SP20-0002_Hall Land Company- CC- EIR reso Exhibit A Findings & SOC

1 California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Findings Regarding Significant Effects for the Hallmark-Barham Specific Plan Project and Statement of Overriding Considerations

GPA20-0002, SPA20-0002, R20-0001, MFSD20-0001,
TSM20-0001, CUP20-0007, GV20-0002

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The City of San Marcos has prepared an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed Hallmark- Barham Specific Plan Project (Project) in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA; Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq. ) and the State CEQA Guidelines ( 14 California Code of Regulations Section 15000 et seq. as amended).

FINAL EIR EVALUATION

The Final EIR evaluated potentially significant effects for the following environmental areas of potential concern: 1) Aesthetics; 2) Air Quality; 3) Biological Resources; 4) Cultural Resources; 5) Energy; 6) Geology and Soils; 7) Greenhouse Gas; 8) Hazards and Hazardous Materials; 9) Hydrology and Water Quality; 10) Land Use and Planning; 11) Noise; 12) Population and Housing; 13) Public Services; 14) Recreation; 15) Transportation; 16) Tribal Cultural Resources; and 1 7) Utilities and Service Systems.

The issue areas of Agriculture/Forestry Resources , Mineral Resources , and Wildfire were analyzed during t he Initial Study process for the EIR and were determined to have no impact or less than significant impacts.

The Final EIR identified potentially significant environmental effects related to Biological Resources (sensitive species - nesting birds and sensitive habitat ); Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources (unknown cultural resources during project grading); Geology and Soils (paleontological resources), Land Use and Planning (inconsistency with Mobility Element policies); Noise (onsite noise levels at select locations and rock crusher noise ); and Transportation (inconsistency with Mobility Element policies and impacts related to vehicle miles traveled).

Public Resources Code Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 require that the City of San Marcos, as lead agency for this Project , prepare written findings for any identified significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding. The possible findings under CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines are:

(1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate, avoid or substantially lessen the significant effects on the environment.

(2) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency.

(3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or alternatives identified in the Final EIR.

After consideration of an EIR, the lead agency may decide whether or how to approve or carry out the project. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(a)(1) and CEQA Guidelines Section 2 15091(a)(1) of the Guidelines, the City finds that for each of the significant effects identified in the Final EIR, changes or alterations (mitigation measures) have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project which will avoid or substantially lessen each of the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR. The significant effects (impacts) and mitigation measures are stated fully in the Final EIR. The rationale for this finding for each impact is discussed below.

The official custodian of the documents and other materials that constitute the record of proceedings is:

City of San Marcos Planning Division
1 Civic Center Drive
San Marcos, CA 92069

Copies of all these documents, which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the City’s decision is based, are, and at all relevant times have been, available upon request at the offices of the City, the custodian for such documents.

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The Hallmark-Barham Specific Plan P roject ( Proposed Project) consists of a 151-unit multi-family residential development with associated common and private open space located on a 10.56 -acre site located at 943 E. Barham Drive, west of La Moree Road in t he City of San Marcos .

Residential buildings compose approximately 2.8 -acres of the Project site. Multi- family residential dwelling units are comprised of one, two, and three -story condominiums with ten dwelling unit types interspersed throughout the Project site. Overall building heights will not exceed 40 feet.

There are two main categories of open space proposed for the Project – common open space and private space. Common open space will total approximately 5.35 acres and includes open space with grades 10 percent and greater, common open space with grades less than ten percent, the water quality basin/ bioretention area and recreational areas. Private open space is associated with private patio and deck areas on the residential units.

The Project is processing the following entitlements:
• General Plan Amendment (GP20 -0002) – A General Plan Amendment would be required to change the existing Mixed Use 3 (MU3) designation to Specific Plan Area (SPA). • Specific Plan (SP20 -0002) - The Specific Plan establishes the dev elopment rules and regulations of all land uses within the Project site. Upon adoption of the Specific Plan by the City, all development within the Project site must conform to the regulations of the Specific Plan. The Specific Plan would be required to be reviewed and approved concurrently with the Multi-Family Site Development Plan application.

