance buffer shall be determined by a qualified biologist in coordination with the city. The avoidance buffer width will depend upon the species, the proposed work activity, and existing disturbances associated with land uses outside of the site, which shall be demarcated by the biologist with bright orange construction fencing, flagging, construction lathe, or other means to demarcate the boundary. All construction personnel shall be notified as to the existence of the buffer zone and to avoid entering the buffer zone during the nesting season. No ground disturbing activities shall occur within the buffer until the biologist has confirmed that breeding/nesting is completed, and the young have fledged the nest. Encroachment into the buffer shall occur only at the discretion of the qualified biologist on the basis that the encroachment will not be detrimental to an active nest. A report summarizing the pre-construction survey(s) shall be prepared by a qualified biologist and shall be submitted to the city prior to the commencement of construction activities.

All Rezone Sites Project PLN
PROJECT NAME: Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update PROJECT NUMBER: GPA 2022-0001/ZCA 2022-0004/ZC 2022-0001/LCPA 2022-001/AMEND 2023-0008/AMEND 2023-0009/AMEND 2023-0010/AMEND 2023-0011/AMEND 2023-0012/EIR 2022-0007 (PUB2022-0010)

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 6 of 22 MITIGATION MEASURE Applicable Rezone Sites
Monitoring Type
Monitoring
Department
Shown on Plans
Verified
Implementation
Remarks
BIO-3 Habitat Buffers. For projects where native habitat may be present (specifically Sites 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 17, 18, and 19) and if development cannot avoid native habitat, prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a qualified biologist shall be retained by the project applicant to conduct a vegetation community survey of the site. The qualified biologist shall map the extent of vegetation communities on the project site plus 100 feet and report on the findings. This survey and report can be combined with BIO-1, Biological Resources Technical Report. The report shall confirm potential impacts to riparian and wetland habitat have been sufficiently avoided or minimized to reduce impacts to less than significant. Housing development at any of the sites containing riparian or wetland habitat shall adhere to the HMP Guidelines for Riparian and Wetland Buffers. Housing developments at any of the sites within the coastal zone shall adhere to the upland and wetland buffer requirements pursuant to the HMP coastal zone standards. The Biological Resources technical report shall include a figure showing all required upland, riparian and wetland buffers.

Sites 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9,
17, 18, and 19
Project PLN
BIO-4 Habitat impact Mitigation. For projects that will require mitigation through restoration of sensitive upland natural communities (e.g. coastal sage scrub) or wetland habitat, including streams, riparian, and other water bodies, specifically Sites 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 9, 17, 18, and 19, mitigation through restoration, creation, or enhancement of in-kind habitats shall be implemented in accordance with ratios identified in the HMP (Table 11 and coastal zone standards Section D-7) and an approved mitigation plan. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall prepare and submit a Conceptual Restoration/Mitigation Plan (CRMP) consistent with the HMP Components of a Conceptual Restoration/Mitigation Plan and Guidelines for Habitat Creation and Restoration. The CRMP will provide the framework for compensating for impacts to sensitive riparian and coastal sage scrub habitat at a ratio consistent with HMP Table 11 and coastal zone standards.

Sites 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 9, 17,
18, and 19
Project PLN
PROJECT NAME: Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update PROJECT NUMBER: GPA 2022-0001/ZCA 2022-0004/ZC 2022-0001/LCPA 2022-001/AMEND 2023-0008/AMEND 2023-0009/AMEND 2023-0010/AMEND 2023-0011/AMEND 2023-0012/EIR 2022-0007 (PUB2022-0010)

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 7 of 22 MITIGATION MEASURE Applicable Rezone Sites
Monitoring Type
Monitoring
Department
Shown on Plans
Verified
Implementation
Remarks
BIO-5 Agency Coordination For projects on sites within potential jurisdictional features, including Sites 1, 2, 4, 9, and 17, permits, agreements, and/or water quality certifications from applicable state and federal agencies regarding compliance with state and federal laws governing work within jurisdictional features are required for submission to the city of Carlsbad with the grading permit application for the project. The project applicant shall satisfy all mitigation requirements of the above agencies. The applicant shall provide such permits and/or agreements prior to issuance of a grading permit.

Sites 1, 2, 4, 9, and 17 Project PLN
BIO-6 Protected Tree and Tree Canopy Survey. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a tree survey shall be conducted by a certified arborist prior to project construction to tag and assess all trees subject to the city’s Trees and Shrubs Ordinance (Municipal Code Title 11.12) and/or CFMP. A city arborist will inspect the property and recommend approving or denying the application in a written report submitted to the city manager. The city shall post a letter of notification and a non-removable marking upon the subject tree a minimum of 30 days prior to its removal. The letter will be posted in a prominent location, visible from a public street and will include, the location of the tree, the reason for the trees removal, the date of the scheduled removal, the species of tree to be replanted, the size of the tree to be replanted, the date by which an appeal must be made to the parks and recreation commission, and a description of the appeal process.

The following measures shall be implemented in addition to those required under the city’s permits required for tree removal and maintenance ordinance Guidelines (Municipal Code Title 11.12.090) to avoid and/or compensate for potential indirect impacts to preserved sensitive natural communities and protected trees within Carlsbad before, during, and following construction activities.

Pre-Construction
 Fencing. Protective fencing at least three feet high with signs and flagging shall be erected around all preserved sensitive natural communities where adjacent to proposed vegetation clearing and grubbing, grading, or other construction activities. The protective fence shall be installed at a minimum of five feet beyond the tree canopy dripline. The intent of protection fencing is to prevent inadvertent All Rezone Sites Project PLN
PROJECT NAME: Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update PROJECT NUMBER: GPA 2022-0001/ZCA 2022-0004/ZC 2022-0001/LCPA 2022-001/AMEND 2023-0008/AMEND 2023-0009/AMEND 2023-0010/AMEND 2023-0011/AMEND 2023-0012/EIR 2022-0007 (PUB2022-0010)

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 8 of 22 MITIGATION MEASURE Applicable Rezone Sites
Monitoring Type
Monitoring
Department
Shown on Plans
Verified
Implementation
Remarks
limb/vegetation damage, root damage and/or compaction by construction equipment. The protective fencing shall be depicted on all construction plans and maps provided to contractors and labeled clearly to prohibit entry, and the placement of the fence in the field shall be approved by a qualified biologist prior to initiation of construction activities. The contractor shall maintain the fence to keep it upright, taut and aligned at all times. Fencing shall be removed only after all construction activities are completed.
 Pre-Construction Meeting. A pre-construction meeting shall be held between all site contractors and a registered consulting arborist and/or a qualified biologist. All site contractors and their employees shall provide written acknowledgement of their receiving sensitive natural community protection training. This training shall include, but shall not be limited to, the following information: (1) the location and marking of protected sensitive natural communities; (2) the necessity of preventing damage to these sensitive natural communities; and (3) a discussion of work practices that shall accomplish such.

During Construction
 Fence Monitoring. The protective fence shall be monitored regularly (at least weekly) during construction activities to ensure that the fencing remains intact and functional, and that no encroachment has occurred into the protected natural community; any repairs to the fence or encroachment correction shall be conducted immediately.  Equipment Operation and Storage. Contractors shall avoid using heavy equipment around the sensitive natural communities. Operating heavy machinery around the root zones of trees would increase soil compaction, which decreases soil aeration and, subsequently, reduces water penetration into the soil. All heavy equipment and vehicles shall, at minimum, stay out of the fenced protected zones, unless where specifically approved in writing and under the supervision of a registered consulting arborist and/or a qualified biologist.  Materials Storage and Disposal. Contractors shall not store or discard any construction materials within the fenced protected zones and shall remove all foreign debris within these areas. The contractors shall leave the duff, mulch, chips, and leaves around the retained trees for water retention and nutrient supply. Contractors shall avoid draining or PROJECT NAME: Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update PROJECT NUMBER: GPA 2022-0001/ZCA 2022-0004/ZC 2022-0001/LCPA 2022-001/AMEND 2023-0008/AMEND 2023-0009/AMEND 2023-0010/AMEND 2023-0011/AMEND 2023-0012/EIR 2022-0007 (PUB2022-0010)

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 9 of 22 MITIGATION MEASURE Applicable Rezone Sites
Monitoring Type
Monitoring
Department
Shown on Plans
Verified
Implementation
Remarks
leakage of equipment fluids near retained trees. Fluids such as gasoline, diesel, oils, hydraulics, brake and transmission fluids, paint, paint thinners, and glycol (anti-freeze) shall be disposed of properly. The contractors shall ensure that equipment be parked at least 50 feet, and that equipment/vehicle refueling occur at least 100 feet, from fenced protected zones to avoid the possibility of leakage of equipment fluids into the soil.
 Grade Changes. Contractors shall ensure that grade changes, including adding fill, shall not be permitted within the fenced protected zone without special written authorization and under supervision by a registered consulting arborist and/or a qualified biologist. Lowering the grade within the fenced protected zones could necessitate cutting main support and feeder roots, thus jeopardizing the health and structural integrity of the tree(s). Adding soil, even temporarily, on top of the existing grade could compact the soil further, and decrease both water and air availability to the tree roots. Contractors shall ensure that grade changes made outside of the fenced protected zone shall not create conditions that allow water to pond.
 Trenching. Except where specifically approved in writing beforehand, all trenching shall be outside of the fenced protected zone. Roots primarily extend in a horizontal direction forming a support base to the tree similar to the base of a wineglass. Where trenching is necessary in areas that contain roots from retained trees, contractors shall use trenching techniques that include the use of either a root pruner (Dosko root pruner or equivalent) or an Air-Spade to limit root impacts.

An International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) certified arborist or American Society of Consulting Arborists (ASCA) registered consulting arborist shall ensure that all pruning cuts shall be clean and sharp, to minimize ripping, tearing, and fracturing of the root system. Root damage caused by backhoes, earthmovers, dozers, or graders is severe and may ultimately result in tree mortality. Use of both root pruning and Air-Spade equipment shall be accompanied only by hand tools to remove soil from trench locations. The trench shall be made no deeper than necessary.
 Erosion Control. Appropriate erosion control best management practices (BMPs) shall be implemented to protect preserved sensitive PROJECT NAME: Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update PROJECT NUMBER: GPA 2022-0001/ZCA 2022-0004/ZC 2022-0001/LCPA 2022-001/AMEND 2023-0008/AMEND 2023-0009/AMEND 2023-0010/AMEND 2023-0011/AMEND 2023-0012/EIR 2022-0007 (PUB2022-0010)

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 10 of 22 MITIGATION MEASURE Applicable Rezone Sites
Monitoring Type
Monitoring
Department
Shown on Plans
Verified
Implementation
Remarks
natural communities during and following project construction. Erosion control materials shall be certified as weed free.
 Inspection. An ISA certified arborist or ASCA registered consulting arborist shall inspect the preserved trees adjacent to grading and construction activity on a monthly basis for the duration of the grading and construction activities. A report summarizing site conditions, observations, tree health, and recommendations for minimizing tree damage shall be submitted by the registered consulting arborist following each inspection.

Post-construction
 Mulch. The contractors shall ensure that the natural duff layer under all trees adjacent to construction activities shall be maintained. This would stabilize soil temperatures in root zones, conserve soil moisture, and reduce erosion. The contractors shall ensure that the mulch be kept clear of the trunk base to avoid creating conditions favorable to the establishment and growth of decay causing fungal pathogens. Should it be necessary to add organic mulch beneath retained oak trees, packaged or commercial oak leaf mulch shall not be used as it may contain root fungus. Also, the use of redwood chips shall be avoided as certain inhibitive chemicals may be present in the wood. Other wood chips and crushed walnut shells can be used, but the best mulch that provides a source of nutrients for the tree is its own leaf litter. Any added organic mulch added by the contractors shall be applied to a maximum depth of 4 inches where possible.
 Watering Adjacent Plant Material. All installed landscaping plants near the preserved sensitive natural communities shall require moderate to low levels of water. The surrounding plants shall be watered infrequently with deep soaks and allowed to dry out in between, rather than frequent light irrigation. The soil shall not be allowed to become saturated or stay continually wet, nor should drainage allow ponding of water. Irrigation spray shall not hit the trunk of any tree. The contractors shall maintain a 30-inch dry-zone around all tree trunks. An above ground micro-spray irrigation system shall be used in lieu of typical underground pop-up sprays.
 Monitoring. An ISA certified arborist or ASCA registered consulting arborist shall inspect the trees preserved on the site adjacent to PROJECT NAME: Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update PROJECT NUMBER: GPA 2022-0001/ZCA 2022-0004/ZC 2022-0001/LCPA 2022-001/AMEND 2023-0008/AMEND 2023-0009/AMEND 2023-0010/AMEND 2023-0011/AMEND 2023-0012/EIR 2022-0007 (PUB2022-0010)

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 11 of 22 MITIGATION MEASURE Applicable Rezone Sites
Monitoring Type
Monitoring
Department
Shown on Plans
Verified
Implementation
Remarks
construction activities for a period of two years following the completion of construction. Monitoring visits shall be completed quarterly, totaling eight visits. Following each monitoring visit, a report summarizing site conditions, observations, tree health, and recommendations for promoting tree health shall be submitted to the city. Additionally, any tree mortality shall be noted and any tree dying during the two year monitoring period shall be replaced at a minimum 3:1 ratio on-site in coordination with the city.

BIO-7 HMP Minor Amendments. Prior to project approval at Site 4, 6, 7, 9 and 17, each project shall be analyzed for consistency with the HMP in coordination with responsible agencies including CDFW and USFWS. Development may not occur within an Existing or Proposed Hardline. Any revisions to the HMP hardline boundary to allow for development on these sites shall require a HMP minor amendment, to be processed as an Equivalency Finding. Such boundary revisions must not involve any revisions the HMP operations or implementation, produce any adverse effects on the environment that are new or significantly different from those previously analyzed, result in additional take not previously analyzed, or reduce the acreage or quality of the habitat within the HMP. Any loss of HMP hardline shall be replaced with equal or greater acres of hardline, adjacent to existing hardline elsewhere in the city, and preserved and managed in accordance with the HMP. Any development within the Standards Area portion of Site 4 shall require a HMP Minor Amendment, to be processed as a Consistency Finding, which requires consistency with the HMP Planning Standards for Local Facilities Management Zone 15
Sites 4, 6, 7, 9, and 17 Project PLN
BIO-8 HMP Adjacency Standards. Projects within sites 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 17, 18, 19 shall evaluate potential indirect impacts, such as wildfire, erosion, invasive species, unauthorized access, or predators, to habitat and species adjacent to the proposed development. Projects shall be consistent with the HMP Adjacency Standards (Section F-3).

Sites 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9,
17, 18, 19
Project PLN
CUL-1 Tribal Cultural Resources. Projects subject to discretionary actions shall comply with the city's Tribal, Cultural, and Paleontological Resources Guidelines. For ministerial projects, the city shall provide Traditionally and Culturally Affiliated Luiseño tribes (“TCA Tribe”) with early notification and the opportunity to consult on development applications and identify and All Rezone Sites Project PLN
PROJECT NAME: Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update PROJECT NUMBER: GPA 2022-0001/ZCA 2022-0004/ZC 2022-0001/LCPA 2022-001/AMEND 2023-0008/AMEND 2023-0009/AMEND 2023-0010/AMEND 2023-0011/AMEND 2023-0012/EIR 2022-0007 (PUB2022-0010)

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 12 of 22 MITIGATION MEASURE Applicable Rezone Sites
Monitoring Type
Monitoring
Department
Shown on Plans
Verified
Implementation
Remarks
assess impacts to tribal and cultural resources. Further, before commencement of any ground-disturbing activities, the project developer shall comply with the following requirements to ensure the appropriate response to the presence of any tribal and cultural resources:
a. Retain the services of a qualified archaeologist who shall be on-site for ground-disturbing activities. In the event cultural material is encountered, the archaeologist is empowered to temporarily divert or halt grading to allow for coordination with the Luiseño Native American monitor and to determine the significance of the discovery. The archaeologist shall follow all standard procedures for cultural materials that are not Tribal Cultural Resources.
b. Enter into a Pre-Excavation Agreement, otherwise known as a Tribal Cultural Resources Treatment and Tribal Monitoring Agreement, with a TCA tribe. This agreement will address provision of a Luiseño Native American monitor and contain provisions to address the proper treatment of any tribal cultural resources and/or Luiseño Native American human remains inadvertently discovered during the course of the project. The Agreement will outline the roles and powers of the Luiseño Native American monitors and the archaeologist and may include the following provisions.
i. A Luiseño Native American monitor shall be present during all ground-disturbing activities. Ground disturbing activities may include, but are not limited to, archaeological studies, geotechnical investigations, exploratory geotechnical investigations/borings for contractor bidding purposes, clearing, grubbing, trenching, excavation, preparation for utilities and other infrastructure, and grading activities.
ii. Any and all uncovered artifacts of Luiseño Native American cultural importance shall be returned to the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians or other Luiseño Tribe, and/or the Most Likely Descendant, if applicable, and not be curated, unless ordered to do so by a federal agency or a court of competent jurisdiction.
iii. The Luiseño Native American monitor shall be present at the project’s pre-construction meeting to consult with grading and excavation contractors concerning excavation schedules and safety issues, as well as to consult with the archaeologist PI (principal PROJECT NAME: Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update PROJECT NUMBER: GPA 2022-0001/ZCA 2022-0004/ZC 2022-0001/LCPA 2022-001/AMEND 2023-0008/AMEND 2023-0009/AMEND 2023-0010/AMEND 2023-0011/AMEND 2023-0012/EIR 2022-0007 (PUB2022-0010)

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 13 of 22 MITIGATION MEASURE Applicable Rezone Sites
Monitoring Type
Monitoring
Department
Shown on Plans
Verified
Implementation
Remarks
investigator) concerning the proposed archaeologist techniques and/or strategies for the project.
iv. Luiseño Native American monitors and archaeological monitors shall have joint authority to temporarily divert and/or halt construction activities. If tribal cultural resources are discovered during construction, all earthmoving activity within and around the immediate discovery area must be diverted until the Luiseño Native American monitor and the archaeologist can assess the nature and significance of the find.
v. If a significant tribal cultural resource(s) and/or unique archaeological resource(s) are discovered during ground-disturbing activities for this project, the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians or other Luiseño tribe shall be notified and consulted regarding the respectful and dignified treatment of those resources. Pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 21083.2(b) avoidance is the preferred method of preservation for archaeological and tribal cultural resources. If, however, the Applicant is able to demonstrate that avoidance of a significant and/or unique cultural resource is infeasible and a data recovery plan is authorized by the City of Carlsbad as the lead agency, the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians or other Luiseño tribe shall be consulted regarding the drafting and finalization of any such recovery plan.
vi. When tribal cultural resources are discovered during the project, if the archaeologist collects such resources, a Luiseño Native American monitor must be present during any testing or cataloging of those resources. If the archaeologist does not collect the tribal cultural resources that are unearthed during the ground disturbing activities, the Luiseño Native American monitor may, at their discretion, collect said resources and provide them to the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians or other Luiseño tribe for dignified and respectful treatment in accordance with their cultural and spiritual traditions. vii. If suspected Native American human remains are encountered, California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5(b) states that no further disturbance shall occur until the San Diego County Medical Examiner has made the necessary findings as to origin. Further, pursuant to California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98(b) PROJECT NAME: Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update PROJECT NUMBER: GPA 2022-0001/ZCA 2022-0004/ZC 2022-0001/LCPA 2022-001/AMEND 2023-0008/AMEND 2023-0009/AMEND 2023-0010/AMEND 2023-0011/AMEND 2023-0012/EIR 2022-0007 (PUB2022-0010)

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 14 of 22 MITIGATION MEASURE Applicable Rezone Sites
Monitoring Type
Monitoring
Department
Shown on Plans
Verified
Implementation
Remarks
remains shall be left in place and free from disturbance until a final decision as to the treatment and disposition has been made.

Suspected Native American remains shall be examined in the field and kept in a secure location at the site. A Luiseño Native American monitor shall be present during the examination of the remains. If the San Diego County Medical Examiner determines the remains to be Native American, NAHC must be contacted by the Medical Examiner within 24 hours. The NAHC must then immediately notify the “Most Likely Descendant” about the discovery. The Most Likely Descendant shall then make recommendations within 48 hours and engage in consultation concerning treatment of remains as provided in Public Resources Code 5097.98.
viii. In the event that fill material is imported into the project area, the fill shall be clean of tribal cultural resources and documented as such.

Commercial sources of fill material are already permitted as appropriate and will be culturally sterile. If fill material is to be utilized and/or exported from areas within the project site, then that fill material shall be analyzed and confirmed by an archaeologist and Luiseño Native American monitor that such fill material does not contain tribal cultural resources.
ix. No testing, invasive or non-invasive, shall be permitted on any recovered tribal cultural resources without the written permission of the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians or other Luiseño tribe. x. Prior to the completion of project construction, a monitoring report and/or evaluation report, if appropriate, which describes the results, analysis, and conclusions of the monitoring program shall be submitted by the Project Archaeologist, along with the Luiseño Native American monitor’s notes and comments, to the City of Carlsbad for approval, and shall be submitted to the South Coastal Information Center. Said report shall be subject to confidentiality as an exception to the Public Records Act and will not be available for public distribution.
c. Furthermore, the Agreement may include additional measures mutually agreed upon by the project developer, city, and TCA Tribe such as evaluation of the project site’s pre-construction conditions for the PROJECT NAME: Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update PROJECT NUMBER: GPA 2022-0001/ZCA 2022-0004/ZC 2022-0001/LCPA 2022-001/AMEND 2023-0008/AMEND 2023-0009/AMEND 2023-0010/AMEND 2023-0011/AMEND 2023-0012/EIR 2022-0007 (PUB2022-0010)

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 15 of 22 MITIGATION MEASURE Applicable Rezone Sites
Monitoring Type
Monitoring
Department
Shown on Plans
Verified
Implementation
Remarks
presence or potential presence of TCRs as well as other measures tailored to and deemed necessary for the specific project.

GHG-1 Update City of Carlsbad Climate Action Plan. The City shall draft and City Council shall adopt 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 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 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
All Rezone Sites Ongoing PLN
PROJECT NAME: Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update PROJECT NUMBER: GPA 2022-0001/ZCA 2022-0004/ZC 2022-0001/LCPA 2022-001/AMEND 2023-0008/AMEND 2023-0009/AMEND 2023-0010/AMEND 2023-0011/AMEND 2023-0012/EIR 2022-0007 (PUB2022-0010)

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 16 of 22 MITIGATION MEASURE Applicable Rezone Sites
Monitoring Type
Monitoring
Department
Shown on Plans
Verified
Implementation
Remarks
NOI-1 Construction Noise Reduction Measures. The following construction noise reduction measures shall be implemented during project construction:
 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.

All Rezone Sites for
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.

Project PLN
PROJECT NAME: Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update PROJECT NUMBER: GPA 2022-0001/ZCA 2022-0004/ZC 2022-0001/LCPA 2022-001/AMEND 2023-0008/AMEND 2023-0009/AMEND 2023-0010/AMEND 2023-0011/AMEND 2023-0012/EIR 2022-0007 (PUB2022-0010)

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 17 of 22 MITIGATION MEASURE Applicable Rezone Sites
Monitoring Type
Monitoring
Department
Shown on Plans
Verified
Implementation
Remarks
 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 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.
 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 PROJECT NAME: Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update PROJECT NUMBER: GPA 2022-0001/ZCA 2022-0004/ZC 2022-0001/LCPA 2022-001/AMEND 2023-0008/AMEND 2023-0009/AMEND 2023-0010/AMEND 2023-0011/AMEND 2023-0012/EIR 2022-0007 (PUB2022-0010)

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 18 of 22 MITIGATION MEASURE Applicable Rezone Sites
Monitoring Type
Monitoring
Department
Shown on Plans
Verified
Implementation
Remarks
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.

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 All Rezone Sites Project PLN
PROJECT NAME: Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update PROJECT NUMBER: GPA 2022-0001/ZCA 2022-0004/ZC 2022-0001/LCPA 2022-001/AMEND 2023-0008/AMEND 2023-0009/AMEND 2023-0010/AMEND 2023-0011/AMEND 2023-0012/EIR 2022-0007 (PUB2022-0010)

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 19 of 22 MITIGATION MEASURE Applicable Rezone Sites
Monitoring Type
Monitoring
Department
Shown on Plans
Verified
Implementation
Remarks
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.

T-1 Achieve VMT Reductions for Development Projects. During the project design and project-level review phases of development projects at the 18 rezone sites, the city shall review each project compared to the City of Carlsbad VMT Analysis Guidelines screening criteria to determine if the submitted project is eligible to be screened out of conducting project-level VMT analysis. If a project meets one or more of the screening criteria, the project is determined to have a less than significant impact to VMT in accordance with the city’s VMT Analysis Guidelines. A project that has not been excluded from the VMT analysis screening process outlined above must undergo a quantitative VMT analysis to determine whether it will have a significant impact on VMT. If it is determined that the project would have a significant impact on VMT (i.e., it does not result in at least a 15 percent reduction in VMT compared to existing conditions), the city shall require the project to implement project-level VMT reduction measures, as noted below, prior to project approval and issuance of construction permits.

Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures and physical measures to reduce VMT are outlined in the City’s VMT Analysis Guidelines and have been identified as potentially VMT reducing in the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity (December 2021). The CAPCOA Handbook provides detailed requirements, calculation steps, and limitations for assessing the VMT reduction effectiveness of each measure, including reductions from combinations of measures.

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 20 of 22 MITIGATION MEASURE Applicable Rezone Sites
Monitoring Type
Monitoring
Department
Shown on Plans
Verified
Implementation
Remarks
Trip reduction strategies may include, but are not limited to, the following:

Provision of bus stop improvements or on-site mobility hubs Pedestrian improvements, on-site or off-site, to connect to nearby transit stops, services, schools, shops, etc.

Bicycle programs including bike purchase incentives, storage, maintenance programs, and on-site education program
Enhancements to the citywide bicycle network
Parking reductions and/or fees set at levels sufficient to incentivize transit, active transportation, or shared modes
Cash allowances, passes, or other public transit subsidies and purchase incentives
Providing enhanced, frequent bus service
Implementation of shuttle service
Other measures not listed in CAPCOA but are proven to be effective means of reducing the amount of VMT generated by residents include increasing the mix of uses by adding retail or services within a site or within convenient walking distance.
1 Although it is unlikely that TDM measures will fully
mitigate the impact of the program to a less-than-significant level, CEQA mandates the implementation of feasible mitigation measures to reduce a project or program's level of impact. In this context, Fehr & Peers identified a list of recommended TDM measures from Appendix E of the city's VMT Analysis Guidelines to mitigate the project VMT impact to the extent feasible as presented in Table 4.13-3. The summary provides an estimate of the effectiveness of these measures and specifies which ones are applicable to areas that have adjacent or near transit.

1. 2.

3. 4.

5. 6.

7. 8.

PROJECT NAME: Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update PROJECT NUMBER: GPA 2022-0001/ZCA 2022-0004/ZC 2022-0001/LCPA 2022-001/AMEND 2023-0008/AMEND 2023-0009/AMEND 2023-0010/AMEND 2023-0011/AMEND 2023-0012/EIR 2022-0007 (PUB2022-0010)

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 21 of 22 MITIGATION MEASURE Applicable Rezone Sites
Monitoring Type
Monitoring
Department
Shown on Plans
Verified
Implementation
Remarks
Table 4.13-1 TDM Measures for Rezone Sites in Carlsbad
Measures
Maximum
Percent
Reduction in
VMT1
Applicable to
Sites Adjacent
to or Near
Transit
Implement Commute Trip Reduction
Marketing
4% -
Implement Subsidized or Discounted
Transit Program

5.50% Yes
Provide Ridesharing Program 8% -
Integrate Affordable and Below Market
Rate Housing (Construct the affordable
housing at the city’s requirement, no
payment of in lieu fees)
Approx. 4% if
meeting city’s
requirement.

28.60% if 100%
affordable
-
Provide Bike Parking Not Quantified -
Improve Transit Access, Safety, and
Comfort
Not Quantified Yes
Provide Bike Parking Near Transit Not Quantified Yes
Orient Project Toward Non-Auto
Corridor
Not Quantified Yes
Source: City of Carlsbad Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis Guidelines, 2022; Fehr & Peers, 2023
Individual rezone sites (if their location based on the TAZ exceeds the city’s VMT threshold) should include all feasible mitigation measures from Table

4.13-3. Projects that are within a half mile of a transit stop should incorporate the measures that are applicable to encouraging transit.

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Page 22 of 22

This page intentionally left blank.

Attachment B
Housing Element Implementation and Public
Safety Element Update - Draft EIR
(on file in the Office of the City Clerk)

Housing Element Implementation and Public
Safety Element Update
Draft Supplemental Environmental Impact Report
prepared by
City of Carlsbad
Planning Division
1635 Faraday Avenue
Carlsbad, California 92008
Contact: Scott Donnell, Senior Planner
prepared with the assistance of
Rincon Consultants, Inc.
2215 Faraday Avenue, Suite A
Carlsbad, California 92008
July 2023
Attachment B
r
RINCON CONSULTANTS, INC.

Environmental Scientists I Planners I Engineers
rinconconsultants.com

This report prepared on 50% recycled paper with 50% post-consumer content.

Table of Contents

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report i
Table of Contents
Executive Summary ...........................................................................................................................ES-1 Project Synopsis .........................................................................................................................ES-1 Alternatives ................................................................................................................................ES-2 Areas of Known Controversy .....................................................................................................ES-2 Issues to be Resolved .................................................................................................................ES-3 Issues Not Studied in Detail in the EIR .......................................................................................ES-3 Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures ........................................................................ES-3 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................ 1-1

1.1 Overview of Previous EIR ................................................................................................ 1-1

1.2 Basis for a Supplemental EIR ........................................................................................... 1-1

1.3 Project Requiring Environmental Analysis ...................................................................... 1-3

1.4 Purpose and Legal Authority ........................................................................................... 1-3

1.5 Documents Incorporated by Reference .......................................................................... 1-5

1.6 Public Review and Participation Process ........................................................................ 1-5

1.7 SEIR Content .................................................................................................................... 1-9

1.8 Scope of this SEIR .......................................................................................................... 1-10

1.9 Baseline and Approach for Impact Analysis .................................................................. 1-11

1.10 Lead, Responsible, and Trustee Agencies ..................................................................... 1-11

1.11 Environmental Review Process ..................................................................................... 1-11 2 Project Description ..................................................................................................................... 2-1

2.1 Project Proponent and Lead Agency ............................................................................... 2-1

2.2 Project Location .............................................................................................................. 2-1

2.3 Background ..................................................................................................................... 2-4

2.3.1 Land Use and Zoning Designations ................................................................. 2-4

2.4 Project Characteristics .................................................................................................... 2-8

2.4.1 Legislative Requirements ................................................................................ 2-8

2.4.2 Objectives of the General Plan ....................................................................... 2-8

2.4.3 Proposed Amendments to the General Plan .................................................. 2-9

2.4.4 Objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map .................................. 2-20

2.4.5 Amendment to Zoning Ordinance ................................................................ 2-20

2.4.6 A mendment to Local Coastal Program ......................................................... 2-20

2.4.7 Amendment to Master and Specific Plans ................................................... 2-21

2.4.8 Anticipated Growth ...................................................................................... 2-21

2.5 Project Objectives ......................................................................................................... 2-22

2.6 Required Approvals ....................................................................................................... 2-22

2.7 California Native American Tribal Consultation ............................................................ 2-24 3 Environmental Setting ................................................................................................................ 3-1

3.1 Regional Setting .............................................................................................................. 3-1

3.2 Rezone Sites Setting ........................................................................................................ 3-1

3.3 Cumulative Projects Setting ............................................................................................ 3-3 4 Environmental Impact Analysis .................................................................................................. 4-1

4.1 Aesthetics ..................................................................................................................... 4.1-1 City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

4.1.1 Setting .......................................................................................................... 4.1-1

4.1.2 Regulatory Setting ....................................................................................... 4.1-2

4.1.3 Impact Analysis ............................................................................................ 4.1-7

4.2 Air Quality .................................................................................................................... 4.2-1

4.2.1 Setting .......................................................................................................... 4.2-1

4.2.2 Regulatory Setting ....................................................................................... 4.2-6

4.2.3 Impact Analysis .......................................................................................... 4.2-10

4.3 Biological Resources ..................................................................................................... 4.3-1

4.3.1 Setting .......................................................................................................... 4.3-1

4.3.2 Regulatory Setting ..................................................................................... 4.3-12

4.3.3 Impact Analysis .......................................................................................... 4.3-19

4.4 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources ......................................................................... 4.4-1

4.4.1 Cultural Setting ............................................................................................ 4.4-1

4.4.2 Regulatory Setting ....................................................................................... 4.4-6

4.4.3 Existing Conditions ..................................................................................... 4.4-14

4.4.4 Impact Analysis .......................................................................................... 4.4-20

4.5 Geology and Soils ......................................................................................................... 4.5-1

4.5.1 Setting .......................................................................................................... 4.5-1

4.5.2 Regulatory Setting ..................................................................................... 4.5-12

4.5.3 Impact Analysis .......................................................................................... 4.5-16

4.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions .......................................................................................... 4.6-1

4.6.1 Setting .......................................................................................................... 4.6-1

4.6.2 Regulatory Setting ....................................................................................... 4.6-5

4.6.3 Impact Analysis .......................................................................................... 4.6-14

4.7 Hazards and Hazardous Materials ............................................................................... 4.7-1

4.7.1 Setting .......................................................................................................... 4.7-1

4.7.2 Regulatory Setting ....................................................................................... 4.7-4

4.7.3 Impact Analysis .......................................................................................... 4.7-14

4.8 H ydrology and Water Quality ...................................................................................... 4.8-1

4.8.1 Setting .......................................................................................................... 4.8-1

4.8.2 Regulatory Setting ....................................................................................... 4.8-8

4.8.3 Impact Analysis .......................................................................................... 4.8-15

4.9 Land Use and Planning ................................................................................................. 4.9-1

4.9.1 Setting .......................................................................................................... 4.9-1

4.9.2 Regulatory Setting ....................................................................................... 4.9-2

4.9.3 Impact Analysis .......................................................................................... 4.9-10

4.10 Noise .......................................................................................................................... 4.10-1

4.10.1 Setting ........................................................................................................ 4.10-1

4.10.2 Regulatory Setting ................................................................................... 4.10-12

4.10.3 Impact Analysis ........................................................................................ 4.10-17

4.11 Population and Housing ............................................................................................. 4.11-1

4.11.1 Setting ........................................................................................................ 4.11-1

4.11.2 Regulatory Setting ..................................................................................... 4.11-1

4.11.3 Impact Analysis .......................................................................................... 4.11-5

4.12 Public Services and Recreation .................................................................................. 4.12-1

4.12.1 Setting ........................................................................................................ 4.12-1

4.12.2 Regulatory Setting ..................................................................................... 4.12-6

4.12.3 Impact Analysis ........................................................................................ 4.12-11 Table of Contents

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report iii

4.13 Transportation ........................................................................................................... 4.13-1

4.13.1 Setting ........................................................................................................ 4.13-1

4.13.2 Regulatory Setting ..................................................................................... 4.13-3

4.13.3 Impact Analysis .......................................................................................... 4.13-9

4.14 Utilities and Service Systems ..................................................................................... 4.14-1

4.14.1 Setting ........................................................................................................ 4.14-1

4.14.2 Regulatory Setting ..................................................................................... 4.14-6

4.14.3 Impact Analysis ........................................................................................ 4.14-24

4.15 Wildfire ...................................................................................................................... 4.15-1

4.15.1 Setting ........................................................................................................ 4.15-1

4.15.2 Regulatory Setting ..................................................................................... 4.15-6

4.15.3 Impact Analysis ........................................................................................ 4.15-12

4.16 Other Environmental Issue Areas Analyzed ............................................................... 4.16-1

4.16.1 Agricultural and Forestry Resources .......................................................... 4.16-1

4.16.2 Energy ........................................................................................................ 4.16-1

4.16.3 Mineral Resources ..................................................................................... 4.16-2 5 Other CEQA Required Discussions .............................................................................................. 5-1

5.1 Growth Inducement ........................................................................................................ 5-1

5.1.1 Economic Growth ........................................................................................... 5-1

5.1.2 Population Growth ......................................................................................... 5-1

5.1.3 Removal of an Impediment to Growth ........................................................... 5-2

5.2 Irreversible Environmental Effects .................................................................................. 5-2

5.3 List of Significant and Unavoidable Impacts ................................................................... 5-3 6 Alternatives ................................................................................................................................. 6-1

6.1 Methodology ................................................................................................................... 6-1

6.2 Alternative 1: No Project Alternative .............................................................................. 6-2

6.2.1 Description ...................................................................................................... 6-2

6.2.2 Impact Analysis ............................................................................................... 6-3

6.3 Alt ernative 2: Reduced Sites ........................................................................................... 6-8

6.3.1 Description ...................................................................................................... 6-8

6.3.2 Impact Analysis ............................................................................................... 6-8

6.4 Environmentally Superior Alternative .......................................................................... 6-18 7 References .................................................................................................................................. 7-1

7.1 Bibliography .................................................................................................................... 7-1

7.2 List of Preparers ............................................................................................................ 7-20 Tables
Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts .......................................................................ES-4 Table 1-1 NOP Comments and SEIR Response ......................................................................... 1-6 Table 2-1 Existing Land Use Designations (2022) ..................................................................... 2-6 Table 2-2 Existing Zoning Designations (2022) ......................................................................... 2-7 Table 2-3 Proposed Land Uses ............................................................................................... 2-10 Table 2-4 Proposed General Plan Land Use and Zoning Map Changes .................................. 2-14 City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

iv
Table 3-1 Rezone Site Characteristics ...................................................................................... 3-1 Table 4.2-1 Ambient Air Quality Standards and Basin Attainment Status ............................... 4.2-5 Table 4.2-2 Ambient Air Quality Data at the Nearest Monitoring Station ............................... 4.2-6 Table 4.2-3 SDAPCD Construction Emissions Thresholds ....................................................... 4.2-10 Table 4.2-4 SDAPCD Operational Emissions Thresholds ........................................................ 4.2-11 Table 4.2-5 Estimated Operational Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions (lbs/day)....................... 4.2-15 Table 4.3-1 Vegetation Communities by Rezone Site .............................................................. 4.3-2 Table 4.3-2 Special- Status Plant and Wildlife Species with Potential to be Affected by the Proposed Project ................................................................................................... 4.3-8 Table 4.4-1 Known Historical Resources on and Adjacent to the Rezone Sites ..................... 4.4-16 Table 4.4-2 Inventory of Rezone Sites .................................................................................... 4.4-17 Table 4.5-1 Geologic Units within City of Carlsbad and their Paleontological Sensitivity...... 4.5-10 Table 4.6-1 Combined Annual Emissions of Greenhouse Gases ............................................ 4.6-19 Table 4.7-1 Project Consistency with McClellan-Palomar Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan ...................................................................................................................... 4.7-20 Table 4.9-1 Existing Land Use Designations ............................................................................. 4.9-1 Table 4.10-1 Building Vibration Damage Potential .................................................................. 4.10-4 Table 4.10-2 Vibration Annoyance Potential ........................................................................... 4.10-5 Table 4.10-3 Project Site Vicinity Sound Level Monitoring Results .......................................... 4.10-6 Table 4.10-4 Noise and Land Use Compatibility Matrix ......................................................... 4.10-16 Table 4.10-5 Allowable Noise Exposure1 ............................................................................... 4.10-17 Table 4.10-6 Performance Standards for Non-Transportation Sources (As Measured at Property Line of Source/Sensitive Use) ............................................................................ 4.10-17 Table 4.10-7 Construction Noise Criteria ............................................................................... 4.10-18 Table 4.10-8 Typical Vibration Levels for Construction Equipment ....................................... 4.10-21 Table 4.10-9 Construction Equipment Noise Levels ............................................................... 4.10-22 Table 4.10-10 Typical Construction Noise Level at 50 Feet ...................................................... 4.10-23 Table 4.10-11 Daily VMT Summary .......................................................................................... 4.10-28 Table 4.10- 12 Construction Equipment Noise Levels ............................................................... 4.10-30 Table 4.12-1 Parkland Acreage by Park District ....................................................................... 4.12-4 Table 4.12-2 Parkland Acreage by Park District with the Proposed Project .......................... 4.12-19 Table 4.13-1 Citywide Average Project Generated VMT per Resident .................................. 4.13-14 Table 4.13-2 VMT per Resident for Project TAZs ................................................................... 4.13-16 Table 4.13-3 TDM Measures for Rezone Sites in Carlsbad ..................................................... 4.13-18 Table of Contents

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report v
Table 4.14-1 CMWD Normal Year Supply and Demand Comparison (AFY) ............................. 4.14-2 Table 4.14-2 CMWD Single Dry Year Supply and Demand Comparison (AFY) ......................... 4.14-2 Table 4.14-3 CMWD Multiple Dry Year Supply and Demand Comparison (AFY) ..................... 4.14-2 Table 4.14-4 2021 Electricity Consumption ............................................................................. 4.14-5 Table 4.14-5 2021 Natural Gas Consumption .......................................................................... 4.14-5 Table 4.14-6 Wastewater Treatment Plant Capacity ............................................................. 4.14-27 Table 6-1 Citywide Average Project Generated VMT per Resident ......................................... 6-7 Table 6-2 Estimated Operational Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions (lbs/day)............................ 6-9 Table 6-3 Combined Annual Emissions of Greenhouse Gases ............................................... 6-11 Table 6-4 Citywide Average Project Generated VMT per Resident ....................................... 6-15 Table 6-5 Daily VMT Summary for Alternative 2 .................................................................... 6-15 Table 6-6 Comparison of Alternative’s Impacts ..................................................................... 6-19 Figures
Figure 1-1 Environmental Review Process .............................................................................. 1-14 Figure 2-1 Regional Location ..................................................................................................... 2-2 Figure 2-2 Carlsbad City Boundaries .......................................................................................... 2-3 Figure 2-3 Existing General Plan Land Use Designations ........................................................... 2-5 Figure 2-4 Proposed Rezone Sites Locations ........................................................................... 2-13 Figure 4.1-1 Transit Priority Areas and Housing Sites ............................................................... 4.1-4 Figure 4.3-1 Carlsbad National Wetlands Inventory Map ......................................................... 4.3-7 Figure 4.5-1 Soil Orders in Carlsbad .......................................................................................... 4.5-2 Figure 4.5-2 Regional Faults near Carlsbad ............................................................................... 4.5-4 Figure 4.5-3 Liquefaction Risk in Carlsbad ................................................................................. 4.5-6 Figure 4.5-4 Landslide Susceptibility in Carlsbad....................................................................... 4.5-8 Figure 4.5-5 Paleontological Sensitivity in Carlsbad ................................................................ 4.5-11 Figure 4.7-1 Schools within 0.25-mile of Housing Sites ............................................................. 4.7-5 Figure 4.7-2 Mc-Clellan-Palomar Airport Safety Zone and Housing Sites ............................... 4.7-12 Figure 4.7- 3 Mc-Clellan-Palomar Airport Airport Influence Area and Housing Sites .............. 4.7-13 Figure 4.8-1 Watershed and Surface Waters in Carlsbad .......................................................... 4.8-2 Figure 4.8-2 FEMA Flood Hazard Zones in Carlsbad .................................................................. 4.8-5 Figure 4.8-3 Dam Inundation Zones in Carlsbad ....................................................................... 4.8-6 Figure 4.8-4 Tsunami Hazard Areas in Carlsbad ........................................................................ 4.8-7 Figure 4.9-1 Carlsbad Coastal Zone Boundary ........................................................................... 4.9-3 City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update vi
Figure 4.10-1 Examples of Typical Noise Levels ........................................................................ 4.10-2 Figure 4.10-2 Noise Measurement Locations and Housing Sites .............................................. 4.10-7 Figure 4.10-3 City Noise Contours – Existing ............................................................................. 4.10-9 Figure 4.10-4 City Noise Contours – Future............................................................................. 4.10-10 Figure 4.10-5 Airport Noise Contours ...................................................................................... 4.10-11 Figure 4.12-1 Rezone Sites Proximity to Parks and Recreational Areas .................................... 4.12-5 Figure 4.12-2 Rezone Sites Proximity to Fire Stations ............................................................. 4.12-15 Figure 4.13-1 Project TAZ Containing Rezone Sites ................................................................. 4.13-15 Figure 4.15 1 Carlsbad Fire Hazard Severity Zones and Responsibility Areas ........................... 4.15-2 Figure 4.15-2 Wildland Urban Interface .................................................................................... 4.15-4 Figure 6-1 Traffic Analysis Zones Containing Alternative 2 Rezone Sites ................................ 6-16 Appendices
Appendix A Notice of Preparation (NOP) and NOP Responses Appendix B Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Modeling Results Appendix C Previous Historical Resources Documentation
Appendix D Noise Measurement Data and Noise Modeling Results Appendix E Transportation Modeling Considerations and Results Memorandum Executive Summary

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report ES-1
Executive Summary
Project Synopsis
Project Applicant and Lead Agency
City of Carlsbad
City of Carlsbad Planning Division
1635 Faraday Avenue
Carlsbad, California 92008
Background
This Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) augments the previously certified Programmatic Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the City of Carlsbad General Plan certified in September 2015. For purposes of this SEIR, the previously certified EIR is referred to herein as the 2015 EIR, and the Carlsbad General Plan is referred to herein as the 2015 General Plan. The impacts of the current 2015 General Plan were analyzed in the 2015 EIR.