• Rezone (R20-0001) - A rezone would be required to change the existing Mixed-Use-3 (MU-3) zoning to Specific Plan Area (SPA).

• Multi-Family Site Development Plan (MFSDP20 -0001) - The Site Development Plan approval would be required to construct 151 multi -family residential units and address the details of the architectural style, building elevation, fencing, landscaping, among other criteria, within the development.
3 • Tentative Subdivision Map (TSM20 -0001) – A Tentative Subdivision Map would be required for formation of residential condominium units, private driveways, and open space areas.

• Conditional Use Permit (CUP20 -0007) - A Conditional Use Permit would be required for potential use of a temporary rock crusher.

• Grading Variance (GV20-0002) - A Grading Variance would be required to allow manufactured slopes and/or retaining walls in excess of 20 feet in height without benching within the Project area.

PROJECT OBJECTIVES

The City identified project objectives to develop a reasonable range of alternatives to analyze within the Final EIR. The objectives for the Proposed Project are:

1) Provide a multi-family housing opportunity through a range of unit types, sizes, and number of different bedroom counts, including one, two, three, and four-bedroom units, as well as a range of affordability to accommodate a full spectrum of family demographics to contribute to the growing housing needs of the region;
2) To the extent possible given the site constraints, maximize the opportunity to provide medium-density housing for the City of San Marcos in the 12.1-15.0 dwelling unit density range which is comparable to other medium-density housing developments near the Specific Plan Area.
3) Create a development which accommodates appropriate recreational open space for the anticipated residents expected to reside within the Specific Plan Area; 4) Provide development standards to regulate the nature and appearance of all construction within the Hallmark-Barham Specific Plan Area through integration of landform use, architectural design, unified landscape theme, and recreation areas; 5) Design a safe and efficient circulation system that adequately supports the appropriate level of traffic within the Specific Plan Area as well as connections to public roadways and improvements to public streets and rights-of-way inclusive of vehicular, bicycle, pedestrian modes of travel;
6) Develop a financing plan that provides for the efficient and timely provision of infrastructure and public services prior to and as development occurs; 7) Implement a maintenance program which will ensure all common areas are maintained to standards set forth in the City’s General Plan; and
8) Finance and/or contribute to all appropriate community and citywide infrastructure as warranted.

These objectives have been considered in preparing the findings discussed below.

4 Section I Findings Regarding Certification of Final EIR

Pursuant to CEQA and the Guidelines, the City Council of the City of San Marcos as the lead agency under CEQA is responsible for certification of the EIR and therefore makes the following findings:

1. The City Council has reviewed and considered the information in the Final EIR, which has been completed in compliance with CEQA;

2. The Final EIR reflects the City’s, as lead agency, independent judgment and analysis; and,

3. The City Council adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ( Attachment A) to reduce or avoid the significant and mitigable impacts of the Project.

Section II Environmental Effects Found Not to be Significant

Through project scoping and the environmental analysis conducted for and included within the Final EIR, it was determined that the Project would not result in a potential significant effect on the environment with respect to A esthetics, Agriculture and For estry Resources, Air Quality, Energy, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality, Mineral Resources, Population and Housing, Public Services, Recreation, Transportation (hazardous design features and inadequate emergency access), Utilities and Service Systems, and Wildfire. A summary of the reasons for this determination can be found in Sections 3.1, 3.2, 3.5, 3.7, 3.8, 3.9, 3.12, 3.13,

3.14, 3.15,3.17 and 5.0 of the Final EIR. No further findings are required for these subject areas.

Section III Environmental Effects Mitigated to Below a Level of Significance

The following findings supported by substantial evidence in the record, including the Final EIR, and technical appendices, have been made for the significant environmental effects identified in the Final EIR related to Biological Resources, Cultural Resources and Tribal Cultural Resources, Geology and Soils, Land Use and Planning, and Noise.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES

The Project would result in potentially significant impacts related to species identified as a candidate, sensitive or special status species (nesting birds) and sensitive habitats (direct and indirect impacts) (Impacts BIO-1, BIO-2 and BIO-3).

Mitigation Measures: The Project includes mitigation measures in the MMRP that is to be adopted concurrently with these findings.

All biological resource impacts and mitigation measures are detailed in Attachment A at the end of this document. Mitigation measure MM-BIO-1 will mitigate Impact BIO -1 to below a level of significance .

Mitigation measure MM-BIO-2 will mitigate Impact BIO -2 to below a level of significance . Mitigation measure MM-BIO-3 will mitigate Impact BIO-3 to below a level of significance.

In order to mitigate potential impacts to nesting birds, implementation of the following mitigation measures will be required:

MM-BIO-1 To avoid direct impacts on raptors and/or native/migratory birds, removal of habitat that supports active nests in the proposed area of disturbance should occur outside of the breeding season for these species (February 1 to September 15). If removal of habitat in the proposed area of disturbance must occur during the breeding season, a 5 qualified biologist shall conduct a preconstruction survey to determine the presence or absence of nesting birds in the proposed area of disturbance. The pre-construction (precon) survey shall be conducted within ten (10) calendar days prior to the start of construction activities (including removal of vegetation). If nesting birds are observed, a letter report or mitigation plan in conformance with applicable State and Federal Law (i.e., appropriate follow up surveys, monitoring schedules, construction and noise barriers/buffers, etc.) shall be prepared and include proposed measures to be implemented to ensure that take of birds or eggs or disturbance of breeding activities is avoided. The report or mitigation plan shall be submitted to the CDFW and/or USFWS as applicable for review and approval and implemented to the satisfaction of those agencies. The project biologist shall verify and approve that all measures identified in the report or mitigation plan are in place prior to and/or during construction. If nesting birds are not detected during the preconstruction survey, no further mitigation is required.

In order to mitigate direct impacts to sensitive habitats, including Diegan coastal sage scrub, Diegan coastal sage scrub- Baccharis dominated, and non-native grasslands, implementation of the following mitigation measure will be required:

MM-BIO-2 Direct impact to 0.61 acre of Diegan coastal sage scrub and 0.03 acre of Diegan coastal sage scrub – Baccharis dominated shall be mitigated at a 2:1 ratio for a total of 1.28 acres. Direct Impact to 9.50 acres of non-native grassland shall be mitigated at a 0.5:1 ratio for a total of 4.75 acres. Th ese mitigation ratios are consistent with Tables 4-6 and 4-7 of the MHCP (SANDAG 2003) and Table 4 in Section 5.2.1 of the City’s Draft Subarea Plan (City of San Marcos 2001).

This mitigation shall be accomplished by the project applicant through off -site acquisition, in lieu fees, a purchase of credits from an approved mitigation bank, or a combination thereof as approved by the Planning Manager. Proof of off -site acquisition, payment of in lieu fees, purchase of credits from an approved mitigation bank o r a combination thereof shall be provided to the Planning Manager prior to issuance of a grading permit.

In order to mitigate potential indirect impacts to s ensitive habitats during project construction implementation of the following mitigation measure will be required:

MM-BIO-3 A biologist shall be contracted to perform regular random checks (at minimum once a month) to ensure implementation of the following monitoring requirements and BMPs.

Monitoring reports and a post -construction monitoring report will be prepared to document compliance with these requirements and shall be submitted to the Planning Manager.