The city recently updated its Housing Element to be in compliance with State housing legislation.

The updated 2021-2029 Housing Element was adopted by the Carlsbad City Council on April 6, 2021.

Updates to the Housing Element triggered the need for changes to the 2015 General Plan to, among others, create new land use designations (R-35 and R-40) and accommodate higher density residential development. The recent approval of the Housing Element has also triggered required analysis and compliance with recent and new state safety legislation. For purposes of this SEIR, the discussion will be primarily focused on the proposed changes within the 2015 General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and other documents and not on the Housing Element as that was already analyzed in its own CEQA Addendum document.

Project Description
The Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update Project (proposed project) consists of amendments to the 2015 General Plan, including the Land Use and Community Design Element and Public Safety Element, and revisions to Carlsbad Municipal Code (CMC) Title 21, the Zoning Ordinance. The updates are necessary to implement the programs of the city’s 2021-2029 Housing Element Update, which was adopted by the Carlsbad City Council on April 6, 2021, and comply with changes in state law.

A major component of the project is the change of land use and zoning designations on 18 sites identified in the Housing Element (referred to in this SEIR as “rezone sites”) to facilitate residential development. These rezone sites, identified in the Housing Element and as further directed by the City Council, consist of single or multiple properties currently designated for low-density residential, commercial, industrial or public land uses. As proposed, the rezone sites would be partially or entirely redesignated to medium or high-density residential land use designations. This would require changes to the General Plan and Local Coastal Program land use maps, Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map, and to various master and specific plans. While the proposed project would facilitate new housing through the redesignations, it would not approve any housing construction.

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

ES-2
Alternatives
This SEIR examines two alternatives to the proposed project:

Alternative 1, No Project Alternative, includes a land use pattern comprised of land use trends according to the 2015 General Plan. In other words, it assumes that regional growth trends and land use according to the 2015 General Plan would continue, without the proposed project. Under Alternative 1 population in the Plan Area (City of Carlsbad) for 2035 would be 133,410, consistent with the findings of the 2015 General Plan and acknowledging approved residential development since the General Plan’s adoption. The 18 rezone sites would not be developed at the same capacity under this scenario as they would under the proposed project. Under existing zoning, Alternative 1 would result in the development of approximately 506 units on the 18 rezone sites, which would be 2,789 units fewer than the 3,295 units contemplated for the proposed project. Land use projects would be comprised of those that are currently in construction or are implemented through the 2015 General Plan updated to reflect current conditions. As land use under the current General Plan still has residential capacity (as well as capacity for new non-residential construction, such as new commercial and industrial buildings), the city would continue to grow in terms of housing units, population, non-residential square footage, and jobs. While not an environmental impact under CEQA, this alternative would not be consistent with the required programs of the 2021-2029 Housing Element and the city would be at risk of having the Housing Element “decertified” by the State if these programs are not implemented.

Alternative 2, Reduced Sites, includes development on most of the rezone sites as identified in the project. However, Alternative 2 would exclude development on rezone sites 3, 8, and 15, which, as identified in Table 2-4 of Section 2, Project Description, would accommodate a net increase (not including units already permitted under current designations) of 137 dwelling units total under the project. Additionally, the number of units on sites 14 and 17 would be increased to accommodate more housing (180 units more than analyzed under the project) near COASTER transit stations, which are operated by North County Transit District. Therefore, development under Alternative 2 would accommodate 43 more dwelling units than the proposed project. Alternative 2 would still achieve project objectives such as facilitating residential development to meet the 2021-2029 RHNA and pursuing an infill strategy to create walkable communities.

Each alternative is described in greater detail and analyzed in Section 6, Alternatives, to determine whether environmental impacts would be similar to, less than, or greater than those of the proposed project.

Areas of Known Controversy
Areas of controversy associated with the proposed project are made known through comments received during the Notice of Preparation (NOP) process, as well as input solicited during public scoping meetings and an understanding of the community issues in the region. The SEIR scoping process and comments received in response to the NOP identified areas of known controversy for the proposed project, including issues related to air quality, biological resources, cultural and tribal cultural resources, and transportation. Public comments received during the NOP scoping period as well as the main areas of controversy raised in the comments are summarized in Section 1, Introduction.

Executive Summary

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report ES-3
Issues to be Resolved
Section 15123(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines requires that an EIR contain a discussion of issues to be resolved including the choice among the project and alternatives, and whether or how to mitigate significant effects. Issues to be resolved include:
 Whether to approve the proposed project or an alternative.

Issues Not Studied in Detail in the EIR
Section 4.16, Effects Found Not to Be Significant, of this SEIR, analyzes any possible significant effects that were determined not to be significant and, therefore, were not discussed in detail in this SEIR. The topics analyzed in Section 4.16 include Agricultural and Forestry Resources, Energy, and Mineral Resources.

Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Measures
Table ES-1 summarizes the environmental impacts of the proposed project, proposed mitigation measures, and residual impacts (the impact after application of mitigation, if required).

Impacts are categorized as follows:

Significant and Unavoidable. An impact that cannot be reduced to below the threshold level given reasonably available and feasible mitigation measures. Such an impact requires a Statement of Overriding Considerations to be issued if the project is approved per Section 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines.

Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. An impact that can be reduced to below the threshold level given reasonably available and feasible mitigation measures. Such an impact requires findings under Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines.

Less than Significant. An impact that may be adverse, but does not exceed the threshold levels and does not require mitigation measures. However, mitigation measures that could further lessen the environmental effect may be suggested if readily available and easily achievable.

No Impact. The proposed project would have no effect on environmental conditions or would reduce existing environmental problems or hazards.

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

ES-4
Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts
Impact Mitigation Measure (s) Residual Impact
Aesthetics
Impact AES-1. Similar to the development analyzed in the 2015 General Plan EIR, development under the project would not have a substantial effect on a scenic vista. This impact would be less than significant.

None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
Impact AES-2. The City of Carlsbad does not contain a designated state scenic highway. This impact would be less than significant.

None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
Impact AES-3. Similar to development analyzed in the 2015 General Plan EIR, development under the project would not conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. This impact would be less than significant.

None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
Impact AES-4. Similar to development analyzed in the 2015 General Plan EIR, development under the project would result in new sources of light or glare in the area, but would not adversely affect day or nighttime views. This impact would be less than significant.

None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
Air Quality
Impact AQ-1. Similar to the development analyzed in the 2015 General Plan EIR, the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct the San Diego Regional Air Quality Strategy or State Implementation Plan. This impact would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

AQ-1 Housing Forecast Revisions. Prior to the next update of the Regional Housing Needs Assessment and within six months of the certification of the Final SEIR, the City Planner shall provide a revised housing forecast to SANDAG to ensure that any revisions to the population and employment projections used by SDAPCD in updating the RAQS and the SIP will accurately reflect anticipated growth due to the proposed project.

Less than Significant
with Mitigation
Impact AQ-2. Implementation of the proposed project would violate air quality standards or contribute to an existing air quality violation because project-related emissions would exceed SDAPCD thresholds.

Similarly, the proposed project would result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria pollutants for which the project region is nonattainment under applicable federal or state ambient air quality standards. This impact would be significant and unavoidable.

AQ-2 Operational Emissions Reductions. During the project design and project-level review phases of development projects at the 18 rezone sites, the city shall require each project to determine operational air quality emissions from the project. For projects that exceed regulatory SDCAPCD thresholds, mitigation shall be implemented to reduce impacts to below the regulatory thresholds or to the maximum extent feasible implementing all feasible mitigation. The following represents some measures aimed at reducing air pollutant emissions from operational sources. This is not an exhaustive list of measures, and individual projects shall incorporate measures that best fit each project design.

Significant and
Unavoidable
Executive Summary

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report ES-5
Impact Mitigation Measure (s) Residual Impact
 Use architectural coating materials, as defined in SDAPCD Rule 67.0.1, that are zero-emission or have a low-VOC content (below 10 grams per liter). Where such VOC coatings are not available or feasible, the coating with the lowest VOC rating available shall be used. These measures shall be noted on all construction plans, and the city shall perform periodic site inspections during construction to verify compliance.
 Prohibit the installation of woodstoves, hearths, and fireplaces in new construction facilitated by the proposed project.
 Expand and facilitate completion of planned networks of active transportation infrastructure.
 Implement EV charging infrastructure beyond requirements set forth in the 2022 CalGreen mandatory measures. Such requirements would be equivalent to the Tier 2 voluntary measures set forth in the 2022 CalGreen standards.
 Implement traffic demand measures, such as unbundling parking fees from rent/lease options, encouraging/developing a ride-share program for the community, and provide car/bike sharing services, that will reduce daily individual car usage and reduce project VMT

Impact AQ-3. Development facilitated by the proposed project would not expose offsite sensitive receptors to substantial pollution concentrations. However, the project would site sensitive receptors within close proximity to sources of TAC emissions. This impact would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

AQ-3 Construction Health Risk Assessment. For individual projects (excluding ADUs, single-family residences, and duplexes) where construction activities would occur within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors, would last longer than two months, and would not utilize a fleet comprised of strictly EPA rated Tier 4 engines and/or alternative fuel construction equipment, it is required that a construction health risk assessment (HRA) be performed.
1 The construction health risk shall be
performed by a qualified air quality consultant coordinated through the City. The HRA shall be conducted following the Office of Environmental Health Hazards Association’s (OEHHA) 2015 Health Risk Guidelines (OEHHA 2015) and SDAPCD guidelines to determine potential risk and compare the risk to the following SDAPCD thresholds:
 Increased cancer risk of > 10.0 in a million;
Less than Significant
with Mitigation

1 Sensitive receptors are that segment of the public most susceptible to respiratory distress as a result of poor air quality, such as children under 1 4, persons over 65, persons engaged in strenuous work or exercise, and people with pre-existing cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases. Locations of sensitive receptors include schools, parks and playgro unds, hospitals, day cares, assisted living facilities, and residential communities (CARB 2005) City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

ES-6
Impact Mitigation Measure (s) Residual Impact
 Increased non-cancer risk of > 1.0 Hazard Index (Chronic or Acute); or If risk exceeds the thresholds, measures such as requiring the use of Tier 4 and/or alternative fuel construction equipment are recommended to reduce the risk to appropriate levels. The incorporation of Tier 4 and/or alternative fuel construction equipment reduces the emissions of DPM from construction activities and therefore reduces the potential risk to nearby sensitive receptors.

AQ-4 Operational Health Risk Assessment. Consistent with the

provisions contained in the California Air Resources Board Air Quality and Land Use Handbook, future development projects occurring on Site 2, Site 5, or Site 16 under the proposed project should implement the following:

Project applicants shall retain a qualified air quality consultant to prepare a health risk assessment (HRA) in accordance with the CARB and the Office of Environmental Health and Hazard Assessment requirements to determine the exposure of nearby sensitive receptors to emission sources resulting from the project. The HRA shall be submitted to the City of Carlsbad for review and approval. Project applicants shall implement the approved HRA recommendations to any nearby sensitive receptor, if any. Such measures may include, but are not limited to:
 Install, operate, and maintain in good working order a central heating and ventilation system or other air take system in the building of a sensitive receptor that would be impacted by the project, or in each individual residential unit, that meets the efficiency standard of the minimum efficiency reporting value of 13. The heating and ventilation system should include the following features: installation of a high- efficiency filter and/or carbon filter to minimize particulate and other airborne chemical matter from entering the building. Either high- efficiency particulate absorption filters or American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air-Conditioning Engineers 85 percent supply filters should be used.
 Ensure that positive pressure occurs in the building.  Achieve a performance standard of at least one air exchange per hour of fresh outside filtered air.
 Achieve a performance standard of at least four air exchanges per hour of recirculation.

Executive Summary

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report ES-7
Impact Mitigation Measure (s) Residual Impact
 Achieve a performance standard of 0.25 air exchanges per hour of unfiltered infiltration if the building is not positively pressurized.

Impact AQ-4. Similar to the development analyzed in the 2015 General Plan EIR, the proposed project would not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. This impact would be less than significant.

None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
Cumulative Impact: As described under Impact AQ-1, the SDAPCD’s approach for assessing cumulative impacts is based on consistency with the latest adopted RAQS. With implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1, the proposed project would be consistent with the RAQS. Additionally, SDAPCD best management practices are required for all grading activities in the SDAPCD’s jurisdiction, which would reduce Citywide emissions of ozone precursors, PM
10, and PM2.5 from
construction facilitated by the proposed project. However, operational emissions resulting from the proposed project would result in exceedances of SDAPCD thresholds, even with
implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-2, and thus would be significant and unavoidable. Therefore, the proposed project’s contribution to cumulative air quality impacts would result in a cumulatively significant impact.

No feasible mitigation measures have been identified. Cumulatively considerable impact.

Biological Resources
Impact BIO-1. The proposed project could potentially adversely impact special-status species or their habitat. Local special-status species and nesting birds could occur within the sites during potential construction periods and may potentially be affected by construction activity.

This impact would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

3.7 No. 5, and HMP Section D-6 for TLB, VP species) and special species standards (HMP Section D-6 for LBV and Harb Dun Skipper). The Less than Significant
with Mitigation
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

ES-8
Impact Mitigation Measure (s) Residual Impact
Biological Resources Technical Report shall address the presence/absence of suitable habitat for special-status plant and wildlife species, and any additional protocol surveys that may be needed to determine the potential presence/absence of special status species, sensitive plant communities and wetlands, and other special status biological resources protected under the HMP. The report will further propose avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures, consistent with HMP requirements, necessary to reduce potential impacts to special-status biological resources to less than significant.

BIO-2 Pre-Construction Bird Surveys, Avoidance, and Notification. If construction activities are initiated during the bird nesting season (February 1 – August 31) involving removal of vegetation or other nesting bird habitat, including abandoned structures and other man-made features, a pre-construction nesting bird survey shall be conducted no more than three days prior to initiation of ground disturbance and vegetation removal activities. The nesting bird pre-construction survey shall be conducted on foot and shall include a 300-foot buffer around the construction site. The survey shall be conducted by a biologist familiar with the identification of avian species known to occur in southern California coastal communities (i.e., qualified biologist). If nests are found, an avoidance buffer shall be determined by a qualified biologist in coordination with the city. The avoidance buffer width will depend upon the species, the proposed work activity, and existing disturbances associated with land uses outside of the site, which shall be demarcated by the biologist with bright orange construction fencing, flagging, construction lathe, or other means to demarcate the boundary. All construction personnel shall be notified as to the existence of the buffer zone and to avoid entering the buffer zone during the nesting season. No ground disturbing activities shall occur within the buffer until the biologist has confirmed that breeding/nesting is completed, and the young have fledged the nest. Encroachment into the buffer shall occur only at the discretion of the qualified biologist on the basis that the encroachment will not be detrimental to an active nest. A report summarizing the pre-construction survey(s) shall be prepared by a qualified biologist and shall be submitted to the city prior to the commencement of construction activities.

Executive Summary

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report ES-9
Impact Mitigation Measure (s) Residual Impact
Impact BIO-2. Development resulting from the project could potentially adversely impact areas that support sensitive natural communities and riparian habitats. This impact would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

BIO-3 Habitat Buffers. For projects where native habitat may be present (specifically Sites 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 17, 18, and 19) and if development cannot avoid native habitat, prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a qualified biologist shall be retained by the project applicant to conduct a vegetation community survey of the site. The qualified biologist shall map the extent of vegetation communities on the project site plus 100 feet and report on the findings. This survey and report can be combined with BIO-1, Biological Resources Technical Report. The report shall confirm potential impacts to riparian and wetland habitat have been sufficiently avoided or minimized to reduce impacts to less than significant. Housing development at any of the sites containing riparian or wetland habitat shall adhere to the HMP Guidelines for Riparian and Wetland Buffers.

Housing developments at any of the sites within the coastal zone shall adhere to the upland and wetland buffer requirements pursuant to the HMP coastal zone standards. The Biological Resources technical report shall include a figure showing all required upland, riparian and wetland buffers.

BIO-4 Habitat Impact Mitigation. For projects that will require mitigation through restoration of sensitive upland natural communities (e.g. coastal sage scrub) or wetland habitat, including streams, riparian, and other water bodies, specifically Sites 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 9, 17, 18, and 19, mitigation through restoration, creation, or enhancement of in-kind habitats shall be implemented in accordance with ratios identified in the HMP (Table 11 and coastal zone standards Section D-7) and an approved mitigation plan.

Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall prepare and submit a Conceptual Restoration/Mitigation Plan (CRMP) consistent with the HMP Components of a Conceptual Restoration/Mitigation Plan and Guidelines for Habitat Creation and Restoration. The CRMP will provide the framework for compensating for impacts to sensitive riparian and coastal sage scrub habitat at a ratio consistent with HMP Table 11 and coastal zone standards.

Less than Significant
with Mitigation
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

ES-10
Impact Mitigation Measure (s) Residual Impact
Impact BIO-3. Development resulting from the project could potentially adversely impact federally protected wetlands. This impact would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

BIO-5 Agency Coordination. For projects on sites within potential jurisdictional features, including Sites 1, 2, 4, 9, and 17, permits, agreements, and/or water quality certifications from applicable state and federal agencies regarding compliance with state and federal laws governing work within jurisdictional features are required for submission to the city of Carlsbad with the grading permit application for the project.

The project applicant shall satisfy all mitigation requirements of the above agencies. The applicant shall provide such permits and/or agreements prior to issuance of a grading permit.

Less than Significant
with Mitigation
Impact BIO-4. Development under the proposed project would be primarily concentrated on sites in urban areas of Carlsbad that have been previously developed and disturbed, rather than adjacent to native habitats and potential wildlife corridors. Development under the project could result in significant impacts to potential local wildlife movement along watercourses such as Buena Vista Creek and Agua Hedionda Creek. This impact would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

Implementation of mitigation measures BIO-1, BIO-3, and BIO-4 (listed under Impact BIO-1 and Impact BIO-2) is required.

Less than Significant
with Mitigation
Impact BIO-5. Development under the proposed project could potentially adversely impact areas that support protected trees or tree canopies. This impact would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

BIO-6 Protected Tree and Tree Canopy Survey. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a tree survey shall be conducted by a certified arborist prior to project construction to tag and assess all trees subject to the city’s Trees and Shrubs Ordinance (Municipal Code Title 11.12) and/or CFMP. A city arborist will inspect the property and recommend approving or denying the application in a written report submitted to the city manager. The city shall post a letter of notification and a non-removable marking upon the subject tree a minimum of 30 days prior to its removal.

The letter will be posted in a prominent location, visible from a public street and will include, the location of the tree, the reason for the trees removal, the date of the scheduled removal, the species of tree to be replanted, the size of the tree to be replanted, the date by which an appeal must be made to the parks and recreation commission, and a description of the appeal process.

The following measures shall be implemented in addition to those required under the city’s permits required for tree removal and maintenance ordinance Guidelines (Municipal Code Title 11.12.090) to avoid and/or compensate for potential indirect impacts to preserved Less than Significant
with Mitigation
Executive Summary

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report ES-11
Impact Mitigation Measure (s) Residual Impact
sensitive natural communities and protected trees within Carlsbad before, during, and following construction activities.

PRE-CONSTRUCTION
 Fencing. Protective fencing at least three feet high with signs and flagging shall be erected around all preserved sensitive natural communities where adjacent to proposed vegetation clearing and grubbing, grading, or other construction activities. The protective fence shall be installed at a minimum of five feet beyond the tree canopy dripline. The intent of protection fencing is to prevent inadvertent limb/vegetation damage, root damage and/or
compaction by construction equipment. The protective fencing shall be depicted on all construction plans and maps provided to contractors and labeled clearly to prohibit entry, and the placement of the fence in the field shall be approved by a qualified biologist prior to initiation of construction activities. The contractor shall maintain the fence to keep it upright, taut and aligned at all times. Fencing shall be removed only after all construction activities are completed.  Pre-Construction Meeting. A pre-construction meeting shall be held between all site contractors and a registered consulting arborist and/or a qualified biologist. All site contractors and their employees shall provide written acknowledgement of their receiving sensitive natural community protection training. This training shall include, but shall not be limited to, the following information: (1) the location and marking of protected sensitive natural communities; (2) the necessity of preventing damage to these sensitive natural communities; and (3) a discussion of work practices that shall accomplish such.

Operating heavy machinery around the root zones of trees would increase soil compaction, which decreases soil aeration and, City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

ES-12
Impact Mitigation Measure (s) Residual Impact
subsequently, reduces water penetration into the soil. All heavy equipment and vehicles shall, at minimum, stay out of the fenced protected zones, unless where specifically approved in writing and under the supervision of a registered consulting arborist and/or a qualified biologist.
 Materials Storage and Disposal. Contractors shall not store or discard any construction materials within the fenced protected zones and shall remove all foreign debris within these areas. The contractors shall leave the duff, mulch, chips, and leaves around the retained trees for water retention and nutrient supply. Contractors shall avoid draining or leakage of equipment fluids near retained trees. Fluids such as gasoline, diesel, oils, hydraulics, brake and transmission fluids, paint, paint thinners, and glycol (anti-freeze) shall be disposed of properly. The contractors shall ensure that equipment be parked at least 50 feet, and that equipment/vehicle refueling occur at least 100 feet, from fenced protected zones to avoid the possibility of leakage of equipment fluids into the soil.
 Grade Changes. Contractors shall ensure that grade changes, including adding fill, shall not be permitted within the fenced protected zone without special written authorization and under supervision by a registered consulting arborist and/or a qualified biologist. Lowering the grade within the fenced protected zones could necessitate cutting main support and feeder roots, thus jeopardizing the health and structural integrity of the tree(s). Adding soil, even temporarily, on top of the existing grade could compact the soil further, and decrease both water and air availability to the tree roots.

Contractors shall ensure that grade changes made outside of the fenced protected zone shall not create conditions that allow water to pond.
 Trenching. Except where specifically approved in writing beforehand, all trenching shall be outside of the fenced protected zone. Roots primarily extend in a horizontal direction forming a support base to the tree similar to the base of a wineglass. Where trenching is necessary in areas that contain roots from retained trees, contractors shall use trenching techniques that include the use of either a root pruner (Dosko root pruner or equivalent) or an Air-Spade to limit root impacts. An International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) certified arborist or American Society of Consulting Arborists (ASCA) registered Executive Summary

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report ES-13
Impact Mitigation Measure (s) Residual Impact
consulting arborist shall ensure that all pruning cuts shall be clean and sharp, to minimize ripping, tearing, and fracturing of the root system.

Erosion control materials shall be certified as weed free.  Inspection. An ISA certified arborist or ASCA registered consulting arborist shall inspect the preserved trees adjacent to grading and construction activity on a monthly basis for the duration of the grading and construction activities. A report summarizing site conditions, observations, tree health, and recommendations for minimizing tree damage shall be submitted by the registered consulting arborist following each inspection.

OST-CONSTRUCTION
 Mulch. The contractors shall ensure that the natural duff layer under all trees adjacent to construction activities shall be maintained. This would stabilize soil temperatures in root zones, conserve soil moisture, and reduce erosion. The contractors shall ensure that the mulch be kept clear of the trunk base to avoid creating conditions favorable to the establishment and growth of decay causing fungal pathogens. Should it be necessary to add organic mulch beneath retained oak trees, packaged or commercial oak leaf mulch shall not be used as it may contain root fungus. Also, the use of redwood chips shall be avoided as certain inhibitive chemicals may be present in the wood. Other wood chips and crushed walnut shells can be used, but the best mulch that provides a source of nutrients for the tree is its own leaf litter. Any added organic mulch added by the contractors shall be applied to a maximum depth of 4 inches where possible.  Watering Adjacent Plant Material. All installed landscaping plants near the preserved sensitive natural communities shall require moderate to low levels of water. The surrounding plants shall be watered infrequently with deep soaks and allowed to dry out in- City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

ES-14
Impact Mitigation Measure (s) Residual Impact
between, rather than frequent light irrigation. The soil shall not be allowed to become saturated or stay continually wet, nor should drainage allow ponding of water. Irrigation spray shall not hit the trunk of any tree. The contractors shall maintain a 30-inch dry-zone around all tree trunks. An above ground micro-spray irrigation system shall be used in lieu of typical underground pop-up sprays.  Monitoring. An ISA certified arborist or ASCA registered consulting arborist shall inspect the trees preserved on the site adjacent to construction activities for a period of two years following the completion of construction. Monitoring visits shall be completed quarterly, totaling eight visits. Following each monitoring visit, a report summarizing site conditions, observations, tree health, and recommendations for promoting tree health shall be submitted to the city. Additionally, any tree mortality shall be noted and any tree dying during the two-year monitoring period shall be replaced at a minimum 3:1 ratio on-site in coordination with the city.

Impact BIO-6. The proposed project (specifically Sites 4, 6, 9, and 17) may conflict with an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plans. This impact would be less than significant with mitigation incorporated.

BIO-7 HMP Minor Amendments. Prior to project approval at Site 4, 6, 9 and 17, each project shall be analyzed for consistency with the HMP.

Development may not occur within an Existing or Proposed Hardline. Any revisions to the HMP hardline boundary to allow for development on these sites shall require a HMP minor amendment, to be processed as an Equivalency Finding. Such boundary revisions must not involve any revisions the HMP operations or implementation, produce any adverse effects on the environment that are new or significantly different from those previously analyzed, result in additional take not previously analyzed, or reduce the acreage or quality of the habitat within the HMP.

Any loss of HMP hardline shall be replaced with equal or greater acres of hardline, adjacent to existing hardline elsewhere in the city, and preserved and managed in accordance with the HMP. Any development within the Standards Area portion of Site 4 shall require a HMP Minor Amendment, to be processed as a Consistency Finding, which requires consistency with the HMP Planning Standards for Local Facilities Management Zone 15.

BIO-8 HMP Adjacency Standards. Projects within sites 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 17, 18, 19 shall evaluate potential indirect impacts, such as wildfire, erosion, invasive species, unauthorized access, or predators, to habitat Less than Significant
with Mitigation.

Executive Summary

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report ES-15
Impact Mitigation Measure (s) Residual Impact
and species adjacent to the proposed development. Projects shall be consistent with the HMP Adjacency Standards (Section F-3).

Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
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.

No feasible mitigation measures beyond compliance with applicable city standards including general plan policies, the Historic Preservation Ordinance and the Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidelines.

Significant and
Unavoidable

Impact CUL-2. Development accommodated by the Project could adversely affect identified and previously unidentified Archaeological resources. Impacts would be less than significant with adherence to the Carlsbad Cultural Resource Guidelines.

None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
Impact CUL-3. Ground-disturbing activities associated with development under the 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.

None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
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.

None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
Cumulative Impact: 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 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.

No feasible mitigation measures have been identified. Cumulatively considerable impact.

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

ES-16
Impact Mitigation Measure (s) Residual Impact
Geology and Soils
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.

None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
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.

None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
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.

None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
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.

None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
Executive Summary

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report ES-17
Impact Mitigation Measure (s) Residual Impact
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.

None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
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 None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
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.

GHG-1 Update City of Carlsbad Climate Action Plan. The City shall draft and City Council shall adopt 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 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.

Significant and
Unavoidable
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

ES-18
Impact Mitigation Measure (s) Residual Impact
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
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.

None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
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.

None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
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.

None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
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.

None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
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.

None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
Executive Summary

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report ES-19
Impact Mitigation Measure (s) Residual Impact
Hydrology and 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.

None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
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.

None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
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.

None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
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.

None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
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
None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

ES-20
Impact Mitigation Measure (s) Residual Impact
Land Use and Planning
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.

None required. No Impact
Impact LU-2. The proposed project would not result in a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan and policy. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.

None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
Noise
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.

NOI-1 Construction Noise Reduction Measures. The following construction noise reduction measures shall be implemented during project construction:
 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 Significant and
Unavoidable
Executive Summary

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report ES-21
Impact Mitigation Measure (s) Residual Impact
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 City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

ES-22
Impact Mitigation Measure (s) Residual Impact
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.  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.

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.

None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
Executive Summary

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report ES-23
Impact Mitigation Measure (s) Residual Impact
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.

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).

Less than Significant
with Mitigation
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

ES-24
Impact Mitigation Measure (s) Residual Impact
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.

None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
Cumulative Impact: Under a worse-case scenario, 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. 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.

No feasible mitigation measures have been identified. Cumulatively considerable impact.

Population and Housing
Impact POP-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.

None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
Impact POP-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.

None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
Executive Summary

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report ES-25
Impact Mitigation Measure (s) Residual Impact
Public Services and Recreation
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.

None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
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.

None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
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.

None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
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.

None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
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 None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

ES-26
Impact Mitigation Measure (s) Residual Impact
Transportation
Impact T-1. Similar to the development analyzed in the 2015 General Plan EIR, development facilitated by the proposed project would not result in additional conflicts with programs and plans related to the circulation system, relative to the 2015 General Plan. This impact would be less than significant.

None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
Impact T-2. Development facilitated by the proposed project has the potential to interfere with achievement of the VMT reductions set forth in City of Carlsbad VMT Analysis Guidelines. This impact would be significant and unavoidable.

Trip reduction strategies may include, but are not limited to, the following:

Provision of bus stop improvements or on-site mobility hubs Significant and
Unavoidable

1. Executive Summary

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report ES-27
Impact Mitigation Measure (s) Residual Impact
Pedestrian improvements, on-site or off-site, to connect to nearby transit stops, services, schools, shops, etc.

Bicycle programs including bike purchase incentives, storage, maintenance programs, and on-site education program
Enhancements to the citywide bicycle network
Parking reductions and/or fees set at levels sufficient to incentivize transit, active transportation, or shared modes
Cash allowances, passes, or other public transit subsidies and purchase incentives
Providing enhanced, frequent bus service
Implementation of shuttle service
Other measures not listed in CAPCOA but are proven to be effective means of reducing the amount of VMT generated by residents include increasing the mix of uses by adding retail or services within a site or within convenient walking distance.2 Although it is unlikely that TDM measures will fully mitigate the impact of the program to a less-than- significant level, CEQA mandates the implementation of feasible mitigation measures to reduce a project or program's level of impact. In this context, Fehr & Peers identified a list of recommended TDM measures from Appendix E of the city's VMT Analysis Guidelines to mitigate the project VMT impact to the extent feasible [as presented in Table 4.13-3 of Section 4.13, Transportation, of this SEIR]. The summary provides an estimate of the effectiveness of these measures and specifies which ones are applicable to areas that have adjacent or near transit.

Individual rezone sites (if their location based on the TAZ exceeds the city’s VMT threshold) should include all feasible mitigation measures Table 4.13-3. Projects that are within a half mile of a transit stop should incorporate the measures that are applicable to encouraging transit.

Impact T-3. Similar to development analyzed in the 2015 General Plan EIR, development facilitated by the project would not substantially increase hazards due to geometric design features (e.g., share curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment). This impact would be less than significant.

None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation

2 American Planning Association PAS Memo, 2013. “Getting Trip Generation Right: Eliminating the Bias Against Mixed Use Development” by Jerry Wa lters, Brian Bochner, and Reid Ewing, May.

2. 3.

4. 5.

6. 7.

8. City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

ES-28
Impact Mitigation Measure (s) Residual Impact
Impact T-4. Similar to development analyzed in the 2015 General Plan EIR, development by the project would not result in inadequate emergency access. This impact would be less than significant.

None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
Cumulative Impact: Because the analysis for the project is based on VMT per resident, the significant VMT impact finding implies that the project would also have a cumulatively considerable contribution to a significant cumulative impact. Since project-level significance thresholds were designed to support long-term environmental goals, they inherently also address potential cumulative VMT impacts. As such, VMT would be cumulatively considerable. Therefore, the cumulative impact related to VMT would be significant and unavoidable.

No feasible mitigation measures have been identified. Cumulatively considerable impact.

Utilities and Service Systems
Impact UTIL-1. Similar to the development analyzed in the 2015 General Plan EIR, development under the project may require the relocation or construction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment, stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, and telecommunications facilities. However, such relocation and construction would not cause significant environmental effects beyond those already identified in this SEIR. This impact would be less than significant.

None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
Impact UTIL-2. Similar to the development analyzed in the 2015 General Plan EIR, construction and operation of development under the project would result in a net increase in water demand. However, this increase in demand can be served by projected and reasonably available water supplies. This Impact would be less than significant.

None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
Impact UTIL-3. Similar to the development analyzed in the 2015 General Plan EIR, Wastewater generated by development under the project would be treated at the Encina Wastewater Authority in Carlsbad. The plant would have adequate capacity to serve the anticipated wastewater generation in addition to its existing wastewater treatment commitments. This Impact would be less than significant.

None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
Executive Summary

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report ES-29
Impact Mitigation Measure (s) Residual Impact
Impact UTIL-4. Similar to the development analyzed in the 2015 General Plan EIR, development under the project would not generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, including the Republic Services Palomar Transfer Station. The project would not impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals, and development would comply with federal, State, and applicable local statutes and regulations related to solid waste. This impact would be less than significant
None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
Wildfire
Impact WF-1. Similar to the development analyzed in 2015 General Plan, development facilitated by the project would result in additional population and vehicle miles traveled in the city. The project could result in changes to emergency evacuation routes or could increase roadway congestion such that the use of an evacuation route would be hindered. However, impacts would remain less than significant.

None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
Impact WF-2. Carlsbad is located within a Local Responsibly Area Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone and adjacent to a State Responsibility Area Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone. Compliance with applicable policies, codes and regulations would reduce the risk of loss, injury, or death from wildfire associated with development facilitated by the project. This impact would remain less than significant.

None required. Less than Significant
without Mitigation
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

ES-30

This page intentionally left blank.

Introduction

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 1-1
Introduction
This Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR) evaluates impacts associated with the proposed project (“Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update”), which consists of amendments to the Carlsbad General Plan, including the Land Use and Community Design Element and Public Safety Element, and amendments to Carlsbad Municipal Code Title 21, the Zoning Ordinance. The General Plan, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) environmental review process, and the legal basis for preparing an SEIR are described below.

This section discusses:
 Overview of previous Environmental Impact Report (EIR);  Basis for an SEIR;
 Project requiring environmental analysis;
 Purpose and legal authority of the SEIR;
 Public review and participation process;
 SEIR content;
 SEIR scope;
 Baseline and approach of the SEIR impact analysis;
 Agency roles and responsibilities; and,
 Environmental review process

1.1 Overview of Previous EIR
The City of Carlsbad’s certified 2015 General Plan and Climate Action Plan EIR (“2015 General Plan EIR”) analyzed impacts from the 2015 General Plan Update and the city’s Climate Action Plan. The 2015 General Plan EIR anticipated the addition of 6,798 new residential dwelling units by the horizon year of 2035. The 2015 General Plan EIR found less than significant impacts for aesthetics, agricultural resources, biological resources, cultural resources, energy, greenhouse gas emissions, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use, noise, population and housing, public services and recreation, tribal cultural resources, utilities and service systems, and wildfire; and significant and unavoidable impacts for air quality and transportation.

1.2 Basis for a Supplemental EIR
When an EIR has been adopted and a project is modified or expanded upon, additional CEQA review may be necessary. The key considerations in determining the need for the appropriate type of additional CEQA review are outlined in Section 21166 of the Public Resources Code (PRC) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15163.

Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared unless one or more of the following conditions is present:

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

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

1-2
Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the Negative Declaration was adopted, shows any of the following:
a. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration;
b. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR;
c. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or d. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative.

Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15163, a lead agency may choose to prepare a supplement to the EIR rather than subsequent EIR if:

Any of the conditions described in Section 15162 would require the preparation of a subsequent EIR, and
Only minor additions or changes would be necessary to make the previous EIR adequately apply to the project in the changed situation.

Furthermore, according to CEQA Guidelines Section 15163:

The supplement to the EIR need contain only the information necessary to make the previous EIR adequate for the project as revised.

A supplement to an EIR shall be given the same kind of notice and public review as is given to a draft EIR under Section 15087.

A supplement to an EIR may be circulated by itself without recirculating the previous draft or final EIR.

When the agency decides whether to approve the project, the decision-making body shall consider the previous EIR as revised by the supplemental EIR. A finding under Section 15091 shall be made for each significant effect shown in the previous EIR as revised.

Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15163, the City of Carlsbad prepared this as a “Supplemental” EIR because only minor additions and changes would be necessary to make the previously certified 2015 General Plan EIR adequately apply to the project. An SEIR is the appropriate level of CEQA documentation for multiple reasons. First, the document incorporates updates to the CEQA Guidelines since 2015 and includes analysis of environmental issue areas added to the CEQA Guidelines and not included in the 2015 General Plan EIR. New environmental issue areas analyzed in this SEIR include energy, wildfire, vehicle miles traveled (VMT) and tribal cultural resources.

Therefore, the City of Carlsbad has determined that the preparation of a SEIR is the appropriate

2. 3.

1. 2.
a.
b.
c.
d.

Introduction

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 1-3
approach to CEQA compliance. Consistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15050, the 2015 General Plan EIR is incorporated into this document by reference. A summary of impacts and applicable mitigation identified in the 2015 General Plan EIR is included in Section 4, Environmental Impact Analysis.

1.3 Project Requiring Environmental Analysis
The proposed project would facilitate the development of housing on 18 sites as part of the Housing Element implementation. Accordingly, the Carlsbad General Plan, specifically the Land Use and Community Design Element, would be updated to allow for this development. The Public Safety Element would also be updated to ensure consistency with State regulations. Updates to the Land Use and Community Design Element include the proposed addition of two new residential land use designations (R-35 and R-40) for the accommodation of higher density residential development, establishment of revised minimum densities for some residential designations, miscellaneous, related changes to tables, text and policies, and changes to land use designations on multiple sites to accommodate the city’s RHNA share. Updates to the Public Safety Element would include addition of the requirements of new State legislation and the incorporation of new policies based on local and regional data. The following documents would be updated consistent with the changes noted above:
 Consistent with project General Plan changes, revise the Zoning Ordinance.  Amend the Local Coastal Program as necessary to maintain consistency with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
 Revise various master plans and specific plans as necessary to reflect amendments to the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and Local Coastal Program.

See Section 2, Project Description, for additional information about the proposed project.

1.4 Purpose and Legal Authority
The proposed project requires the discretionary approval of the City of Carlsbad; therefore, the project is subject to the environmental review requirements of CEQA PRC Section 21000, commonly referred to as the CEQA. As such, this SEIR is an informational document for use by the City of Carlsbad (Lead Agency), other agencies, and the general public in their consideration and evaluation of the environmental consequences of implementing the proposed project.

In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15121(a), the purpose of this SEIR is to:
 Inform public agency decision makers and the pubic of any significant environmental effects that would result from the Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update;  Identify possible ways to minimize significant effects; and,  Identify reasonable alternatives to the Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update.

This SEIR was prepared in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15151, which defines the standards for EIR adequacy as follows:

An EIR should be prepared with a sufficient degree of analysis to provide decision makers with information which enables them to make a decision which intelligently takes account of City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

1-4
environmental consequences. An evaluation of the environmental effects of a proposed project need not be exhaustive, but the sufficiency of an EIR is to be reviewed in the light of what is reasonably feasible. Disagreement among experts does not make an EIR inadequate, but the EIR should summarize the main points of disagreement among the experts. The courts have looked not for perfection but for adequacy, completeness, and a good faith effort at full disclosure.

The 2015 General Plan EIR was a Program EIR as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15168 because it enabled the City of Carlsbad, as the Lead Agency, to examine the overall effects of a series of actions that can be characterized as one large project. Consistent with the 2015 General Plan EIR, this SEIR is a Program EIR under Section 15168(a) of the CEQA Guidelines. Section 15168(a) states that:

A Program EIR is an EIR which may be prepared on a series of actions that can be characterized as one large project and are related either: (1) geographically; (2) as logical parts in a chain of contemplated actions; (3) in connection with issuance of rules, regulations, plans, or other general criteria, to govern the conduct of a continuing program; or (4) as individual activities carried out under the same authorizing statutory or regulatory authority and having generally similar environmental effects which can be mitigated in similar ways.

This SEIR is intended to serve as a Program EIR under CEQA. Although the legally required contents of a Program EIR are the same as those of a Project EIR, Program EIRs are typically more conceptual and may contain a more general or qualitative discussion of impacts, alternatives, and mitigation measures than a Project EIR. As provided in CEQA Guidelines Section 15168, a Program EIR may be prepared on a series of actions that may be characterized as one large project. Use of a Program EIR provides the city with the opportunity to consider broad policy alternatives and program-wide mitigation measures, and provides the city with greater flexibility to address project-specific and cumulative environmental impacts on a comprehensive basis.

A Program EIR is appropriate for the proposed project because it satisfies Section 15168(a). The project area for this analysis includes the incorporated city; is within a logical part in a chain of contemplated actions for implementation of the Housing Element and other updates to the General Plan; would be under the city’s rules, regulations, plans, and other general criteria; is carried out under one regulatory authority, the city; and would have generally similar environmental effects, as they relate to increasing housing units within the city, which can be mitigated in similar ways. Once a Program EIR has been prepared, subsequent activities within the program must be evaluated to determine whether an additional CEQA document needs to be prepared. However, if the Program EIR addresses the program’s effects as specifically and comprehensively as possible, many subsequent activities could be found to be within the Program EIR scope and additional environmental documents may not be required (14 CCR 15168[c]).

When a Program EIR is relied on for a subsequent activity, the lead agency must incorporate feasible mitigation measures and alternatives developed in the Program EIR into the subsequent activities (14 CCR 15168[c][3]). If a subsequent activity would have effects that were not examined in the Program EIR, the lead agency must prepare a new Initial Study leading to a Negative Declaration, Mitigated Negative Declaration, or an EIR (14 CCR 15168[c][1]). The CEQA Guidelines encourage the use of Program EIRs, citing five advantages in Section 15168(b):

Provide an occasion for a more exhaustive consideration of effects and alternatives than would be practical in an EIR on an individual action,
Ensure consideration of cumulative impacts that might be slighted in a case-by-case analysis,

1. 2.