• To prevent inadvertent disturbance to areas outside the limits of work, the construction limits shall be clearly demarcated ( e.g., installation of flagging or temporary visibility construction fence) prior to ground disturbance activities and all construction activities, including equipment staging and maintenance shall be conducted within the marked disturbance limits. The work limit delineation will be maintained throughout project construction.
6 • Spoils, trash, and any excavation-generated debris will be removed to an approved offsite disposal facility. Trash and food items will be contained in closed containers and removed daily to reduce the attraction of opportunistic predators to the site, such as common ravens, coyotes, and feral cats and dogs that may prey on listed species.
• Raw cement/concrete or washings thereof, asphalt, paint or other coating material, oil, or other pe troleum products, or any other substances that could be hazardous to vegetation or wildlife resources, resulting from project -related activities, will be prevented from contaminating the soil. • Construction activities will be limited to daylight hours to th e extent feasible. If nighttime work is necessary, lighting will be shielded away from surrounding natural areas. Fixtures will be shielded to downcast below the horizontal plane of the fixture height and mounted as low as possible.

In order to mitigate potential indirect impacts to sensitive habitats during operation, implementation of the following mitigation measure will be required:

MM-BIO-4 To avoid indirect impacts on adjacent sensitive habitats, final landscape plans will be reviewed and approved by a qualified biologist to ensure that no invasive plant materials are included in planting plans.

Finding

Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project as mitigation measures MM-BIO-1 through MM-BIO-4, which are feasible, and would mitigate, avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects as identified in t he Final EIR to species identified as a candidate, sensitive or special status species (nesting birds) and sensitive natural habitats.

Facts in Support of Finding:

Based on the presence of suitable avian nesting habitat, implementation of the Project could result in potentially significant impacts to nesting birds that are afforded protection under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) would occur (see MM -BIO-1). Mitigation Measure MM -BIO-1 requires a preconstruction survey if construction is proposed dur ing the nesting season. If nesting birds are found, avoidance measures would be implemented to minimize impacts. With the implementation of MM-BIO-1, direct impacts on nesting birds would be less than significant.

The Project would result in a direct impact to sensitive habitats, including Diegan coastal sage scrub, Diegan coastal sage scrub – Baccharis dominated and non-native grassland. Mitigation Measure MM- BIO-2 would reduce this impact to below a level of significance through off-site acquisition, in lieu fees, a purchase of credits from an approved mitigation bank, or a combination thereof as approved by the Planning Manager at a 1:1 ratio for the Diegan coastal sage scrub and Diegan coastal sage scrub – Baccharis dominated habitats and at a 0.5:1 rat io for non -native grassland. Proof of off -site acquisition, payment of in lieu fees, purchase of credits from an approved mitigation bank or a combination thereof shall be provided to the Planning Manager prior to issuance of a grading permit. 7 The Project could indirectly impact sensitive species during Project construction. Implementation of Mitigation Measures MM -BIO-3 would ensure impacts on adjacent habitats are avoided through construction monitoring.

The Project could indirectly impact sensitive species during Project operation through introduction of non-native invasive species in landscape plans. Implementation of Mitigation Measures MM -BIO-3 and BIO-4 would ensure impacts on adjacent habitats are avoided through review and approval of landscape plans to ensure the exclusion of non-native, invasive plant materials With the incorporation of the above mitigation measures, significant environmental effects to biological resources would be less than significant.

CULTURAL RESOURCES AND TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES

The Project would result in potentially significant impacts related to unidentified archaeological resources, historical resources, and human remains (Impacts CR-1a, CR-1b, CR-1c and CR-2).

Mitigation Measures: The Project includes mitigation measures in the MMRP that are to be adopted concurrently with these findings.

All cultural resources impacts and mitigation measures are detailed in Attachment A at the end of this document. Mitigation measures MM-CR-1a through MM-CR-1c will mitigate Impact CR -1-a (potential impact to unidentified cultural resources) and Impact CR-1b (potential impact to historical resources) to below a level of significance . MM-CR-2 will mitigate Impact CR -2 (potential impact to human remains) to below a level of significance.

In order to mitigate potential impacts to unidentified subsurface archaeological and historical resources, implementation of the following mitigation measures will be required:

MM-CR-1a Pre-Excavation Agreement. Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit, or ground disturbing activities, the Applicant/Owner shall enter into a Tribal Cultural Resources Treatment and Repatriation Agreement (Pre -Excavation Agreement) with a Traditionall y and Culturally Affiliated Native American Tribe (TCA Tribe), identified in consultation with the City. The purpose of the Pre -Excavation Agreement shall be to formalize protocols and procedures between the Applicant/Owner and the TCA Tribe for the protection, treatment, and repatriation of Native American human remains, funerary objects, cultural and/or religious landscapes, ceremonial items, traditional gathering areas, and other tribal cultural resources. Such resources may be located within and/or discovered during ground disturbing and/or construction activities for the proposed project, including any additional culturally appropriate archaeological studies, excavations, geotechnical investigations, grading, preparation for wet and dry infrastructure, and other ground disturbing activities. Any project -specific Monitoring Plans and/or excavation plans prepared by the project archaeologist shall include the TCA Tribe requirements for protocols and protection of tribal cultural resources that were agreed to during the tribal consultation.

The landowner shall relinquish ownership of all non -burial related tribal cultural resources collected during construction monitoring and from any previous archaeological studies or excavations on the project site to the TCA Tribe for proper treatment and disposition per the Pre-Excavation Agreement, unless ordered to do otherwise by responsible agency or court of competent jurisdiction. The 8 requirement and timing of such release of ownership, and the recipient thereof, shall be reflected in the Pre-Excavation Agreement. If the TCA Tribe does not accept the return of the cultural resources, then the cultural resources will be subject to curation. Additionally, all non-tribal artifacts collected by the archaeologist will also be subject to curation.

MM-CR-1b Construction Monitoring. Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit or ground disturbing activities, the Applicant/Owner or Grading Contractor shall provide written documentation (either as signed letters, contracts, or emails) to the City’s Planning Division stating that a Qualif ied Archaeologist and Traditionally and Culturally Affiliated Native American monitor (TCA Native American monitor) have been retained at the Applicant/Owner or Grading Contractor’s expense to implement the construction monitoring program, as described in the Pre - Excavation Agreement.

The Qualified Archaeologist and TCA Native American monitor shall be invited to attend all applicable pre-construction meetings with the General Contractor and/or associated subcontractors to present the construction monitoring program. The Qualified Archaeologist and TCA Native American monitor shall be present on site during grubbing, grading, trenching, and/or other ground disturbing activities that occur in areas of native soil or other permeable natural surfaces that have the potential to unearth any evidence of potential archaeological resources or tribal cultural resources. In areas of artificial paving, the Qualified Archaeologist and TCA Native American monitor shall be present on the site during grubbing, grading, trenching, and/or other ground disturbing activities that have the potential to disturb more than six inches below the original pre -project ground surface to identify any evidence of potential archaeological or tribal cultural resources. No monitoring of fill material, existing or imported, will be required if the General Contractor or developer can provide documentation to the satisfaction of the City that all fill materials being utilized at the site are either: 1) from existing commercial (previously permitted) sources of materials; or 2) are from private or other non - commercial sources that have been determined to be absent of tribal cultural resources by the Qualified Archaeologist and TCA Native American monitor.

The Qualified Archaeologist and TCA Native American monitor shall maintain ongoing collaborative coordination with one another during all ground disturbing activities. The requirement for the construction monitoring program shall be noted on all applicable construction documents, including demolit ion plans, grading plans, etc. The Applicant/Owner or Grading Contractor shall provide written notice to the Planning Division and the TCA Tribe, preferably through e -mail, of the start and end of all ground disturbing activities.

Prior to the release of a ny grading bonds, or prior to the issuance of any project Certificate of Occupancy, an archaeological monitoring report, which describes the results, analysis, and conclusions of the construction monitoring shall be submitted by the Qualified Archaeologist , along with any TCA Native American monitor’s notes and comments received by the Qualified Archaeologist, to the Planning Division Manager for approval. Once approved, a final copy of the archaeological monitoring report shall be retained in a confidential City project file and may be released, as a formal condition of Assembly Bill (AB) 52 consultation, 9 to the Rincon Band, the San Luis Rey Band or any parties involved in the project specific monitoring or consultation process. A final copy of the report, with all confidential site records and appendices, will also be submitted to the South Coastal Information Center after approval by the City.