Introduction

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 1-5
Avoid duplicative reconsideration of basic policy considerations, Allow the Lead Agency to consider broad policy alternatives and program-wide mitigation measures at an early time when the agency has greater flexibility to deal with basic problems or cumulative impacts, and
Allow reduction in paperwork.

The proposed project involves the implementation of a broad policy planning document. The project-level details of the implementation of the proposed project would not be known at the time of preparation of the EIR. In this case, the Program EIR still serves a valuable purpose as the first-tier environmental analysis. The Program EIR approach would provide a sufficient level of analysis for the broad nature of the proposed project and future development goals. The city intends to take full advantage of the CEQA streamlining provisions in order to encourage the construction of more housing options quicker and more efficiently.

The SEIR will help facilitate the opportunity for projects to utilize Public Resource Code Section 21159.24, which allows urban infill residential development that meets certain criteria be exempt from CEQA. The city would also facilitate the statutory Infill Housing Exemption by providing updated community level environmental review, as defined by Public Resources Code Section 21159.20, for properties designated for residential development by the General Plan. In addition, the city may utilize the SB266 CEQA streamlining provisions that was adopted as part of CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.3 to streamline review for eligible infill projects by limiting the topic subject to review at the project level.

1.5 Documents Incorporated by Reference
As permitted by State CEQA Guidelines Section 15150, this SEIR has referenced several technical studies, analyses, and previously certified environmental documentation. Information from the documents, which have been incorporated by reference, has been briefly summarized in the appropriate section(s). The relationship between the incorporated part of the referenced document and the SEIR has also been described. The documents and other sources that have been used in the preparation of this SEIR are listed in Section 7, References and Preparers, of this SEIR.

Technical appendices, used as a basis for much of the environmental analysis in the SEIR, have been summarized in the SEIR, and are provided under separate cover as part of the SEIR. The technical appendices are available for review at the City of Carlsbad Planning Division at 1635 Faraday Avenue, Carlsbad CA 92008.

1.6 Public Review and Participation Process
The City of Carlsbad published and distributed a Notice of Preparation (NOP) of the SEIR for a 30-day agency and public review period starting on September 14, 2022, and ending on October 14, 2022.

The city held two scoping meetings on September 26, 2022 (in-person) and September 28, 2022 (virtual). On October 13, 2022, the city issued an amended NOP extending the public comment period to October 26, 2022, and adding a third scoping meeting on October 19, 2022 (in-person).

The scoping meetings were aimed at providing information about the proposed project to members of public agencies, interested stakeholders, residents, and community members. Awareness of the project and first two scoping meetings was provided via mailers to all property owners and residents within a 600-foot radius of each housing site.

3. 4.

5. City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

1-6
The city received letters from three agencies in response to the NOP during the public review period, as well as numerous written comments via email and verbal comments during the scoping meetings. The NOP is presented in Appendix A of this SEIR. Table 1-1 summarizes the content of many of the letters, comment cards, and verbal comments received and where the issues raised are addressed in the EIR. All comments, including those that are non-CEQA related, are included in Appendix A and the administrative record.

The City of Carlsbad also consulted with Native American Tribal representatives consistent with the requirements of SB 18 and AB 52. A summary of consultation activities is provided in Section 4.4, Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources, of this SEIR.

Table 1-1 NOP Comments and SEIR Response
Commenter Comment/Request How and Where It Was Addressed Agency Comments
California
Department of
Fish and Wildlife
(CDFW)
Recommends the SEIR include discussions in the
Biological Resources section of direct, indirect,
and cumulative impacts expected to adversely
impact biological resources in public lands, open
space, riparian ecosystems, and any designated
or proposed existing reserve lands. Impacts on,
and maintenance of, wildlife corridors and habitat
linkages, including linkages that connect coastal
California gnatcatcher populations, should be
fully evaluated in the SEIR.

Issue is discussed under Impacts BIO-2 and
BIO-4 of Section 4.3, Biological Resources, of
this SEIR.

Recommends discussion of project consistency
with the biological goals and guidelines outlined
in the city’s Habitat Management Plan (HMP) and
Implementation Agreement. In addition, the
project should not preclude the completion of a
viable reserve system as outlined in the HMP.

Issue is discussed under Impact BIO-6 of
Section 4.3, Biological Resources, of this
SEIR.

Recommends an analysis of impacts from
changes in land use designations and zoning
located nearby or adjacent to natural areas that
may inadvertently contribute to wildlife-human
interactions. A discussion of possible conflicts and
mitigation measures to reduce these conflicts
should be included in the SEIR.

Issue is discussed under Impacts BIO-1, BIO-
2, and BIO-5 of Section 4.3, Biological
Resources, of this SEIR.

Recommends a cumulative effects analysis, as
described under CEQA Guidelines section 15130.

General and specific plans, as well as future
projects, should be analyzed relative to their
impacts on similar plant communities and wildlife
habitats.

Issue is discussed in Section 4.3.4, Biological
Resources - Cumulative Impacts, of this SEIR.

California
Department of
Transportation
(Caltrans)
Requests new developments resulting from the
project should provide a VMT based Traffic
Impact Study (TIS) using OPR guidance. The TIS
may also need to identify the proposed project’s
near-term and long-term safety or operational
issues, on or adjacent to any existing State
facilities.

Issue is discussed under Impact T-2 of
Section 4.13, Transportation, of this SEIR.

Requests the city include discussions and
mapping/graphics that describe the city’s existing
and future housing inventory per the city’s RHNA
Existing and future housing inventory per the
city’s RHNA is discussed in Section 2, Project
Description.

Introduction

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 1-7
Commenter Comment/Request How and Where It Was Addressed Suggests Carlsbad evaluate and potentially
implement Complete Streets projects to improve
bicycle and pedestrian access and safety.

Issue is discussed under Impact T-1 of
Section 4.13, Transportation, of this SEIR.

Requests city continue to coordinate with
Caltrans to implement necessary improvements
at intersections and interchanges where the
agencies have joint jurisdiction.

No intersection or interchange
improvements are included as part of this
project. Nonetheless, the city will continue
to coordinate with Caltrans as necessary.

Native American
Heritage
Commission
(NAHC)
States that the proposed project is subject to the
requirements and provisions under Assembly Bill
(AB 52) for tribal cultural resources.

Consultation required by AB 52 was carried
out by the City of Carlsbad, as discussed in
Section 4.4.3, Cultural and Tribal Cultural
Resources – Existing Conditions, of this SEIR.

Public Comments (by topic)
Aesthetics Commenters expressed concern regarding
changing the character of established neighbor-
hoods
Scenic resources and the potential for
degrading existing visual character or quality
of public views are discussed under Impacts
AES-1 through AES-3 of Section 4.1,
Aesthetics, of this SEIR.

Air Quality and
Greenhouse Gas
Emissions
Multiple commenters expressed concern
regarding air pollution, including lead, from
Palomar Airport over sites included in project
Issues associated with air pollution
generated from the proposed project are
discussed under Impact AQ-2 of Section 4.2,
Air Quality, of this SEIR.

Issues associated with aerially-deposited
lead are discussed in Section 4.7, Hazards
and Hazardous Materials, of this SEIR.

Commenters raised concern regarding dust
control during construction and grading activities
Issue is discussed under Impact AQ-3 of
Section 4.2, Air Quality, of this SEIR.

Commenters express concern regarding potential
increase in greenhouse gas emissions beyond
those addressed in the Climate Action Plan as a
result of the project.

Issue is discussed under Impact GHG-1 of
Section 4.6, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, of
this SEIR.

Biological
Resources
Commenter expresses concern regarding
increased coyote sightings and space for coyotes
to roam outside of developed areas.

Issue of impacts on habitat and special
status species is discussed under Impacts
BIO-4 and BIO-6 of Section 4.3, Biological
Resources, of this SEIR.

Commenter concerned potential development on
site 10 would affect nesting habitat for hawks and
owls.

Issue of impacts on habitat and special
status species is discussed under Impact BIO-
1 of Section 4.3, Biological Resources, of this
SEIR.

Commenter expresses concern regarding the
preservation of older eucalyptus trees.

Issue of the project conflicting with local
policies or ordinances, such as a tree
preservation policy, is discussed in Impact
BIO-5 of Section 4.3, Biological Resources, of
this SEIR.

Commenter expresses concern for impacts on the
Buena Vista Lagoon and Creek from project
impacts.

Issues to riparian areas are discussed under
Impacts BIO-2 and BIO-3, as well as Impact
HYD-4 of Sections 4.3, Biological Resources,
and 4.8, Hydrology and Water Quality, of
this SEIR.

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

1-8
Commenter Comment/Request How and Where It Was Addressed Cultural and Tribal
Cultural Resources
Commenter representing Rincon Band of Luiseno
Indians notes the City of Carlsbad is located
within the Tribe’s Traditional Use Area and is
asking to be consulted and provided the
opportunity to provide input to the SEIR process.

The Tribe also asks to attend any potential
cultural resources field surveys.

Comment is noted, issues regarding Tribal
Cultural Resources are discussed in Section

4.4, Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources, in
this SEIR. As discussed in Section 4.4, tribal
consultation letters were sent via certified
mail to Cheryl Madrigal, Tribal Historic
Preservation Officer of the Rincon Band of
Luiseño Indians.

Geology and Soils Commenters concerned Site 3, 8 would not be tenable due to topography
Issue of potential hazards from project due
to slopes discussed under Impacts GEO-2
through GEO-4 of Section 4.5, Geology and
Soils, of this SEIR.

Commenter notes paleontological concern near
sites.

Issue discussed under Impact GEO-6 of
Section 4.5, Geology and Soils, of this SEIR.

Commenter notes concern regarding expansive
soils recorded on or near Sites 10 and 11.

Issues related to expansive soils are
discussed under Impact GEO-4 of Section

4.5, Geology and Soils, of this SEIR.

Hazards and
Hazardous
Materials
Commenters expressed concern regarding safety
from McClellan-Palomar Airport
Issue is discussed under Impact HAZ-4 of
Section 4.7, Hazards and Hazardous
Materials, of this SEIR.

Commenter notes concern regarding toxic spills
on sites near commercial areas.

Issue is discussed under Impact HAZ-3 of
Section 4.7, Hazards and Hazardous
Materials, of this SEIR.

Hydrology and
Water Quality
Commenter expressed concern regarding runoff
during construction.

Issue is discussed under Impacts HYD-1 and
HYD-2 of Section 4.8, Hydrology and Water
Quality, of this SEIR.

Land Use and
Planning
Requests review of sites in relation to Palomar
Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan
Issue is discussed under Impact HAZ-4 of
Section 4.7, Hazards and Hazardous
Materials, and Impact NOI-4, of Section 4.10,
Noise, of this SEIR.

Noise Commenters expressed concern regarding noise
from McClellan-Palomar Airport over sites
included in project.

Issue is discussed under Impact NOI-4 of
Section 4.10, Noise, of this SEIR.

Commenters express concerns regarding noise
from potential increase of traffic.

Issue is discussed under Impact NOI-2 of
Section 4.10, Noise, of this SEIR.

Public Services Multiple commenters express concern of
potential increase in crime with additional
housing.

This is not a CEQA issue and will not be
directly discussed in this SEIR. However,
Section 4.12, Public Services and Recreation,
analyzes the effects of potential increased
population on police facilities and
protection.

Recreation Commenters expressed concern regarding the
loss of any open space and potential for parks on
site.

Issue is discussed under Impact PS-4 of
Section 4.12, Public Services and Recreation,
of this SEIR.

Transportation Commenters express concern regarding the impact of increased development of sites on
emergency evacuation, particularly Site 10.

Issue is discussed under Impacts HAZ-5, T-4
and WF-2 of Sections 4.7, Hazards and
Hazardous Materials, 4.13, Transportation,
and 4.15, Wildfire, of this SEIR.

Introduction

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 1-9
Commenter Comment/Request How and Where It Was Addressed Commenters express concern for potential traffic
and congestion increases in the Village, on El
Camino Real, College Blvd, Cannon Road, and
other corridors and intersections.

As discussed in Section 4.13, Transportation,
of this SEIR, pursuant to SB 743, vehicle
miles traveled (VMT) would replace level of
service (LOS) as the metric for determining
significance of transportation impacts.

Therefore, this SEIR does not analyze LOS or
congestion as they are non-CEQA issues.

Commenters note need for VMT analysis
regarding project impacts.

Issue is discussed under Impact T-2 of
Section 4.13, Transportation, of this SEIR.

Commenter requests projects currently in
development are taken into account in SEIR.

Issue is discussed under Section 4.13.3,
Transportation – Cumulative Impacts, of this
SEIR.

Utilities and
Service Systems
Commenter concerned electrical grid will be able
to handle additional residents on sites such as site

10. Impacts associated with electrical
infrastructure to connect new development
are discussed in Section 4.14, Utilities and
Service Systems.

Commenters noted concerns of maintaining
adequate water supply given population increase
on potential sites.

Issue is discussed Impact UTIL-2 of Section

4.14, Utilities and Service Systems, of this
SEIR.

Commenter notes a concern of the additional
population on sewage collection and treatment
and solid waste services.

Issue is discussed Impact UTIL-3 and UTIL-4
of Section 4.14, Utilities and Service Systems,
of this SEIR.

1.7 SEIR Content
This SEIR has been organized into seven sections. These include:
1) Introduction. Provides the project background, and information about the purpose and legal authority of a SEIR, and SEIR content and scope.
2) Project Description. Identifies the project lead agency, presents and discusses the project objectives, project locations and specific project characteristics. 3) Environmental Setting. Provides a description of the existing physical setting of the project area and an overview of the progress in implementing the Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update.
4) Analysis of Environmental Issues. Describes existing conditions found in the project area and assesses potential environmental impacts that may be generated by implementing the proposed project and cumulative development. These potential project impacts are compared to “thresholds of significance” in order to determine the nature and severity of the direct and indirect impacts. Mitigation measures, intended to reduce adverse, significant impacts below threshold levels, are proposed where feasible. Impacts that cannot be eliminated or mitigated to less-than-significant levels are also identified.
5) Other CEQA-Required Discussions. Identifies the spatial, economic, or population growth impacts that may result from implementation of the proposed project, as well as long-term effects of the project and significant irreversible environmental changes. 6) Alternatives. Presents and assesses the potential environmental impacts of three alternatives (one no-build) analyzed in addition to implementation of the proposed Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update.

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

1-10
7) References/Preparers. Lists all published materials, federal, State, and local agencies, and other organizations and individuals consulted during the preparation of this SEIR. It also lists the SEIR preparers.

1.8 Scope of this SEIR
This SEIR programmatically analyzes the effects of the proposed Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update Project, which consists of (1) the rezone of specific sites in the city designed to meet current and projected future housing needs of Carlsbad and, (2) for the Public Safety Element Update, the addition of requirements of new State legislation and the incorporation of new policies based on local and regional data.

As noted in more detail in Section 3, Environmental Setting, the cumulative effects of the Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update along with the probable future growth in the San Diego Association of Governments region are included in the analysis at the end of each impact section.

For environmental issue areas that may result in an increased level of impact or a potential change in impact level from the 2015 General Plan EIR, based on new information or changes to regulations or circumstance since the 2015 General Plan EIR certification, those issue areas are further reviewed in this SEIR. These issues have been determined to be:
 Aesthetics
 Air Quality
 Biological Resources
 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
 Geology and Soils
 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
 Hydrology and Water Quality
 Land Use and Planning
 Noise
 Population and Housing
 Public Services and Recreation
 Transportation
 Utilities and Service Systems
 Wildfire
If previous mitigation measures from the 2015 General Plan EIR still apply and would reduce impacts to a less-than-significant level, those measures are listed in the SEIR in the same manner as in the 2015 General Plan EIR.

The level of detail contained throughout this SEIR is consistent with the requirements of CEQA and applicable court decisions. CEQA Guidelines Section 15151 provides the standard of adequacy on which this document is based:

An EIR should be prepared with a sufficient degree of analysis to provide decision-makers with information which enables them to make a decision which intelligently takes account of environmental consequences. An evaluation of the environmental effects of the proposed project need not be exhaustive, but the sufficiency of an EIR is to be reviewed in light of what is reasonably feasible. Disagreement among experts does not make an EIR inadequate, but the EIR should summarize the main points of disagreement among the experts. The courts have looked not for perfection but for adequacy, completeness, and a good faith effort at full disclosure.

Introduction

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 1-11
In preparing the SEIR, use was made of pertinent policies and guidelines, certified EIRs and adopted CEQA documents, and other background documents. A full reference list is contained in Section 7, References.

1.9 Baseline and Approach for Impact Analysis
The concept of a significant effect on the environment focuses on changes to the baseline physical conditions that will arise as a result of the project (CEQA Guidelines Section 15002(g)). Potential new impacts associated with the Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update are determined through this process as mandated by CEQA. Buildout of the 2015 General Plan EIR is measured as the baseline, except in cases of changed circumstances or new impacts not evaluated in the 2015 General Plan EIR. In these cases, existing conditions at the time the NOP for this SEIR was published are measured as baseline, consistent with Section 15125 of the CEQA Guidelines. As described above, the NOP for this SEIR was published on September 14, 2022.

As described above, the proposed Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update is an update of the current 2015 General Plan. The impacts of the current General Plan were analyzed in the previously certified 2015 General Plan EIR, which was a Program EIR. The analysis in this SEIR is also programmatic and is focused on the potential changes in environmental effects that could result from the updates to the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and other documents that are included in the proposed project, including updates or changes to policies, projects, and growth scenarios. Therefore, this SEIR is being prepared to analyze only the changes to the General Plan or changes in circumstances under which the projects would be implemented since certification of the previous 2015 General Plan EIR which occurred on September 22, 2015.

1.10 Lead, Responsible, and Trustee Agencies
The CEQA Guidelines define lead, responsible and trustee agencies. The city of Carlsbad is the lead agency for the project because it holds principal responsibility for approving the project.

A responsible agency refers to a public agency other than the lead agency that has discretionary approval over the project. The Carlsbad City Council is the final approving authority, with the exception of the proposed changes to the Local Coastal Program (LCP Land Use Map, Zoning Map, Zoning Ordinance, master and specific plans, as applicable in the Coastal Zone), which are subject to California Coastal Commission approval. Therefore, the California Coastal Commission is a responsible agency with approval authority over changes to the Local Coastal Plan.

A trustee agency refers to a State agency having jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by a project. There are no trustee agencies for the proposed project or EIR. Implementation of the proposed project would not directly cause development in areas where trustee agencies mentioned in CEQA Guidelines Section 15386 have jurisdiction. However, future development projects could be located on lands under trustee agency jurisdiction, at which time subsequent environmental review would occur.

1.11 Environmental Review Process
The environmental impact review process, as required under CEQA, is summarized below and illustrated in Figure 1-1. The steps are presented in sequential order. Please note that the process summarized below is for an EIR consistent with the referenced sections of the CEQA Guidelines.

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

1-12
However, CEQA Guidelines Section 15163(e) requires the same kind of notice and public review for an SEIR as given to a Draft EIR. Therefore, the process summarized below is also applicable to this SEIR.

1. Determination that a SEIR is warranted. When an EIR has been certified for a project, a lead agency must determine if a Supplemental EIR should be prepared if only minor additions or changes would be necessary to make the previous EIR adequately apply to the project in a changed situation. As described in Section 1.2, Basis for a Supplemental EIR, the proposed project would involve changes to the General Plan which require revisions to the 2015 General Plan EIR. Therefore, the City has determined that the preparation of a Supplemental EIR is the appropriate approach to CEQA compliance.

NOP. Pursuant to the provision of CEQA Guidelines Section 15082, the City (as lead agency) issued a NOP for public review and comment (see Appendix A of this SEIR). As required by CEQA Guidelines Section 15375, an NOP is a brief document sent by the lead agency to notify the responsible agencies, trustee agencies, the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR), and other involved agencies that the lead agency plans to prepare a SEIR for a project. The purpose of the notice is to solicit guidance from those agencies as to the scope and content of the environmental information to be included in the SEIR and to solicit recommendations and develop information regarding the scope, focus, and content of the SEIR. The Lead Agency (City of Carlsbad) must file a NOP soliciting input on the EIR scope (or SEIR scope) to the State Clearinghouse, other concerned agencies, and parties previously requesting notice in writing (CEQA Guidelines Section 15082; Public Resources Code Section 21092.2). The NOP must be posted in the County Clerk’s office for 30 days.

Draft SEIR Prepared. The Draft SEIR must contain: a) table of contents or index; b) summary; c) project description; d) environmental setting; e) discussion of significant impacts (direct, indirect, cumulative, growth-inducing and unavoidable impacts); f) a discussion of alternatives; g) mitigation measures; and h) discussion of irreversible changes. The contents of an SEIR, though not explicitly listed in the CEQA Guidelines, are generally assumed to be the same as a Draft EIR.

Notice of Completion (NOC). The Lead Agency must file a NOC with the State Clearinghouse when it completes the Draft SEIR and prepare a Public Notice of Availability of a Draft SEIR. The Lead Agency must post the NOC in the County Clerk’s office for 30 days (Public Resources Code Section 21092) and send a copy of the NOC to anyone requesting it (CEQA Guidelines Section 15087). Additionally, public notice of the Draft SEIR availability must be given through at least one of the following procedures: a) publication in a newspaper of general circulation; b) posting on and off the project site; and c) direct mailing to owners and occupants of contiguous properties. The lead agency must solicit input from other agencies and the public and respond in writing to all comments received (Public Resources Code Sections 21104 and 21253). The minimum public review period for a Draft SEIR is 30 days. When Draft SEIR is sent to the State Clearinghouse for review, the public review period must be 45 days unless the State Clearinghouse approves a shorter period (Public Resources Code 21091). Pursuant to Section 15163(d) of the CEQA Guidelines, a SEIR may be circulated by itself without recirculating the previous Draft EIR or Final EIR that it supplements.

Final SEIR/Mitigation Monitoring. A Final SEIR consists of the Draft SEIR; revisions to the Draft SEIR; responses to comments addressing concerns raised by individuals, organizations, and public agencies or other reviewing parties; and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP). According to PRC Section 21081.6, for projects in which significant impacts would be

2. 3.

4. 5.

Introduction

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 1-13
minimized by mitigation measures, the lead agency must include an MMRP. The purpose of an MMRP is to ensure compliance with required mitigation measures during implementation of the project.

After the Final SEIR is completed, and at least 10 days prior to its certification, a copy of the response to comments on the Draft SEIR will be provided or made available to all commenting parties.

Certification of Final SEIR. Prior to making a decision on a proposed project, the Lead Agency must certify that: a) the Final SEIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA; b) the Final SEIR was presented to the decision-making body of the Lead Agency; and c) the decision-making body reviewed and considered the information in the Final SEIR prior to approving a project (CEQA Guidelines Section 15090).

Findings/Statement of Overriding Considerations. For each significant impact of the project identified in the SEIR, the Lead Agency must find, based on substantial evidence, that either: a) the project has been changed to avoid or substantially reduce the magnitude of the impact; b) changes to the project are within another agency’s jurisdiction and such changes have or should be adopted; or c) specific economic, social, or other considerations make the mitigation measures or project alternatives infeasible (CEQA Guidelines Section 15091). If an agency approves a project with unavoidable significant environmental effects, it must prepare a written Statement of Overriding Considerations that sets forth the specific social, economic, or other reasons supporting the agency’s decision.

Lead Agency Project Decision. The Lead Agency may a) disapprove the project because of its significant environmental effects; b) require changes to the project to reduce or avoid significant environmental effects; or c) approve the project despite its significant environmental effects, if the proper findings and statement of overriding considerations are adopted (CEQA Guidelines Sections 15042 and 15043). Pursuant to Section 15163(e) of the CEQA Guidelines, when the Lead Agency decides whether to approve the project, the decision-making body shall consider the previous EIR as revised by the SEIR. A finding under Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines shall be made for each significant effect shown in the previous EIR as revised.

Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program. When the Lead Agency makes findings on significant effects identified in the SEIR, it must adopt a reporting or monitoring program for mitigation measures that were adopted or made conditions of project approval to mitigate significant effects.

Notice of Determination (NOD). The Lead Agency must file a NOD after deciding to approve a project for which an SEIR is prepared (CEQA Guidelines Section 15094). A local agency must file the NOD with the County Clerk. The NOD must be posted for 30 days and sent to anyone previously requesting notice. Posting of the NOD starts a 30-day statute of limitations on CEQA legal challenges (Public Resources Code Section 21167[c]).

6. 7.

8. 9.

10. City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

1-14
Figure 1-1 Environmental Review Process

Lead Agency determines
SEIR is warranted
Lead Agency
files Notice of Determination
with County Clerk
Lead Agency solicits input from
agencies + public on the
content of the Draft SEIR
Lead Agency solicits comment
from agencies+ public on the
adequacy of the Draft SEIR
Responsible Agency
decision-making bodies consider
the Final SEIR
Project Description

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 2-1
2 Project Description
The Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update (herein referred to as the “proposed project”) consists of amendments to the Carlsbad General Plan adopted in 2015 (“2015 General Plan”), including the Land Use and Community Design Element and Public Safety Element, and revisions to Carlsbad Municipal Code (CMC) Title 21, the Zoning Ordinance. The updates are necessary to implement the programs of the city’s Housing Element Update 2021-2029 (“Housing Element”), which was adopted by the Carlsbad City Council on April 6, 2021, and comply with changes in state law.

A major component of the project is the change of land use and zoning designations on 18 sites (herein referred to as the “rezone sites”) throughout Carlsbad to facilitate residential development.

These rezone sites, identified in the Housing Element and as further directed by the City Council, consist of single or multiple properties currently designated for low-density residential, commercial, industrial or public land uses. As proposed, the rezone sites would be partially or entirely redesignated to medium or high-density residential land use designations. This would require changes to the General Plan and Local Coastal Program land use maps, Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map, and to various master and specific plans. The project proposes no development as further discussed below.

This section describes the project, including the applicant, the rezone sites and locations, major characteristics, objectives, and discretionary actions needed for approval. This section also summarizes key aspects of the 2015 General Plan that have the potential to result in physical environmental effects compared to what was previously analyzed under the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the General Plan (“2015 General Plan EIR”) certified in September 2015.

2.1 Project Proponent and Lead Agency
City of Carlsbad
Community Development Department
Planning Division
1635 Faraday Avenue
Carlsbad, California 92008
Contact: Scott Donnell, 442-339-2618, [email protected]

2.2 Project Location
The City of Carlsbad is located on the coast of the Pacific Ocean in northwest San Diego County and encompasses approximately 39 square miles of land area. Carlsbad is surrounded by the cities of Oceanside to the north, Encinitas to the south, and 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 acts as a 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 Vista and San Marcos and unincorporated county lands. The city’s regional location is depicted in Figure 2-1.

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

2-2
Figure 2-1 Regional Location

p
0 0

2.5 5 M i s
Ma -reCOl)E
6aEe ca p
Pe eto~
(I I] Carlshad City Limit s A
I '>
.,.t ~J
I I
'>:9s,_j,--.---· .-••
~,!.,...._,.i. ...,
1-
0cean!;fd,e
Mi_,.
' ,. (._ c,·1
•, .. " -i/¢-·· (.
,..,..,.J ~·
I ,
~f
j
_,_I
~1- -,_~
-,"'1, ,_
ci;,
❖
}
I
-- ""-"···
:!iml V ion.. f(l,::.."t'
Los Angeles
Ontodo
-.... ......,-
-- Nllnlct.a
* 5an Diego
,;
-
,
I,
1 -f
~- l l
-_#L
Project Description

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 2-3
Figure 2-2 Carlsbad City Boundaries

/tmrq'Erl' pra¥i::lrrd ~ Mi:.ra:iia{.! l!imf rzwrJ rh lk.m.an C MM.

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

2-4

2.3 Background
The city recently updated its Housing Element to be in compliance with State housing legislation.

The updated Housing Element was adopted by the Carlsbad City Council on April 6, 2021. Updates to the Housing Element triggered the need for changes to the 2015 General Plan to, among others, create new land use designations (R-35 and R-40) and accommodate higher density residential development. The recent approval of the Housing Element has also triggered required analysis and compliance with recent and new state safety legislation. The project would address the requirements of new state legislation and incorporate new policies into the Public Safety Element based on updated local and regional data. Furthermore, the Housing Element resulted in necessary changes to be made to the Zoning Ordinance, Local Coastal Program, and various specific and master plans, to maintain consistency across all documents. Changes in large part are necessary so the city can demonstrate it has adequate sites to accommodate residential development at suitable densities to meet its Regional Housing Needs Assessment, or RHNA, objectives. These changes would amend the land use and zoning designations of multiple sites in Carlsbad.

The proposed changes to land use and zoning designations have been presented and discussed with the community on many occasions, including as part of the Housing Element adoption in April 2021, a City Council meeting in August 2021, public outreach conducted in fall 2021, and a City Council meeting on Feb. 15, 2022. At the February 2022 meeting, the City Council provided direction on specific sites to analyze environmentally as part of this SEIR and present for possible land use changes through the public hearing process.

The Housing Element was analyzed under its own respective CEQA document, an Addendum to the 2015 General Plan EIR which was approved by the City Council also on April 6, 2021 (SCH#2011011004). Thus, for the purposes of this Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR), the discussion in this SEIR will be primarily focused on the proposed changes within the 2015 General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and other documents and not on the Housing Element as that was already analyzed in its own CEQA Addendum document.

2.3.1 Land Use and Zoning Designations
The City of Carlsbad currently has two broad land use categories including Residential and Non- Residential and Mixed-Use. Under the Residential land use category, there are currently six residential land use designations, not including those that may be combined with other designations (e.g., R-15/L). These land use designations range from R-1.5 to accommodate single family dwellings to R-30 for the accommodation of multi-family dwellings. Under the Non-Residential and Mixed-Use land use category, there are currently eleven land use designations, not including those that may be combined with other designations. These designations cover various land uses from commercial, office, industrial, manufacturing, open space, transportation corridors, and the Village-Barrio Master Plan area. Some of these land use designations allow residential uses, but do not prioritize residential development.

Figure 2-3 illustrates the locations of the existing General Plan land uses designations throughout the city. Table 2-1 provides the current breakdown of land use designations that are present in the city. Table 2-2 provides the current breakdown of zoning designations that are present in the city.

Project Description

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 2-5
Figure 2-3 Existing General Plan Land Use Designations

Carlsbad City Boundary
-+-- Railroad
General Plan Land Use
---
R-1.5 - Residentia l 0-1.5 du/ac
R-4 - Residen tia l 0-4 du/ac
R-8 - Residentia l 4-8 du/ac
R-15 - Residentia l 8-15 du/ac
R-15/L - Residential 8-15 du/ac/ Local
Shopping Center
R-15/O - Residentia l 8-15 du/ac/O ffi ce
R-15/VC - Residential 8-15 du/ac/V isitor
Commercia l
- R-23 - Residential 15-23 du/ac
- R-30 - Residentia l 23-30 du/ac
- V-B - Village-Barrio
- L - Local Shopping Cent er
----
L/CF - Local Shopping Center/
Community Facilitie s
GC - General Comm ercial
VC - Visitor Comm ercia l
VC/OS - Visitor Commercial/Open
Space
R - Regional Commercial
Pl - Planned Indust rial
Pl/O - Planned Industrial/ Offi ce
O -Office
- P - Public
- CF - Community Facilitie s
- OS - Open Space
- TC - Transporta tion Corridor
N 0.75 1.5 J..
'----M-l;'l-ie-, ----'I ,--.._
Jmogery provrded by Esri and its liceMors ~ 2022.

Add;tionol data provided by the c;zy of Carlsbad, 20 22.

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

2-6
Table 2-1 Existing Land Use Designations (2022)
Land Use Acres Percent of Total
Residential 8,381 38.1%
R-1.5 – Residential 0-1.5 du/ac 546.8 2.5%
R-4 – Residential 0-4 du/ac 4,825.7 21.9%
R-8 - Residential 4-8 du/ac 1,849.8 8.4%
R-15- Residential 8-15 du/ac 808.6 3.7%
R-23 – Residential 15-23 du/ac 331.6 1.5%
R-30 - Residential 23-30 du/ac 18.6 .1%
Mixed Use 22.8 .1%
R-15/L – Residential 8-15 du/ac/Local Shopping Center 17.9 <.1% R-15/O – Residential 8-15 du/ac/Office 1.3 <.1%
R-15/VC – Residential 8-15 du/ac/Visitor Commercial 3.6 <.1% Commercial/Industrial 3,217.1 14.6%
V-B Village-Barrio 263.9 1.2%
L-Local Shopping Center 157.2 <.1%
L/CF – Local Shopping Center/Community Facilities 14.3 <.1% GC – General Commercial 59.8 0.3%
VC – Visitor Commercial 439.6 2%
VC/OS - Visitor Commercial/Open Space 70.9 0.3%
R – Regional Commercial 238.2 1.1%
PI – Planned Industrial 1,811.1 8.2%
PI/O – Planned Industrial/Office 53.9 0.2%
O – Office 108.1 0.5%
Public/Quasi-Public Total 1,221.5 5.6%
P – Public 765.3 3.5%
CF- Community Facilities 930 4%
TC – Transportation Corridor 427.4 1.9%
OS – Open Space 9,174.1 41.7%
Grand Total 22,016.5 100%

1. Percentages may not add up due to rounding.

2. Planned land uses, such as open space, may differ than existing land uses shown in this table.

Sources: City of Carlsbad Land Use Map
Project Description

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 2-7
Table 2-2 Existing Zoning Designations (2022)
Zoning District Acreage
Percentage of
Total Acreage
R-A – Residential Agriculture 226.6 1.03%
R-E – Rural Residential Estate 184.37 0.84%
R-1 -One-Family Residential 2872.29 13.05%
R-2 – Two-Family Residential 98.24 0.45%
R-3 – Multiple Family Residential 164.4 0.75%
RD-M – Residential Density-Multiple 1086.87 4.94%
RD-M/C-2 - Residential Density-Multiple/ General Commercial 32.82 0.15% RD-M/C-2/OS - Residential Density-Multiple/General Commercial/ Open Space 39.75 0.18% RD-M/OS - Residential Density-Multiple/ Open Space 7.71 0.04% RMHP – Residential Mobile Home Park 204.6 0.93%
R-T – Residential Tourist 3.32 0.02%
R-W – Residential Waterway 10.34 0.05%
R-P-Q – Residential Professional with “Q,” Qualified Development Overlay Zone 8.24 0.04% O – Office 93.92 0.43%
C-L – Local Shopping Center 88.15 0.40%
C-2 – General Commercial 192.08 0.87%
C-T – Commercial Tourist 284.13 1.29%
RD-M/TC 5.8 0.03%
RD-M/C-T 1.21 0.01%
C-M – Heavy Commercial – Limited Industrial Zone 434.17 1.97% M – Industrial 372.62 1.69%
P-M – Planed Industrial 1094.25 4.97%
P-M/O – Planned Industrial and Office 42.52 0.19%
P-U – Public Utility 208.59 0.95%
V-B – Village-Barrio 256.09 1.16%
V-B, T-C 7.75 0.04%
P-C – Planned Community 8499.7 38.61%
L-C – Limited Control 161.26 0.73%
OS – Open Space 4834.44 21.96%
CR-A/OS – Cannon Road-Agricultural/Open Space 72.55 0.33% T-C – Transportation Corridor 427.42 1.94%
Total 22016.2 100.00%
Sources: City of Carlsbad Zoning Map
The city implements the provisions outlined in CMC Title 21 Zoning to classify, regulate, restrict and segregate the uses of land and buildings. The city’s Zoning Ordinance intends to maintain consistency with the land use designations set forth in the 2015 General Plan through more detailed provisions and standards for both existing and new development. The Zoning Ordinance contains 36 zones and overlay zones to regulate various land uses and types of development throughout the City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

2-8
city. More than one zoning district may be consistent with a single General Plan land use designation.

2.4 Project Characteristics

2.4.1 Legislative Requirements
A “Project,” as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, means “the whole of an action, which has a potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or a reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, and that is the enactment and amendment of zoning ordinances, and the adoption and amendment of local General Plans or elements thereof pursuant to Government Code Sections 65100–65700” (14 Cal.

Code of Reg. 15378[a]).

For the purposes of this SEIR, the “project” would:
 Amend the City of Carlsbad’s General Plan by updating the Land Use and Community Design Element to implement programs of the Housing Element, including facilitating residential development on 18 rezone sites identified in the Housing Element and as further directed by the City Council on Feb. 15, 2022.
 Consistent with the project’s General Plan changes, revise the Zoning Ordinance.  Amend the Local Coastal Program as necessary to maintain consistency with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance.
 Revise various master plans and specific plans as necessary to reflect amendments to the General Plan, Zoning Ordinance, and Local Coastal Program.  Update the Public Safety Element to comply with State housing and safety legislation.

2.4.2 Objectives of the General Plan
According to California Government Code Section 65302, General Plans are required to cover the following “elements” or topics: land use, circulation, housing, conservation, open space, noise, safety, and if applicable, air quality and environmental justice. Jurisdictions may include any other topic that is relevant to planning its future. The Carlsbad General Plan, adopted in 2015, includes all required elements plus elements that discuss arts, culture, history and education; economy, business diversity, and tourism; and sustainability.

Under State law, the General Plan must serve as the foundation upon which all land use decisions are based, and must also be comprehensive, internally consistent, and have a long-term perspective. State law further mandates that the General Plan:
 Identify land use, circulation, environmental, economic, and social goals and policies for the city and its surrounding planning area (i.e., the city’s sphere of influence) as they relate to future growth and development;
 Provide a basis for local government decision-making, including decisions on development approvals and exactions;
 Provide citizens the opportunity to participate in the planning and decision-making process of their communities; and
 Inform citizens, developers, decision-makers, and other cities and counties of the ground rules that guide development within a particular community.

Project Description

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 2-9
The General Plan functions as a guide to the type of community that Carlsbad citizens desire and provides the means by which that desired future can be achieved. Carlsbad is a community that values its small-town feel, community heritage, and natural setting. The city is committed to encouraging economically sustainable, balanced growth that respects its natural environment and long standing history, while meeting additional needs such as infrastructure and housing. The Carlsbad General Plan’s vision for the future focuses on the following core values and priorities:

Small town feel, beach community character and connectedness. Enhance Carlsbad’s defining attributes—its small-town feel and beach community character. Build on the city’s culture of civic engagement, volunteerism and philanthropy.

Open space and the natural environment. Prioritize protection and enhancement of open space and the natural environment. Support and protect Carlsbad’s unique open space and agricultural heritage.

Access to recreation and active, healthy lifestyles. Promote active lifestyles and community health by furthering access to trails, parks, beaches and other recreation opportunities.

The local economy, business diversity and tourism. Strengthen the city’s strong and diverse economy and its position as an employment hub in north San Diego County. Promote business diversity, increased specialty retail and dining opportunities, and Carlsbad’s tourism.

Walking, biking, public transportation and connectivity. Increase travel options through enhanced walking, bicycling and public transportation systems. Enhance mobility through increased connectivity and intelligent transportation management.

Sustainability. Build on the city’s sustainability initiatives to emerge as a leader in green development and sustainability. Pursue public/ private partnerships, particularly on sustainable water, energy, recycling and foods.

History, the arts and cultural resources. Emphasize the arts by promoting a multitude of events and productions year-round, cutting-edge venues to host world- class performances, and celebrate Carlsbad’s cultural heritage in dedicated facilities and programs.

High quality education and community services. Support quality, comprehensive education and life-long learning opportunities, provide housing and community services for a changing population, and maintain a high standard for citywide public safety.

Neighborhood revitalization, community design and livability. Revitalize neighborhoods and enhance citywide community design and livability. Promote a greater mix of uses citywide, more activities along the coastline, and link density to public transportation. Revitalize the downtown Village as a community focal point and a unique and memorable center for visitors, and rejuvenate the historic Barrio neighborhood.

2.4.3 Proposed Amendments to the General Plan
Land Use and Community Design Element
The Land Use and Community Design Element provides the long-term vision, goals, and policies for Carlsbad through the year 2035. The focus is on the accommodation of change and growth in the city, while preserving and enhancing the features and attributes that make it a desirable place to live. As discussed in Section 2.3.1, the Land Use and Community Design Element identifies two primary land use categories including Residential and Non-Residential and Mixed-Use.

Implementation of the city’s Housing Element as noted above triggers the need to make changes to the Land Use and Community Design Element, including the Land Use Map. These changes include

1. 2.

3. 4.

5. 6.

7. 8.

9. City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

2-10
the proposed addition of two new residential land use designations (R-35 and R-40) for the accommodation of higher density residential development, establishment of new minimum densities for some residential designations, miscellaneous, related changes to tables, text and policies, and changes to land use designations on multiple sites to accommodate the city’s RHNA share. Table 2-3 below lists the new land use designations including the addition of R-35 and R-40, which are indicated with underlines. Designations below that are combined (e.g., R-30/OS) retain the attributes of each individual designation and would be applied to sites to indicate different residential densities and land uses that could occur there.

Table 2-3 Proposed Land Uses
Land Use Acres Percent of Total
Residential 8,461 38.44%
R-1.5 – Residential 0-1.5 du/ac 546.8 2.48%
R-4 – Residential 0-4 du/ac 4,805.50 21.83%
R-8 - Residential 4-8 du/ac 1,849.80 8.40%
R-15- Residential 11.5-15 du/ac 806.21 3.66%
R-15/R-30 - Residential 11.5-15 du/ac / Residential 26.5-30 du/ac 17.8 0.08% R-23 – Residential 19-23 du/ac 331.6 1.51%
R-23/P - Residential 19-23 du/ac / Public 5.83 0.03%
R-23/OS - Residential 19-23 du/ac / Open Space 19.73 0.09% R-30 - Residential 26.5-30 du/ac 48.67 0.22%
R-30/OS - Residential 26.5-30 du/ac / Open Space 9.16 0.04% R-35 – Residential 32.5-35 du/ac 14.05 0.06%
R-40 Residential 37.5-40 du/ac 5.32 0.02%
Mixed Use 78 0.35%
R-15/O – Residential 11.5-15 du/ac/Office 1.3 0.01%
R-15/VC – Residential 11.5-15 du/ac/Visitor Commercial 1.18 0.01% R/R-40 - Regional Commercial / Residential 37.5-40/du/ac 3.64 0.02% R/R-40/R-23 - Regional Commercial/ Residential 37.5-40 du/ac / Residential 19-23 du/ac

28.81 0.13%
R/R-40/R-23/OS - Regional Commercial/Residential 37.5-40 du/ac / Residential 19- 23 du/ac / Open Space

23.6 0.11%
R/R-40/OS - Regional Commercial/ Residential 37.5-40 du/ac / Open Space 19.39 0.09% Commercial/Industrial 3,084.34 14.01%
V-B Village-Barrio 256.15 1.16%
L-Local Shopping Center 157.2 0.71%
L/CF – Local Shopping Center/Community Facilities 14.3 0.06% GC – General Commercial 55.96 0.25%
VC – Visitor Commercial 439.6 2.00%
VC/OS - Visitor Commercial/Open Space 70.9 0.32%
R – Regional Commercial 162.9 0.74%
PI – Planned Industrial 1,779.39 8.08%
PI/O – Planned Industrial/Office 42.51 0.19%
Project Description

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 2-11
Land Use Acres Percent of Total
O – Office 97.68 0.44%
Public/Quasi-Public Total 1,211.50 5.50%
P – Public 755.31 3.43%
CF- Community Facilities 930 4.23%
TC – Transportation Corridor 427.4 1.94%
OS – Open Space 9,174.10 41.68%
Grand Total 22,010.00

Notes: Red text indicates new land use designations to facilitate implementation of the 2021-2029 Housing Element Proposed Changes to Sites
A critical measure of compliance with state housing element law is the ability of a jurisdiction to accommodate its share of the region’s housing needs. This is accomplished by providing plans, policies, and programs designed to meet the city’s RHNA. For San Diego County, the state, through the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), projected the region’s growth for an 8-year projection period between April 15, 2021, and April 15, 2029. SANDAG set Carlsbad’s RHNA target at 3,873, broken into very low income (1,311 units), low income (784 units), moderate income (749 units), and above moderate income (1,029 units). Furthermore, the state strongly advises that jurisdictions incorporate a buffer in their original RHNA allocation of Housing Element sites inventory of at least 15% to 30% more capacity than is required. For the 6 th Housing Element cycle,
the city accounted for a 30% buffer, based on the city’s total RHNA allocation. The buffer equates to 854 units (629 lower and 225 moderate income units).