MM-CR-1c Unanticipated Discovery Procedures. Both the Qualified Archaeologist and the TCA Native American monitor may temporarily halt or divert ground disturbing activities if potential archaeological resources or tribal cultural resources are discovered during construction activities. Ground disturbing activities shall be temporarily directed away from the area of discovery for a reasonable amount of time to allow a determination of the resource’s potential significance. Isolates and clearly non - significant archaeological resources (as determined by the Qualified Archaeologist, in consultation with t he TCA Native American monitor) will be minimally documented in the field. All unearthed archaeological resources or tribal cultural resources will be collected, temporarily stored in a secure location (or as otherwise agreed upon by the Qualified Archaeol ogist and the TCA Tribe ) and repatriated according to the terms of the Pre -Excavation Agreement, unless ordered to do otherwise by responsible agency or court of competent jurisdiction.

If a determination is made that the archaeological resources or tribal cultural resources are considered potentially significant by the Qualified Archaeologist, the TCA Tribe, and the TCA Native American monitor, then the City and the TCA Tribe shall determine, in consultation with the Applicant/Owner and the Qualified Archaeologist, the culturally appropriate treatment of those resources.

If the Qualified Archaeologist, the TCA Tribe, and the TCA Native American monitor cannot agree on the significance or mitigation for such resources, these issues will be presented to the Planning Division Manager for decision. The Planning Division Manager shall make a determination based upon the provisions of CEQA and California Public Resources Code Section 21083.2(b) with respect to archaeological resources and California Public Resour ces Section 21704 and 21084.3 with respect to tribal cultural resources, and shall take into account the religious beliefs, cultural beliefs, customs, and practices of the TCA Tribe.

All sacred sites, significant tribal cultural resources, and/or unique archaeological resources encountered within the project area shall be avoided and preserved as the preferred mitigation. If avoidance of the resource is determined to be infeasible by the City as the Lead Agency, then the City shall require additional cultur ally appropriate mitigation to address the negative impact to the resource, such as, but not limited to, the funding of an ethnographic study and/or a data recovery plan, as determined by the City in consultation with the Qualified Archaeologist and the TCA Tribe. The TCA Tribe shall be notified and consulted regarding the determination and implementation of culturally appropriate mitigation and the drafting and finalization of any ethnographic study and/or data recovery plan, and/or other culturally appropriate mitigation. Any archaeological isolates or other cultural materials that cannot be avoided or preserved in place as the preferred mitigation shall be temporarily stored in a secure location on site (or as otherwise agreed upon by the Qualified Archae ologist and TCA Tribe ) and repatriated according to the terms of the Pre -Excavation Agreement, unless ordered to do otherwise by responsible agency or court of competent jurisdiction. The removal of 10 any artifacts from the project site will be inventoried w ith oversight by the TCA Native American monitor.

If a data recovery plan is authorized as indicated above and the TCA Tribe does not object, then an adequate artifact sample to address research avenues previously identified for sites in the area will be collected using professional archaeological collection methods. If the Qualified Archaeologist collects such resources, the TCA Native American monitor must be present during any testing or cataloging of those resources. Moreover, if the Qualified Archaeologist does not collect the cultural resources that are unearthed during the ground disturbing activities, the TCA Native American monitor may, at their discretion, collect said resources for later reburial or storage at a local curation facility, as describ ed in the Pre -Excavation Agreement.