To help achieve the city’s designated RHNA, the city proposes under this project to undergo both General Plan land use and zoning map amendments as necessary to permit housing on the 18 rezone sites identified in the Housing Element and as directed by City Council in February 2022. The 18 rezone sites are shown below in Figure 2-4. This effort also implements Program 1.1 of the Housing Element. Table 2-4 shows the existing and proposed land use and zoning map amendments to permit housing on the identified housing sites. As the table notes, not all sites require rezoning but have been identified because of their potential to develop with residential units. Further, to maintain consistency with proposed land use and zoning, amendments are required as well to various master and specific plans and to the Local Coastal Program for properties in the Coastal Zone.

Out of the 3,873 units in the RHNA, 3,295 units, which factors in the state-advised buffer, will be part of the rezone program as the city’s existing inventory of residential land is inadequate to accommodate these units. Housing Element Program 1.1 (specifically, program objectives a. – d.) was established to rezone properties as necessary to make up the shortfall. Because most of the needed units are in the lower income category, most sites must be rezoned at densities of 26.5 units per acre or more. At these densities, apartments of three or more stories are common.

As shown in Figure 2-4, of the 18 rezone sites, ten sites are north of Palomar Airport Road and eight are south. Most of the sites are privately owned, three are owned by the city and two by the North County Transit District. The identified sites are located in each quadrant and each of the four City Council Districts. The quadrants divide the city into four geographic areas along El Camino Real and Palomar Airport Road, and each Council District includes portions of two or more quadrants. The sites are currently designated for commercial, industrial, public, and residential uses, or a City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

2-12
combination of uses, such as commercial and residential, in the Village and elsewhere. At the time of publication of this SEIR, two sites have approved projects, and one site has an active development application. Owners of most of the sites have expressed interest in having their properties rezoned to allow for this type of development. If the sites’ full potential is realized and developed at rents or purchase prices considered affordable to lower and moderate-income households, the city would be able to accommodate its designated RHNA for the 6th Housing Element cycle and provide the state-recommended buffer.

Project Description

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 2-13
Figure 2-4 Proposed Rezone Sites Locations
,~ .. ~ \
' ~-
Highway
Major Street
Planned Street
Railroad
D Coastal Zone
Potential Housing Sites •
. . '
D
-D
Convert government -owned prope rty to
allow housing
Convert comm ercial property to allow
hou sing
Increase uni ts allowed on propertie s that
already allow housing
Convert vacant industrial property to
allo w housing
* 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 i-.
'----M-'ll--ie-, ----'1 f\
Imagery provided by Esri and its licensors © 2023.

Additional data provided by City of Carlsbad, 2023.

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

2-14
Table 2-4 Proposed General Plan Land Use and Zoning Map Changes Site # Location APN
Current
Land
Use
Designation
Proposed
Land
Use
Designation
Current
Zoning
Designation
Proposed
Zoning
Designation
Existing
Units
on Site
Unit Yields
Permitted
Under
Existing
General
Plan
Residential
Designation,
if Present
Proposed
Unit Yield
Net Increase in Units
(Proposed Unit Yield –
Existing Residential
Units and/or Units
Allowed by Existing
Residential Land Use
Designation)1
Site 1 North County
Plaza
156-301-16 R/OS R/R-40/OS C-2/Q RD-M/C-
2/OS
0 0 240 units 240 units
Site 2 The Shoppes
at Carlsbad
parking lot
156-301-11 R/OS R/R-40/R-
23/OS
C-2 RD-M/C-
2/OS
0 0 993 units 993 units
156-302-35 R R/R-40/R-23 C-2 RD-M/C-2
156-301-06 R R/R-40 C-2 RD-M/C-2
156-301-10 R R/R-40 C-2 RD-M/C-2
156-302-23 R R/R-40 C-2 RD-M/C-2
Site 3 Chestnut at El
Camino Real
167-080-33, 34,
41 and 42
R-4 R-15 R-1-10000 RD-M 0 8 28 units
(at 11.5
du/ac)
20 units
Site 4 Zone 15
Cluster
209-060-72 R-4/OS R-30/OS R-1-10000 RD-M 1 1 1 unit 0 units2 209-090-11 R-15/L R-15/R-30 RD-M/C-L RD-M 0 115 327 units (115 units
at 12
du/ac and
212 units
at 26.5
du/ac)
212 units
Site 5 Avenida
Encinas Car
Storage Lot
210-090-24 PI R-30 P-M RD-M 0 0 53 units
(at 26.5
du/ac)
53 units
Site 6 Crossings Golf
Course Lot 5
212-270-05 PI/O R-30 P-M/O RD-M 0 0 181 units
(at 26.5
du/ac)
181 units
Project Description

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 2-15
Site # Location APN
Current
Land
Use
Designation
Proposed
Land
Use
Designation
Current
Zoning
Designation
Proposed
Zoning
Designation
Existing
Units
on Site
Unit Yields
Permitted
Under
Existing
General
Plan
Residential
Designation,
if Present
Proposed
Unit Yield
Net Increase in Units
(Proposed Unit Yield –
Existing Residential
Units and/or Units
Allowed by Existing
Residential Land Use
Designation)1
Site 7 Salk Avenue 212-021-04 O R-30 O RD-M 0 0 259 units (at 26.5
du/ac)
259 units
Site 8 Cottage Row
Apartments
212-040-47 R-4 R-23/OS R-1-10000-Q RD-M 24 33 150
additional
units (at
19 du/ac)
117 units
Site 9 West Oaks
Industrial
212-040-26 and
212-110-01 to -
08 PI and OS R-30/OS PI RD-M/OS 0 192 192 units 0 units Site 10 Bressi Ranch
Colt Place
213-262-17 PI R-23 P-C P-C 0 0 49 units
(at 19
du/ac)
49 units
Site 11 Bressi Ranch
Gateway
Road
213-263-19,
213-263-20
PI R-40 P-C P-C 0 0 199 units
(at 37.5
du/ac)
199 units
Site 12 Industrial
Sites East of
Melrose
221-015-08,
221-014-03
PI R-35 P-M RD-M 0 0 456 units
(at 32.5
du/ac)
456 units
Site 14 Carlsbad
Village

COASTER
Station
155-200-11 and
12, 760-166-37,
203-296-12
V-B V-B (no
change)
V-B V-B (no
change)
0 93 93 units
(at 28
du/ac) or
200 units
(at under
30 du/ac)
0 units or 107 units
3 Site 15 City's Oak
Yard
204-010-05,
204-010-06
V-B V-B (no
change)
V-B V-B (no
change)
0 24 24 units
(at 18
du/ac)
0 units
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

2-16
Site # Location APN
Current
Land
Use
Designation
Proposed
Land
Use
Designation
Current
Zoning
Designation
Proposed
Zoning
Designation
Existing
Units
on Site
Unit Yields
Permitted
Under
Existing
General
Plan
Residential
Designation,
if Present
Proposed
Unit Yield
Net Increase in Units
(Proposed Unit Yield –
Existing Residential
Units and/or Units
Allowed by Existing
Residential Land Use
Designation)1
Site 16 Caltrans
Maintenance
Station/
Pacific Sales
211-050-08, 09 GC, P R-30 RA-
10,000/C-2
RD-M 0 0 183 units
(at 26.5
du/ac)
182 units
Site 17 Poinsettia

COASTER
Station
214-150-08,
214-150-20,
214-150-11
P, TC R-23/P RD-M-Q, T-C RD-M/T-C 0 0 27 units
or 100
units
27 units or 100 units4
Site 18 North Ponto
Parcels
216-010-01, 02,
03, 04, 05; 214-
160-25 and 28;
214-171-11
R-15,
VC/R15, GC
R-23 C-2, RD-M-

Q/C-T-Q,
RD-M-Q
RD-M 0 40 90 units
(at 19
du/ac)
50 units
Site 19 La Costa
Glen/Forum
255-012-05 R/OS R-23/OS P-C P-C 0 0 76 units
(at 19
du/ac)
76 units
Total 3,295 units
*Site 13: Removed from Housing Site Inventory and is not included within this SEIR. *Unit yields are estimates only.
*Site 1: A private development application has been submitted. The 240 net increase in units reflects the units the application proposes. *Site 9: A project has been approved for 192 units that includes its own project-level CEQA review. However, for a conservative programmatic analysis, this SEIR includes Site 9 in its analysis. *Site 18: A private development application with 86 units has been approved on a portion of the site. 1 Net increase in units does not take into account units estimated from properties that are currently designated or partially designated as commercial (sites 1, 2, 4, 16, 18, 19). 2 Site “4a” (APN 209-060-72): Site could generate 154 units if rezoned to R-30. However, since the site is currently within a floodplain, the net increase in unit yield is 0. 3 Site 14: The City Council has directed the study of two different proposed unit yields for this site under Map 1 and Map 2. Map 1 has a proposed yield of 93 units, and Map 2 has a proposed yield of 200 units. The Map 1 yield of 93 units is an estimate of allowed units based on Village and Barrio Master Plan minimum density calculations (28 du/ac based on 50% of the developable area).

The Map 2 yield is based on a higher density determined over the entire developable area and still within the density range allowed by the master plan (28-35 du/ac). The 107 units is the difference between the Map 2 and Map 1 unit yield estimates (200 - 93 = 107 units). This analysis assumes 107 units as a conservative estimate. 4 Site 17: The City Council has directed the study of two different proposed unit yields for this site under Map 1 and Map 2. Map 1 has a proposed yield of 27 units, and Map 2 has a proposed yield of 100 units. This analysis assumes 100 unit as a conservative estimate.

Notes: du/ac = dwelling units per acre

Project Description

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 2-17
Public Safety Element
The Public Safety Element is a required component of the city’s General Plan that serves to reduce the potential short and long-term risk of death, injuries, property damage, and economic and social dislocation associated with potential hazards. The recent approval of the Housing Element, including the identification of new housing sites for the 6th cycle Housing Element site inventory, have triggered required analysis and compliance with recent state safety legislation. The project would address the requirements of new State legislation and incorporate new policies into the Public Safety Element based on updated local and regional data.

The project would address state legislative requirements, including but not limited to:
 Approved in 2019, Senate Bill (SB) 99 requires jurisdictions, upon the next revision of the Housing Element on or after January 1, 2020, to review and update the safety element to include information identifying residential developments in hazard areas that do not have at least two emergency evacuation routes.
 Senate Bill 379 requires Safety Elements to include a climate change vulnerability assessment, measures to address vulnerabilities, and a comprehensive hazard mitigation and emergency response strategy. In addition, Senate Bill 1035 requires cities and counties to update their safety element during a housing element or local hazard mitigation plan update cycle, but not less than once every eight years, if new information on flood hazards, fire hazards, or climate adaptation or resilience is available that was not available during the previous revision of the safety element.
 Senate Bill 1241 requires review and update of the safety element, upon the next revision of the housing element on or after January 1, 2014, as necessary to address the risk of fire in state responsibility areas and very high fire hazard severity zones.  Assembly Bill 747 requires that upon the next revision of a local hazard mitigation plan, adopted in accordance with the federal Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-390), on or after January 1, 2022, or, if a local jurisdiction has not adopted a local hazard mitigation plan, beginning on or before January 1, 2022, the safety element adopted pursuant to subdivision (g) of Section 65302 shall be reviewed and updated as necessary to identify evacuation routes and their capacity, safety, and viability under a range of emergency scenarios.

Based on the legislative requirements discussed above, the following physical changes resulting from new or modified policies (as listed below) would be made as a result of the implementation of the Public Safety Element:

Policy 6-P.2 Continue to implement and pursue flood control programs that reduce flood hazards, such as the city’s Grading Ordinance and the Floodplain Management Regulations
Policy 6-P.4 Require all proposed drainage facilities to comply with the city’s Standard Design Criteria to ensure they are properly sized to handle 100-year flood conditions.

Incorporate updated hydrology and hydraulic data as it becomes available.

Policy 6-P.5 Require installation of protective structures or other design measures to protect proposed building and development sites, existing infrastructure, and critical services from the effects of flooding. Utilize, where possible, nature-based solutions and pervious pavement to assist in protection.

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

2-18
Policy 6-P.6 Encourage the use of permeable materials and surfaces in new development and road repaving to decrease surface water runoff during storms.

Policy 6-P.7 Promote the use of green infrastructure such as swales to manage stormwater runoff.

Policy 6-P.13 Regulate new development, redevelopment and lot creation, which requires a coastal development permit, to avoid exposure to sea level rise hazards such as erosion, flooding, inundation, groundwater changes and shoreline migration throughout the lifespan of the proposed development.

Policy 6-P.16 Require removal or relocation of structures away from sea level rise hazards if public health and safety risks exist, if essential services can no longer be maintained, if the structures are no longer on private property due to migration of the public trust boundary, or if the development requires new or augmented shoreline protective devices that would not otherwise be permitted.

Policy 6-P.17 Develop sea level rise adaptation plans for assets vulnerable to sea level rise.

Policy 6-P.31 Minimize 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.

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 their representative.

Policy 6-P.52 Maintain and implement Wildland/Urban Interface Guidelines for new and existing development within neighborhoods that are proximal to existing fire hazard 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.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.

Policy 6-P.55 In planned developments that may occupy the wildland urban interface, High and Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones, increase resilience during a potential wildfire evacuation through:
 Enforcing visible address numbers painted on sidewalks. Applying special construction features found in California Building Code Chapter 7A for developments in Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones & High Fire Hazard Severity Zones areas. Developing and/or adapting multiple language accessible materials for how to prepare your family and home for an evacuation and go kit.

Project Description

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 2-19
 Identifying and preparing at risk and vulnerable populations that may need assistance to evacuate.
 Maintaining existing critical evacuation routes, community fire breaks, emergency vehicle access.
 Requiring adequate access (ingress, egress) to new development, including safe access for emergency response vehicles
 Identification of anticipated water supply for structural fire suppression.  Developing fuel modification plans for all new developments.

Policy 6-P.58 Coordinate with telecommunication service entities and the San Diego County Communication Department to fire-harden communications.

Policy 6-P-60 Develop and implement density management strategies that cluster residential developments and minimize low-density exurban development patterns to reduce amounts of flammable vegetation and collective exposure to wildfire risk. When feasible and practicable, require new residential development to be located outside of the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ). Should new residential development be located in VHFHSZ’s, then require that it be built to the current California Building Code and Fire Code.

Policy 6-P.61 When feasible, site new residential developments and critical facilities outside of the Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ). Protect and harden critical facilities from natural hazards and minimize interruption of essential infrastructure, utilities, and services.

Policy 6-P.62 Site structures to maximize low-flammability landscape features to buffer against wildfire spread.

Policy 6-P.63 Require that new development and redevelopment have adequate fire protection, including proximity to adequate emergency services, adequate provisions for fire flow and emergency vehicle access and fire hardened communication, including high speed internet service.

Policy 6-P.65 Coordinate with San Diego Gas & Electric to implement an electrical undergrounding plan with a focus on critical evacuation roadways and areas with highest wildfire risk.

Policy 6-P.74 Maintain roadways that are likely to function as key evacuation routes.

Policy 6-P.80 Protect vulnerable natural and recreational habitats and parks impacted by extreme heat through expansion of large continuous greenspaces wherever possible for greater cooling magnitude and extent. Include:
 A mix of drought tolerant and native habitat types for greatest cooling benefits.  Mitigation of risk of dried out vegetation and wildfire risk through drought tolerant and wildfire resilient landscaping on private property.  Facilitate mitigation projects through Carlsbad Habitat Management Division Policy 6-P.86 Seek funding to plan and implement microgrids, cool roofs, and resilience hubs, and other similar technology in areas with vulnerable populations.

Policy 6-P.89 Expand the resilience of new and existing critical buildings and infrastructure to function properly while subject to increased climate hazard frequency such as flooding, extreme heat, regional wildfires, and landslides.

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

2-20
Policy 6-P.90 Partner with utility companies and/or community choice energy entities to improve grid resilience and backup power for the community including but not limited to utility and/or community choice energy entity activities that seek to:
 Harden vulnerable overhead lines against winds and wildfires;  Protect energy infrastructure and increase redundancy of energy storage and distribution systems in surrounding hazard zones for wildfire;  Invest in sustainable power sources to provide redundancy and continued services for critical facilities during periods of high demand during extreme heat events; and
 Continue exploring the feasibility of installing microgrids, battery storage, or other local energy storage options.

2.4.4 Objectives of the Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map In contrast to the long-term broad-based outlook of the Carlsbad General Plan, the Zoning Ordinance provides site-specific controls and guidance on the use and development of properties.

Carlsbad Municipal Code (CMC) Title 21, also known as the Zoning Ordinance, consists of two main elements, the Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map. To prevent incompatible land use relationships, the city’s Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map designate areas or zones for different types of land uses and establishes standards for development. These standards may specify requirements for lot sizes, lot coverages, building heights, setbacks, parking, landscaping, and other development standards. State law (AB 283) requires the city’s zoning designations to be consistent with those of the General Plan.

The primary purpose of a zoning ordinance is to establish zoning districts that regulate the use, placement, and form of development throughout the city in order to preserve the health and welfare of the community and carry out the requirements of federal, State, and local law. The zoning ordinance provides specific guidance on future development to accomplish the policies set forth in the Carlsbad General Plan and the desires of the community.

2.4.5 Amendment to Zoning Ordinance
Because the city’s Zoning Ordinance is the primary implementing tool for key portions of the Carlsbad General Plan, it must be amended to effectively achieve the city’s vision.

Although the proposed project will create two new General Plan land use designations (R-35 and R- 40), it would not create any new zoning classifications. However, other changes will be made such as to development standards to ensure consistency with the updated General Plan and to implement housing programs and policies contained in the Housing Element.

The Zoning Ordinance and Map implement the city’s Local Coastal Program. Revisions to both will trigger amendments to the Local Coastal Program that will be subsequently sent to the California Coastal Commission for final approval.

2.4.6 Amendment to Local Coastal Program
The California Coastal Act regulates all development within the state-designated Coastal Zone. The zone extends through the length of the city, and covers approximately one-third of the city’s land area. The Coastal Act requires that individual jurisdictions adopt local coastal programs (LCP) to implement the Coastal Act. Carlsbad’s LCP consists of a separate land use plan document containing Project Description

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 2-21
separate land use policies and an implementation plan, which primarily consists of the city’s Zoning Ordinance, as well as portions of the Grading and Drainage Ordinance and Building Codes and Regulations that are applicable to storm water management and grading; master and specific plans applicable to areas in the Coastal Zone are also part of the LCP Implementation plan. Development in the Coastal Zone must comply with the LCP in addition to the General Plan.

Rezone sites 1, 5, 6, 8, 9, 16, 17, 18 and 19 are mostly or entirely in the city’s Coastal Zone. If approved by City Council, land use designation changes to these sites and project changes to the Zoning Ordinance and Map and master and specific plans that affect properties in the Coastal Zone will be subject to California Coastal Commission approval. Review and any action by the Coastal Commission on the project would occur after City Council approval and as part of a review process entirely separate from the City’s.

2.4.7 Amendment to Master and Specific Plans
Several of the rezone sites are within master or specific plans. These plans provide a comprehensive set of guidelines, regulations, and implementation programs for ensuring development of a specific site or area in accordance with the city’s General Plan, CMC, and other applicable planning documents. Often, master and specific plans provide more tailored objectives and standards than possible through city-wide documents such as the Zoning Ordinance. Examples of such plans include the Bressi Ranch Master Plan, Village and Barrio Master Plan, and Westfield Carlsbad Specific Plan.

Rezone sites 1, 2, 7, 10, 11, 14, 15 and 19 are all within master or specific plans. These plans require amendment as necessary to ensure consistency with the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance and Map as proposed by this project.

2.4.8 Anticipated Growth
The Carlsbad General Plan has an approximate year 2035 horizon, but actual buildout of all planned land uses may occur earlier or later, as long-range demographic and economic trends are difficult to predict. The designation within the proposed General Plan of a site for a certain use does not necessarily mean that the site will be developed or redeveloped with that use during the planning period, as most development will depend on property owner initiative.

In 2015, the General Plan EIR reported 45,522 existing housing units in Carlsbad (See Section 4.11, Population and Housing) and projected that in the buildout year of 2035, Carlsbad would have 52,320 units (Section 3.9, Land Use, Housing, and Population: 3.9-13). Based on information collected by city staff, 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. As of January 1, 2023, Carlsbad had 47,003 housing units, excluding accessory dwelling units. Therefore, as of release of this SEIR, the city had an available housing unit capacity of 6,218 (53,221 – 47,003) through the buildout year of 2035 under the existing General Plan.

Implementation of the rezone program under the proposed project would facilitate the development of 18 sites, which if developed based on the estimates in Table 2-4 would result in a net increase of 3,295 new housing units to the city’s housing stock compared to what is allowed today. These new housing units would generate 8,260 new residents at buildout (see Section 4.11, Population and Housing, for calculations).

Combined with the available housing unit capacity under the existing General Plan (6,218 units), the 3,295 new units would result in a new housing capacity of 9,513 units or a total 56,516 units.

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

2-22

2.5 Project Objectives
A clear statement of project objectives allows for the analysis of reasonable alternatives to the proposed project, assists the city in making the findings required by CEQA, and informs the city’s statement of overriding considerations, if needed. The city’s objectives for each of the project’s major components are described below:
 Implement the Land Use and Community Design Element, Public Safety Element, and Zoning Ordinance, as amended by this project, to achieve adequate sites for all income groups;  Provide adequate sites, zoned at appropriate densities and development standards, to facilitate residential development and affordability goals set forth in the 2021-2029 RHNA and as identified in the Housing Element.
 Pursue an infill strategy to foster compact development patterns, create walkable communities and preserve the natural environment and critical environmental areas;  Expand housing choices to provide a diverse housing inventory to meet the changing needs of the Planning Area, which includes more affordable housing options;  Update the Public Safety Element to comply with existing State laws.  Ensure high level of public safety to protect the personal safety and welfare of people who live, work, and visit Carlsbad from crime, pollution, disasters, and other threats and emergencies.

2.6 Required Approvals
The following list specifies non-exhaustively and non-exclusively the approvals from the City of Carlsbad and from other agencies necessary for the project. The City Planning Commission and City Council (the City Council is the final approving authority, with the exception of legislative changes in the Coastal Zone, which is subject to California Coastal Commission approval) will review the updated Carlsbad General Plan and its SEIR and supporting documents to consider whether or not to take the following actions:
 Certification of an SEIR;
 Approval of the EIR Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations;  Adoption of a Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program in conjunction with the SEIR;  Approval of amendments to the General Plan;
 Approval of amendments to the Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map;  Approval of amendments to the Local Coastal Program; and  Approval of amendments to various master and specific plans As outlined in this section, the proposed project would result in the rezoning of sites with specific development standards. Future projects on the rezone sites must adhere to the CEQA mitigation measures identified in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for this SEIR in order for the site to develop consistent with the purpose of the rezone and to ensure that future development reduces environmental impacts to the extent feasible. Future development consistent with the Project Description could proceed “by right” as required by State law. Subsequent projects may tier from the SEIR or a finding may be made that sufficient environmental clearance occurred with the SEIR for the Housing Element (CEQA Guidelines Sections 15152, 15162 and 15168). This SEIR comprehensively considers a series of related projects with the intent to streamline Project Description

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 2-23
subsequent review of future development projects. Some future development would be subject to subsequent discretionary review and permitting as required by the updated Municipal Code. It should be noted that the following actions are associated with the future development of the city as it builds out pursuant to the 2015 General Plan. That is, actions of the types listed here would occur whether or not the proposed project was approved. Subsequent discretionary actions must be examined in the light of the SEIR to determine whether an additional environmental document needs to be prepared. Most projects would require subsequent discretionary approvals including:
 Coastal Development Permit
 Habitat Management Plan Permit
 Hillside Development Permit
 Planned Development Permit
 Site Development Plan
 Special Use Permit (floodplain, scenic corridor, etc.)  Tentative Map
 Tentative Parcel Map
City Approvals
City permits are processed upon formal submittal of a development application. Typically, these permits are considered by the Planning Commission in a public hearing setting. In some cases, projects may also require City Council review and approval.  Coastal Development Permit
 Habitat Management Plan Permit
 Hillside Development Permit
 Planned Development Permit
 Site Development Plan
 Special Use Permit (floodplain, scenic corridor, etc.)  Tentative Map
 Tentative Parcel Map
Other Agencies’ Approvals
Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15096, Responsible Agencies should review and comment on draft EIRs for projects which the Responsible Agency would later be asked to approve. The proposed changes to the Local Coastal Program (LCP Land Use Map, Zoning Map, Zoning Ordinance, master and specific plans, as applicable in the Coastal Zone) are subject to California Coastal Commission approval. Therefore, the California Coastal Commission is a responsible agency with approval authority over changes to the Local Coastal Plan. The California Coastal Commission shall make a determination on certifying the Local Coastal Plan Amendment (LCPA). The California Coastal Commission certification of the LCPA shall be scheduled after the proposed project is adopted. The LCPA portion of the proposed project and associated amendments shall not be effective unless and until fully certified by the California Coastal Commission.

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

2-24
Additionally, subsequent development projects may also require review and approval by other agencies including but not limited to those listed below:
 Future development affecting Waters of the U.S. or adjacent wetlands would need to obtain a permit from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers issued pursuant to Section 404 of the Federal Clean Water Act (CWA).
 Prior to obtaining a CWA Section 404 permit, a future development may also need to obtain a water quality certification or waiver from the Regional Water Quality Control Board pursuant to Section 401 of the Federal CWA.
 Future development affecting native habitat within a streambed may need a Streambed/Bank Alteration Agreement issued by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife pursuant to Section 1600 et seq. of the California Fish and Game Code.  Future development located within the City’s Coastal Zone may need to gain authorization, including the proper permits and certification from the California Coastal Commission pursuant to the regulations set forth in the California Coastal Act.  Future development will be required to submit a fugitive dust control plan to the San Diego County Air Pollution Control District (SDAPCD) for approval prior to issuance of grading permits (SDAPCD Rule 55).
 Future development within or altering a 100-year floodplain or other FEMA-mapped flood hazard area would need to obtain a Letter of Map Revision (LOMR), Conditional Letter of Map Revision (CLOMR) or Conditional Letter of Map Revision Based on Fill (CLOMR-F) that describes the effect that the proposed project or fill would have on the National Flood Insurance Program map.
 Future development, such as industrial or medical, for example may need hazardous material handling, use, storage, and/or disposal permit(s) from the appropriate local, regional, state, or federal agency.
 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction General Permits will be required for grading activities of 1 acre or larger. The developer must file a Notice of Intent with the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) and obtain a General Construction Activity Stormwater Permit pursuant to the NPDES regulations established under the CWA. This permit requires preparation and implementation of a Stormwater Pullulation Prevention Plan, which is intended to prevent degradation of surface and groundwaters during the grading and construction process.
 Other agencies for which development projects may need to receive permits or clearances include Caltrans; water, wastewater, and other utility districts; North County Transit District (NCTD); San Diego County Regional Airport Authority (Airport Land Use Commission), and; the Federal Aviation Administration.

2.7 California Native American Tribal Consultation
Three California Native American Tribe have requested consultation pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080.3.1. Information about consultation is included in Section 4.4, Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources, of this SEIR.

Environmental Setting

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 3-1
3 Environmental Setting
This section provides a general overview of the environmental setting for the proposed Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update. More detailed descriptions of the environmental setting for each environmental issue area evaluated in this SEIR can be found in Section 4, Environmental Impact Analysis.

3.1 Regional Setting
The City of Carlsbad is located on the coast of the Pacific Ocean in northwest San Diego County and encompasses approximately 39 square miles of land area. The city is located about 30 miles north of San Diego and about 90 miles south of Los Angeles. Carlsbad is surrounded by the cities of Oceanside to the north, Encinitas to the south, and 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 acts as a 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 county lands.

3.2 Rezone Sites Setting
To help achieve the City’s designated RHNA, the city proposes under this project to undergo both General Plan land use and zoning map amendments as necessary to permit housing on 18 rezone sites identified in the Housing Element. A map of the 18 rezone sites is included in Figure 2-4 in Section 2, Project Description. Table 3-1 includes a description of the characteristics of the sites.

Site 3 Chestnut at El Camino
Real

2.5 acres The site consists of three vacant properties. The site contains slopes and potential biological resources.

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

3-2
Site # Location
Approximate
Site Size Existing Use and Site Features
Site 4 Zone 15 Cluster 27.7 acres The site includes two separate properties currently used for an RV storage lot, a house, and outbuildings. The site is mostly undeveloped. The northern portion of the site includes a Proposed Hardline and a Standards Area, which are designated for future conservation in the Carlsbad Habitat Management Plan. The Proposed Hardline has been approved as a biological mitigation site for the future extension of College Blvd and is designated as Open Space.

Site 6 Crossings Golf Course
Lot 5

Site 7 Salk Avenue 9.8 acres The site has been graded but is currently vacant and undeveloped.

The site contains manufactured slopes and vegetation.

Site 8 Cottage Row
Apartments

Site 10 Bressi Ranch Colt
Place

2.6 acres The site is a previously graded but vacant lot located between residential developments. Approximately 0.6 acres of the site is restricted by McClellan-Palomar Airport Safety Zone 2.

Site 11 Bressi Ranch Gateway
Road

5.3 acres The site consists of two vacant and undeveloped parcels adjacent to industrial and commercial uses.

Site 12 Industrial Sites East of
Melrose

Site 14 Carlsbad Village
COASTER Station

Environmental Setting

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 3-3
Site # Location
Approximate
Site Size Existing Use and Site Features
Site 16 Caltrans Maintenance
Station and Pacific
Sales

Site 17 Poinsettia COASTER
Station

5.8 acres The site is developed with transit facilities and 341 parking spaces for transit riders and is owned by the North County Transit District.

The site is bordered by railroad tracks to the west and mixed-use development to the east.

Site 18 North Ponto Parcels 5.9 acres The site consists of eight vacant properties which include self- storage and undeveloped areas. The site is generally flat and is bounded by railroad on the eastern side. The city approved 86 apartments on the north three parcels of Site 18 in May 2022.

Note: Site 13 removed from Housing Site Inventory and is not included within this SEIR.

3.3 Cumulative Projects Setting
Because the project is a general plan update, cumulative impacts are treated somewhat differently than would be the case for a project-specific development. CEQA Guidelines Section 15130(b)(1)(B) provides the following direction relative to cumulative impact analysis and states that the following elements are necessary for an adequate discussion of environmental impacts:

A summary of projections contained in an adopted local, regional or statewide plan, or related planning document, that describes or evaluates conditions contributing to the cumulative effect. Such plans may include: a general plan, regional transportation plan, or plans for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions. A summary of projections may also be contained in an adopted or certified prior environmental document for such a plan. Such projections may be supplemented with additional information such as a regional modeling program. Any such document shall be referenced and made available to the public at a location specified by the lead agency.

Some analyses including air quality, energy, greenhouse gas emissions, transportation, and population and housing, rely on much larger geographic areas such as the San Diego County region.

For issues that may have regional cumulative implications, the cumulative impact analysis for this SEIR is based on the regional growth assumed in the San Diego Association of Governments’ (SANDAG) most recent Series 14 Regional Growth Forecast 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.

For analyses that may have more localized or neighborhood implications (biological resources, cultural resources, noise, public services, utilities, wildfire), the cumulative impact analysis includes development proposed under the 2015 General Plan. As discussed in Section 2, Project Description, the 2015 General Plan EIR reported 45,522 housing units in Carlsbad and projected that in horizon year 2035, Carlsbad would have 52,320 units. Development under the proposed project in City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

3-4
conjunction with the development forecasted in the 2015 General Plan and development that has occurred since the General Plan’s approval, is accounted for in the cumulative impacts analysis.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15130 provides guidance on the discussion of cumulative impacts. Two conditions apply to determine the cumulative effect of a project: first, the overall effect caused by existing and known or forecasted projects must be considered significant under the significance thresholds discussed above; and second, the project must have a “cumulatively considerable” contribution to that effect.

Environmental Impact Analysis

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4-1
4 Environmental Impact Analysis
This section discusses the possible environmental effects of the proposed project for the specific issue areas that were identified as having the potential to experience significant impacts. As a Supplemental EIR, this report analyzes the same potentially significant impact areas as the certified EIR (2015) issued by the City of Carlsbad for the 2015 General Plan. A “significant effect” is defined by the CEQA Guidelines Section 15382 as:
a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise, and objects of historic or aesthetic significance. An economic or social change by itself shall not be considered a significant effect on the environment but may be considered in determining whether the physical change is significant.

The following issue areas were identified as having potentially significant impacts in the 2015 General Plan EIR and are evaluated in this section:

Air Quality
Transportation1
The following issue areas were determined in the 2015 General Plan EIR to have less than significant impacts or less than significant impacts with mitigation, and are further evaluated in this section:
 Aesthetics
 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
 Geology and Soils
 Greenhouse Gas Emissions/Climate Change
 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
 Hydrology and Water Quality
 Land Use and Planning
 Noise
 Population and Housing
 Public Services and Recreation
 Utilities and Service Systems
 Wildfire
In addition to the issue areas listed above, the following issue areas were determined in this SEIR to have no impacts, and therefore are addressed in Section 4.16, Effects Found Not to be Significant, of this SEIR: Agricultural and Forestry Resources, Energy, and Minerals.

The assessment of each issue area begins with a discussion of the environmental setting related to the issue, which is followed by the impact analysis. In the impact analysis, the first subsection identifies the methodologies used and the “significance thresholds,” which are criteria adopted by the City of Carlsbad and other agencies, universally recognized, or developed specifically for this analysis to determine whether potential effects are significant. The next subsection summarizes the environmental analysis findings of the 2015 General Plan EIR. The last subsection describes each impact of the proposed project, mitigation measures for significant impacts, and the level of significance after mitigation. Each effect under consideration for an issue area is separately listed in

1 While the 2015 General Plan EIR determined that the 2015 General Plan would result in significant and unavoidable impacts, this determination was made using the previous metric of LOS. As discussed in Section 4.13, Transportation, of this SEIR, pursuant to SB 743, VMT has replaced LOS as the metric for determining transportation significance.

1. 2.

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

4-2
bold text with the discussion of the effect and its significance. Each bolded impact statement also contains a statement of the significance determination for the environmental impact as follows:

Less than Significant. An impact that may be adverse but does not exceed the threshold levels and does not require mitigation measures. However, mitigation measures that could further lessen the environmental effect may be suggested if readily available and easily achievable.

No Impact. The proposed project would have no effect on environmental conditions or would reduce existing environmental problems or hazards.

Following each environmental impact discussion is a list of mitigation measures (if required) and the residual effects or level of significance remaining after implementation of the measure(s). In cases where the mitigation measure for an impact could have a significant environmental impact in another issue area, this impact is discussed and evaluated as a secondary impact. The impact analysis concludes with a discussion of cumulative effects, which evaluates the impacts associated with the proposed project in conjunction with other planned and pending developments in the area listed in Section 3, Environmental Setting.

The Executive Summary of this SEIR summarizes all impacts and mitigation measures that apply to the proposed project.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Aesthetics

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.1-1

4.1 Aesthetics
This section evaluates the potential impacts related to aesthetics, including scenic vistas, scenic resources, visual character and quality, and light and glare associated with the implementation of the proposed project.

4.1.1 Setting
The following setting information is based on the 2015 General Plan EIR and updated where appropriate (City of Carlsbad 2015).

Carlsbad is located in northwest San Diego County. In addition to the Pacific Ocean coastline along its western boundary, Carlsbad is surrounded by the cities of Oceanside to the north, Encinitas to the south, and Vista and San Marcos and unincorporated areas of San Diego County to the east.

The Pacific Ocean is among Carlsbad’s principal visual features and frames the city’s western edge.

Vistas of the ocean can be seen from much of Carlsbad Boulevard, especially in the central and southern portions of the boulevard. The city’s three lagoons are also distinctive aspects of the city’s visual character. The somewhat flatter terrain along the coastline gives way to hillsides toward the east.

The dominant man-made features are Interstate 5 (I-5) and the railroad corridor, which run parallel to the coastline within a mile of the ocean, and the McClellan-Palomar Airport located at the geographic center of the community along Palomar Airport Road and El Camino Real. In the northwest, the older neighborhoods of the Village and the Barrio form a gridded network of streets near the coast.

Urban development abuts Highway 78 along Carlsbad’s northern edge, with the highway and Buena Vista Lagoon acting as a boundary between Carlsbad and Oceanside. Along the city’s southern edge, Batiquitos Lagoon separates Carlsbad from the city of Encinitas. City boundaries to the east are less distinctive, where a mix of hillsides and urban development lie between the center and the cities of Oceanside, Vista and San Marcos.

Although primarily a residential community by land area, Carlsbad contains a mix of development typologies and patterns. These range from the small-scaled mixed-use and neighborhood commercial found in the northwestern Village and Barrio neighborhoods to the larger lot sizes and auto-oriented shopping centers found in the suburban neighborhoods of the northeast, southeast, and southwest quadrants. In general, most Carlsbad buildings are one to two stories tall, although there are several three- and four-story residential and office/industrial buildings.

Scenic Resources and Vistas
The Carlsbad coastline is one of the largest scenic areas in the city. Although access points to Carlsbad beaches are available, pedestrian and auto access is limited by both natural topography and man-made barriers, such as I-5 and the railroad. As a result, the most convenient way to access the beach is via car at designated crossings or road bridges. The promenade along the beach near Carlsbad Village and its overlook points provide visual access to the shoreline at Carlsbad State Beach. However, views of the coast from Carlsbad Boulevard are often interrupted by buildings, such as residential developments, hotels, and retail uses. Near the intersections of Carlsbad Boulevard with Carlsbad Village Drive and Cannon Road, there are several private uses along the coast that limit waterfront access and views from public streets.

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

4.1-2
Natural areas and open spaces, including watershed features, hillsides, habitats, parks and vistas, are some of the most defining and integral components of the city’s form and structure. Carlsbad’s beaches connect to three of California’s natural lagoons—Buena Vista, Agua Hedionda and Batiquitos. These lagoons are rich with a diversity of plant, animal and aquatic wildlife and offer public amenities, such as hiking trails, scenic views, fishing, and water recreation. Watershed drainages give Carlsbad its rolling topography in the east, resulting in areas with steep slopes ideal for protected habitat. Hillsides layered with trees and brush create unique, intimate spaces where many of Carlsbad’s master planned communities and resorts are located. Natural features also help shape the city’s network of manmade open spaces such as city parks, trails and golf courses, many of which extend to the eastern boundary of the city. Parks are distributed throughout the city and host a variety of passive and active resources. A small amount of agricultural land is in productive use in Carlsbad, including the Flower Fields and Strawberry Fields and Sunny Creek area.

Trails, promenades and bikeways are unique visual features and public amenities that evoke images of the city’s beach community, small town feel, and connectedness. The beaches and the coastal corridor are key visual amenities in the city, enjoyed not only by beach goers, joggers, bicyclists, but also by passengers in cars along the coastal roads. The seawalls, ramps, and promenade that descend to the beach; the trails that meander along major roads; and the separated and landscaped bikeways along the railroad in the Barrio foster connections and are heavily used amenities for residents and visitors. When applied on a citywide scale, these types of amenities improve pedestrian and bike access while further enhancing neighborhood connections to natural and scenic surroundings. The El Camino Real roadway corridor is also considered a scenic roadway – areas adjacent to the roadway provide rolling hillsides and diverse views.

4.1.2 Regulatory Setting
a. Federal
No existing federal regulations pertain to the visual resources in the project area. b. State
State Scenic Highway Program
According to Caltrans, a state scenic highway should traverse an area of outstanding scenic quality, containing striking views, flora, geology, or other unique natural attributes. Therefore, Caltrans evaluates the merits of a nominated highway on how much of the natural landscape a traveler sees and the extent to which visual intrusions impact the "scenic corridor." Visual intrusions may be natural or constructed elements, viewed from the highway, that adversely affect the scenic quality of a corridor. Visual intrusions are evaluated in the following manner (Caltrans 2012):
 The more pristine the natural landscape is and less affected by intrusions, the more likely the nominated highway will qualify as scenic.
 Where intrusions have occurred, the less impact they have on an area's natural beauty, the more likely the nominated highway will qualify as scenic.

The extent to which intrusions dominate views from the highway will determine the significance of their impact on the scenic corridor. The segment of Interstate 5 (I-5) running through the City of Carlsbad is not an officially designated scenic highway, however it is currently designated as eligible (Caltrans 2023).

Environmental Impact Analysis
Aesthetics

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.1-3
Senate Bill 743
Senate Bill 743 (California Public Resources Code Section 21099) passed in 2013, made changes to the CEQA for projects located in transit-oriented development areas. Among these changes are that a project’s aesthetics impacts are no longer considered significant impacts on the environment if the project is a residential, mixed-use residential, or employment center project and if the project is located on an infill site within a transit priority area (TPA). Pursuant to Section 21099 of the California Public Resources Code, a “transit priority area” is defined in as an area within 0.5 mile of an existing or planned major transit stop. A "major transit stop" is defined in Section 21064.3 of the California Public Resources Code as a rail transit station, a ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail transit service, or the intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service interval of 15 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods.

Carlsbad includes areas that are within a TPA including within 0.5 mile of major transit stops such as the Carlsbad Poinsettia COASTER station and Carlsbad Village COASTER Station. As shown in Figure 4.1-1, sites within a TPA include Sites 14 and 15, which are within 0.5 mile of the Carlsbad Village COASTER station, and Site 17 which is within 0.5 mile of the Carlsbad Poinsettia COASTER station.
c. Local
City of Carlsbad Local Coastal Program
The Coastal Act of 1976 mandates the preparation of Local Coastal Programs that aim to protect, maintain, enhance, and restore the quality of Coastal Zone resources. The California Coastal Commission last certified the City of Carlsbad’s Local Coastal Program (LCP) on October 16, 2019.

The LCP consists of six geographical segments: the Agua Hedionda Lagoon LCP segment; the Carlsbad Mello I segment; the Carlsbad Mello II segment, the West Batiquitos Lagoon/Sammis Properties segment; the East Batiquitos Lagoon/Hunt Properties segment; and the Village-Barrio segment. The City’s LCP contains land use policies that serve to address land use, visitor-serving uses, recreation, public access to the coast, agriculture, cultural and scenic resources, environmentally sensitive habitat, water quality, and coastal hazards (City of Carlsbad 2023). Sites 1, 5, 6, 8, 9, 16, and 17 are located within the Mello II segment; Site 18 is located partially within the Mello II and West Batiquitos Lagoon/Sammis Properties segment; and Site 19 is located within the East Batiquitos Lagoon/Hunt Properties segment (City of Carlsbad 1998).

City of Carlsbad Zoning Ordinance
The city’s Municipal Code does not have a specific section dedicated to prevention of nuisance light and glare through regulation; rather, lighting is addressed for each land use type in the city’s Zoning Ordinance (Municipal Code Title 21). For example, for industrial uses allowed in the Planned Industrial zone, the ordinance states, “all uses shall be operated so as not to produce humidity, heat, glare or high-intensity illumination which is perceptible without instruments by the average person while on or beyond the lot containing the use.” For uses allowed in the Local Shopping Center, and Office uses, the ordinance states that “light sources shall be designed to avoid direct or indirect glare to any off-site properties or public rights-of-way.” Light and glare conditions are also regulated for campgrounds, greenhouses, and gas stations.

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

4.1-4
Figure 4.1-1 Transit Priority Areas and Housing Sites

~-: ~ j City Limit s
Highway
M ajor Street
Planne d Street
Railroad
CJ Tra nsit Priority Area
- Potentia l Housing Sites•
* 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 /1.

L..----,,M,.,l\.,1e"'s---~I f.:..

Additional data provided by City of Carlsbad, 2022; SANDAG, 2023.

San Marcos
Environmental Impact Analysis
Aesthetics

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.1-5
Chapter 21.40: Scenic Preservation Overlay Zone
The purpose of the city’s Scenic Preservation Overlay Zone is to supplement the underlying zoning by providing additional regulations for development within designated areas to preserve or enhance outstanding views, flora and geology, or other unique natural attributes and historical and cultural resources. This chapter establishes criteria by which standards may be applied. Adopted standards may address, but are not limited to signs, utilities, landscaping, architectural treatment, setbacks, side yards, height, bulk, and building spacing. Currently, this overlay zone is applied to the El Camino Real corridor. Sites 2, 3, and 4 are located immediately adjacent to the El Camino Real corridor.

Chapter 21.95: Hillside Development Regulations
The city’s Hillside Development Regulations are intended to preserve and/or enhance the aesthetic qualities of natural hillsides and manufactured slopes. The regulations require project grading to be minimized, to relate to the slope of the land, and to incorporate contours in manufactured slopes located in highly visible public locations. The regulations additionally assure that the alteration of natural hillsides is done in an environmentally sensitive manner to protect lagoons and riparian ecosystems from increased erosion and avoid substantial impacts to natural resource areas, wildlife habitats, or native vegetation. According to the Hillside Development Guidelines, “A Hillside Development Permit (HDP) is required when a development is proposed on any slope which has a gradient of 15% or greater and a slope height of greater than 15 feet. Development means grading, erecting or constructing on a hillside area.”
Specific and Master Plans
The city uses specific plans and master plans 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 Master Plan (described below) guides development in that area. There are also many older specific plans and master plans that have been fully implemented.

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

4.1-6
 Embody the principles of smart growth, with a mix of commercial and residential land uses, a variety of housing choices, walkable neighborhoods and multiple transportation options.  Attract high quality, sustainable development that enhances vitality and local character.

Sites 14 and 15 are within the Carlsbad Village and Barrio Master Plan area.

City of Carlsbad Scenic Corridor Guidelines
The Scenic Corridor Guidelines (Guidelines) were completed in 1988 and were developed to implement the then-existing Scenic Highways Element of the Carlsbad General Plan. The Guidelines designate a number of city streets and locations as scenic corridors based on criteria listed in the document and provide guidance for improvements to take place within or adjacent to the scenic corridor rights-of-way. The Guidelines also designate a number of community identity entries, based on included criteria, to receive monumentation or signage. For the scenic corridors, the Guidelines establish the following four categories:

Community Theme Corridors – This category contains El Camino Real, Carlsbad Boulevard, and Palomar Airport Road. The guidelines include goals and guidance for right-of way treatments for each of these streets to promote the distinct characteristics of each of these three major thoroughfares.

Community Scenic Corridors – Streets included in this category are major arterial streets that pass through and connect major subareas of the city. These streets generally traverse the hills and residential areas of the central and eastern parts of the city.

Natural Open Space and Recreation Corridors – Streets in this category were selected based on their rural quality, and each is located adjacent to one of the city’s three lagoons. These streets are narrower, with relatively light traffic volume compared to the other categories, and generally do not connect to high-activity centers.

Railroad Corridor – This category encompasses the Atchison Topeka and Santa Fe Railway. The Guidelines recognize the difficulty of controlling railroad-owned right-of-way, but offers guidance on improvements outside of the right-of-way to impact the viewing experience of rail passengers traveling through the city.

The Guidelines reflect the city’s official intentions for scenic corridor rights-of-way and adjacent properties, though the document is not intended to function as development standards or to supersede city policies. Rather, it is intended to be used in conjunction with the city’s other design guidelines, standards, and policies to aid in decisions regarding visual quality and aesthetics.

El Camino Real Corridor Development Standards
The El Camino Real Corridor Development Standards were adopted in 1984 to further the goals of the then-existing Land Use and Scenic Highways Elements of the Carlsbad General Plan to preserve unique city resources as they relate to highways. The 1988 Scenic Corridor Guidelines recognize the standards and note they should be consulted when developing along El Camino Real, so it is appropriate to identify them apart from the Scenic Corridor Guidelines. The standards provide a general design concept for the entire length of the El Camino Real right-of-way, and establish development restrictions for private properties fronting the roadway. The design concept is an easily identifiable homogenous corridor that capitalizes on the distinct design characteristics of five distinct subareas. The standards include design guidelines emphasizing retention of natural topography; right-of-way standards for landscaping, street lighting, signage, and furniture; and

1. 2.

3. 4.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Aesthetics

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.1-7
private frontage standards for design theme, medians, sidewalks, signage, building height and setback, grading, street furniture and lighting, roofing, and land use.

City of Carlsbad General Plan
The current Carlsbad General Plan, adopted in 2015, lists several policies related aesthetics in its Land Use and Community Design Element and Mobility Element. The following policies are applicable to proposed project (City of Carlsbad 2015):

Land Use and Community Design Element
Policy 2-P.10 Development on slopes, when permitted, shall be designed to minimize grading and comply with the hillside development provisions of the Zoning Ordinance and the Carlsbad Local Coastal Program.

Policy 2-P.11 Consider density and development right transfers in instances where a property owner is preserving open space in excess of normal city requirements for purposes of environmental enhancement, complying with the city’s Habitat Management Plan, or otherwise leaving developable property in its natural condition. The density/development potential of the property being left in open space shall be reserved for and used on the remainder of the project site or, through an agreement with the city, may be transferred to another property.

Policy 2-P.40 Establish development standards that will preserve natural features and characteristics, especially those within coastal, hillside and natural habitat areas.

Policy 2-P.41 Ensure that the review of future projects places a high priority on the compatibility of adjacent land uses along the interface of different residential density and non-residential intensity categories. Special attention should be given to buffering and transitional methods, especially, when reviewing properties where different residential densities or land uses are involved.

Policy 2-P.43 Where feasible, locate development away from visible ridges; larger buildings, such as large retail stores and office and industrial development, should be arranged to minimize the buildings’ visual appearance from major transportation corridors and vistas.

Mobility Element
Policy 3-P.23 Maintain the city’s scenic transportation corridors as identified in the Carlsbad Scenic Corridor Guidelines.

4.1.3 Impact Analysis
a. Methodology and Significance Thresholds
The following thresholds of significance are based on CEQA Guidelines Appendix G. For purposes of this SEIR, implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact if it would do any of the following:

Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista.

Substantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway.

1. 2.

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

4.1-8
In non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality.

Create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area.

As described in Section 4.1.2, Regulatory Setting, under Senate Bill 743 aesthetic impacts associated with residential projects in a TPA cannot be considered significant impacts on the environment.

Because implementation of the proposed rezoning would facilitate residential development on infill sites within a TPA, aesthetics impacts of development of those locations within a TPA may not be considered significant impacts on the environment. Sites within a TPA include Sites 14 and 15, which are within 0.5 mile of the Carlsbad Village COASTER station, and Site 17, which is within 0.5 mile of the Carlsbad Poinsettia COASTER station. Therefore, aesthetic impacts associated with Sites 14, 15, and 17 are assumed to be less than significant pursuant to SB 743 and will not be discussed in the analysis below. This analysis focuses on the rezone sites that are not within a TPA (Sites 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 16, 18, and 19).

Pursuant to CEQA Statute Section 21099.d, “aesthetic impacts do not include impacts on historical or cultural resources.” This analysis is included in Section 4.4, Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources, of this SEIR. In addition, Section 4.9, Land Use and Planning, includes a discussion of the proposed rezoning’s consistency with city plans and goals, including those applicable to design and aesthetics. b. Prior Environmental Analysis
The 2015 General Plan EIR determined that impacts to aesthetic resources would be less than significant for scenic vistas, scenic highways, visual quality, and light and glare (Section 3.1, Aesthetics: 3.1-7 to 3.1-17). It further stated that individual development projects would be subject to project-specific development and planning review, including adherence to standards for community design and visual quality. As such, all projects proposed under General Plan implementation would be required to conform to zoning, design standards, and other regulations concerning aesthetic resources such as those that address architectural design, lighting, signage, landscaping, building setbacks, and hillside protection.

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 aesthetics. 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 aesthetics would occur. Therefore, this analysis focuses on impacts associated with implementation of the rezone program which would facilitate the development of rezone sites listed in Table 2-4 in Section 2, Project Description.

3. 4.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Aesthetics

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.1-9
Threshold 1: Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? Impact AES-1 SIMILAR TO THE DEVELOPMENT ANALYZED IN THE 2015 GENERAL PLAN EIR, DEVELOPMENT UNDER THE PROJECT WOULD NOT HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL EFFECT ON A SCENIC VISTA. THIS IMPACT WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.

As stated above under Methodology and Significance Thresholds and because three of the rezone sites are within a TPA and aesthetic impacts in those areas cannot be considered significant impacts, this analysis focuses on the 15 rezone sites not within a TPA.

For the purposes of this analysis, a scenic vista is a view from a public place (roadway, designated scenic viewing spot, etc.) that is expansive and considered important by a jurisdiction or a community. It can be obtained from an elevated position (such as from the top of a hillside) or it can be seen from a roadway with a longer-range view of the landscape. An adverse effect would occur if a proposed project would alter, block, or otherwise damage a scenic vista upon implementation.

Scenic vistas in Carlsbad consist of the scenic corridors and views to and from the coastline, open spaces, and hillsides.

The proposed project introduces land use changes on the rezone sites detailed in Table 2-4 of the Project Description. In most cases, the rezone sites are located in or near already developed areas and coincide with areas designated for development under the existing General Plan. Most of the development on the rezone sites that would be facilitated by the proposed project would occur along already developed corridors. These areas are urbanized with development of varying heights and topographies. Additional development at these rezone sites would not substantially alter or block views of the landscape or towards the ocean from public viewpoints such as roadways, as building heights would be generally similar to existing and ongoing development. The maximum building heights for R-35 and R-40 zoning districts would be increased to 45 feet, and would apply to rezone sites 1, 2, 11, and 12. However, many of the views that would be affected are already fully or intermittently impeded by mature trees, buildings, or existing topography.

Although Site 2 would be located along El Camino Real, a scenic corridor, development under the proposed project would continue to abide by development regulations in these areas, and existing General Plan policies would ensure that opportunities to enjoy scenic views are either preserved or enhanced.

Future development projects would still be subject to development and planning review and must therefore conform to zoning and other ordinances regarding protection of aesthetic qualities as listed above in the Regulatory Setting. As was found in the 2015 General Plan EIR, compliance with policies 2-P.10, 2-P. 11, 2-P.40, 2-P.41, 2-P.43, 2-P.53, and 3-P.23 would reduce impacts.

Due to the siting and nature of the proposed project, and policies that ensure that new development will have minimal impact on scenic corridors and other scenic resources, the proposed project will have a less than significant impact on the city’s scenic vistas.

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

4.1-10
Threshold 2: Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? Impact AES-2 THE CITY OF CARLSBAD DOES NOT CONTAIN A DESIGNATED STATE SCENIC HIGHWAY.

THIS IMPACT WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.

There are no designated scenic highways in Carlsbad. The segment of I-5 running through the City of Carlsbad is designated as eligible to become a scenic highway, however it is not designated (Caltrans 2023). Therefore, no impacts to designated state scenic highways would occur. The 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 3: Would the project, in non-urbanized areas, substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of public views of the site and its surroundings? (Public views are those that are experienced from a publicly accessible vantage point). If the project is in an urbanized area, would the project conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality?
Impact AES-3 SIMILAR TO DEVELOPMENT ANALYZED IN THE 2015 GENERAL PLAN EIR, DEVELOPMENT

UNDER THE PROJECT WOULD NOT CONFLICT WITH APPLICABLE ZONING AND OTHER REGULATIONS GOVERNING SCENIC QUALITY. THIS IMPACT WOULD BE LESS THAT SIGNIFICANT.

Carlsbad can be categorized as an urban area as it is largely built out with a mix of residential neighborhoods, commercial areas and corridors, and industrial areas, and has a population of more than 100,000 residents (CEQA Statute Section 21071). Therefore, for the purposes of this CEQA threshold question, Carlsbad is considered an “urbanized area.” The proposed project does not call for any substantial changes to land use or building design for most neighborhoods within the city and includes provisions to preserve or improve the existing visual character of the city. The proposed project would involve land use changes at 18 rezone sites, 15 of which are not within a TPA. However, future development under the program would not conflict with applicable zoning provisions regulating scenic quality such as height, lot coverage and setback requirements, as well as applicable design standards in effect at that time.

The proposed project would facilitate infill development on underutilized sites in order to increase density to accommodate a higher number of affordable housing units in the city in compliance with State law. Development facilitated by the project would be infill development and may enhance the visual quality of the affected rezone sites in some cases by filling in vacant and underdeveloped visual areas with new development.

Future development projects would be subject to development and planning review and must therefore conform to zoning and other ordinances regarding protection of aesthetic qualities as listed above in the Regulatory Setting. As was found in the 2015 General Plan EIR, compliance with policies 2-P.10, 2-P. 11, 2-P.40, 2-P.41, 2-P.43, 2-P.53, and 3-P.23 would reduce impacts.

Overall, for the 15 rezone sites not within a TPA, the proposed project would not conflict with regulations governing scenic quality. The impact would be less than significant.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Aesthetics

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.1-11
Mitigation Measures
No mitigation measures are required because, like under the 2015 EIR, impacts would be less than significant without mitigation.

Threshold 4: Would the project create a new source of substantial light or glare that would adversely affect daytime or nighttime views in the area? Impact AES-4 SIMILAR TO DEVELOPMENT ANALYZED IN THE 2015 GENERAL PLAN EIR, DEVELOPMENT

UNDER THE PROJECT WOULD RESULT IN NEW SOURCES OF LIGHT OR GLARE IN THE AREA BUT WOULD NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT DAY OR NIGHTTIME VIEWS. THIS IMPACT WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.

Carlsbad is an urbanized city with commensurate level of light and glare. Development facilitated by the project would, in large part, occur as infill on already developed parcels or on vacant or underutilized sites within existing neighborhoods. However, the proposed project would increase allowed density of development on the rezone sites which would add sources of lighting and glare.

New lighting could occur on buildings for safety and in pedestrian walkways, and light could be emitted from interior sources through windows on upper stories of tall buildings. The main source of glare would likely be from the sun shining on reflective or light-colored building materials and glazing.

Most of the 15 rezone sites not within a TPA and areas surrounding these rezone sites are developed or located in developed urban areas. Development facilitated by the proposed project would mostly occur as redevelopment of existing built sites or infill development of unused parcels mostly between existing built sites. When facilities such as parking lots or underdeveloped sites are replaced with buildings, these replacements may reduce nighttime sources of light, because parking lots are often more brightly lit during the nighttime than most buildings. Development of underutilized or vacant parcels may result in new light sources, but they would likely be congruous with nearby light sources (e.g., lighting from residential windows). Furthermore, as the development facilitated by the project would be residential units, light from windows would be mostly filtered or obscured by window coverings. Light spillover from exterior residential lighting is typically blocked by adjacent structures or trees.

Furthermore, development facilitated by the proposed project would comply with applicable guidelines including the City’s Zoning Ordinance and Title 24 of the California Building Code which aim to reduce light spillover. Therefore, overall, new development on the rezone sites resulting from the proposed project would take place in or near developed and urbanized areas, where moderate light and glare already exist, and would not be out of character with the urban environment. 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
Development facilitated by the project in conjunction with other nearby reasonably foreseeable future projects in the area could result in impacts to visual resources and aesthetic quality.

Implementation of the project would encourage increased housing development citywide, mainly in areas already developed with other uses. Most projects in the city, adjacent cities, and San Diego City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

4.1-12
County that are not within TPAs would be required to undergo analysis for impacts to aesthetics and visual resources. These impacts would be mitigated by design guidelines, regulations, policies, and project-specific mitigation measures, thereby limiting damage to existing visual resources and enhancing the visual quality of areas where development occurs. Consequently, development facilitated by the project would not result in significant cumulative environmental impacts in conflict with requirements for preserving scenic vistas, scenic resources in State- or locally designated highways or drives, visual quality, and for limiting the effects of light and glare. Therefore, project implementation would not result in a cumulatively considerable contribution to impact on aesthetics.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Air Quality

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.2-1

4.2 Air Quality
This section evaluates the impacts of the proposed project upon local and regional air quality. Both temporary impacts relating to construction activity and long-term impacts associated with population growth and associated growth in vehicle traffic are discussed.

4.2.1 Setting
a. Local Climate and Meteorology
Air quality is affected by the rate and location of pollutant emissions and by climatic conditions that influence the movement and dispersion of pollutants. Atmospheric conditions, such as wind speed, wind direction, and air temperature gradients, along with local and regional topography, mediate the relationship between air pollutant emissions and air quality.

The City of Carlsbad is located within the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB), which is bordered by the Pacific Ocean to the west, the South Coast Air Basin to the north, the Salton Sea Air Basin to the east, and the United States/Mexico border to the south. Regional wind patterns are dominated by onshore sea breezes during the day, and winds generally slow or reverse direction toward the sea at night. Temperature and precipitation can vary widely in the SDAB, where average annual precipitation ranges from approximately 10 inches in the coastal and inland areas to over 30 inches in the mountains. In general, milder annual temperatures are experienced in the maritime and coastal areas, whereas the interior and desert areas experience warmer summers and cooler winters.

High air pollution levels in coastal communities of San Diego can often occur when polluted air from the South Coast Air Basin, particularly from Los Angeles, travels southwest over the ocean at night and is brought on shore into San Diego by the sea breeze during the day (San Diego County Air Pollution Control District [SDAPCD] 2010). Air Pollutants are also transported to San Diego during relatively mild Santa Ana weather conditions, however, during strong Santa Ana weather conditions, pollutants are pushed away from San Diego far out to sea. b. Sources of Air Pollution
Air pollutant emissions in the SDAB are generated primarily by stationary and mobile sources.

Stationary sources can be divided into two major subcategories:
 Point sources occur at a specific location and are often identified by an exhaust vent or stack.

Examples include boilers or combustion equipment that produce electricity or generate heat.  Area sources are widely distributed and include such sources as residential and commercial water heaters, painting operations, lawn mowers, agricultural fields, landfills, and some consumer products.

Mobile sources refer to emissions from motor vehicles, including tailpipe and evaporative emissions, and can also be divided into two major subcategories:
 On-road sources consist of legally operated vehicles on roadways and highways.  Off-road sources include aircraft, ships, trains, and self-propelled construction equipment.

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

4.2-2
Air pollutants can also be generated by the natural environment, such as when high winds suspend fine dust particles or when wildfires generate smoke containing particulate matter. c. Air Pollutants of Primary Concern
The federal and State Clean Air Acts (CAA) mandate the control and reduction of certain air pollutants. Under these laws, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the California Air Resources Board (CARB) have established the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) and the California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS) for “criteria pollutants” and other pollutants. Some pollutants are emitted directly from a source (e.g., vehicle tailpipe, an exhaust stack of a factory, etc.) into the atmosphere, including carbon monoxide, volatile organic compounds (VOC)/reactive organic gases (ROG),
1 nitrogen oxides (NOX), particulate matter with
diameters of up to ten microns (PM10) and up to 2.5 microns (PM2.5), sulfur dioxide (SO2), and lead.

Other pollutants are created indirectly through chemical reactions in the atmosphere, such as ozone, which is created by atmospheric chemical and photochemical reactions primarily between VOC and NO
X. Secondary pollutants include oxidants, ozone, and sulfate and nitrate particulates (smog). The characteristics, sources and effects of criteria pollutants are discussed in the following subsections. The following subsections describe the characteristics, sources, and health and atmospheric effects of air pollutants of primary concern.

Ozone
Ozone is produced by a photochemical reaction (triggered by sunlight) between NOX and VOC/ROG are composed of non-methane hydrocarbons (with some specific exclusions), and NOX is composed of different chemical combinations of nitrogen and oxygen, mainly nitric oxide and nitrogen dioxide.

NOX are formed during the combustion of fuels, while VOC are formed during combustion and evaporation of organic solvents. As a highly reactive molecule, ozone readily combines with many different components of the atmosphere. Consequently, high levels of ozone tend to exist only while high VOC and NO
X levels along with abundant sunshine are present to sustain the ozone formation process. Once the precursors have been depleted, ozone levels rapidly decline. Because these reactions occur on a regional rather than local scale, ozone is considered a regional pollutant.

In addition, because ozone requires sunlight to form, it mostly occurs in concentrations considered serious between the months of April and October. Ozone is a pungent, colorless, toxic gas with direct health effects on humans, including changes in breathing patterns, reduction of breathing capacity, increased susceptibility to infections, inflammation of lung tissue, and some immunological changes (USEPA 2022a). Groups most sensitive to ozone include children, the elderly, people with respiratory disorders, and people who exercise strenuously outdoors.

Carbon Monoxide
Carbon monoxide is a localized pollutant that is found in high concentrations only near its source.

The major source of carbon monoxide, a colorless, odorless, poisonous gas, is the incomplete combustion of petroleum fuels by automobile traffic. Therefore, elevated concentrations are usually found only near areas of high traffic volumes. Other sources of carbon monoxide include the incomplete combustion of petroleum fuels at power plants and fuel combustion from wood stoves

1 CARB defines VOC and ROG similarly as, “any compound of carbon excluding carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, carbonic acid, metallic carbides or carbonates, and ammonium carbonate,” with the exception that VOC are compounds that participate in atmospheric photochemical reactions. For the purposes of this analysis, ROG and VOC are considered comparable in terms of mass emissions, and the term VOC is used in this EIR.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Air Quality

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.2-3
and fireplaces during the winter. The health effects of carbon monoxide are related to its affinity for hemoglobin in the blood. Carbon monoxide causes a number of health problems, including aggravation of some heart diseases (e.g., angina), reduced tolerance for exercise, impaired mental function, and impaired fetal development. At high levels of exposure, carbon monoxide reduces the amount of oxygen in the blood, leading to mortality (USEPA 2022b). Carbon monoxide tends to dissipate rapidly into the atmosphere; consequently, violations of the NAAQS and/or CAAQS for carbon monoxide are generally associated with localized carbon monoxide “hotspots” that can occur at major roadway intersections during heavy peak-hour traffic conditions.

Nitrogen Dioxide
Nitrogen dioxide is a by-product of fuel combustion; the primary sources are motor vehicles and industrial boilers and furnaces. The principal form of NOX produced by combustion is nitric oxide, but nitric oxide reacts rapidly with the oxygen in the air to form nitrogen dioxide, creating the mixture of nitric oxide and nitrogen dioxide commonly called NO X. Nitrogen dioxide is an acute
irritant that can aggravate respiratory illnesses and symptoms, particularly in sensitive groups (SCAQMD 1993; USEPA 2022c). A relationship between nitrogen dioxide and chronic pulmonary fibrosis may exist, and an increase in bronchitis in young children at concentrations below 0.3 parts per million (ppm) may occur. Nitrogen dioxide absorbs blue light, gives a reddish-brown cast to the atmosphere, and reduces visibility (USEPA 2022c). It can also contribute to the formation of PM10 and acid rain.

Sulfur Dioxide
Sulfur dioxide is included in a group of highly reactive gases known as “oxides of sulfur.” The largest sources of sulfur dioxide emissions are from fossil fuel combustion at power plants (73 percent) and other industrial facilities (20 percent). Smaller sources of sulfur dioxide emissions include industrial processes such as extracting metal from ore and the burning of fuels with a high sulfur content by locomotives, large ships, and off-road equipment. Sulfur dioxide is linked to a number of adverse effects on the respiratory system, including aggravation of respiratory diseases, such as asthma and emphysema, and reduced lung function (USEPA 2022d).

Particulate Matter
Suspended atmospheric PM10 and PM2.5 is comprised of finely divided solids and liquids such as dust, soot, aerosols, fumes, and mists. Both PM10 and PM2.5 are directly emitted into the atmosphere as by-products of fuel combustion and wind erosion of soil and unpaved roads.

Particulate matter is also created in the atmosphere through chemical reactions. The characteristics, sources, and potential health effects associated with PM 10 and PM2.5 can be very different. PM10 is
generally associated with dust mobilized by wind and vehicles while PM2.5 is generally associated with combustion processes as well as formation in the atmosphere as a secondary pollutant through chemical reactions. Due to its small size, PM

2.5 is more likely to penetrate deeply into the lungs and poses a health threat to all groups, but particularly to the elderly, children, and those with respiratory problems (CARB 2022a). More than half of PM2.5 that is inhaled into the lungs remains there. These materials can damage health by interfering with the body’s mechanisms for clearing the respiratory tract or by acting as carriers of an absorbed toxic substance. Suspended particulates can also reduce lung function, aggravate respiratory and cardiovascular diseases, increase mortality rates, and reduce lung function growth in children (CARB 2022a).

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

4.2-4
Lead
Lead is a metal found naturally in the environment, as well as in manufacturing products. The major sources of lead emissions historically have been mobile and industrial sources. However, as a result of the USEPA’s regulatory efforts to remove lead from gasoline, atmospheric lead concentrations have declined substantially over the past several decades. The most dramatic reductions in lead emissions occurred prior to 1990 due to the removal of lead from gasoline sold for most highway vehicles. Lead emissions were further reduced substantially between 1990 and 2008, with reductions occurring in the metals industries at least in part as a result of national emissions standards for hazardous air pollutants (USEPA 2013). As a result of phasing out leaded gasoline, metal processing currently remains the primary source of lead emissions. The highest level of lead in the air is generally found near lead smelters. Other stationary sources include waste incinerators, utilities, and lead-acid battery manufacturers. The health impacts of lead include behavioral and hearing disabilities in children and nervous system impairment (USEPA 2022e).

Toxic Air Contaminants
Toxic air contaminants (TACs) are a diverse group of air pollutants that may cause or contribute to an increase in deaths or serious illness, or that may pose a present or potential hazard to human health. TACs include both organic and inorganic chemical substances that may be emitted from a variety of common sources, including gasoline stations, motor vehicles, dry cleaners, industrial operations, painting operations, and research and teaching facilities. One of the main sources of TACs in California is diesel engine exhaust that contains solid material known as diesel particulate matter (DPM). More than 90 percent of DPM is less than one micron in diameter (about 1/70 th the
diameter of a human hair) and thus is a subset of PM2.5. Because of their extremely small size, these particles can be inhaled and eventually trapped in the bronchial and alveolar regions of the lungs (CARB 2022b). Particulate matter emitted from diesel engines contributes more than 70 percent of the air emission cancer risk associated with the on-road heavy-duty sector within the SCAB (CARB 2017).

TACs are different than criteria pollutants because ambient air quality standards have not been established for TACs. TACs occurring at extremely low levels may still cause health effects and it is typically difficult to identify levels of exposure that do not produce adverse health effects. TAC impacts are described by carcinogenic risk and by chronic (i.e., long duration) and acute (i.e., severe but of short duration) adverse effects on human health. d. Current Air Quality
As mentioned above, CARB and the USEPA have established ambient air quality standards for major pollutants, including O3, CO, NO2, SO2, Pb, PM10, and PM2.5. Standards have been set at levels intended to be protective of public health. California standards are typically more restrictive than federal standards.

Local air districts and CARB monitor ambient air quality to ensure that air quality standards are met and, if they are not met, are required to develop strategies to meet the standards. Air quality monitoring stations measure pollutant ground-level concentrations (typically, 10 feet above ground level). Depending on whether the standards are met or exceeded, the local air basin is classified as in “attainment” or “non-attainment.” Some areas are unclassified, which means no monitoring data are available but are considered to be in attainment. Table 4.2-1 summarizes the CAAQS and the NAAQS for each of these pollutants as well as the attainment status of the SDAB. As shown in Environmental Impact Analysis
Air Quality

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.2-5
Table 4.2-1, the SDAB is in non-attainment for the state and federal standards for ozone, the state standard for PM2.5, and the state standard for PM10 (SDAPCD 2023).

Table 4.2-1 Ambient Air Quality Standards and Basin Attainment Status Pollutant
Averaging
Time
California Standards Federal Standards
Concentration Attainment Status Concentration Attainment Status Ozone 1-Hour 0.09 ppm N − −
8-Hour 0.070 ppm N 0.070 ppm N
Carbon
Monoxide
8-Hour 9.0 ppm A 9.0 ppm U/A
1-Hour 20.0 ppm A 35.0 ppm U/A
Nitrogen
Dioxide
Annual 0.030 ppm A 0.053 ppm U/A
1-Hour 0.18 ppm A 0.100 ppm U/A
Sulfur
Dioxide
24-Hour 0.04 ppm A − −
1-Hour 0.25 ppm A 0.075 ppm U/A
PM10 Annual 20 µg/m3 N -- −
24-Hour 50 µg/m3 N 150 µg/m3 U
PM2.5 Annual 12 µg/m3 N 12 µg/m3 U/A
24-Hour − − 35 µg/m3 U/A
Lead 30-Day
Average 1.5 µg/m3 A − −
3-Month
Average − − 0.15 µg/m3 U/A
Notes: ppm = parts per million; µg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter; A = Attainment; N = Non-attainment; and U = Unclassified Source: SDAPCD 2023
Monitoring of ambient air pollutant concentrations is conducted by CARB and the San Diego County Air Pollution Control District (SDAPCD). The monitoring station located closest to the City of Carlsbad is the Camp Pendleton station (21441 West B Street, Oceanside), located approximately 4 miles to the northwest. This monitoring station measures only ozone, NO2, and PM2.5. The closest monitoring site with available PM10 data is the El Cajon-Lexington Elementary School station, which is approximately 30 miles southeast of the project site. Table 4.2-2 summarizes the maximum concentration of each criteria pollutant measured at these monitoring stations in 2019, 2020, and 2021.

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

4.2-6
Table 4.2-2 Ambient Air Quality Data at the Nearest Monitoring Station Pollutant 2019 2020 2021
Ozone (ppm), Worst 1-Hour 0.075 0.094 0.074
Number of days of state exceedances (>0.09 ppm) 0 0 0
Ozone (ppm), 8-Hour Average 0.064 0.074 0.059
Number of days of state exceedances (>0.07 ppm) 0 3 0
Number of days of federal exceedances (>0.07 ppm) 0 3 0 Nitrogen Dioxide (ppb) – Worst Hour 53.0 58.0 59.0
Number of days of above state standard (>180 ppb) 0 0 0 Particulate Matter <10 microns, mg/m3, Worst 24 Hours1 38.0 55.0 40.0 Number of days above state standard (>50 mg/m3) 0 0 0
Number of days above federal standard (>150 mg/m3) 0 0 0 Particulate Matter <2.5 microns, mg/m3, Worst 24 Hours 13.8 61.1 20.7 Number of days above federal standard (>35 mg/m3) * * * 1 Data from the El Cajon-Lexington Elementary School Monitoring Station Notes: ppm = parts per million; ppb = parts per billion; µg/m3 = micrograms per cubic meter; * = data not available Source: CARB 2023; USEPA 2023a
e. Sensitive Receptors
The NAAQS and CAAQS were established to represent the levels of air quality considered sufficient, with an adequate margin of safety, to protect public health and welfare. They are designed to protect that segment of the public most susceptible to respiratory distress as a result of poor air quality, such as children under 14, persons over 65, persons engaged in strenuous work or exercise, and people with pre-existing cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases. Locations of sensitive receptors include schools, parks and playgrounds, hospitals, day cares, assisted living facilities, and residential communities (CARB 2005). Federal, State and local regulations, including land use plans, can influence the proximity to which a sensitive receptor can be located near a significant source of air pollution.

CARB’s Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective (2005) provides recommendations regarding the siting of new sensitive land uses near potential sources of air toxic emissions (e.g., freeways, distribution centers, rail yards, ports, refineries, chrome plating facilities, dry cleaners, and gasoline dispensing facilities). CARB guidelines also suggest that sensitive receptors not be sited within 500 feet of a high traffic freeway to avoid prolonged exposure to diesel particulates (CARB 2005).

4.2.2 Regulatory Setting
a. Federal
Federal Clean Air Act
The Federal CAA governs air quality in the United States. The CAA is administered by USEPA at the federal level, CARB at the State level, and by the Air Quality Management Districts at the regional and local levels. The CAA of 1970 and the CAA Amendments of 1971 required the USEPA to establish Environmental Impact Analysis
Air Quality

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.2-7
the NAAQS, with states retaining the option to adopt more stringent standards or to include other specific pollutants. On April 2, 2007, the Supreme Court found that CO2 is an air pollutant covered by the CAA; however, no NAAQS have been established for CO2.

The USEPA is responsible for enforcing the federal CAA. The USEPA is also responsible for establishing NAAQS. NAAQS are required under the 1977 CAA and subsequent amendments. The USEPA regulates emission sources that are under the exclusive authority of the federal government, such as aircraft, ships, and certain types of locomotives. The agency has jurisdiction over emission sources outside State waters (e.g., beyond the outer continental shelf) and establishes various emission standards, including those for vehicles sold in states other than California. Automobiles sold in California must meet the stricter emission standards established by CARB.

Construction Equipment Fuel Efficiency Standard
The USEPA sets emission standards for construction equipment. The first federal standards (Tier 1) were adopted in 1994 for all off-road engines over 50 horsepower (hp) and were phased in by 2000.

A new standard was adopted in 1998 that introduced Tier 1 for all equipment below 50 hp and established the Tier 2 and Tier 3 standards. The Tier 2 and Tier 3 standards were phased in by 2008 for all equipment. The current iteration of emissions standards for construction equipment are the Tier 4 efficiency requirements, which are contained in 40 Code of Federal Regulations Parts 1039, 1065, and 1068 (originally adopted in 69 Federal Register 38958 [June 29, 2004], and most recently updated in 2014 [79 Federal Register 46356]). Emissions requirements for new off-road Tier 4 vehicles were completely phased in by the end of 2015.
b. State
California Clean Air Act
The California CAA allows the State to adopt ambient air quality standards and other regulations provided that they are at least as stringent as federal standards. CARB, a part of the California Environmental Protection Agency (CalEPA), is responsible for the coordination and administration of both federal and state air pollution control programs within California, including setting the CAAQS.

CARB also conducts research, compiles emission inventories, develops suggested control measures, and provides oversight of local programs. CARB establishes emissions standards for motor vehicles sold in California, consumer products (such as hairspray, aerosol paints, and barbecue lighter fluid), and various types of commercial equipment. It also sets fuel specifications to further reduce vehicular emissions. CARB also has primary responsibility for the development of California’s State Implementation Plan (SIP), for which it works closely with the federal government and the local air districts.

CARB established fifteen air basins and delegated local pollution control authority to Air Pollution Control Districts (APCD) or Air Quality Management Districts (AQMD). For San Diego County, air pollution control authority is vested with the SDAPCD.
c. Regional and Local
San Diego Regional Air Quality Strategy
The San Diego County Air Pollution Control District (SDAPCD) is the designated air quality control agency for the SDAB. The SDAPCD developed the San Diego Regional Air Quality Strategy (RAQS) pursuant to California Clean Air Act (CCAA) requirements. The RAQS was initially adopted in 1991 City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

4.2-8
and was updated in 1995, 1998, 2001, 2004, 2009, 2016, 2020, and 2022 (SDAPCD 2022a). The RAQS identifies feasible emission control measures to provide progress in San Diego County toward attaining the State ozone standard. The pollutants addressed in the RAQS are volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and NOX, precursors to the photochemical formation of ozone (the primary component of smog). At present, no attainment plan for PM10 or PM2.5 is required by the state regulations. However, SDAPCD has adopted measures to reduce PM10 and PM2.5 in San Diego County. These measures range from regulation against open burning to incentive programs that introduce cleaner technology. These measures can be found in a report titled “Measures to Reduce Particulate Matter in San Diego County” (SDAPCD 2005).

The RAQS relies on information from CARB and SANDAG, including mobile and area source emissions, as well as information regarding projected growth in the County, to project future emissions and then determine from that the strategies necessary for the reduction of emissions through regulatory controls.

SDAPCD Rules and Regulations
Regulation II: Permits; Rule 10: Permits Required. Requires that any person building, erecting, altering, or replacing any article, machine, equipment or other contrivance, the use of which may cause the issuance of air contaminants, shall receive written authorization (Authority to Construction) and a Permit to Operate from the SDAPCD.

Regulation II: Permits; Rule 20.1: New Source Review – General Provisions. Establishes the general provisions, including exemptions, definitions, and emission calculations, that apply to any new or modified emission unit, any replacement emission unit, any relocated emission unit or any portable emission unit for which an Authority to Construct or Permit to Operate is required.

Regulation II: Permits; Rule 20.2: New Source Review – Non-Major Sources. Applies to any new or modified stationary source, to any new or modified emission unit and to any relocated emission unit that is not considered a major stationary source. As applied to new or modified sources, the rule requires (1) the use of Best Available Control Technology (BACT) where the emissions of PM10, NOx, VOC, or SOx would increase by 10 pounds per day or more; (2) an air quality impact analysis if the emissions of PM10, NOx, VOC, SOx, or lead exceed designated trigger levels; and (3) establishes public noticing requirements prior to issuance of a permit.

Regulation IV: Prohibitions; Rule 50: Visible Emissions. Prohibits any activity causing air contaminant emissions darker than 20% opacity for more than an aggregate of 3 minutes in any consecutive 60-minute time period. In addition, Rule 50 prohibits any diesel pile-driving hammer activity causing air contaminant emissions for a period or periods aggregating more than 4 minutes during the driving of a single pile.

Regulation IV: Prohibitions; Rule 51: Nuisance. Prohibits the discharge, from any source, of such quantities of air contaminants or other materials that cause or have a tendency to cause injury, detriment, nuisance, annoyance to people and/or the public, or damage to any business or property.

Regulation IV: Prohibitions; Rule 55: Fugitive Dust. Regulates fugitive dust emissions from any commercial construction or demolition activity capable of generating fugitive dust emissions, including active operations, open storage piles, and inactive disturbed areas, as well as track-out and carry-out onto paved roads beyond a project site. 1 Environmental Impact Analysis
Air Quality

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.2-9
Regulation IV: Prohibitions; Rule 67.0: Architectural Coatings. Requires manufacturers, distributors, and end users of architectural and industrial maintenance coatings to reduce VOC emissions from the use of these coatings, primarily by placing limits on the VOC content of various coating categories.

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 Sustainable Communities Strategy (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 greenhouse gas emissions set by the CARB. The State- mandated target is a 19 percent reduction compared to 2005 levels in per capita greenhouse gas emissions from cars and light-duty trucks by 2035, and the 2021 Regional Plan aims to achieve a 20 percent reduction by then.

Carlsbad General Plan
The Carlsbad General Plan (2015) Land Use Element contains the following applicable policies aimed at reducing impacts related to air quality:

Policy 2-P.13 Encourage medium to higher density residential uses located in close proximity to commercial services, employment opportunities and major transportation corridors.

Policy 4-P.55 Cooperate with the ongoing efforts of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, the San Diego Air Pollution Control District, and the State of California Air Resources Board in improving air quality in the regional air basin.

Policy 4-P.56 Ensure that construction and grading projects minimize short-term impacts to air quality.
a) Require grading projects to provide a storm water pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) in compliance with city requirements, which include standards for best management practices that control pollutants from dust generated by construction activities and those related to vehicle and equipment cleaning, fueling and maintenance;
b) Require grading projects to undertake measures to minimize mononitrogen oxides (NO
X) emissions from vehicle and equipment operations; and c) Monitor all construction to ensure that proper steps are implemented.

The Carlsbad Housing Element contains the following applicable policies aimed at reducing impacts related to air quality and environmental justice:

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
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

4.2-10
Policy 10-P.43 Prohibit the introduction of new incompatible land uses and environmental hazards into existing residential areas.

Policy 10-P.44 Reduce negative impacts associated with environmental hazards, including but not limited to industrial operations and roadway, railway, and airplane generated air and noise pollution through the enforcement of additional project specific mitigations for all development.

4.2.3 Impact Analysis
a. Methodology and Significance Thresholds
Significance Thresholds
This analysis is based on the guidance and methodologies recommended in the air quality emissions thresholds established by the SDAPCD and the CEQA Appendix G thresholds. For purposes of this SEIR, implementation of the proposed project may have a significant adverse impact if it would:
1) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan; 2) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation;
3) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard; 4) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations; and/or 5) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people.

The SDAPCD has established thresholds for criteria air pollutants in Rule 20.2, Table 20-2-1, “AQIA Trigger Levels" requiring the preparation of air quality impact assessments for permitted stationary sources. These thresholds represent levels below which a stationary source would not have a significant impact on ambient air quality. Project-related air quality impacts estimated in this environmental analysis would be considered significant if any of the applicable significance thresholds presented in Table 4.2-3 or are exceeded.

Table 4.2-3 SDAPCD Construction Emissions Thresholds
Pollutant Total Emissions (lbs/day)
PM10 100
PM2.5 55
NOX 250
SOX 250
CO 550
VOC 1371
1 VOC threshold based on SCAQMD levels per South Coast Air Quality Management District SDAPCD (9/01) and the Monterey Bay ARD (MBARD) which has similar federal and state attainment status as San Diego (City of Carlsbad 2015; City of San Diego 2022).

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.2-11
Table 4.2-4 SDAPCD Operational Emissions Thresholds
Total Emissions
Pollutant Pounds per Hour (lbs/hr) Pounds per Day (lbs/day) Tons per Year (tpy) PM10 N/A 100 15
PM2.5 N/A 55 10
NOX 25 250 40
SOX 25 250 40
CO 100 550 100
VOC N/A 1371 13.71
Lead and Lead Compounds N/A 3.2 0.6
1 VOC threshold based on SCAQMD levels per South Coast Air Quality Management District SDAPCD (9/01) and the Monterey Bay ARD (MBARD) which has similar federal and state attainment status as San Diego (City of Carlsbad 2015; City of San Diego 2023).

PM10 = particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter, PM2.5 = particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in diameter, NO X = nitrous oxides, SOX = sulfur oxides, VOC = volatile organic compounds; CO = carbon monoxide, lbs/day = pounds per day, N/A = not applicable Source: SDAPCD 2020
State and federal clean air laws require that emissions of pollutants for which federal or state ambient air quality standards are violated be reduced from current levels. In addition, as an SEIR, this analysis is intended to identify any additional impacts to air quality resulting from updates to the City of Carlsbad General Plan that have not been previously addressed in the 2015 General Plan EIR.

Methodology
Short-term Emissions
Emissions from construction activities represent temporary impacts that are typically short in duration, and depend on the size, phasing, and type of project. Air quality impacts can nevertheless be acute during construction periods, resulting in significant impacts to air quality. Construction- related emissions are speculative at the program level because such emissions are dependent on the characteristics of individual development projects. However, because construction of projects under the proposed project would generate temporary criteria pollutant emissions, primarily due to the operation of construction equipment and truck trips, a qualitative analysis is provided below.

Long-term Emissions
For this SEIR, the methodology for determining the significance of air quality impacts is by analyzing impacts resulting from buildout of the 18 rezone sites identified in Table 2-4 in Section 2, Project Description. Operational emissions were quantified using the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) version 2022.1 Project emissions represent the expected development resulting from buildout of the 18 rezone sites as described in in Section 2, Project Description. For modeling purposes, this evaluation assumes that buildout under the proposed project would be 3,295 units of mid-rise apartments (defined in CalEEMod as 3 to 10 floors) during the planning period.