In the event that curation of archaeological resources or tribal cultural resources is required by a superseding regulatory agency, curation shall be conducted by an approved local facility within San Diego County and the curation shall be guided by California State Historical Resources Commission’s Guidelines for the Curation of Archaeological Collections. The City shall provide the Applicant/Owner final curation language and guidance on the project grading plans prior t o issuance of the grading permit, if applicable, during project construction. The Applicant/Owner shall be responsible for all repatriation and curation costs and provide to the City written documentation from the TCA Tribe or the curation facility, whichever is most applicable, that the repatriation and/or curation have been completed.

In order to mitigate potential impacts to human remains , implementation of the following mitigation measure will be required:

MM-CR-3 Human Remains. As specified by California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, if human remains, or remains that are potentially human, are found on the project site during ground disturbing activities or during archaeological work, the person responsible for the excavation, or his or her authorized representative, shall immediately notify the San Diego County Medical Examiner’s Office by telephone. No further excavation or disturbance of the discovery or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remain s (as determined by the Qualified Archaeologist and/or the TCA Native American monitor) shall occur until the Medical Examiner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code 5097.98.

If the Medical Examiner recognizes the remains to be Native American, and not under his or her jurisdiction, then he or she shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission by telephone within 24 hours. The Native American Heritage Commission will make a determination as to the Most Likely Descendent, who shall 11 be afforded 48 hours from the time access is granted to the discovery site to make recommendations regarding culturally appropriate treatment.

According to California Health and Safety Code, six or more human burials at one location constitute a cemetery (Section 8100), and disturbance of Native American cemeteries is a felony (Section 7052). In the event that the Applicant/Owner and the Most Likely Descendant are in d isagreement regarding the disposition of the remains, State law will apply, and the mediation process will occur with the NAHC.

In the event that mediation is not successful, the landowner shall rebury the remains at a location free from future disturbance (see Public Resources Code Section 5097.98(e) and 5097.94(k)).

Finding

Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project as mitigation measures MM CR-1a through MM CR-2, which are feasible, and will mitigate, avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR to archaeological resources, historical resources and human remains.

Facts in Support of Finding:

Specifically, implementation of these mitigation measures provides for the presence of archaeological and Native American monitors during ground disturbing activities that would be able to identify any previously unidentified cultural and/ or historical resources, to prevent inadvertent disturbance of any intact cultural deposits that may be present. Should any resources be identified, implementation of MM-CR-1a through MM -CR-1c would ensure proper handling and treatment of such resources by providing for a proper evaluation to determine whether additional archaeological work is necessary.

To further ensure impacts to Native American archaeological resources are protected, implementation of MM -CR-1a through MM -CR-1c provides additional protections for signif icant resources and describes the process for proper treatment and handling to ensure impacts are minimized.

Potential impacts to human remains would be mitigated through implementation of MM -CR-2, which specifies that remains shall not be further disturb ed until the San Diego County Coroner has determined origins of the remains and final treatment has been agreed to with input of Native American Tribes as necessary.

GEOLOGY AND SOILS

The Project would result in potentially significant impacts related t o unidentified paleontological resources (Impact GEO-1).

Mitigation Measures: The Project includes a mitigation measure in the MMRP that is to be adopted concurrently with these findings.

12 The geology and soils impact (paleontological resources) and mitigation measure is detailed in Attachment A at the end of this document. Mitigation measure MM -GEO-1 will mitigate Impact GEO-1 (potential impact to previously unknown paleontological resources) to below a level of significance.

In order to mitigate potential impacts to paleontological resources, implementation of the following mitigation measure will be required:

MM-GEO-1 Prior to project grading the project applicant shall retain a qualified paleontologist to review the proposed project area to determine the potential for paleontological resources to be encountered. If there is a potential for paleontological resources to occur, the paleontologist shall identify the area(s) where these resourc es are expected to be present, and a qualified paleontological monitor shall be retained to monitor the initial cut in any areas that have the potential to contain paleontological resources.

Finding

Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project as mitigation measure MM-GEO-1, which is feasible, and will mitigate, avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects as identified in the Final EIR to paleontological resources.