In CalEEMod, operational sources of criteria pollutant emissions include area, energy, and mobile sources. Area emissions were based on CalEEMod defaults for each land use type. Electricity use assumed CalEEMod default values and Title 24 compliance based on the construction/operational year. Modeling for water and wastewater were based on CalEEMod defaults. Mobile source emissions consist of emissions generated by vehicles to and from the development sites proposed City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

4.2-12
under the 2023-2031 Housing Element. Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) was derived from the project specific VMT analysis conducted by Fehr & Peers (2023). The VMT analysis indicated that per capita VMT would be approximately 23.6 under buildout of the proposed project.

Toxic Air Contaminants
The USEPA considers those pollutants that could cause cancer risks between one in 10,000 (1.0 x 10 4) and one in one million (1.0 x 10-6) for risk management. Proposition 65 (California Health and Safety Code Section 25249.6), enacted in 1986, prohibits a person in the course of doing business from knowingly and intentionally exposing any individual to a chemical that has been listed as known to the state to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity without first giving clear and reasonable warning. For a chemical that is listed as a carcinogen, the “no significant risk” level under Proposition 65 is defined as the level that is calculated to result in not more than one excess case of cancer in 100,000 individuals (1.0 x 10
-5). The SDAPCD recommends the use of this risk level (also reportable as 10 in one million) as the significance threshold for TACs (SDAPCD 2022b). The SDAPCD also recommends that the non-carcinogenic hazards of TACs should not exceed a hazard index (the summation of the hazard quotients for all chemicals to which an individual would be exposed) of 1.0 for either chronic or acute effects (SDAPCD 2022b).
b. Prior Environmental Analysis
The 2015 General Plan EIR determined that impacts to air quality would be significant and unavoidable, including for violation of air quality standards and substantial contribution to an existing air quality violation (Section 3.2, Air Quality: 3.2-19 through 3.2-30). It also determined that growth facilitated by the General Plan would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the General Plan region is nonattainment, nor would it conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan. Additionally, sensitive receptors would not be exposed to substantial concentrations of pollutants or odors under growth facilitated by the 2015 General Plan EIR. However, even with implementation of the proposed General Plan goals and policies, long-term operation air quality impacts would remain significant and unavoidable.

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 air 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 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 air 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, as well as impacts associated with updates to the Public Safety Element.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Air Quality

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.2-13
Threshold 1: Would the project conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
Impact AQ-1 SIMILAR TO THE DEVELOPMENT ANALYZED IN THE 2015 GENERAL PLAN EIR, THE

PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD NOT CONFLICT WITH OR OBSTRUCT THE SAN DIEGO REGIONAL AIR QUALITY STRATEGY OR STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN. THIS IMPACT WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED.

The CARB mobile source emission projections and SANDAG growth projections are based on population and vehicle trends and land use plans developed by cities. As such, projects that propose development that is consistent with the growth anticipated by the general plan (or less dense) would be consistent with the RAQS. If a project proposes development that is greater than what is assumed in SANDAG’s growth projections upon which the RAQS is based, then the project would be in conflict with the RAQS and SIP. However, the current population and housing in the County are lower than what was projected for the region, and therefore it is unlikely that the additional units from the proposed project would interfere with the SCAPCD’s goals for improving air quality in the SDAB. However, from a long-term planning standpoint, implementation of the proposed project would not comply with the existing assumptions of density and land use utilized to develop the RAQS and applicable SIP. Therefore, even though the proposed project is intended to meet the city’s RHNA which is provided by SANDAG, a revised housing forecast will need to be provided to SANDAG to ensure that the next revisions to the RAQS and the SIP accurately reflect the anticipated growth.

SANDAG housing forecasts are updated every four years. The next forecast is scheduled for revision in 2025. Because the proposed project would result in emissions that are greater than what is currently accounted for in the RAQS, the significant air quality impacts would conflict with the RAQS, which is the applicable air quality plan. Therefore, this impact is potentially significant.

Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation is required for the city under the proposed project in order to ensure project consistency with SANDAG growth projections and the SDAPCD RAQS and SIP.

AQ-1 Housing Forecast Revisions
Prior to the next update of the Regional Housing Needs Assessment and within six months of the certification of the Final SEIR, the City Planner shall provide a revised housing forecast to SANDAG to ensure that any revisions to the population and employment projections used by SDAPCD in updating the RAQS and the SIP will accurately reflect anticipated growth due to the proposed project.

Significance after Mitigation
Mitigation measure AQ-1 would ensure that future development under the proposed project is accounted for in SANDAG’s regional growth projections, which are incorporated into the SDAPCD RAQS and SIP. Therefore, this impact would be less than significant with mitigation.

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

4.2-14
Threshold 2: Would the project violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation?
Threshold 3: Would the project result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard?
Impact AQ-2 IMPLEMENTATION OF THE PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD VIOLATE AIR QUALITY STANDARDS

OR CONTRIBUTE TO AN EXISTING AIR QUALITY VIOLATION BECAUSE PROJECT-RELATED EMISSIONS WOULD EXCEED SDAPCD THRESHOLDS. SIMILARLY, THE PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD RESULT IN A CUMULATIVELY

CONSIDERABLE NET INCREASE OF CRITERIA POLLUTANTS FOR WHICH THE PROJECT REGION IS NONATTAINMENT UNDER APPLICABLE FEDERAL OR STATE AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS. THIS IMPACT WOULD BE SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE.

As discussed under Section 4.2.2, Regulatory Setting, criteria pollutants include ozone, carbon monoxide, NOX, PM10, PM2.5, SO2, and lead. The SDAB is a non-attainment area for the federal standards for ozone and the state standards for ozone, PM2.5 and PM10. The SDAB is designated unclassifiable or in attainment for all other federal and State standards. If the proposed project does not exceed thresholds, it would be determined to have less than significant impacts relating to both violation of air quality standards and cumulatively considerable net increases in pollutant emissions.

Construction
Construction activities from development facilitated by the proposed project would generate temporary air pollutant emissions associated with fugitive dust (PM₁₀ and PM₂․₅) and exhaust emissions from heavy construction equipment and construction vehicles in addition to VOC emissions that would be released during the paving phase and the drying phase of architectural coatings. The extent of daily emissions, particularly NOₓ emissions, generated by construction equipment, would depend on the equipment used and the hours of operation for each project. The extent of PM₁₀ and PM₂․₅ emissions would depend upon the following factors: (1) the amount of disturbed soils; (2) the length of disturbance time; (3) whether existing structures are demolished; (4) whether excavation is involved; and (5) whether transporting excavated materials off site is necessary. The extent of VOC emissions would primarily depend on the square footage of buildings being painted and asphalt surfaces being paved each day.

As discussed in Section 4.2.2(a), Significance Thresholds, the SDAPCD has not established plan-level significance thresholds for construction air pollutant emissions. At this time, development facilitated by the proposed project do not have sufficient detail (e.g., construction schedule, amount of soil export, specific buildout parameters) to allow for project-level analysis given the programmatic nature of the plan and thus it would be speculative to analyze project-level impacts. Therefore, a qualitative approach to characterizing construction-related air emissions has been employed for this analysis.

Construction activities would occur at the sites identified in the suitable sites inventory contained in Table 2-4 in Section 2, Project Description, which are generally located in urbanized portions of the city. Development at these sites would be subject to compliance with applicable SDAPCD regulations, including Rule 51 (Nuisance), Rule 55 (Fugitive Dust Control), and Rule 67 (Architectural Coating). Additionally, future development would be subject to compliance with General Plan Policy 4-P.56, which includes best management practices for grading activities.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Air Quality

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.2-15
Compliance with SDAPCD rules would reduce the overall level of air quality impacts associated with construction activities under the proposed project. Furthermore, development facilitated by the proposed project would be required to implement additional mitigation if project-specific analysis identifies the potential to exceed the SDAPCD’s thresholds for construction activities. However, because the exact nature and intensity of reasonably foreseeable development projects is not known at this time, it is speculative to determine whether project-specific mitigation measures would reduce project-level emissions below SDAPCD thresholds for construction activities.

Therefore, construction activities under the proposed project could contribute to existing air quality violations and impacts would be potentially significant.

Operation
Operational emission sources typical of residential land uses include area sources (e.g., fireplaces, architectural coatings, consumer products, and landscaping equipment), energy sources (i.e., use of natural gas for space and water heating and cooking), and mobile sources (i.e., vehicle trips to and from the project sites). Operation of the residential developments facilitated by the proposed project would generate criteria air pollutant emissions associated with area sources, mobile sources, and energy sources.

Table 4.2-5 summarizes estimated daily operational emissions of criteria air pollutants and precursors associated with full buildout of the proposed project and provides a conservative comparison of plan-level emissions to the SDAPCD project-level significance thresholds.

Table 4.2-5 Estimated Operational Criteria Air Pollutant Emissions (lbs/day) Maximum Daily Emissions (lbs/day)
Emission Source VOC NOX CO SO2 PM10 PM2.5
Area 5,144 100 6,411 11 858 854
Energy 1 6 3 <1 <1 <1
Mobile 32 63 601 2 56 11
Project Emissions 5,177 169 6,748 13 914 865
SDAPCD Emissions Thresholds 137 250 550 250 100 55
Threshold Exceeded? Yes No Yes No Yes Yes
Notes: See Appendix B for modeling results. Some numbers may not add up precisely due to rounding considerations.

As shown in Table 4.2-5, buildout under the proposed project would generate daily mobile source air pollutant emissions in excess of SDAPCD project-level significance thresholds for VOC, CO, PM10, and PM2.5.

The city’s 2015 General Plan includes policies to programmatically address long-term increases in air pollutant emissions, such as Policies 2-P.13, 4-P.52, and 9-P.2 which seek to reduce mobile source emissions, encourage infill development, and improve multimodal transportation infrastructure.

The Public Safety Element Update also contains the following applicable policy aimed at reducing impacts related to air quality.

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

4.2-16
Policy 6-P.82 Coordinate with San Diego County Public Health Services and local community organizations to establish extreme heat, drought, and air quality monitoring systems and develop accessible community education resources to prepare community members for increase extreme heat events and ambient air pollution.

Furthermore, development facilitated by the proposed project would be required to implement additional mitigation if project-specific analysis identifies the potential to exceed the SDAPCD’s significance thresholds for operational activities. However, despite the emphasis from the project to change land uses to concentrate growth and residences to jobs and services to reduce singular vehicle trips and encourage alternative modes of travel, the project-related emissions would exceed SDAPCD project-level mobile source emissions thresholds. Although the above listed policies would have the effect of reducing mobile VMT, and in turn criteria pollutants, in the project area, emissions would remain in exceedance of SDAPCD thresholds. Therefore, this impact is potentially significant.

Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation is required for future development under the proposed project in order to reduce operational emissions.

AQ-2 Operational Emissions Reductions
During the project design and project-level review phases of development projects at the 18 rezone sites, the city shall require each project to determine operational air quality emissions from the project. For projects that exceed regulatory San Diego County Air Pollution Control District (SDAPCD) thresholds, mitigation shall be implemented to reduce impacts to below the regulatory thresholds or to the maximum extent feasible implementing all feasible mitigation. The following represents some measures aimed at reducing air pollutant emissions from operational sources. This is not an exhaustive list of measures, and individual projects shall incorporate measures that best fit each project design.
 Use architectural coating materials, as defined in SDAPCD Rule 67.0.1, that are zero-emission or have a low-VOC content (below 10 grams per liter). Where such VOC coatings are not available or feasible, the coating with the lowest VOC rating available shall be used. These measures shall be noted on all construction plans, and the city shall perform periodic site inspections during construction to verify compliance.
 Prohibit the installation of woodstoves, hearths, and fireplaces in new construction facilitated by the proposed project.
 Expand and facilitate completion of planned networks of active transportation infrastructure.  Implement EV charging infrastructure beyond requirements set forth in the 2022 CalGreen mandatory measures. Such requirements would be equivalent to the Tier 2 voluntary measures set forth in the 2022 CalGreen standards.
 Implement traffic demand measures, such as unbundling parking fees from rent/lease options, encouraging/developing a ride-share program for the community, and provide car/bike sharing services, that will reduce daily individual car usage and reduce project VMT.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Air Quality

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.2-17
Significance after Mitigation
Mitigation measure AQ-2 would reduce operational emissions from future development under the proposed project, however it would be speculative to quantify such emissions at this time as the details of the individual projects are not known. Therefore, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable.

Threshold: Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
Impact AQ-3 DEVELOPMENT FACILITATED BY THE PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD NOT EXPOSE OFFSITE SENSITIVE RECEPTORS TO SUBSTANTIAL POLLUTION CONCENTRATIONS. HOWEVER, THE PROJECT WOULD SITE SENSITIVE RECEPTORS WITHIN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO SOURCES OF TAC EMISSIONS. THIS IMPACT WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED.

Carbon Monoxide Hotspots
A carbon monoxide hotspot is a localized concentration of carbon monoxide that is above the NAAQS and CAAQS for carbon monoxide. Localized carbon monoxide hotspots can occur at intersections with heavy peak hour traffic. Specifically, hotspots can be created at intersections where traffic levels are sufficiently high such that the local carbon monoxide concentration exceeds the federal one-hour standard of 35.0 parts per million (ppm) or the federal and State eight-hour standard of 9.0 ppm (USEPA 2023b).

The SDAB is in attainment of the carbon monoxide NAAQS and CAAQS, and the SDAPCD has not recorded an exceedance of carbon monoxide standards at any monitoring stations over the last 20 years (SDAPCD 2021). Based on the low background level of carbon monoxide in the project area, ever-improving vehicle emissions standards for new cars in accordance with State and federal regulations, and the low level of operational carbon monoxide emissions anticipated for reasonably foreseeable development facilitated by the proposed project, the project would not create new hotspots or contribute substantially to existing hotspots. Therefore, the proposed project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial concentrations of carbon monoxide, and impacts would be less than significant.

Toxic Air Contaminants
TACs are defined by California law as air pollutants that may cause or contribute to an increase in mortality or an increase in serious illness, or which may pose a present or potential hazard to human health. The following subsections discuss the project’s potential to result in impacts related to TAC emissions during construction and operation.

Construction
Construction-related activities would result in temporary project-generated emissions of DPM exhaust emissions from off-road, heavy-duty diesel equipment for site preparation, grading, building construction, and other construction activities. DPM was identified as a TAC by CARB in 1998. The potential cancer risk from the inhalation of DPM (discussed in the following paragraphs) outweighs the potential non-cancer health impacts (CARB 2022b) and is therefore the focus of this analysis.

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

4.2-18
Generation of DPM from construction projects typically occurs in a single area for a short period.

Construction of housing units facilitated by the proposed project would occur over timeframes ranging generally from one to five years. The dose to which the receptors are exposed is the primary factor used to determine health risk. Dose is a function of the concentration of a substance or substances in the environment and the extent of exposure that person has with the substance. Dose is positively correlated with time, meaning that a longer exposure period would result in a higher exposure level for the Maximally Exposed Individual. The risks estimated for a Maximally Exposed Individual are higher if a fixed exposure occurs over a longer period of time. According to the California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment, health risk assessments, which determine the exposure of sensitive receptors to toxic emissions, should be based on a 70-year exposure period; however, such assessments should be limited to the period/duration of activities associated with the project. Thus, the duration of proposed construction activities (i.e., one to five years) is approximately 3 to 17 percent of the total exposure period used for 30-year health risk calculations. Current models and methodologies for conducting health-risk assessments are associated with longer-term exposure periods of 9, 30, and 70 years, which do not correlate well with the temporary and highly variable nature of construction activities, resulting in difficulties in producing accurate estimates of health risk (Bay Area Air Quality Management District 2017).

The maximum PM
10 and PM2.5 emissions would occur during demolition, site preparation and grading activities, which would only occur for a portion of the overall estimated timeframe of one to five years for construction of housing units facilitated by the proposed project. These activities would typically last for approximately two weeks to two years, depending on the extent of grading and excavation required (e.g., projects with subterranean parking structures or geological constraints require additional grading as compared to those without). PM 10 and PM2.5 emissions
would decrease for the remaining construction period because construction activities such as building construction and architectural coating would require less intensive construction equipment. While the maximum DPM emissions associated with demolition, site preparation, and grading activities would only occur for a portion of the overall construction period, these activities represent the worst-case condition for the total construction period. This would represent between

0.1 to 7 percent of the total 30-year exposure period for health risk calculation. Moreover, the proposed housing sites are spread throughout Carlsbad such that people affected by construction- related TAC emissions generated at one site would likely not be affected by construction-related TAC emissions generated at another site should construction activities occur simultaneously.

Furthermore, development facilitated by the proposed project would be required to implement additional mitigation if project-specific analysis identifies the potential for construction-related TAC emissions to exceed SDAPCD thresholds. However, because the exact nature and intensity of reasonably foreseeable development projects is not known at this time, it is speculative to determine whether project-specific mitigation measures would reduce project-level emissions below the SDAPCD thresholds. Therefore, impacts would be potentially significant. Implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-3 would ensure that construction activities would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial TAC concentrations.

Operation
O

FF-SITE RECEPTORS
Residential land uses are not considered land uses that generate substantial TAC emissions based on review of the air toxic sources listed in CARB’s guidelines. It is expected that quantities of hazardous TACs generated on-site (e.g., cleaning solvents, paints, landscape pesticides, etc.) for the types of Environmental Impact Analysis
Air Quality

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.2-19
proposed residential land uses would be below thresholds warranting further study under the California Accidental Release Program. Because the project would not include substantial TAC sources and is consistent with CARB and SDAPCD guidelines, it would not result in the exposure of off-site sensitive receptors to significant amounts of carcinogenic or toxic air contaminants. Impacts would be less than significant.

ON-SITE RECEPTORS
The proposed project residential land uses are considered air quality sensitive land uses where sensitive receptors would inhabit. The population residing close to freeways or busy roadways may experience adverse health effects beyond those typically found in urban areas. CARB has published the Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective (CARB 2005), which identifies certain types of facilities or sources that may emit substantial quantities of TACs and therefore could conflict with sensitive land uses, such as “schools and schoolyards, parks and playgrounds, daycare centers, nursing homes, hospitals, and residential communities.” CARB, in the Air Quality and Land Use Handbook, recommends avoiding siting new sensitive land uses within 500 feet of a freeway, urban roads with 100,000 vehicles/day, or rural roads with 50,000 vehicles/day.

Additional non-cancer health risk attributable to proximity to freeways was seen within 1,000 feet and was strongest within 300 feet. California freeway studies show about a 70 percent drop-off in particulate pollution levels at 500 feet (CARB 2005). As discussed above, proximity to freeways increases cancer risk and exposure to particulate matter. Similarly, proximity to heavily travelled transit corridors and intersections would expose residents to higher levels of DPM and carbon monoxide. Additional non-cancer health risk attributable to proximity to freeways was seen within 1,000 feet and was strongest within 300 feet.

Implementation of the proposed project involves rezoning that would result in the potential placement of new sensitive receptors (i.e., residences) proximate to existing sources of TACs.

Therefore, exposure of future onsite receptors to TACs could occur. The analysis of impacts from the environment on the proposed project is not required under CEQA. 2 However, as there is the
potential for impacts to onsite receptors from locations near high volume roadways and CARB has set specific screening distances where impacts to sensitive receptors could occur, a discussion of impact is included to fully inform the potential impacts of project implementation. Of the 18 rezone sites, Site 5 and Site 16 are located within 500 feet of the I-5 freeway and Site 2 is located within 500 feet of SR 78. Therefore, impacts at these sites are potentially significant.

Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures are required:

AQ-3 Construction Health Risk Assessment
For individual projects (excluding ADUs, single-family residences, and duplexes) where construction activities would occur within 1,000 feet of sensitive receptors, would last longer than two months, and would not utilize a fleet comprised of strictly EPA rated Tier 4 engines and/or alternative fuel construction equipment, it is required that a construction health risk assessment (HRA) be

2 The August 12, 2015 case law California Building Industry Association v. Bay Area Air Quality Management District (2015) 62 Cal.4th 269 determined that CEQA does not require an agency to consider the effects of existing environmental conditions on a proposed project’s future users or residents.

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

4.2-20
performed.3 The construction HRA shall be performed by a qualified air quality consultant coordinated through the City. The HRA shall be conducted following the Office of Environmental Health Hazards Association’s (OEHHA) 2015 Health Risk Guidelines (OEHHA 2015) and SDAPCD guidelines to determine potential risk and compare the risk to the following SDAPCD thresholds:
 Increased cancer risk of > 10.0 in a million;
 Increased non-cancer risk of > 1.0 Hazard Index (Chronic or Acute); or If risk exceeds the thresholds, measures such as requiring the use of Tier 4 and/or alternative fuel construction equipment are recommended to reduce the risk to appropriate levels. The incorporation of Tier 4 and/or alternative fuel construction equipment reduces the emissions of DPM from construction activities and therefore reduces the potential risk to nearby sensitive receptors.

AQ-4 Operational Health Risk Assessment
Consistent with the provisions contained in the California Air Resources Board Air Quality and Land Use Handbook, future development projects occurring on Site 2, Site 5, or Site 16 under the proposed project should implement the following:

Project applicants shall retain a qualified air quality consultant to prepare a HRA in accordance with the CARB and the Office of Environmental Health and Hazard Assessment requirements to determine the exposure of onsite sensitive receptors to emission sources resulting from the proximity to existing high volume roadways. The HRA shall be submitted to the City of Carlsbad for review and approval. Project applicants shall implement the approved HRA recommendations for all impacted onsite sensitive receptor, if any. Such measures may include, but are not limited to:
 Install, operate, and maintain in good working order a central heating and ventilation system or other air take system in the building of a sensitive receptor that would be impacted by the project, or in each individual residential unit, that meets the efficiency standard of the minimum efficiency reporting value of 13. The heating and ventilation system should include the following features: installation of a high-efficiency filter and/or carbon filter to minimize particulate and other airborne chemical matter from entering the building. Either high-efficiency particulate absorption filters or American Society of Heating, Refrigeration, and Air-Conditioning Engineers 85 percent supply filters should be used.
 Ensure that positive pressure occurs in the building.  Achieve a performance standard of at least one air exchange per hour of fresh outside filtered air.
 Achieve a performance standard of at least four air exchanges per hour of recirculation.  Achieve a performance standard of 0.25 air exchanges per hour of unfiltered infiltration if the building is not positively pressurized.

3 Sensitive receptors are that segment of the public most susceptible to respiratory distress as a result of poor air quality, such as children under 14, persons over 65, persons engaged in strenuous work or exercise, and people with pre-existing cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases. Locations of sensitive receptors include schools, parks and playgrounds, hospitals, day cares, assisted living facilities, and residential communities (CARB 2005)
Environmental Impact Analysis
Air Quality

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.2-21
Significance after Mitigation
Implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ-3 and AQ-4 would reduce impacts related to potential health risks associated with exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations of DPM and TACs. Mitigation Measure AQ-3 would ensure that construction activities would not result in exposure of offsite sensitive receptors to substantial TAC concentrations. Mitigation Measure AQ-4 would ensure that new development facilitated by the project would not expose onsite sensitive receptors to substantial air pollutant concentrations. Implementation of these mitigation measures would reduce impacts from DPM and TACs to a less than significant level.

Threshold: Would the project create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people?
Impact AQ-4 SIMILAR TO THE DEVELOPMENT ANALYZED IN THE 2015 GENERAL PLAN EIR, THE

PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD NOT CREATE OBJECTIONABLE ODORS AFFECTING A SUBSTANTIAL NUMBER OF PEOPLE. THIS IMPACT WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT.

The occurrence and severity of potential odor impacts depends on a number of factors, including the nature, frequency, and intensity of the source; the wind speeds and direction; and the sensitivity of the receiving location, each contributing to the intensity of the impact. Although offensive odors seldom cause physical harm, they can be perceived as a nuisance, cause distress among the public, and result in citizen complaints.

The proposed project would facilitate the development of additional housing units in an urbanized area with existing residential, commercial, and industrial uses. Construction activities for development forecasted in accordance with the proposed project may produce temporary odors.

Examples of potential odors produced by construction activities include concentrations of unburned hydrocarbons from construction equipment tailpipes and reactive organic gases/compounds from architectural coatings. Such odors generally disperse rapidly from individual project sites, occur at magnitudes that would not affect substantial numbers of people, and would be limited to the temporary construction period.

Construction activities forecasted in accordance with the proposed project would be required to comply with SDAPCD Rule 51 (Nuisance), which regulates nuisance odors (SDAPCD 1976).

Accordingly, the construction of future development in accordance with the proposed project is not anticipated to create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people or expose future residents to odors in concentrations that would produce a public nuisance or hazard. Therefore, 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
Project related air pollution may combine with other cumulative projects (past, present, and reasonably foreseeable future) to violate criteria pollutant standards if the existing background sources cause nonattainment conditions. Air districts manage attainment of the criteria pollutant standards by adopting rules, regulations, and attainment plans, which comprise a multifaceted programmatic approach to such attainment.

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

4.2-22
The geographic scope for analyzing cumulative air quality impacts is the SDAB. The SDAB is designated a nonattainment area for the ozone NAAQS and CAAQS, the PM10 CAAQS, and the PM2.5 CAAQS. The SDAB is in attainment of all other NAAQS and CAAQS. Therefore, cumulative air quality impacts related to PM10, PM2.5, and ozone are potentially significant.

As described under Impact AQ-1, the SDAPCD’s approach for assessing cumulative impacts is based on consistency with the latest adopted RAQS. With implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-1, the proposed project would be consistent with the RAQS. Additionally, SDAPCD best management practices are required for all grading activities in the SDAPCD’s jurisdiction, which would reduce Citywide emissions of ozone precursors, PM10, and PM2.5 from construction facilitated by the proposed project. However, operational emissions resulting from the proposed project would result in exceedances of SDAPCD thresholds, even with implementation of Mitigation Measure AQ-2, and thus would be significant and unavoidable. Therefore, the proposed project’s contribution to cumulative air quality impacts would result in a cumulatively significant impact.

As identified under Impact AQ-3, the proposed project would result in a potentially significant impact related to DPM and TAC exposure within the city. Discussion of these impacts considers the cumulative nature of the pollutants in the region; for example, the cancer risk and non-cancer risk thresholds have been set pursuant to existing cancer risks in the area and exceeding those thresholds would be considered a cumulative impact. Implementation of Mitigation Measures AQ-3 and AQ-4 would ensure that future development would not expose new or existing sensitive receptors to cumulatively considerable amount of substantial pollutant concentrations from carbon monoxide hotspots or TACs. Therefore, the project’s contribution to cumulative air quality impacts related to these pollutants would not result in a cumulatively significant impact.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Biological Resources

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.3-1

4.3 Biological Resources
This section assesses potential for the proposed project to directly or indirectly impact biological resources. This section builds off the prior biological resources analysis in the 2015 General Plan EIR.

4.3.1 Setting
The City of Carlsbad is located on the coast of the Pacific Ocean in northwest San Diego. Carlsbad is surrounded by the cities of Oceanside to the north, Encinitas to the south, and Oceanside, 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 acts as a 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 Vista and San Marcos and unincorporated county lands. The city’s regional location is depicted in Figure 2-1. Elevations range from sea level along the coast to about 1,000 feet above mean sea level at the southeastern border of the city. Land within the city’s jurisdiction covers about 39 square miles 25,021 acres, about 38 percent of which is currently open space for resource conservation, recreation, agriculture, and aesthetic use. About 7,376 acres (78 percent of open space land) is comprised of natural open space such as native habitats, lagoons, and streams. The city’s open space network boasts three lagoons, nearly 40 miles of hiking trails, and almost seven miles of coastline, as well as unique agricultural and horticultural resources such as the strawberry fields and the Flower Fields.

The western edge of the city is characterized by sandy beaches and three low-lying river estuaries or lagoons – the Batiquitos, Agua Hedionda, and Buena Vista lagoons. The lagoons dominate the city’s coastal landscape and provide habitat for a variety of resident and migratory bird species as a part of the city’s overall open space network. The coastal portions of the city are largely developed; however, natural vegetation communities remain in and around the three coastal lagoons and on some of the higher, steeper-sloped, inland portions of the city. The adjacent cities of Oceanside and Vista are largely built out, such that in many places the natural vegetation communities end abruptly along the city border. The remaining landscape linkages to natural communities outside the city occur along the southeastern border with San Marcos and unincorporated lands and along the southern border with Encinitas.
a. Vegetation Communities and Land Cover Types
Vegetation classification is based on the classification systems provided in the Draft Vegetation Communities of San Diego County (Oberbauer et al. 2008) to provide consistency with the San Diego Multiple Habitat Conservation Program (MHCP) and modified as appropriate to reflect the existing site conditions. Where applicable, vegetation communities were further classified using Vegetation Classification Manual for Western San Diego County (Sproul et al. 2011) to better identify the species composition and provide consistency with California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) classifications.

Natural vegetation communities cover approximately 7,574 acres, or 30 percent, of land within the city’s jurisdiction. The remainder of the city is agricultural lands, disturbed lands, or developed lands. Natural vegetation communities within the city include coastal sage scrub; chaparral (including undifferentiated and southern maritime); grassland (native and non-native); marsh, City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

4.3-2
estuarine, and freshwater (including southern coastal saltwater marsh and coastal and valley freshwater marsh); riparian (including sycamore alluvial woodland and riparian scrub); and woodland (including oak woodland and eucalyptus woodland). The principal natural vegetation communities in the city include coastal sage scrub (37 percent) and grassland (18 percent). A description of the natural vegetation communities found within the city is provided below.

Vegetation communities at each of the 18 rezone sites are listed in Table 4.3-1 and described more broadly below.

Table 4.3-1 Vegetation Communities by Rezone Site
Site Name Vegetation Community Description
Site 1 North County Plaza Developed, Riparian Developed shopping center, constrained by Buena Vista Creek and its associated riparian
habitat and floodplain area
Site 2 The Shoppes at Carlsbad
parking lot
Developed, Riparian Developed shopping center constrained by Buena Vista Creek and its associated riparian
habitat and floodplain area
Site 3 Chestnut at El Camino Real Woodland Slopes with ornamental woodland Site 4 Zone 15 Cluster Grassland, Coastal Sage
Scrub, Riparian
Flat, previously graded pad (portion of site)
Elements of coastal sage scrub, Agua
Hedionda Creek, ornamental trees. High
potential for thread-leaved brodiaea (narrow
endemic, endangered plant)
Site 5 Avenida Encinas Car Storage
Lot
Developed Paved with planted ornamental vegetation
Site 6 Crossings Golf Course Lot 5 Grassland, Coastal Sage Scrub
Flat, previously graded pad (grassland) with
steep manufactured slope (coastal sage
scrub) that drops to the golf course and open
space
Site 7 Salk Avenue Grassland, Ornamental Flat, previously graded pad with manufactured slopes, high probability of
thread-leaved brodiaea onsite (narrow
endemic, endangered plant)
Site 8 Cottage Row Apartments Coastal Sage Scrub,
Disturbed, Developed
Coastal sage scrub along northern portion,
remainder is developed and disturbed, steep
slopes
Site 9 West Oaks Industrial Disturbed, Riparian,
Coastal Sage Scrub
Previously graded pad, Encinas Creek
traverses site, riparian intermixed with
coastal sage scrub along north side
Site 10 Bressi Ranch Colt Place Disturbed Vacant and graded, planted landscaping Site 11 Bressi Ranch Gateway Road Disturbed Vacant and graded, planted landscaping Site 12 Industrial Sites East of Melrose
Drive
Disturbed Vacant and graded, planted landscaping
Site 14 Carlsbad Village COASTER
Station
Disturbed, Developed Undeveloped dirt lot and paved areas Site 15 City’s Oak Yard Developed Paved
Site 16 Caltrans Maintenance
Station/Pacific Sales
Developed Planted trees and developed
Environmental Impact Analysis
Biological Resources

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.3-3
Site Name Vegetation Community Description
Site 17 Poinsettia Coaster Station Developed, Coastal Sage Scrub, Vernal Pool
Lot overlaps with Poinsettia Station Vernal
Pool Preserve. Remainder is paved parking
lot and sidewalk
Site 18 North Ponto Parcels Disturbed, Coastal Sage
Scrub
Disturbed lots with remnant native shrubs
Site 19 La Costa Glen/Forum Coastal Sage Scrub,
Chaparral, Disturbed,
Developed
Paved parking lot surrounded by coastal sage
scrub, chaparral and disturbed habitat
Upland Habitat
Coastal Sage Scrub
Coastal sage scrub habitat is found on Sites 4, 6, 8, 9, 17, 18, and 19. According to the General Plan, three types of coastal sage scrub exist within the city, representing approximately 38 percent of the natural vegetation in the city: Diegan coastal sage scrub, maritime succulent scrub and coastal sage scrub- chaparral scrub (City of Carlsbad 2015). Diegan coastal sage scrub is drought-deciduous (plants drop their leaves during dry season, as compared to plants that drop their leaves during cold season) and comprised of aromatic shrubs with a diverse understory of annual and perennial non- woody flowering plants and grasses. Diegan coastal sage scrub primarily occurs along dry south- facing slopes or hillsides or on clay-rich soils adjacent to chaparral. In the city, the largest remaining areas of Diegan coastal sage scrub are in Calavera Hills, near the intersection of College Boulevard and Carlsbad Village Drive, and in the Villages of La Costa. Maritime succulent scrub includes a variety of succulents mixed with typical Diegan sage scrub species. Coastal sage scrub–chaparral scrub is a sub-type of coastal sage scrub and considered a transitional community between coastal sage scrub and chaparral types.

Coastal sage scrub is home to the federally threatened coastal California gnatcatcher (Polioptila californica californica), as well as the orange-throated whiptail (Aspidoscelis hyperythra; a California Species of Special Concern). Coastal sage scrub is considered sensitive habitat under California regulations, but Diegan coastal sage scrub, in particular, is identified in the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) as a priority for monitoring and restoration. Coastal sage scrub in the city is part of a regionally significant steppingstone corridor that extends into Oceanside, connecting gnatcatcher populations in Orange and Riverside counties with those south and east of Carlsbad.

Vernal Pool
Vernal pool habitat is present within Site 17. Vernal pools are defined as seasonally flooded depressions that support a distinctive plant and animal community adapted to extreme variability in hydrologic conditions. They fluctuate between seasonally very dry and very wet conditions. Vernal pools must meet both of the following conditions to be characterized as such under the MHCP: (1) the basin is at least partially vegetated during the normal growing season or is unvegetated due to heavy clay or hardpan soils that do not support plant growth or due to degradation by anthropogenic activities; and (2) the basin contains at least one vernal pool obligate species (i.e., species which occur primarily in vernal pools) (County of San Diego 2009). A suite of endemic plant species occurs in vernal pools, many of which are rare species such as San Diego button celery City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

4.3-4
(Eryngium aristulatum var. parishii), see Table 4.3-2 below. Additionally, vernal pools can support federally listed fairy shrimp species.

Chaparral
Elements of chaparral habitat are found on Site 19. There are two categories of chaparral habitat located in the city: undifferentiated (including southern mixed and chamise chaparral) and southern maritime chaparral. Approximately 11 percent of the natural vegetation communities in the city are undifferentiated chaparral, and approximately 4 percent are mapped as southern maritime chaparral, which is subject to change as a result of site-specific surveys. Southern mixed chaparral is a fire- and drought-adapted plant community consisting of various woody shrubs. Chamise chaparral is dominated by chamise (Adenostoma fasciculatum), with remaining species including shrubs and understory plants common in other types of chaparral. Both these vegetation communities occur in a patchy distribution throughout the city and are located on wetter north and west-facing slopes, alternating with coastal sage scrub, grasslands, and oak woodlands.

Southern maritime chaparral is the most limited type of chaparral in the city and is considered a sensitive habitat. It is similar to southern mixed chaparral, except that it occurs on sandstone.

Sensitive plant and animal species that may be found in chaparral habitat are the wart-stemmed ceanothus (Ceanothus verrucosus; designated as sensitive by the California Native Plant Society (CNPS)), the federally and state-listed endangered Orcutt’s spineflower (Chorizanthe orcuttiana), the California endangered short-leaved dudleya (Dudleya blochmaniae ssp. brevifolia), and the California Watch List species, southern California rufous-crowned sparrow (Aimophila ruficeps).

Grassland
Grassland habitat is found on Sites 4, 6, and 7. There are approximately 1,807 acres of both native and non-native grasslands within Carlsbad. Native grasslands are considered a sensitive habitat under California regulations and are identified in the CNDDB as priority areas for monitoring and restoration. Within the city, native grassland vegetation is extremely limited and characterized by valley needlegrass and valley and foothill needlegrass. Non-native grassland, characterized by wild oats, bromes, and other such non-native grasses, is not considered a sensitive habitat. However, it is important to note that non-native grassland may be a significant foraging habitat for raptors and the California Fully Protected white-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus). Non-native grassland may also support sensitive plant species such as the federally and state-listed thread leaved brodiaea (Brodiaea filifolia) and San Diego thorn-mint (Acanthomintha ilicifolia), and may serve as a habitat linkage for a number of wildlife species such as mule deer (Odocoileus hemionus) and scrub species such as the coastal California gnatcatcher.

Woodland
Woodland habitat dominated by eucalyptus (Eucalyptus spp.) is found on Site 3. There are two types of woodlands that occur within Carlsbad: oak woodland (approximately 29 acres) and eucalyptus woodland (approximately 257 acres). Oak woodland is dominated by coast live oak with other scattered tree species. Eucalyptus woodland is dominated by various species of planted eucalyptus that survived from agricultural hedgerows, around old dwellings, or in entire groves. Although eucalyptus woodland is a non-native community that does not support sensitive plant species, it is often used for nesting by raptors and other birds or roosting by bats. Sensitive species that may occur in oak woodlands include the Cooper’s hawk (Accipiter cooperii; a California Watch List Environmental Impact Analysis
Biological Resources

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.3-5
species), regionally sensitive Harbison’s dun skipper (Euphyes vestris harbisoni), and Nuttall’s scrub oak (Quercus dumosa) and Engelmann oak (Quercus engelmannii; designated as sensitive by CNPS).

Riparian Habitat
Riparian habitat is found on Sites 1, 2, 4 and 9. Riparian habitats are found along drainages and streams, where soils tend to be moist during all or part of the year. Within Carlsbad, riparian communities may also be the result of agricultural runoff. There are approximately 572 acres of riparian habitat located in the city, consisting of riparian scrub, riparian woodland and riparian forest. Riparian habitats are all considered sensitive under federal and state regulations and policies.

Riparian scrub is characterized by several natural and semi-disturbed wetland communities that occur along river courses and seasonally moist drainages. Within Carlsbad, areas of riparian scrub occur in numerous locations, including but not limited to along El Camino Real (south of Batiquitos Lagoon), Encinas Creek, Box Canyon, along the northern portion of the city south of Highway 78 in Buena Vista Creek and in small pockets throughout the city in springs and seeps. Riparian woodland, including sycamore–alder and other riparian woodland, occurs in broad channels of intermittent streams. Riparian forest includes southern coast live oak, which is dominated by coast live oak with other scattered tree species. Sensitive species that may occur in riparian habitats include the federally and state-listed endangered least Bell’s vireo (Vireo bellii). Riparian woodland and forest support nesting for a number of raptor species, including white-tailed kite and Cooper’s hawk. b. Jurisdictional Wetlands, Streams, and Riparian Habitats In accordance with Section 1602 of the California Fish and Game Code (CFGC), the CDFW has jurisdiction over lakes and streambeds (including adjacent riparian resources). CDFW regulates wetland areas that are part of a river, stream, or lake, but also temporary wetland features such as vernal pools. Under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA), the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) has authority to regulate activities that discharge dredge or fill material into wetlands or other “waters of the United States” through issuance of a Section 404 Permit. Finally, the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) has jurisdiction over “waters of the state” pursuant to the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act and has the responsibility for review of the project water quality certification per Section 401 of the federal CWA.

The National Wetlands Inventory illustrates several wetlands and non-wetland waters that occur within the city (Figure 4.3-1). Sites 1, 2, 4, 9, and 17 contain mapped NWI wetlands. Buena Vista Creek Creek, Agua Hedionda Creek, and San Marcos Creek are Relatively Permanent Waters (RPWs) that maintain a direct hydrologic surface connection to the Pacific Ocean, a traditional navigable water (TNW).
c. Special-Status Species
Special-status species include those listed as rare, threatened, or endangered by CDFW or the USFWS, or are candidates for either state or federal listing, or have been designated as "fully protected" or "species of special concern" by USFWS and CDFW, or are other species that are tracked by the California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) or California Native Plant Society (CNPS), but do not fall into any of the categories cited above. Table 4.3-2 contains a list of the special-status species from the CNDDB and CNPS Inventory of Rare Plants that have been recorded in the San Luis Rey, California 7.5-minute USGS quadrangle and the surrounding eight quadrangles.

Information regarding the occurrences of special-status species in the Planning Area was also City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

4.3-6
obtained from a query of the USFWS Information for Planning and Conservation (IPaC) (February 2022).

The CNDDB includes all taxa that are listed by the CESA, as well as most federally listed taxa that occur in California. Additionally, the CNDDB includes elements that are considered rare by experts, but that have not undergone the rigorous steps necessary to become officially listed through CESA.

Many of the listed observations are historic (i.e., found in habitat that is no longer present).

Therefore, while it is likely that several of these species are found in the city’s open space areas and undeveloped vegetated hillsides at the wildland-urban interface, most of the species on this list would have low potential to occur on, and adjacent to the rezone sites and are not expected to be present due to the lack of suitable habitat or other factors (e.g., urban development, nighttime noise and light, domestic animals). Federally- and/or state-designated threatened and endangered species, and California Species of Special Concern (SSC) or California Fully Protected species that have the potential to occur in areas subject to development under the proposed project are listed in Table 4.3-2.

Six special-status species have at least a moderate potential to occur in the project area based on the presence of suitable habitat types. This includes four sensitive wildlife species and two sensitive plant species that are known to be present or are likely present on Sites 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 17, 18 and 19 as described in Table 4.2-3 below.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Biological Resources

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.3-7
Figure 4.3-1 Carlsbad National Wetlands Inventory Map
~ __ J City Limit s
Stream/R iver
[3 Lagoon/Rese rvoi r
Wetland Type
------
Estuarine and Marine
Deepwater
Estuarine and Marine Wetlan d
Freshwater Emergent Wet land
Freshwater Fore sted/Shrub
Wet land
Freshwate r Pond
Lake
River ine
N
o~--~o.,..; .... s ___ .,..1.s 11
Mil es ~
Image ry provided by Esri and its licensors © 2023.
~ .. __ ......
- ...... ,L
' .... -- --
,_.(, '
• ~'it, .~,· '1
~ E' DR 1
' ' ' '
't. •
Additional da ta provided by City of Carlsbad, 2022; USGS, 2022; California Depart ment of Water Resources, 2021.

DAYP.VE
"i"P.OR1
'.__/ -!,
"'<;;
OJ
. 0
City of
San Marcos
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

4.3-8
Table 4.3-2 Special-Status Plant and Wildlife Species with Potential to be Affected by the Proposed Project
Scientific Name
Common Name Status Habitat Requirements
Plants and Lichens
Artemisia palmeri
San Diego sagewort
None/None
G3?/S3?

4.2 Perennial deciduous shrub. Chaparral, coastal scrub, riparian forest, riparian scrub, riparian woodland. Mesic, sandy. Elevations: 50-3000ft. (15- 915m.) Blooms (Feb)May-Sep.

Bloomeria clevelandii
San Diego goldenstar
None/None
G2/S3
1B.1
Perennial bulbiferous herb. Chaparral, coastal scrub, valley and foothill grassland, vernal pools. Clay. Elevations: 165-1525ft. (50-465m.) Blooms Apr-May.

Brodiaea filifolia
thread-leaved brodiaea
FT/SCE
G2/S2
1B.1
Perennial bulbiferous herb. Chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal scrub, playas, valley and foothill grassland, vernal pools. Clay (often).

Elevations: 80-3675ft. (25-1120m.) Blooms Mar-Jun. This species has a high potential to occur on or adjacent to Sites 4 and 7.

Calandrinia breweri
Brewer's calandrinia
None/None
G4/S4

4.2 Annual herb. Chaparral, coastal scrub. Burned areas, disturbed areas, loam (sometimes), sandy (sometimes). Elevations: 35-4005ft. (10-1220m.) Blooms (Jan)Mar-Jun.

Chorizanthe orcuttiana
Orcutt's spineflower
FE/SCE
G1/S1
1B.1
Annual herb. Chaparral, closed-cone coniferous forest, coastal scrub.

Openings, sandy. Elevations: 10-410ft. (3-125m.) Blooms Mar-May.

Eryngium aristulatum
var. parishii
San Diego button-celery
FE/SCE
G5T1/S1
1B.1
Annual/perennial herb. Coastal scrub, valley and foothill grassland, vernal pools. San Diego mesa hardpan and claypan vernal pools and southern interior basalt flow vernal pools; usually surrounded by scrub. Elevations:
65-2035ft. (20-620m.) Blooms Apr-Jun. Known to occur within the vernal pool preserve on Site 17.

Hazardia orcuttii
Orcutt's hazardia
None/SCT
G1/S1
1B.1
Perennial evergreen shrub. Chaparral, coastal scrub. Often on clay; in grassy edges of chaparral and coastal scrub. Elevations: 260-280ft. (80- 85m.) Blooms Aug-Oct.

Horkelia truncata
Ramona horkelia
None/None
G3/S3
1B.3
Perennial herb. Chaparral, cismontane woodland. Habitats in California include: mixed chaparral, vernal streams, and disturbed areas near roads.

Clay soil; at least sometimes on gabbro. Elevations: 1310-4265ft. (400- 1300m.) Blooms May-Jun.

Lepidium virginicum var.
robinsonii
Robinson's pepper-grass
None/None
G5T3/S3

4.3 Annual herb. Chaparral, coastal scrub. Dry soils, shrubland. 4-. Elevations:
5-2905ft. (1-885m.) Blooms Jan-Jul.

Nolina cismontana
chaparral nolina
None/None
G3/S3
1B.2
Perennial evergreen shrub. Chaparral, coastal scrub. Primarily on sandstone and shale substrates; also known from gabbro. Elevations: 460- 4185ft. (140-1275m.) Blooms (Mar)May-Jul.

Pseudognaphalium
leucocephalum
white rabbit-tobacco
None/None
G4/S2
2B.2
Perennial herb. Chaparral, cismontane woodland, coastal scrub, riparian woodland. Sandy, gravelly sites. Elevations: 0-6890ft. (0-2100m.) Blooms (Jul)Aug-Nov(Dec).

Salvia munzii
Munz's sage
None/None
G2/S2
2B.2
Perennial evergreen shrub. Chaparral, coastal scrub. Rolling hills and slopes, in rocky soil. Elevations: 375-3495ft. (115-1065m.) Blooms Feb-Apr.

Viguiera laciniata
San Diego County
viguiera
None/None
G4/S4

4.3 Perennial shrub. Chaparral, coastal scrub. Slopes and ridges. Elevations:
195-2460ft. (60-750m.) Blooms Feb-Jun(Aug).

Environmental Impact Analysis
Biological Resources

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.3-9
Scientific Name
Common Name Status Habitat Requirements
Invertebrates
Danaus plexippus pop. 1
monarch - California
overwintering
population
FC/None
G4T2T3/S2S3
Winter roost sites extend along the coast from northern Mendocino to Baja California, Mexico. Roosts located in wind-protected tree groves (eucalyptus, Monterey pine, cypress), with nectar and water sources nearby.

Branchinecta
sandiegonensis
San Diego fairy shrimp
FE/ None
G1/S2
Endemic to San Diego and Orange County mesas. Inhabit seasonal pools filled by winter/spring rains. Hatch in warm water later in the season.

Known to occur on vernal pool preserve on Site 17
Streptocephalus
woottoni

Riverside fairy shrimp
FE/None
G1G2/S1S2
Endemic to Western Riverside, Orange, and San Diego counties in areas of tectonic swales/earth slump basins in grassland and coastal sage scrub.

Inhabit seasonally astatic pools filled by winter/spring rains. Hatch in warm water later in the season. Known to occur on vernal pool preserve on Site

17. Reptiles
Anniella stebbinsi
Southern California
legless lizard
None/None
G3/S3
SSC
Generally south of the Transverse Range, extending to northwestern Baja California. Occurs in sandy or loose loamy soils under sparse vegetation.

Disjunct populations in the Tehachapi and Piute Mountains in Kern County.

Variety of habitats; generally in moist, loose soil. They prefer soils with a high moisture content.

Aspidoscelis hyperythra
orange-throated whiptail
None/None
G5/S2S3
WL
Inhabits low-elevation coastal scrub, chaparral, and valley-foothill hardwood habitats. Prefers washes and other sandy areas with patches of brush and rocks. Perennial plants necessary for its major food: termites.

Aspidoscelis tigris
stejnegeri
coastal whiptail
None/None
G5T5/S3
SSC
Found in deserts and semi-arid areas with sparse vegetation and open areas. Also found in woodland and riparian areas. Ground may be firm soil, sandy, or rocky.

Crotalus ruber
red-diamond rattlesnake
None/None
G4/S3
SSC
Chaparral, woodland, grassland, and desert areas from coastal San Diego County to the eastern slopes of the mountains. Occurs in rocky areas and dense vegetation. Needs rodent burrows, cracks in rocks or surface cover objects.

Salvadora hexalepis
virgultea
coast patch-nosed snake
None/None
G5T4/S2S3
SSC
Brushy or shrubby vegetation in coastal Southern California. Require small mammal burrows for refuge and overwintering sites.

Birds
Accipiter cooperii
Cooper's hawk
None/None
G5/S4
WL
Woodland, chiefly of open, interrupted or marginal type. Nest sites mainly in riparian growths of deciduous trees, as in canyon bottoms on river flood- plains; also, live oaks.

Aimophila ruficeps
canescens
southern California
rufous-crowned sparrow
None/None
G5T3/S3
WL
Resident in Southern California coastal sage scrub and sparse mixed chaparral. Frequents relatively steep, often rocky hillsides with grass and forb patches.

Artemisiospiza belli belli
Bell's sage sparrow
None/None
G5T2T3/S3
WL
Nests in chaparral dominated by fairly dense stands of chamise. Found in coastal sage scrub in south of range. Nest located on the ground beneath a shrub or in a shrub 6-18 inches above ground. Territories about 50 yds apart.

Campylorhynchus
brunneicapillus
sandiegensis
coastal cactus wren
None/None
G5T3Q/S3
SSC
Southern California coastal sage scrub. Wrens require tall opuntia cactus for nesting and roosting.

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

4.3-10
Scientific Name
Common Name Status Habitat Requirements
Empidonax traillii
extimus
southwestern willow
flycatcher
FE/SE
G5T2/S1
Riparian woodlands in Southern California.

Icteria virens
yellow-breasted chat
None/None
G5/S3
SSC
Summer resident; inhabits riparian thickets of willow and other brushy tangles near watercourses. Nests in low, dense riparian, consisting of willow, blackberry, wild grape; forages and nests within 10 ft of ground.

Polioptila californica
californica

coastal California
gnatcatcher
FT/None
G4G5T3Q/S2
SSC
Obligate, permanent resident of coastal sage scrub below 2500 ft in Southern California. Low, coastal sage scrub in arid washes, on mesas and slopes. Not all areas classified as coastal sage scrub are occupied. High probability of occurrence on or adjacent to Sites 4, 6, 8, 9, 17, 18 and 19.

Setophaga petechia
yellow warbler
None/None
G5/S3S4
SSC
Riparian plant associations in close proximity to water. Also nests in montane shrubbery in open conifer forests in Cascades and Sierra Nevada.

Frequently found nesting and foraging in willow shrubs and thickets, and in other riparian plants including cottonwoods, sycamores, ash, and alders.

Vireo bellii pusillus
least Bell's vireo
FE/SE
G5T2/S2
Summer resident of Southern California in low riparian in vicinity of water or in dry river bottoms; below 2000 ft. Nests placed along margins of bushes or on twigs projecting into pathways, usually willow, Baccharis, mesquite. Moderate potential to occur on or adjacent to Sites 1, 2 and 4.

Mammals
Antrozous pallidus
pallid bat
None/None
G4/S3
SSC
Found in a variety of habitats including deserts, grasslands, shrublands, woodlands, and forests. Most common in open, dry habitats with rocky areas for roosting. Roosts in crevices of rock outcrops, caves, mine tunnels, buildings, bridges, and hollows of live and dead trees which must protect bats from high temperatures. Very sensitive to disturbance of roosting sites.

Chaetodipus californicus
femoralis
Dulzura pocket mouse
None/None
G5T3/S3
SSC
Found in a variety of habitats including coastal scrub, chaparral, and grassland in San Diego County, Baja California, and Mexico. Attracted to grass-chaparral edges.

Chaetodipus fallax fallax
northwestern San Diego
pocket mouse
None/None
G5T3T4/S3S4
SSC
Inhabits coastal sage scrub, sagebrush scrub, grasslands, and chaparral communities. Found in open, sandy areas in southwestern California and northern Baja California. Prefers moderately gravelly and rocky substrates.

Dipodomys stephensi
Stephens' kangaroo rat
FE/ST
G2/S2
Found primarily in annual & perennial grasslands, but also occurs in coastal scrub & sagebrush with sparse canopy cover. Prefers buckwheat, chamise, brome grass & filaree. Will burrow into firm soil and use the burrows of California ground squirrels and pocket gophers.

Occurs only in southern California.

Eumops perotis
californicus
western mastiff bat
None/None
G4G5T4/S3S4
SSC
Occurs in open, semi-arid to arid habitats, including coniferiferous and deciduous woodlands, coastal scrub, grasslands, and chaparral. Roosts in crevices in cliff faces and caves, and buildings. Roosts typically occur high above ground.

Lasiurus cinereus
hoary bat
None/None
G3G4/S4
Typically roosts in trees in deciduous and coniferous forests and woodlands but occassionally roosts in rocks crevices. Forages in open areas, typically along riparian corridors or over water. Diet primarily consists of moths.

Lepus californicus
bennettii
San Diego black-tailed
jackrabbit
None/None
G5T3T4/S3S4
Occurs in Los Angeles, San Bernardino, Riverside, and San Diego Counties of southern California. Typically found in open shrub habitats. Will also occur in woodland habitats with open understory adjacent to shrublands.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Biological Resources

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.3-11
Scientific Name
Common Name Status Habitat Requirements
Myotis yumanensis
Yuma myotis
None/None
G5/S4
Occurs in a variety of lowland and upland habitats including desert scrub, riparian, and woodlands and forests. Distribution is closely tied to bodies of water. Roosts in a variety of areas including caves, cliffs, mines, crevices in live trees, and buildings and other man-made structures.

Neotoma lepida
intermedia
San Diego desert
woodrat
None/None
G5T3T4/S3S4
SSC
Occurs in scrub habitats of southern California from San Luis Obispo County to San Diego County.

Nyctinomops
femorosaccus
pocketed free-tailed bat
None/None
G5/S3
SSC
Variety of arid areas in Southern California; pine-juniper woodlands, desert scrub, palm oasis, desert wash, desert riparian, etc. Rocky areas with high cliffs.

Perognathus
longimembris pacificus
Pacific pocket mouse
FE/None
G5T1/S1
SSC
Inhabits the narrow coastal plains from the Mexican border north to El Segundo, Los Angeles County. Seems to prefer soils of fine alluvial sands near the ocean, but much remains to be learned.

Taxidea taxus
American badger
None/None
G5/S3
SSC
Most abundant in drier open stages of most shrub, forest, and herbaceous habitats, with friable soils. Needs sufficient food, friable soils and open, uncultivated ground. Preys on burrowing rodents. Digs burrows.

Listing and Special-Status Species Information
Status (Federal/State) CRPR (CNPS California Rare Plant Rank) FE = Federal Endangered 1B = Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California and elsewhere FT = Federal Threatened 2A = Presumed extirpated in California, but common elsewhere FD = Federal Delisted 2B= Rare, Threatened, or Endangered in California, but more FC = Federal Candidate common elsewhere
SE = State Endangered 3 = Need more information (Review List) ST = State Threatened 4 = Limited Distribution (Watch List) SCE = State Candidate Endangered
SR = State Rare CRPR Threat Code Extension
SD = State Delisted .1 = Seriously endangered in California (>80% of occurrences SSC = CDFW Species of Special Concern threatened/high degree and immediacy of threat) FP = CDFW Fully Protected .2 = Moderately threatened in California (20-80% of occurrences WL = CDFW Watch List threatened/moderate degree and immediacy of threat) .3 = Not very endangered in California (<20% of occurrences threatened/low degree and immediacy of threat)
Other Statuses
G1 or S1 Critically Imperiled Globally or Subnationally (state) G2 or S2 Imperiled Globally or Subnationally (state)
G3 or S3 Vulnerable to extirpation or extinction Globally or Subnationally (state) G4/5 or S4/5 Apparently secure, common and abundant
Additional notations may be provided as follows
T – Intraspecific Taxon (subspecies, varieties, and other designations below the level of species) Q – Questionable taxonomy that may reduce conservation priority ? – Inexact numeric rank
Sensitive Natural Communities
Plant communities are considered sensitive if they have limited distributions, have high wildlife value, include sensitive species, or are particularly susceptible to disturbance. CDFW maintains a list of sensitive natural communities (CDFW 2022). Sensitive habitats listed by in the CNDDB and the City of Carlsbad’s Habitat Management Plan (HMP) as occurring in the Carlsbad region include:

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

4.3-12
 Coastal Brackish Marsh
 Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub
 Maritime Succulent Scrub
 Oak Woodland
 San Diego Mesa Claypan Vernal Pool
 San Diego Mesa Hardpan Vernal Pool
 Southern Coastal Salt Marsh
 Southern Cottonwood Willow Riparian Forest
 Southern Maritime Chaparral
 Southern Riparian Forest
 Southern Riparian Scrub
 Southern Sycamore Alder Riparian Woodland
 Southern Willow Scrub
 Vernal Pools
Based on a desktop review and site reconnaissance, marsh, riparian, and/or willow scrub communities occur at Sites 1, 2, 4, 7, 9, and 17.

4.3.2 Regulatory Setting
a. Federal
Federal Endangered Species Act
The Federal Endangered Species Act of 1973 (FESA) and subsequent amendments provide for the conservation of endangered and threatened species, and the ecosystems upon which they depend.

Section 7 of the FESA requires federal agencies to aid in the conservation of listed species, and to ensure that the activities of federal agencies will not jeopardize the continued existence of listed species or adversely modify designated critical habitat. The United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) are responsible for administration of the FESA and have regulatory authority over federally listed species.

Migratory Bird Treaty Act
The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) makes it unlawful at any time, by any means or in any manner, to pursue, hunt, take, capture, or kill migratory birds, and prohibits the removal of nests occupied by migratory birds. The USFWS administers the MBTA.

United States Army Corps of Engineers Jurisdiction
The USACE, under provisions of Section 404 of the CWA and USACE implementing regulations, has jurisdiction over the placement of dredged or fill material into “waters of the United States.” Congress enacted the CWA “to restore and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation's waters.” Previous regulations codified in 1986 defined “waters of the United States” as traditional navigable waters, interstate waters, all other waters that could affect interstate or foreign commerce, impoundments of waters of the United States, tributaries, the territorial seas, and adjacent wetlands.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Biological Resources

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.3-13
On March 20,2023, the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and the USACE released a revised definition of waters of the United States. This rule defines several categories of jurisdictional waters, documents certain types of waters that are excluded from jurisdiction, and clarifies some regulatory terms. Under the revised definition, waters of the United States include:

1. Territorial seas and traditional navigable waters;

2. Perennial and intermittent tributaries that contribute surface flow to those waters;

3. Certain Lakes and ponds, and impoundments of jurisdictional waters, and;

4. Wetlands adjacent to jurisdictional waters.

USACE jurisdictional limits are typically identified by the OHWM or the landward edge of adjacent wetlands (where present). The OHWM is the “line on the shore established by the fluctuations of water and indicated by physical characteristics such as a clear, natural line impressed on the bank, shelving, changes in the character of soil, destruction of terrestrial vegetation, the presence of litter and debris, or other appropriate means that consider the characteristics of the surrounding area” (33 CFR 328.3).

The USACE defines wetlands as “those areas that are inundated or saturated by surface or groundwater at a frequency and duration sufficient to support, and that under normal circumstances do support, a prevalence of vegetation typically adapted for life in saturated soil conditions” (33 CFR 328.3). The USACE’s delineation procedures identify wetlands in the field based on indicators of three wetland parameters: hydrophytic vegetation, hydric soils, and wetland hydrology.
b. State
California Endangered Species Act
The California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) is responsible for administration of the California Endangered Species Act (CESA). For projects that affect both a State and federal listed species, compliance with the FESA will satisfy the CESA if the CDFW determines that the federal incidental take authorization is consistent with the CESA. Projects that result in a take of a California listed species require a take permit under the CESA. The federal and State acts lend protection to species that are considered rare enough by the scientific community and trustee agencies to warrant special consideration, particularly with regard to protection of isolated populations, nesting or den locations, communal roosts, and other essential habitat. Unlike the FESA, the CESA prohibits the take of not just listed endangered or threatened, but also candidate species (species petitioned for listing).

The CESA defines an endangered species as:
…a native species or subspecies of a bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, reptile, or plant which is in serious danger of becoming extinct throughout all, or a significant portion, of its range due to one or more causes, including loss of habitat, change in habitat, overexploitation, predation, competition, or disease.

A threatened species is defined as:
…a native species or subspecies of a bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, reptile, or plant that, although not presently threatened with extinction, is likely to become an endangered species in the foreseeable future in the absence of the special protection and management efforts City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

4.3-14
required by this chapter. Any animal determined by the commission as rare on or before January 1, 1985 is a threatened species.

Candidate species are defined as:
…a native species or subspecies of a bird, mammal, fish, amphibian, reptile, or plant that the commission has formally noticed as being under review by the department for addition to either the list of endangered species or the list of threatened species, or a species for which the commission has published a notice of proposed regulation to add the species to either list.

Candidate species may be afforded temporary protection as though they were already listed as threatened or endangered at the discretion of the Fish and Game Commission. Unlike the FESA, CESA does not include listing provisions for invertebrate species. Article 3, Sections 2080 through 2085, of the CESA addresses the taking of threatened or endangered species by stating:
…no person shall import into this State, export out of this State, or take, possess, purchase, or sell within this State, any species, or any part or product thereof, that the commission determines to be an endangered species or a threatened species, or attempt any of those acts, except as otherwise provided.

Under the CESA, “take” is defined as, “hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill, or attempt to hunt, pursue, catch, capture, or kill.” Additionally, some sensitive mammals and birds are protected by the state as Fully Protected Mammals or Fully Protected Birds, as described in the CFGC, Sections 4700 and 3511, respectively.

Nesting Bird Protection – California Fish and Game Code According to CFGC Section 3503 it is unlawful to take, possess, or needlessly destroy the nest or eggs of any bird [except English sparrows (Passer domesticus) and European starlings (Sturnus vulgaris)]. Sections 3503 and 3513 prohibit the taking of specific birds, their nests, eggs, or any portion thereof during the nesting season. Section 3503.5 specifically protects birds in the orders Falconiformes and Strigiformes (birds-of-prey). Section 3513 essentially overlaps with the federal MBTA, prohibiting the take or possession of any migratory nongame bird. Disturbance that causes nest abandonment and/or loss of reproductive effort is considered “take” by CDFW.

California Native Plant Protection Act
The California Native Plant Protection Act (NPPA) was enacted in 1977 and allows the Fish and Game Commission to designate plants as rare or endangered. Currently, 64 species, subspecies, and varieties of plants are protected as rare under the NPPA. The NPPA prohibits take of endangered or rare native plants but includes some exceptions for agricultural and nursery operations; emergencies; and after properly notifying CDFW for vegetation removal from canals, roads, and other sites, changes in land use, and in certain other situations. Effective in 2015, CDFW promulgated regulations (14 CCR 786.9) under the authority of the NPPA, establishing that the CESA permitting procedures (CFG Code Section 2081) would be applied to plants listed under the NPPA as "Rare." With this change, there is little practical difference for the regulated public between plants listed under CESA and those listed under the NPPA.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Biological Resources

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.3-15
San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board
The State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) and the local San Diego RWQCB assert jurisdiction, on behalf of the USEPA, over waters of the U.S. pursuant to Section 401 of the CWA. In addition, where federal jurisdiction is not asserted (for example, due to a lack of connectivity to a Relatively Permanent Waters [RPW] and Traditional Navigable Waters [TNW]), RWQCB assert jurisdiction over “waters of the State” pursuant to Section 13263 of Porter-Cologne, which are defined as any surface water or groundwater, including saline waters, within the boundaries of the State. In this event, the SWRCB may issue general Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) regarding discharges to “isolated” waters of the State if limiting criteria are not exceeded (Water Quality Order No. 2004-0004-DWQ, Statewide General Waste Discharge Requirements for Dredged or Fill Discharges to Waters Deemed by the USACE to be Outside of Federal Jurisdiction) or project-specific WDRs.

California Department of Fish and Wildlife
Stream and Riparian Habitat
Pursuant to CFGC Section 1600, CDFW has authority over all perennial, intermittent, and ephemeral rivers, streams, and lakes in the state, and requires any person, state or local governmental agency, or public utility to notify the CDFW before beginning any activity that would “substantially divert or obstruct the natural flow of, or substantially change or use any material from the bed, channel, or bank of, any river, stream, or lake, or deposit or dispose of debris, waste, or other material containing crumbled, flaked, or ground pavement where it may pass into any river, stream, or lake” that supports fish or wildlife resources.

A stream is defined as a “body of water that flows at least periodically or intermittently through a bed or channel having banks and supports fish or other aquatic life. This includes watercourses having a surface or subsurface flow that supports or has supported riparian vegetation”. A Lake or Streambed Alteration Agreement may be required for any proposed project that would result in an adverse impact to a river, stream, or lake. CDFW jurisdiction typically extends to the top of the bank and out to the outer edge of adjacent riparian vegetation if present. However, CDFW can take jurisdiction over a body of flowing water and the landform that conveys it, including water sources and adjoining landscape elements that are byproducts of and affected by interactions with flowing water without regard to size, duration, or the timing of flow.

Special-Status Species Protection
Special-status wildlife species are those species included on the CDFW “Special Animals” list. “Special Animal” is a general term that refers to all of the taxa the CNDDB is interested in tracking, regardless of their legal or protection status. The CDFW considers the taxa on this list to be those of greatest conservation need. The species on this list generally fall into one or more of the following categories:
 Officially listed or proposed for listing under the State and/or Federal Endangered Species Acts.  State or Federal candidate for possible listing.
 Taxa that meet the criteria for listing, even if not currently included on any list, as described in  Section 15380 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines.  Taxa considered by the Department to be a Species of Special Concern.

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

4.3-16
 Taxa that are biologically rare, very restricted in distribution, declining throughout their range, or have a critical vulnerable stage in their life cycle that warrants monitoring.  Populations in California that may be on the periphery of a taxon’s range but are threatened with extirpation in California.
c. Regional and Local
Multiple Habitat Conservation Program
Under the California NCCP Act, the cities of Carlsbad, Encinitas, Escondido, Oceanside, San Marcos, Solana Beach, and Vista participated in the preparation of the Multiple Habitat Conservation Program (MHCP), a comprehensive plan that addresses the needs of multiple plant and animal species in northwestern San Diego County. The MHCP Subregional Plan was adopted and certified by the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) Board of Directors in March 2003. The intent is that each jurisdiction will implement their respective portions of the MHCP Plan through citywide “subarea” plans, which describe the specific policies each city will institute for the MHCP.

City of Carlsbad Municipal Code Protection of Trees Ordinance City of Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 11.12.080, Protection of Trees, establishes regulations and standards to preserve trees in Carlsbad. This ordinance is designed to protect trees by restricting removal, trim, prune or cutting of any street tree, shrub or plant.

City of Carlsbad Municipal Code Heritage Trees
City of Carlsbad Municipal Code Chapter 11.12.140, Heritage Trees, establishes protection of all designated heritage trees that are on public streets. The city may officially designate as heritage trees those trees in the community which have significant historical or arboricultural interest.

Habitat Management Plan for Natural Communities in the City of Carlsbad The City of Carlsbad prepared a subarea plan as a part of the MHCP, called the “Habitat Management Plan for Natural Communities in the City of Carlsbad,” (HMP) which was adopted by the Carlsbad City Council in November 2004. The HMP outlines specific conservation, management, facility siting, land use, and other measures that the city will take to preserve the diversity of habitat and protect sensitive biological resources in the city while also allowing for additional development and growth as anticipated under the city’s General Plan. Formal approval and adoption of the HMP occurred through issuance of a permit by wildlife agencies, namely USFWS and CDFW, as well as execution of an implementation agreement between the city and the wildlife agencies. To date, Carlsbad’s HMP is the only adopted subarea plan in the MHCP subregion. The Carlsbad HMP preserve contains natural habitats that are necessary to sustain threatened, listed, or sensitive species, and to maintain biological value. According to the permit issued by the wildlife agencies, 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 coastal California gnatcatcher (outside of the city’s jurisdiction).

Open Space Management Plan
As a framework plan to assist in the implementation of the MHCP and HMP, the city’s Open Space Management Plan (OSMP) establishes procedures, standards, guidelines, and conditions for long- Environmental Impact Analysis
Biological Resources

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.3-17
term conservation and management of sensitive species and habitat. The OSMP applies to three additional categories of open space land that are not included in the areas identified as preserved in the HMP or MHCP. The categories are as follows:
 Other Natural Lands. The OSMP applies to all of the natural lands in the city, whereas the HMP applies to natural lands consisting of existing or proposed preserves and lands subject to HMP standards. The other natural lands that are not subject to the HMP (mostly isolated smaller fragments of habitat) were not included in the HMP and MHCP primarily because they did not contribute significantly to the overall biological value of the preserve; however, they are included in the OSMP planning area and continue to be managed as open space.  Developed Parks. This category includes existing parks as well as parks to be developed in the future. Some of the parks under this category are not strictly “open space” in the natural sense, but are developed facilities, such as a skate park or ball field, that are used for outdoor recreational purposes. Developed parks have been incorporated into the city’s geographic information system (GIS) inventory so that citywide management can be scheduled, tracked, and analyzed in this database.
 Drainage Basins. The city’s drainage basin facilities were also incorporated into the city’s GIS inventory for the OSMP so that management can be scheduled, tracked, and analyzed. The drainage basin parcels are included as an overlay because they are sometimes covered by other categories and may overlap with the HMP and MHCP areas.

HMP Guidelines
A set of guidelines have been developed by the city to aid in the implementation of the Carlsbad HMP. The HMP guidelines are intended to provide a summary of pertinent regulations from the HMP.

Guidelines for Biological Studies
The Guidelines for Biological Studies were developed to provide the biological standard for processing HMP permits and to help the user navigate through the HMP regulations. The guidelines are intended to ensure that adequate environmental impact analysis is conducted for projects using the appropriate biological data, and that HMP-compliant mitigation is incorporated into project design and permit conditions.

Guidelines for Riparian and Wetland Buffers
The Guidelines for Riparian and Wetland Buffers provides information about designing effective riparian buffers and identifying allowable land uses in a manner that is consistent with the Carlsbad HMP. The document supplements the HMP by providing recommendations and best practices that are consistent with local, state, and federal wetlands-related regulations. The guidelines objectives include providing buffer design recommendations and variance procedures in order to facilitate HMP implementation in the city; identifying allowable uses and land use restrictions for riparian/wetland buffer zones; developing generic and specific buffer management/land use guidelines corresponding to potential adjacent land uses to reduce or eliminate resulting edge effects; and identifying specific opportunities and constraints for buffer establishment on the watershed (stream-reach) level.

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

4.3-18
Guidelines for Habitat Creation and Restoration
The Guidelines for Habitat Creation and Restoration are intended to assist applicants in designing the restoration part of their mitigation program and to assist city staff in evaluating and approving restoration plans. The guidelines provide project applicants and consulting biologists an overview of typical components included in creation projects for planning purposes. There are separate guidelines for creation, restoration, and enhancement.

Community Forest Management Plan
The Carlsbad Community Forest Management Plan provides guidance to conserve forest areas through proper design, maintenance, and education. The document includes guidelines and procedures for planting, maintaining, removing, replacing, and preserving trees within public areas.

A significant portion of the city’s forest and most visible landscape features include trees within the city’s rights-of-way and other public areas; however, these trees are often the most overlooked by community members. A critical component of the Community Forest Management Plan is to encourage public understanding of the urban and community forest and educate people to make informed decisions regarding tree removal, retention, replacement, and maintenance. A number of direct and indirect public relations and outreach initiatives are outlined in the Community Forest Management Plan in an effort to foster support and citizen education for a healthier and safer urban forest with more positive human effects.

Carlsbad General Plan
The Carlsbad General Plan, Open Space, Conservation, and Recreation Element, addresses open space for resource conservation and recreation, as well as environmental quality topics such as air and water quality. The General Plan has the following goals and policies related to biological resources:

Goal 4-G.3 Protect environmentally sensitive lands, wildlife habitats, and rare, threatened or endangered plant and animal communities.

Goal 4-G.4 Promote conservation of hillsides and ridgelines.

Policy 4-P.9 Maintain and implement the city’s Habitat Management Plan (HMP), including the requirement that all development projects comply with the HMP and related documents. Require assessments of biological resources prior to approval of any development on sites with sensitive habitat, as depicted in Figure 4-3.

Policy 4-P.10 Consider working with private foundations and organizations or designating a conservancy agency to be responsible for protection, maintenance, monitoring and liability of open space lands.

Policy 4-P.11 Ensure that the improvements recommended for open space areas are appropriate for the type of open space and the use proposed. No improvements (excluding necessary infrastructure) shall be made in environmentally sensitive areas, except to enhance the environmental value of the areas.

Policy 4-P.12 Continue participation in regional planning efforts to protect habitat and environmentally sensitive species.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Biological Resources

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.3-19
Policy 4-P.13 Support innovative site design techniques such as cluster-type housing and transfer- of-development-rights to preserve sensitive environmental resources and to allow development projects to comply with the city’s Habitat Management Plan.

Policy 4-P.14 Assure that development or grading on hillsides (if allowed) relates to the slope of the land in order to preserve the integrity and appearance of natural hillsides and other landforms wherever possible.

Policy 4-P.15 Maintain functional wildlife corridors and habitat linkage in order to contribute to regional biodiversity and the viability of rare, unique or sensitive biological resources throughout the city.

Policy 4-P.17 Seek partnering opportunities with other governmental agencies, private land owners and non-profit organizations to acquire open space; utilize grants, bonds and other funding sources to leverage local funds and reduce cost to Carlsbad taxpayers.

Policy 4-P.18 Require that, at the time of any discretionary approval, any land identified as open space for its habitat or scenic value shall have an appropriate easement and/or land use and zoning designation placed on it for resource protection.

Policy 4-P.19 Require a city permit for any grading, grubbing, or clearing of vegetation in undeveloped areas, with appropriate penalties for violations.

4.3.3 Impact Analysis
a. Methodology and Significance Thresholds
Significance Thresholds
Pursuant to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, potentially significant impacts to biological resources would result if the project would:

1. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

2. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

3. Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means.

4. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites.

5. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance.

6. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan.

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

4.3-20
Methodology
The following analysis is based on a literature review concerning biological resources known to occur in the area that is derived from biological resource databases and information on biological resources described in literature, such as, but not limited to, the City of Carlsbad 2015 General Plan Final Environmental Impact Report (City of Carlsbad 2015). The literature review was conducted to assess and verify the environmental setting and to analyze potential impacts that could result from implementation of future projects (at the 18 rezone sites) on sensitive biological resources, including special-status plant and wildlife species, habitat for nesting birds and bats, riparian and other sensitive plant communities, federal and state waters and wetlands, locally protected trees, wildlife movement corridors, and habitat conservation planning areas. b. Prior Environmental Analysis
The 2015 General Plan EIR addressed potential biological resources impacts in Chapter 3.3, Biological Resources of the Draft EIR. The 2015 General Plan EIR determined that impacts to biological resources would be less than significant for effects to listed species or their habitats, loss of significant populations of sensitive species, protected wetlands, wildlife migration or movement corridors, local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, or conflicts with conservation plans and habitat management plans and habitat groups identified therein (Section 3.3, Biological Resources: 3.3-19 through 3.3-30). It further stated that individual development projects would be subject to project-specific development and planning review, including adherence to standards for the protection of biological resources. As such all projects proposed under General Plan implementation would be required to conform to zoning, design standards, the Habitat Management Plan and other regulations concerning the protection of biological resources, including listed species, habitats, and all planning resources designed to protect and conserve these resources.

The proposed project involves development on 18 rezone sites beyond what was anticipated in the 2015 General Plan EIR and could therefore result in new impacts related to biological resources.

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 biological 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.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Biological Resources

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.3-21
Threshold 1: Would the project have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Impact BIO-1 T HE PROPOSED PROJECT COULD POTENTIALLY ADVERSELY IMPACT SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES OR THEIR HABITAT. LOCAL SPECIAL-STATUS SPECIES AND NESTING BIRDS COULD OCCUR WITHIN THE SITES

DURING POTENTIAL CONSTRUCTION PERIODS AND MAY POTENTIALLY BE AFFECTED BY CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY. THIS IMPACT IS LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED.

Sites that contain or are adjacent to natural areas, including coastal sage scrub, oak woodlands, vernal pools, and riparian habitat, have the potential to support special-status species.

Some of the mixed-use and multifamily housing under the proposed project would be located in urban areas and be constructed as infill development or redevelopment. Sites 5 and 10-16 are disturbed or already developed lands, which would therefore avoid direct impacts to sensitive habitats and most special-status species at these sites. However, Sites 5 and 10-16 contain ornamental vegetation. Future developments at these sites could result in impacts to nesting birds due to demolition of the existing structures, removal of vegetation and trees, and grading.

Sites 3, 4, 6-12, and 17 are either all or mostly vacant and undeveloped. Sites 1-2, 6-9, and 18 contain natural habitat or woodlands. Site 17 supports vernal pools. Further discussion of potential impacts to sites that support natural habitats and associated special-status species is provided in the section below.

Special-Status Species
Housing development accommodated under the proposed project may occur in natural areas present on Sites 1- 4, 6-9, 17-19. The CNDDB query (Table 4.3-2) identifies 41 sensitive plant and wildlife species that have been documented in the region, many of which are historic occurrences in habitat that has since been developed. However, as indicated by the HMP several federally and/or state-designated threatened and endangered species, SSC, or California Fully Protected species, have the potential to occur in areas where development would be accommodated under the proposed project. Nearly all of the plant species with a potential to occur are found in chaparral, coastal scrub, vernal pool, valley and foothill grasslands and most of the wildlife would forage, roost, or nest through these habitats whereas other species would be limited to riparian woodland habitat.

Table 4.3-1 identifies vegetation communities and land uses present at each site. There is potential for sensitive species to occur on sites that are characterized by natural habitats as listed above. As discussed in Table 4.3-2, the following sensitive species are either known to occur or likely to be present within these sites supporting suitable habitat:
 Least Bell’s vireo has a moderate potential to occur within riparian habitats on Sites 1, 2, and 4  Coastal California gnatcatcher has a high potential to occur within coastal sage scrub on Sites 4, 6, 8, 9, 17, 18, and 19
 San Diego pool fairy shrimp, Riverside fairy shrimp, and San Diego button-celery are known to occur in vernal pools on Site 17
 Thread-leaved brodiaea has a high potential to occur in coastal sage scrub openings and grassland habitats on Sites 4 and 7
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

4.3-22
Future development at Sites 1- 4, 6-9, 17-19 has the potential to adversely affect special-status species or their habitats, which is considered a potentially significant impact.

For example, vegetation clearing, and excavation could remove habitat or directly impact individuals (e.g., mortality). Excavation, ground clearing, equipment and materials storage, access routes, and other activities could result in impacts on runoff and/or water quality, potentially affecting aquatic habitat. Excavation, ground clearing, and access routes could also result in air quality impacts (dust, exhaust) that could affect adjacent habitats. Equipment or construction-related traffic could introduce hazardous materials into habitats and generate noise that may impact special-status species.

Equipment and construction personnel could also introduce noxious and/or invasive species that could damage habitats, such as by disseminating seeds. Any of these effects could result in significant impacts on special-status species. This impact is potentially significant.

Nesting Birds
Reasonably anticipated development resulting from the proposed project could potentially disturb active bird nests. Migratory birds, including most birds that nest in the areas subject to reasonably foreseeable development under the proposed project, are protected by the federal MBTA, which forbids most forms of harm to birds, including to their active nests. In addition, CFGC Section 3503 makes it unlawful to destroy nests or eggs of any bird, except as otherwise provided by code or regulation. Where vegetation, and especially trees, are removed as part of development under the proposed project, there is the potential for violations under the MBTA and Section 3503 of the CFGC. This impact is potentially significant.

Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures would be required to address potential impacts to special-status species and habitat.

BIO-1 Biological Resources Technical Report
For development projects at Sites 1- 4, 6-9, 17-19 that require vegetation removal, ground disturbance of unpaved areas, parking or staging of equipment or material on unpaved areas, access routes on unpaved areas, or any rehabilitation or construction staging within 100 feet of the property line (except for landscaped developed areas) that contain or have the potential to support special-status species, sensitive habitat, or suitable habitat to support special-status species, prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall retain a qualified biologist to conduct a biological resources reconnaissance of the site, consistent with the requirements of General Plan Policy 4-P.9 and the HMP Guidelines for Biological Studies. All future projects shall be consistent with the HMP and the technical report shall include a consistency analysis, including compliance with the narrow endemic standards (MHCP Volume 1, Section 3.7 No. 5, and HMP Section D-6 for TLB, VP species) and special species standards (HMP Section D-6 for least Bell’s vireo, southwestern willow flycatcher and Harbison’s Dun Skipper).

The Biological Resources Technical Report shall address the presence/absence of suitable habitat for special-status plant and wildlife species, and any additional protocol surveys that may be needed to determine the potential presence/absence of special status species, sensitive plant communities and wetlands, and other special status biological resources protected under the HMP. The report will further propose avoidance, minimization, and mitigation measures, consistent with HMP Environmental Impact Analysis
Biological Resources

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.3-23
requirements, necessary to reduce potential impacts to special-status biological resources to less than significant.

BIO-2 Pre-Construction Bird Surveys, Avoidance, and Notification If construction activities are initiated during the bird nesting season (February 1 – August 31) involving removal of vegetation or other nesting bird habitat, including abandoned structures and other man-made features, a pre-construction nesting bird survey shall be conducted no more than three days prior to initiation of ground disturbance and vegetation removal activities. The nesting bird pre-construction survey shall be conducted on foot and shall include a 300-foot survey buffer around the construction site. The survey shall be conducted by a biologist familiar with the identification of avian species known to occur in southern California coastal communities (i.e., qualified biologist). If active nests are found, an avoidance buffer shall be determined by a qualified biologist in coordination with the city. The avoidance buffer width will depend upon the species, the proposed work activity, and existing disturbances associated with land uses outside of the site, which shall be demarcated by the biologist with bright orange construction fencing, flagging, construction lathe, or other means to demarcate the boundary. All construction personnel shall be notified as to the existence of the buffer zone and to avoid entering the buffer zone during the nesting season. No ground disturbing activities shall occur within the buffer until the biologist has confirmed that breeding/nesting is completed, and the young have fledged the nest. Encroachment into the buffer shall occur only at the discretion of the qualified biologist on the basis that the encroachment will not be detrimental to an active nest. A report summarizing the pre-construction survey(s) shall be prepared by a qualified biologist and shall be submitted to the city prior to the commencement of construction activities.

Significance After Mitigation
Implementation of mitigation measures BIO-1 and BIO-2 would reduce potential impacts to special- status and/or locally important species to a less than significant level, and assure compliance with the MBTA and CFGC Section 3503, by requiring a biological study to document the presence or absence of special-status species on a project specific basis and determining measures to address impacts such as avoidance, minimization, restoration, or compensation to special-status should they be present, and by ensuring that active nests are identified and as necessary avoided.

Threshold 2: Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? Impact BIO-2 D EVELOPMENT RESULTING FROM THE PROJECT COULD POTENTIALLY ADVERSELY IMPACT AREAS THAT SUPPORT SENSITIVE NATURAL COMMUNITIES AND RIPARIAN HABITATS. THIS IMPACT WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED.

Riparian habitats and other sensitive natural communities tracked by the CNDDB and identified in the HMP for the city of Carlsbad include Coastal Brackish Marsh, Maritime Succulent Scrub, San Diego Mesa Claypan Vernal Pool, San Diego Mesa Hardpan Vernal Pool, Southern Coastal Salt Marsh, Southern Cottonwood Willow Riparian Forest, Diegan Coastal Sage Scrub, Southern Maritime Chaparral, Southern Riparian Forest, Southern Riparian Scrub, Southern Sycamore Alder Riparian Woodland, Oak Woodland, and Southern Willow Scrub. Most of these communities are not present at the rezone sites.

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

4.3-24
Housing development proposed at Sites 6, 8, 9, and 18 could occur within riparian vegetation and/or native coastal scrub and result in potential direct and impacts through removal of vegetation, compaction of soils, and/or indirectly through dust and vegetation thinning. Future development at Sites 1, 2, 4, 17, and 19, if proposed could result in similar effects to riparian, coastal scrub, and/or vernal pool habitats. Through land use and zoning restrictions, housing development would be consistent with the objectives, policies, and programs contained within the city’s General Plan Conservation Element to protect sensitive species, which would have direct and indirect beneficial effects for special status species, such as through preserving, protecting, restoring, and enhancing natural plant and wildlife diversity, habitats, corridors, and linkages to enable the healthy propagation and survival of native species.

The proposed project would not change the objectives, policies, and programs contained within the city’s Conservation Element. However, implementation of the proposed project could impact various habitat types, including riparian habitat, other sensitive plant communities, or stands of protected trees. Therefore, impacts related to riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in the City’s HMP, other local or regional policies or regulations, or by the CDFW or USFWS are potentially significant.

Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures are required:

BIO-3 Habitat Buffers
For projects where native habitat may be present (specifically Sites 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 17, 18, and 19) and if development cannot avoid native habitat , prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a qualified biologist shall be retained by the project applicant to conduct a vegetation community survey of the site. The qualified biologist shall map the extent of vegetation communities on the project site plus 100 feet and report on the findings. This survey and report can be combined with BIO-1, Biological Resources Technical Report. The report shall confirm potential impacts to riparian and wetland habitat have been sufficiently avoided or minimized to reduce impacts to less than significant. Housing development at any of the sites containing riparian or wetland habitat shall adhere to the HMP Guidelines for Riparian and Wetland Buffers. Housing developments at any of the sites within the coastal zone shall adhere to the upland and wetland buffer requirements pursuant to the HMP coastal zone standards (HMP Section D-7). The Biological Resources technical report shall include a figure showing all required upland, riparian and wetland buffers.

BIO-4 Habitat Impact Mitigation
For projects that will require mitigation through restoration of sensitive upland natural communities (e.g. coastal sage scrub) or wetland habitat, including streams, riparian, and other water bodies, specifically Sites 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 9, 17, 18, and 19, mitigation through restoration, creation, or enhancement of in-kind habitats shall be implemented in accordance with ratios identified in the HMP (Table 11 and coastal zone standards Section D-7) and an approved mitigation plan. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall prepare and submit a Conceptual Restoration/Mitigation Plan (CRMP) consistent with the HMP Components of a Conceptual Restoration/Mitigation Plan and Guidelines for Habitat Creation and Restoration. The CRMP will provide the framework for compensating for impacts to sensitive riparian and coastal sage scrub habitat at a ratio consistent with HMP Table 11 and coastal zone standards.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Biological Resources

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.3-25
Significance After Mitigation
Implementation of Measures BIO-1 (listed under Impact BIO-1), BIO-3, and BIO-4 would reduce potential impacts to riparian and sensitive habitats to a less than significant level by ensuring that potential impacts are avoided, minimized, restored, or compensated for prior to obtaining a grading permit.

Threshold 3: Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
Impact BIO-3 D EVELOPMENT RESULTING FROM THE PROJECT COULD POTENTIALLY ADVERSELY IMPACT FEDERALLY PROTECTED WETLANDS. THIS IMPACT WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED.

Buena Vista Creek, Agua Hedionda Creek, and the other tributaries and drainages throughout Carlsbad, are likely subject to USACE, CDFW, and RWQCB jurisdiction. Most of the future development on the 18 rezone sites identified for the project would have no impact to state or federally protected wetlands. Development at Site 9 has the potential to directly or indirectly affect wetland and/or jurisdictional habitat through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means, which would be a significant impact. In addition, future development at Sites 1, 2, 4, and 17 could potentially impact jurisdictional waters and wetlands. Project activities within jurisdictional waters and wetlands would likely be subject to the permit requirements of the USACE, RWQCB, and CDFW, pursuant to Sections 404 and 401 of CWA, the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act, and CFGC 1600.

Development under the proposed project generally would not result in the direct modification of wetlands or jurisdictional waters given the prioritization of new housing development on infill sites in urbanized areas. Future development on the rezone sites would also be required to comply with the city’s landscape guidelines manual. Such compliance of future development would ensure that construction does not violate any water quality standards or discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade water quality of wetlands or other jurisdictional waters. If necessary, the city’s Construction Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan Ordinance would require future development to comply with the city’s Standard Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPP) requirements.

Mitigation Measures
Implementation of mitigation measures BIO-1, BIO-3, and BIO-4 (listed under Impact BIO-1 and Impact BIO-2) would ensure potential direct and indirect impacts to potentially jurisdictional waters are avoided, minimized, and/or mitigated. In addition, the following mitigation measure would apply:

BIO-5 Agency Coordination
For projects on sites within potential jurisdictional features, including Sites 1, 2, 4, 9, and 17, permits, agreements, and/or water quality certifications from applicable state and federal agencies regarding compliance with state and federal laws governing work within jurisdictional features are required for submission to the city of Carlsbad with the grading permit application for the project.

The project applicant shall satisfy all mitigation requirements of the above agencies. The applicant shall provide such permits and/or agreements prior to issuance of a grading permit.

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

4.3-26
Significance After Mitigation
Implementation of Measures BIO-1, BIO-3, BIO-4 (listed under Impact BIO-1 and Impact BIO-2), and BIO-5 would reduce potential impacts to wetlands and protected waters to a less than significant level by ensuring that potential impacts are avoided, minimized, restored, or compensated for prior to obtaining a grading permit.

Threshold 4: Would the project interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? Impact BIO-4 D EVELOPMENT UNDER THE PROPOSED PROJECT WOULD BE PRIMARILY CONCENTRATED

ON SITES IN URBAN AREAS OF CARLSBAD THAT HAVE BEEN PREVIOUSLY DEVELOPED AND DISTURBED, RATHER THAN ADJACENT TO NATIVE HABITATS AND POTENTIAL WILDLIFE CORRIDORS. DEVELOPMENT UNDER THE

PROJECT COULD RESULT IN SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS TO POTENTIAL LOCAL WILDLIFE MOVEMENT ALONG WATERCOURSES SUCH AS BUENA VISTA CREEK AND AGUA HEDIONDA CREEK. THIS IMPACT WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED.

There are undeveloped areas within Carlsbad that are located adjacent to large tracks of native habitat. Several of the rezone sites contain or are adjacent to creek corridors or natural habitat.

These areas provide vegetative cover suitable for the movement of many terrestrial wildlife species, including medium to large-sized, mobile mammals with relatively large home ranges, such as coyote, deer, and mountain lion, and also provide foraging and breeding habitat for many species.

Wildlife species can move through these vegetated areas routinely with some species also using concrete-lined or earthen stormwater channels in the area for movement.

Development activities have the potential to directly (e.g., cutting of trees or other vegetation, or removal of man-made structures containing an active bird nest or denning wildlife) or indirectly (e.g., if activities sufficiently harassed birds to cause nest abandonment) affect nesting birds and non-game mammals. As such, reasonably foreseeable development has the potential to interfere substantially with the movement of native resident wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife if sited adjacent to or within suitable wildlife movement corridors.

Thus, the proposed project would result in potentially significant impacts to wildlife movement.

In addition, projects sited within or adjacent to these areas have the potential to generate adverse edge effects that could significantly reduce the use of surrounding habitats by wildlife for movement through the area. The primary potential effect of such projects being indirect impacts from night lighting and urban noises (e.g., vehicular travel). Native habitats located adjacent to urban development have the potential to be permanently degraded if subject to light trespass or glare from artificial night lighting, which could affect the normal behavior of wildlife and cause some species to avoid the area. Individual projects would be required to conform to city’s HMP, which requires lighting use restrictions consistent with existing city lighting guidelines. Compliance with the city’s lighting guidelines, particularly those policies requiring shielding and downward orientation of lights, would minimize potential impacts to sensitive native habitats and ensure light trespass and glare would not encroach substantially into native habitats surrounding reasonably foreseeable development. Nevertheless, direct and indirect edge effects have the potential to affect wildlife movement and nursery sites significantly.

Increased noise levels at reasonably foreseeable development sites could also potentially impact wildlife species in the surrounding areas. Construction related noise would be a temporary occurrence and would be limited to the construction areas. These temporary impacts will be of Environmental Impact Analysis
Biological Resources

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.3-27
short duration and infrequent; thus, impacts to wildlife associated with noise pollution would be less than significant.

Mitigation Measures
Implementation of mitigation measures BIO-1, BIO-3, and BIO-4 (listed under Impact BIO-1 and Impact BIO-2) is required.

Significance After Mitigation
Implementation of mitigation measures BIO-1, BIO-3, and BIO-4 would reduce potential impacts to wildlife movement and nursery sites, to less than significant by requiring a project-specific biological evaluation to determine measures to address impacts such as avoidance, minimization, restoration, or compensation.

Threshold 5: Would the project conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? Impact BIO-5 DEVELOPMENT UNDER THE PROPOSED PROJECT COULD POTENTIALLY ADVERSELY IMPACT AREAS THAT SUPPORT PROTECTED TREES OR TREE CANOPIES. THIS IMPACT WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED.

Development on rezone sites resulting from the implementation of the project may affect some city-protected trees and/or street trees on city rights-of-way. Trees and shrubs are protected in accordance with the city’s Protection of Trees Ordinance and Community Forest Management Plan (CFMP), the latter of which establishes a street tree replacement goal of a 2:1 ratio. In addition, the city’s Protection of Trees Ordinance (Municipal Code Title 11.12.090) requires permits for the pruning, cutting, trimming or removing any street tree in the right of way. Site 3 contains eucalyptus woodland, and Sites 1, 2, 7, and 16, contain ornamental trees. These trees may be located on both private and public (right of way) property. Therefore, impacts related to city-protected trees are potentially significant.

Consistency with the Carlsbad HMP is discussed under Impact BIO-6.

Mitigation Measures
For projects that may potentially impact city-protected trees as defined by the CFMP and/or Municipal Code the following measure shall apply:

BIO-6 Protected Tree and Tree Canopy Survey
Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a tree survey shall be conducted by a certified arborist prior to project construction to tag and assess all trees subject to the city’s Trees and Shrubs Ordinance (Municipal Code Title 11.12) and/or CFMP. A city arborist will inspect the property and recommend approving or denying the application in a written report submitted to the city manager.

The city shall post a letter of notification and a non-removable marking upon the subject tree a minimum of 30 days prior to its removal. The letter will be posted in a prominent location, visible from a public street and will include, the location of the tree, the reason for the trees removal, the date of the scheduled removal, the species of tree to be replanted, the size of the tree to be replanted, the date by which an appeal must be made to the parks and recreation commission, and a description of the appeal process.

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

4.3-28
The following measures shall be implemented in addition to those required under the city’s permits required for tree removal and maintenance ordinance Guidelines (Municipal Code Title 11.12.090) to avoid and/or compensate for potential indirect impacts to preserved sensitive natural communities and protected trees within Carlsbad before, during, and following construction activities.

PRE-CONSTRUCTION
 Fencing. Protective fencing at least three feet high with signs and flagging shall be erected around all preserved sensitive natural communities where adjacent to proposed vegetation clearing and grubbing, grading, or other construction activities. The protective fence shall be installed at a minimum of five feet beyond the tree canopy dripline. The intent of protection fencing is to prevent inadvertent limb/vegetation damage, root damage and/or compaction by construction equipment. The protective fencing shall be depicted on all construction plans and maps provided to contractors and labeled clearly to prohibit entry, and the placement of the fence in the field shall be approved by a qualified biologist prior to initiation of construction activities. The contractor shall maintain the fence to keep it upright, taut and aligned at all times. Fencing shall be removed only after all construction activities are completed.  Pre-Construction Meeting. A pre-construction meeting shall be held between all site contractors and a registered consulting arborist and/or a qualified biologist. All site contractors and their employees shall provide written acknowledgement of their receiving sensitive natural community protection training. This training shall include, but shall not be limited to, the following information: (1) the location and marking of protected sensitive natural communities; (2) the necessity of preventing damage to these sensitive natural communities; and (3) a discussion of work practices that shall accomplish such.

URING CONSTRUCTION
 Fence Monitoring. The protective fence shall be monitored regularly (at least weekly) during construction activities to ensure that the fencing remains intact and functional, and that no encroachment has occurred into the protected natural community; any repairs to the fence or encroachment correction shall be conducted immediately.  Equipment Operation and Storage. Contractors shall avoid using heavy equipment around the sensitive natural communities. Operating heavy machinery around the root zones of trees would increase soil compaction, which decreases soil aeration and, subsequently, reduces water penetration into the soil. All heavy equipment and vehicles shall, at minimum, stay out of the fenced protected zones, unless where specifically approved in writing and under the supervision of a registered consulting arborist and/or a qualified biologist.  Materials Storage and Disposal. Contractors shall not store or discard any construction materials within the fenced protected zones and shall remove all foreign debris within these areas. The contractors shall leave the duff, mulch, chips, and leaves around the retained trees for water retention and nutrient supply. Contractors shall avoid draining or leakage of equipment fluids near retained trees. Fluids such as gasoline, diesel, oils, hydraulics, brake and transmission fluids, paint, paint thinners, and glycol (anti-freeze) shall be disposed of properly.

The contractors shall ensure that equipment be parked at least 50 feet, and that equipment/vehicle refueling occur at least 100 feet, from fenced protected zones to avoid the possibility of leakage of equipment fluids into the soil.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Biological Resources

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.3-29
 Grade Changes. Contractors shall ensure that grade changes, including adding fill, shall not be permitted within the fenced protected zone without special written authorization and under supervision by a registered consulting arborist and/or a qualified biologist. Lowering the grade within the fenced protected zones could necessitate cutting main support and feeder roots, thus jeopardizing the health and structural integrity of the tree(s). Adding soil, even temporarily, on top of the existing grade could compact the soil further, and decrease both water and air availability to the tree roots. Contractors shall ensure that grade changes made outside of the fenced protected zone shall not create conditions that allow water to pond.  Trenching. Except where specifically approved in writing beforehand, all trenching shall be outside of the fenced protected zone. Roots primarily extend in a horizontal direction forming a support base to the tree similar to the base of a wineglass. Where trenching is necessary in areas that contain roots from retained trees, contractors shall use trenching techniques that include the use of either a root pruner (Dosko root pruner or equivalent) or an Air-Spade to limit root impacts. An International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) certified arborist or American Society of Consulting Arborists (ASCA) registered consulting arborist shall ensure that all pruning cuts shall be clean and sharp, to minimize ripping, tearing, and fracturing of the root system.

Root damage caused by backhoes, earthmovers, dozers, or graders is severe and may ultimately result in tree mortality. Use of both root pruning and Air-Spade equipment shall be accompanied only by hand tools to remove soil from trench locations. The trench shall be made no deeper than necessary.
 Erosion Control. Appropriate erosion control best management practices (BMPs) shall be implemented to protect preserved sensitive natural communities during and following project construction. Erosion control materials shall be certified as weed free.  Inspection. An ISA certified arborist or ASCA registered consulting arborist shall inspect the preserved trees adjacent to grading and construction activity on a monthly basis for the duration of the grading and construction activities. A report summarizing site conditions, observations, tree health, and recommendations for minimizing tree damage shall be submitted by the registered consulting arborist following each inspection.

OST-CONSTRUCTION
 Mulch. The contractors shall ensure that the natural duff layer under all trees adjacent to construction activities shall be maintained. This would stabilize soil temperatures in root zones, conserve soil moisture, and reduce erosion. The contractors shall ensure that the mulch be kept clear of the trunk base to avoid creating conditions favorable to the establishment and growth of decay causing fungal pathogens. Should it be necessary to add organic mulch beneath retained oak trees, packaged or commercial oak leaf mulch shall not be used as it may contain root fungus. Also, the use of redwood chips shall be avoided as certain inhibitive chemicals may be present in the wood. Other wood chips and crushed walnut shells can be used, but the best mulch that provides a source of nutrients for the tree is its own leaf litter. Any added organic mulch added by the contractors shall be applied to a maximum depth of 4 inches where possible.
 Watering Adjacent Plant Material. All installed landscaping plants near the preserved sensitive natural communities shall require moderate to low levels of water. The surrounding plants shall be watered infrequently with deep soaks and allowed to dry out in-between, rather than frequent light irrigation. The soil shall not be allowed to become saturated or stay continually wet, nor should drainage allow ponding of water. Irrigation spray shall not hit the trunk of any City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

4.3-30
tree. The contractors shall maintain a 30-inch dry-zone around all tree trunks. An above ground micro-spray irrigation system shall be used in lieu of typical underground pop-up sprays.  Monitoring. An ISA certified arborist or ASCA registered consulting arborist shall inspect the trees preserved on the site adjacent to construction activities for a period of two years following the completion of construction. Monitoring visits shall be completed quarterly, totaling eight visits. Following each monitoring visit, a report summarizing site conditions, observations, tree health, and recommendations for promoting tree health shall be submitted to the city.

Additionally, any tree mortality shall be noted and any tree dying during the two-year monitoring period shall be replaced at a minimum 3:1 ratio on-site in coordination with the city.

Significance After Mitigation
Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-6 would assure consistency with local policy protecting trees and shrubs by requiring a project-specific tree survey to determine measures to address impacts such as avoidance, minimization, restoration, or compensation.

Threshold 6: Would the project conflict with the provision of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plans?
Impact BIO-6 T HE PROPOSED PROJECT (SPECIFICALLY SITES 4, 6, 9 AND 17) MAY CONFLICT WITH AN

ADOPTED HABITAT CONSERVATION PLAN, NATURAL COMMUNITY CONSERVATION PLAN, OR OTHER APPROVED LOCAL, REGIONAL, OR STATE HABITAT CONSERVATION PLANS. THIS IMPACT WOULD BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED.

The city participates in regional conservation efforts through implementation of the Carlsbad HMP, which is Carlsbad’s subarea plan under the MHCP. The MHCP is a comprehensive, multiple jurisdiction planning program designed to develop an ecosystem preserve in northwestern San Diego County. The HMP serves as a federal Habitat Conservation Plan and California Natural Community Conservation Plan. This preserve system is intended to protect viable populations of key sensitive plant and animal species, their habitats and ecosystem function, while accommodating continued economic growth. While the majority of sites would be consistent with the HMP and have less than significant impacts, the following sites are adjacent to areas that currently are designated or proposed Hardline Preserved in the HMP and thus may be inconsistent with the HMP if developed:
 Site 4, Standards Area and Proposed Hardline
 Site 6, small slivers of Existing Hardline along the edges  Site 9, Existing Hardline and Proposed Hardline
 Site 17, a portion of the lot overlaps with Existing Hardline.

Development of these sites and potential preserve areas as residential could result in a loss of HMP Hardline preserve areas, which is inconsistent with General Plan and HMP policies. Therefore, significant impacts to the adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plans may occur with implementation of the proposed project. This impact would be potentially significant.

Further, proposed projects adjacent to natural habitats could cause indirect effects to sensitive habitat or species offsite. The following sites are adjacent to undeveloped areas that could contain Environmental Impact Analysis
Biological Resources

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.3-31
sensitive habitat: 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 17, 18, 19. Development of these sites as residential could result in indirect impacts to adjacent habitat, which is inconsistent with HMP policies. Therefore, significant impacts to the adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plans may occur with implementation of the project. This impact would be potentially significant.

Mitigation Measures
The following mitigation measures are required:

BIO-7 HMP Minor Amendments
Prior to project approval at Site 4, 6, 9 and 17, each project shall be analyzed for consistency with the HMP. Development may not occur within an Existing or Proposed Hardline. Any revisions to the HMP hardline boundary to allow for development on these sites shall require a HMP Minor Amendment, to be processed as an Equivalency Finding. Such boundary revisions must not involve any revisions the HMP operations or implementation, produce any adverse effects on the environment that are new or significantly different from those previously analyzed, result in additional take not previously analyzed, or reduce the acreage or quality of the habitat within the HMP. Any loss of HMP hardline shall be replaced with equal or greater acres of hardline, adjacent to existing hardline elsewhere in the city, and preserved and managed in accordance with the HMP.

Any development within the Standards Area portion of Site 4 shall require a HMP Minor Amendment, to be processed as a Consistency Finding, which requires consistency with the HMP Planning Standards for Local Facilities Management Zone 15.

BIO-8 HMP Adjacency Standards
Projects within sites 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8, 9, 17, 18, 19 shall evaluate potential indirect impacts, such as wildfire, erosion, invasive species, unauthorized access, or predators, to habitat and species adjacent to the proposed development. Projects shall be consistent with the HMP Adjacency Standards (Section F-3).

Significance After Mitigation
Implementation of mitigation measures BIO-1, BIO-2, BIO-3, BIO-4, BIO-7 and BIO-8 (listed under Impact BIO-1, Impact BIO-2 and Impact BIO-6) would reduce any conflicts with Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plans to a less than significant level.
d. Cumulative Impacts
The geographic area to analyze cumulatively considerable biological resource impacts includes the 18 rezone sites and immediately adjacent areas that could be indirectly affected. Therefore, the cumulative impact analyses for the various biological resources are limited to the identification of the types of impacts that may occur as described below.

The following are considered with respect to analyzing cumulative impacts on biological resources:
 The cumulative contribution of other approved and proposed projects to fragmentation of open space in the project vicinity;
 The loss of sensitive habitats and species;
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

4.3-32
 The contribution of the project to urban expansion into natural areas; and  Isolation of open space in the vicinity by proposed/future projects.

Special-Status Species and Sensitive Habitats
The proposed project would facilitate development on 18 rezone sites and primarily emphasize infill development in already urbanized areas that lack existing native biological habitats; however, some development would occur in vacant or partially undeveloped sites with potential to support special- status species and sensitive habitats. Individual projects may adversely affect sensitive species and habitats, including wetlands. Impacts would be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.

Based on the impact analysis provided above, the proposed project contribution to biological resources may be cumulatively considerable. As development occurs in the lesser or undeveloped portions of the city, habitat for biological resources will continue to be converted to urban development. It is understood that mobile species (e.g., most reptiles, mammals, and birds) may survive this development by moving to other areas, but less mobile species (i.e., species reliant on a certain type of habitat) would not. Conversion of natural habitat will reduce the availability of habitat for special-status species and the natural areas remaining will likely be isolated and not support biological resources beyond their carrying capacity. Buildout of the proposed project in combination with cumulative development in the city may result in the increase of urban buildout and contribute to the loss of habitat for special-status species, as well as common species.

Implementation of mitigation measures BIO-1 through BIO-5 would reduce impacts from the proposed project by requiring project applicants to avoid, minimize, or mitigate for impacts to sensitive species and habitats, including riparian habitats. Thus, with implementation of these measures, and adherence to HMP requirements, the proposed project would not contribute to cumulatively considerable impacts related to sensitive species and habitats, including riparian habitats. Therefore, cumulative impacts related to special-status species and habitats would be less than significant.

City Protected Trees
The City’s Heritage Tree Ordinance (Municipal Code Chapter 11.12.140) and Protection of Trees Ordinance (11.12.080) provides protection for tree species citywide, as previously discussed. All reasonably foreseeable development in the city, including development under the proposed project, would be subject to these ordinances and regulations. Implementation of Mitigation Measure BIO-6 would ensure that there would be no net loss of protected trees from the proposed project and cumulative impacts would be less than significant.

HMP Conflicts
As noted in Impact BIO-6, the city participates in regional conservation efforts through implementation of the Carlsbad HMP, which is Carlsbad’s subarea plan under the MHCP. The MHCP is a comprehensive, multiple jurisdiction planning program designed to develop an ecosystem preserve in northwestern San Diego County. With implementation of Mitigation Measures BIO-1, BIO-2, BIO-3, BIO-4, BIO-7 and BIO-8, the City will ensure on a case by case basis that potential conflicts with the HMP, an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan and Natural Community Conservation Plan, from project specific and cumulative impacts are reduced to a less than significant level.

Environmental Impact Analysis
Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.4-1

4.4 Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
This section analyzes impacts to cultural resources and tribal cultural resources within Carlsbad that would result from implementation of the proposed project, and feasible mitigation measures to reduce the severity of these potential impacts. Information in this section is based on the results of a California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) records search, archival and online research, a search of the Sacred Lands File (SLF) by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC), and tribal consultation conducted by the City of Carlsbad.

4.4.1 Cultural Setting
Indigenous History
The project area lies in what is generally described as California’s Southern Bight (Byrd and Raab 2007). This region extends from the Mexican border to Santa Monica and includes Orange and San Diego counties, western Riverside County, and the Southern Channel Islands. At European contact, the Southern Bight was occupied by the Tongva, Juaneño, Luiseño, Cupeño, and Kumeyaay (Ipai and Tipai). For the purposes of this study, the prehistoric cultural chronology for the Southern Bight is presented following Byrd and Raab (2007), who divide the chronology into the Early (9600- 5600 BCE), Middle (5600-1650 BCE), and Late (1650 BCE- 1769 CE) Holocene.

Early Holocene (ca. 9600-5600 BCE)
Evidence of Paleo-Indian occupation of southern California remains very limited. Approximately 75 sites on the southern and central California coast are known that date to 7500 years before present (BP Erlandson and Colten 1991). The earliest accepted dates for human occupation of the California coast are from the Northern Channel Islands, off the Santa Barbara coast. Daisy Cave, on San Miguel Island, dates to as early as 9600 BCE (Erlandson et al. 1996). At the Arlington Springs site on Santa Rosa Island human remains yielded a date of approximately 10,000 BCE (Johnson et al. 2002). San Diego and Orange counties and the Southern Channel Islands have not produced dates as early as these. However, radiocarbon evidence has dated early occupation of the coastal region between circa (ca.) 8000 and 7000 BCE (Byrd and Raab 2007).

Traditional models describe California’s first inhabitants as big-game hunters roaming North America during the end of the last Ice Age. As the Ice Age ended, warmer and drier climatic conditions are thought to have created wide-spread cultural responses. The pluvial lakes and streams in the desert interior began to wane and cultures dependent on these water sources migrated to areas with moister conditions, such as the southern California coast (Byrd and Raab 2007).

The San Dieguito Complex is a well-defined cultural response to these changing climatic conditions in the southern California coastal region and was originally named for the cultural sequence in western San Diego County (Rogers 1929, 1939). Leaf-shaped points and knives, crescents, and scrapers characterize the artifact assemblages throughout the region (Byrd and Raab 2007). San Dieguito sites generally show evidence of the hunting of various animals, including birds, and gathering of plant resources (Moratto 2004).

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

4.4-2
Middle Holocene (ca. 5600–1650 BCE)
The Middle Holocene is generally viewed as a time of cultural transition. During this time, the cultural adaptations of the Early Holocene gradually altered. Use of milling stone tools began to appear across most of central and southern California around 6000-5000 BCE, indicating a focus on the collection and processing of hard-shelled seeds. Environmental changes in the Southern Bight are thought to have been the key factor in these changing adaptations (Byrd and Raab 2007).

Occupation patterns indicated semi-sedentary populations focused on the bays and estuaries of San Diego and Orange counties, with shellfish and plant resources as the most important dietary components (Warren 1968). In the San Diego area, this adaptive strategy is known as the La Jolla complex.

Around 4,000 years ago, extensive estuarine silting began to cause a decline in shellfish and, thus, a depopulation of the coastal zone. Settlement shifted to river valleys, and resource exploitation focused on hunting small game and gathering plant resources (Warren 1968; Byrd and Raab 2007).

Late Holocene (ca. 1650 BCE – 1769 CE)
The Late Holocene witnessed numerous cultural adaptations. The bow and arrow were adopted sometime after 500 CE, and ceramics appeared in the area ca. 1000 CE. Populations were sustained by food surpluses, especially acorns (Kroeber 1925; Byrd and Raab 2007). Other exploited food resources include shellfish, fish, small terrestrial mammals, and small-seeded plants. Settlement patterns of the Late Holocene are characterized by large residential camps linked to smaller specialized camps for resource procurement (Byrd and Raab 2007).

Ethnographic Overview
Carlsbad and the surrounding area were primarily inhabited by the Luiseño, with the Kumeyaay/Diegueño just to the south.

Luiseño
The project area is located in the traditional Luiseño ethnographic territory that extends along the coast of modern-day Southern California in San Diego and Riverside Counties (Bradley 2009). The territory spans between Aliso Creek and Agua Hedionda Creek, inland to Santiago Peak in the north, and to the east side of Palomar Mountain in the south, including Lake Elsinore and the Valley of San José (Bean and Shipek 1978). The term Luiseño was applied to the Native Americans who were administered by the Spanish from Mission San Luis Rey. Prior to missionization, the Luiseño living in the area referred to themselves as the Payomkawichum (Mithun 2001: 539-540, Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians 2020). The Luiseño name was used to encompass both the Gheecham, Kheecham, and Aguas Calientes Indians (White 1998).

The Luiseño, Cahuilla, and Cupeño tribes are often referred to as the Southern California Shoshone due to their use of the Takic branch of the Uto-Aztecan language family (Bradley 2009). The Uto- Aztecan language family’s origins lie in the Great Basin (Mithun 2001: 539). Linguistic studies suggest that Takic-speaking immigrants from the Great Basin displaced Hokan speakers sometime after 500 BCE (Bean and Shipek 1978).

Prior to European contact, the Luiseño lived in permanent, politically autonomous villages with associated seasonal camps for subsistence exploitation. The population of the Luiseño prior to the arrival of Europeans is believed to be approximately 3,500 (O’Neil 2002). Villages ranged in size from 50 to 400 people. Each village controlled a larger resource territory and maintained ties to other Environmental Impact Analysis
Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.4-3
villages through trade and social networks. Trespassing in the resource area of another village was cause for war (White 1963; Bean and Shipek 1978). Village structures consisted of dome-shaped dwellings (kish), sweat lodges, and a ceremonial enclosure (vamkech). Leadership in the villages focused on the chief, or Nota, and a council of elders or puuplem. The chief controlled economic and warfare-related activities, but also held a religious role. Religious leadership included a council of shamans or ritual specialists, with each member of the council inheriting the role patrilineally (Kroeber 1925; Bean and Shipek 1978).

Traditional Luiseño subsistence was focused on the acorn and supplemented by the gathering of other plant resources and shellfish, as well as fishing and hunting. Plant foods typically included pine nuts, seeds from various grasses, manzanita, sunflower, sage, chia, lemonade berry, prickly pear, and lamb’s-quarter. Common animal resources included deer, antelope, rabbit, quail, ducks and other birds. Fish were exploited from nearby rivers and creeks. Marine fish and sea mammals were caught from the shore and dugout canoes. Shellfish collected from the shore included abalone, turbans, mussels, clams, scallops, and other species (Bean and Shipek 1978). Traditional Luiseño pottery includes (but is not limited to) an earthen vessel called narungrush, a wide mouth vessel called a wiwlish, a small mouth vessel called nadungdamal, and a vessel with two small mouths called a papakamal (Sparkman 1909). The narungrush was utilized for keeping water cool and storing seeds. Wiwlish vessels were used for cooking food. The nadungdamal and papakamal vessels were used for carrying water (Sparkman 1908).

The center of the Luiseño religion is Chinigchinich, the last of a series of heroic mythological figures.

The heroes were originally from the stars and their sagas formed Luiseño religious beliefs. Religious rituals took place in a brush enclosure that housed a representation of Chinigchinich. Ritual ceremonies included puberty initiation rites, burial and cremation ceremonies, hunting rituals, and peace rituals (Kroeber 1925, Bean and Shipek 1978). Puberty ceremonies for both girls and boys would include painting pictographs and petroglyphs, categorized by archaeologists as the San Luis Rey style or “Luiseño Rectilinear Abstract.” It is characterized by zigzags, chevrons, straight lines, and diamond chains (DuBois and Kroeber 1908: 96, Hedges 2002).

The Luiseño today have maintained several of their traditional customs and ceremonies (White 1953). Today there are seven bands of Luiseño people including the San Luis Rey, Pala, Pauma, La Jolla, Rincón, Pechanga, and Sobóba. Many Luiseño people continue to speak their native language, sing traditional songs, and utilize oral history through storytelling.

Kumeyaay/Diegueño
The project area is located just north of the traditional territory of the Kumeyaay or Diegueño, which includes the region along the Pacific coast from central San Diego County southward into Baja California and eastward into Imperial County (Gamble and Zepeda 2002). European settlers in the area referred to them as the Diegueño or Diegueno due to the nearby Mission San Diego de Alcala (Gifford 1931). They refer to themselves as “Kumeyaay,” which refers to both the Ipai and Tipai groups. Linguistic studies support the division of the Kumeyaay people into northern (Ipai) and southern (Tipai) dialect groups (Gifford 1931, Luomala 1978). Ipai territory includes the area north of La Jolla to Agua Hedionda Lagoon with tremendous environmental variation and resource zones.

The Tipai territory includes the Pacific coast from La Jolla south to below Ensenada and Todos Santos Bay in Baja California, Mexico. The Kamia, or Desert Kumeyaay, are Tipai located in parts of eastern San Diego County, portions of northeastern Baja California, and the majority of the western portion of Imperial County (Gifford 1931, Luomala 1978). Neighboring groups included the Luiseño City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

4.4-4
and Cupeño to the northwest, the Cahuilla to the northeast, the Quechan to the east, and the Paipai to the south (Kroeber 1925).

Kumeyaay bands typically controlled 10 to 30 linear miles in a drainage system. Each band’s territory contained a primary village and a number of secondary homesteads located along tributary creeks (Shipek 1982:297). Each band was composed of 5 to 15 kinship groups (sibs or shiimul), some of which were divided among more than one band (Kroeber 1925: 719). Approximately 50 to 75 named kinship groups were located throughout the entire Kumeyaay territory. Political organization varied between bands. Basic structure included a patrilineal band leader, or a Kwaaypaay, and at least one assistant who acted as a messenger (Luomala 1978: 597, Shipek 1982). The primary roles of the Kwaaypaay were to direct ceremonies, act as a disciplinary head, advise on marriages and family differences, make war decisions, and to organize hunting and foraging expeditions.

The Kwaaypaay counseled with shamans on many important decisions. Ceremonies among the Kumeyaay are similar to those of other Southern California Native groups (Kroeber 1925: 712–717).

The ceremonial leader was an inherited religious position. Rituals conducted by ceremonial leaders included puberty rites, marriage, naming ceremonies, cremation of the dead, and the annual mourning ceremony (keruk) for all those of the sib who had died the previous year. Kumeyaay groups shared religious mythologies and belief in a higher creator-god (Shipek 1985). Kuuchama, or Tecate Peak, was the most sacred landmark, designated by the Kumeyaay god as the location for acquiring power for good, healing, and peace. Other holy places recognized by all Kumeyaay include Wee’ishpa or Signal Mountain, Jacumba Peak, Mt. Woodson, Viejas Mountain, and other mountains near the Colorado River in the Desert Kumeyaay region (Shipek 1985, 1987: 14).

Entire bands moved to winter villages in sheltered valleys near known sources of water. Dwellings in the relatively permanent winter villages were semi-subterranean and roughly circular with a wooden pole framework covered in brush thatch and a mat covering. They faced east to keep out the wind and ensure privacy (Luomala 1978: 597). Other structures in the village consisted of family- owned platform granaries, a village-owned brush ceremonial enclosure, and sweat lodges. A semi- circular enclosure was used for the keruk mourning ceremony, and rock walls sometimes surrounded ceremonial and dance areas. At summer camps, ramadas and windbreaks were common and built into trees or rock shelters. Granaries and more permanent housing would sometimes be constructed in frequently visited oak groves in the hills and in the mountains of Kumeyaay territory.

Many Kumeyaay camped in coastal valleys at certain times of the year to gather coastal resources.

Fish were caught with hooks, nets, and bows from tule boats. Shellfish were gathered from the sandy beaches (e.g., Chione, scallops, and Donax) and rocky shores (e.g., mussels and abalone).

Common game birds included doves and quail; migratory birds included geese. A primary source of protein came from rabbits, woodrats, and other small game living along the mesas and foothills.

Small mammals were caught using throwing sticks, bow and arrow, or in nets on community drives.

Hunting large game such as deer and mountain sheep was the role of expert hunters trained in specialized hunting folklore (Luomala 1978: 601). Land resources generally belonged to the bands with only a few areas considered “tribal” land and open to anyone (Shipek 1982: 301). Water and stored foods were communally available to all band members on a reciprocal basis (Luomala 1978).

During the winter season, perennial herbs were collected in the valleys. Greens included miner’s lettuce (claytonia perfoliata), clover, pigweed (aramanthus), and other grasses. Seeds were harvested from buckwheat, chia and other salvias, and a variety of grasses. In the mountains and foothills, yucca was gathered for its stalks, flowers, and leaves. Elderberry, manzanita, cholla, Environmental Impact Analysis
Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.4-5
prickly-pear opuntia cactus, and juniper shrubs provided berries and fruit. The acorns from several species of oak were a subsistence staple gathered during the late summer and stored in family and village granaries. At least six species of oaks provided acorns for the Kumeyaay in San Diego County (Luomala 1978: 600).

Production of baskets, nets, and pottery were primarily female occupations. Their main use was tied to food procurement, production, and processing (Wallace 1978). High-quality baskets with a weave similar to other Southern California groups were unique on local and regional levels. The regional unity in basketry traditions is linked to the prominence of acorn processing (Jordan and Shennan 2003). Beyond baskets, carrying nets and sacks were also used for food collection. Regularly manufactured ceramic vessels were used as water jars, for cooking and storage, and as cremation urns (Kroeber 1925: 722).

Men and children wore utilitarian belt sashes and pouches designed to hold tools and small game.

Women wore a one- or two-piece apron made of shredded bark and a round, twined cap. Robes of rabbit fur, willow bark, or deerskin were worn in the winter and also served as bedding. For long distance travel, sandals woven from agave fibers protected their feet (Luomala 1978: 599). Special ceremonial costumes and adornment were worn during ceremonies. With the exception of boys and mourners, hair was worn long with bangs cut at the forehead.

Accounts by Spanish missionaries and Kumeyaay elders suggest that status differentiation was established during the Late Holocene but could possibly have been earlier (Shipek 1982). Socio- political structure was drastically disrupted by the introduction of Spanish, Mexican, and American policies and the subsequent depopulation from disease and drought (Shipek 1982).

Post-Contact Setting
Post-Contact history for the state of California is generally divided into three periods: the Spanish Period (1769–1822), Mexican Period (1822–1848), and American Period (1848–present). Although Spanish, Russian, and British explorers visited the area for brief periods between 1529 and 1769, the Spanish Period in California begins with the establishment in 1769 of a settlement at San Diego and the founding of Mission San Diego de Alcalá, the first of 21 missions constructed between 1769 and 1823. Independence from Spain in 1821 marks the beginning of the Mexican Period, and the signing of the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo in 1848, ending the Mexican American War, signals the beginning of the American Period when California became a territory of the United States.

Excerpted below, the City of Carlsbad General Plan provides the following summary of Carlsbad’s history since the Spanish Period:

Spanish and Mexican Period
In 1769, Spanish explorers first arrived from Mexico and camped near Agua Hedionda Lagoon.

When Mexico achieved independence from Spain in 1821, land ownership and land use patterns evolved, igniting the Rancho period in California history where large tracts of land were granted to settlers and government friends to encourage settlement and cattle raising. In 1833, the mission holdings were secularized and divided into large land grants. Much of greater Carlsbad was part of Rancho Agua Hedionda, a 13,000-acre ranch. The holdings extended from the Pacific Ocean east toward Vista and from the north side of Agua Hedionda Lagoon south to Leucadia in present-day Encinitas. In 1842, Rancho Agua Hedionda was granted to Juan María Marrón, who built a three-room adobe on the property.

City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

4.4-6
Early American Period
By the 1860s, the Rancho Agua Hedionda property had been acquired by Matthew Kelly, who established a homestead near the southeast corner and in 1868 constructed a home and associated outbuildings, naming the property “Los Kiotes.” After the Civil War, the development of railroads had an enormous effect on the development of California and the western United States. The California Southern railroad, with its link to a transnational railroad proved crucial to the transformation of the San Diego region from a farming community to a small city of emerging industry, mercantile and agricultural expansion. The selected route of the railroad determined the future of many coastal town sites, including Carlsbad. The railroad stood as the town’s center in Carlsbad Village, and the town grew several blocks in all directions.

In 1886, the Carlsbad Land and Mineral Company was formed, which laid out a town site and initiated speculative development. The newly formed town was christened Carlsbad because the mineral water found there contained the same mineral properties as the famous Spa No. 7 in Karlsbad, Bohemia. Despite its popularity among visitors seeking the reported curative powers of Carlsbad’s waters, the city experienced a long period of declining growth between 1890 and 1914 due to drought and national economic problems. During that time, buildings were abandoned and land uses changed; mining, industrial and agricultural endeavors were attempted but most failed.

Twentieth Century
Population and economic growth resumed again in the late 1910s, spurred by agriculture.

Development and infrastructure expanded to accommodate a growing population, although even in the 1920 Census, Carlsbad residential units were still primarily farms. Also at this time, millions of Mexicans fled north from Mexico to seek refuge during the Mexican Revolution, some of whom settled in Carlsbad. These immigrants provided additional farm and railroad labor to the area. They built small simple houses with no electricity or indoor plumbing and later sold the homes to other incoming immigrants. This development provided the foundation for the first neighborhood in Carlsbad, which today is called the Barrio. By 1930, areas near the historic core were divided and subdivided to make room for the newly developing suburban enclaves.

Like the rest of the country, Carlsbad felt the effects of the Great Depression in the 1930s, during which numerous businesses failed and many middle- and lower-class residents left the area. After WWII, however, suburban development began to spread throughout Southern California and, following a series of annexations beginning in the 1960s, including La Costa in 1972, Carlsbad has grown gradually in area and population (City of Carlsbad 2015).

4.4.2 Regulatory Setting

National Register of Historic Places
Although the project does not have a federal nexus, properties which are listed in or have been formally determined eligible for listing in the NRHP are automatically listed in the CRHR. The following is therefore presented to provide applicable regulatory context. The NRHP was authorized by Section 101 of the National Historic Preservation Act and is the nation’s official list of cultural resources worthy of preservation. The NRHP recognizes the quality of significance in American, a. Federal
Environmental Impact Analysis
Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources

Supplemental Environmental Impact Report 4.4-7
state, and local history, architecture, archaeology, engineering, and culture is present in districts, sites, buildings, structures, and objects. Per 36 CFR Part 60.4, a property is eligible for listing in the NRHP if it meets one or more of the following criteria:

Criterion A: Is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history.

Criterion B: Is associated with the lives of persons significant in our past.

Criterion C: Embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of installation, or that represent the work of a master, or that possess high artistic values, or that represent a significant and distinguishable entity whose components may lack individual distinction.

Criterion D: Has yielded, or may be likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

In addition to meeting at least one of the above designation criteria, resources must also retain integrity. The National Park Service recognizes seven aspects or qualities that, considered together, define historic integrity. To retain integrity, a property must possess several, if not all, of these seven qualities, defined as follows:

Location: The place where the historic property was constructed or the place where the historic event occurred
Design: The combination of elements that create the form, plan, space, structure, and style of a property
Setting: The physical environment of a historic property Materials: The physical elements that were combined or deposited during a particular period of time and in a particular pattern or configuration to form a historic property Workmanship: The physical evidence of the crafts of a particular culture or people during any given period in history or prehistory
Feeling: A property’s expression of the aesthetic or historic sense of a particular period of time
Association: The direct link between an important historic event or person and a historic property
Certain properties are generally considered ineligible for listing in the NRHP, including cemeteries, birthplaces, graves of historical figures, properties owned by religious institutions, relocated structures, or commemorative properties. Additionally, a property must be at least 50 years of age to be eligible for listing in the NRHP. The National Park Service states that 50 years is the general estimate of the time needed to develop the necessary historical perspective to evaluate significance (National Park Service 1997:41). Properties which are less than 50 years must be determined to have “exceptional importance” to be considered eligible for NRHP listing.

California Environmental Quality Act
California Public Resources Code (PRC) Section 21804.1 requires lead agencies to determine if a project could have a significant impact on historical or unique archaeological resources. As defined in PRC Section 21084.1, a historical resource is a resource listed in, or determined eligible for listing in, the CRHR, a resource included in a local register of historical resources or identified in a historical b. State
City of Carlsbad
Housing Element Implementation and Public Safety Element Update

4.4-8
resources survey pursuant to PRC Section 5024.1(g), or any object, building, structure, site, area, place, record, or manuscript that a lead agency determines to be historically significant. PRC Section 21084.1 also states resources meeting the above criteria are presumed to be historically or culturally significant unless the preponderance of evidence demonstrates otherwise. Resources listed in the NRHP are automatically listed in the CRHR and are, therefore, historical resources under CEQA. Historical resources may include eligible built environment resources and archaeological resources of the precontact or historic periods.

CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5(c) provides further guidance on the consideration of archaeological resources. If an archaeological resource does not qualify as a historical resource, it may meet the definition of a “unique archaeological resource” as identified in PRC Section 21083.2.

PRC Section 21083.2(g) defines a unique archaeological resource as an artifact, object, or site about which it can be clearly demonstrated that, without merely adding to the current body of knowledge, there is a high probability that it meets any of the following criteria: 1) it contains information needed to answer important scientific research questions and that there is a demonstrable public interest in that information, 2) has a special and particular quality such as being the oldest of its type or the best available example of its type, or 3) is directly associated with a scientifically recognized important prehistoric or historic event or person.

If an archaeological resource does not qualify as a historical or unique archaeological resource, the impacts of a project on those resources will be less than significant and need not be considered further (CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5[c][4]). CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5 also provides guidance for addressing the potential presence of human remains, including those discovered during the implementation of a project.

Carlsbad City CouncilJanuary 30, 2024

Carlsbad City Council
January 30, 2024