Facts in Support of Finding:

Due to the fact that Pleistocene old alluvial floodplain deposits have an unproven/undetermined sensitivity, there is a potential that the site could contain paleontological resources that could be disturbed during grading activities for the Project . Incorporation of MM- GEO-1 would require a paleontologist to identify areas where paleontological resources may be present and to monitor the initial cut in any areas that may have the potential to contain paleontological resources. Therefore, impacts to potentially unknown paleontological resources would be reduced to below a level of significance.

LAND USE AND PLANNING

Implementation of the Project would not conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purposes of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect, with the exception of the following Mobility Element policies:
• Policy M-1.1: Safely and efficiently accommodate traffic generated by development and redevelopment associated with implementation of the General Plan Land Use Policy Map (related to LOS)
• Policy M-1.4: Utilize multi-modal LOS techniques to evaluate transportation facilities.

Specifically, a significant LOS related impact would occur at the northbound left -turn movements out of the Project’s western and eastern driveways (E. Barham Drive/Project Driveway) during the PM peak hour of the Near Term 2025 and 2050 Wit h Project scenarios (Impact LU-2a, LU-2b, LU-3a and LU- 3b).

Mitigation Measures: The Project includes mitigation measures in the MMRP that are to be adopted concurrently with these findings.

All land use and planning impacts and mitigation measures are detailed in Attachment A at the end of this document. Implementation of mitigation measures MM LU-2 and MM-LU-3 will reduce Impacts LU- 13 2a, LU -2b, LU-3a, and LU -3b (northbound left -turn movements out of E. Barham Drive/ Project Driveway [East and West]- Near Term 2025) to below a level of significance.

In order to mitigate potential land use impacts, implementation of the following mitigation measures will be required:

Northbound left-turn movement out of the E. Barham Drive/ Project Driveway (West) Near Term 2025 (Impact LU-2a) and Horizon Year 2050 (Impact LU-2b) during PM Peak Hour.

MM-LU-2 The project shall restrict left-turns out of the western project driveway between the hours of 4 PM and 6 PM. Signage shall be placed at the western project driveway identifying the turning movement timing restriction. The signage requirement shall be noted on the final project plans and shall be put in place prior to project operation.

Northbound left-turn movement out of the E. Barham Drive/ Project Driveway (East) Near Term 2025 (Impact LU-3a) and Horizon Year 2050 (Impact LU-3b) during PM Peak Hour.

MM-LU-3 The project shall restrict left-turns out of the eastern project driveway between the hours of 4 PM and 6 PM. Signage shall be placed at the eastern project driveway identifying the turning movement timing restriction. The signage requirement shall be noted on the final project plans and shall be put in place prior to project operation.

Finding

Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project as mitigation measures MM-LU-2 and MM - LU-3, which are feasible, and will mitigate, avoid or substantially lessen the significant effects as identified in the Final EIR resulting from conflicts with Mobility Element policies.

Facts in Support of Finding:

The northbound left-turn movement out of the Project’s western driveway is calculated to operate at LOS E during the PM peak hour. A significant LOS related effect is identified at this approach due to the deficient LOS E during Near Term (Year 2025) and Horizon Year (2050) during PM Peak Hour (Impacts LU-2a and LU-2b). Similarly, the northbound left-turn movement out of the Project’s eastern driveway is calculated to operate at LOS E during the PM peak hour. A significant LOS related effect is identified at this approach due to the deficient LOS E during Near Term (Year 2025) and Horizon Year (2050) during PM Peak Hour (Impacts LU -3a and 3b). Mitigation Measures MM -LU-2 and MM -LU-3 requires the Project to restrict left-turns out of the Project site between the hours of 4 PM and 6 PM in order to improve operations at these intersections. Implementation of these mitigation measures will reduce the Project’s LOS related effects to the E. Barham Drive/ Project Driveway (East and West) to less than significant.

NOISE

The Project would result in potentially sig nificant impacts related to exposure of persons to , or generation of , noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance (Impacts N-1 through N-4).

Mitigation Measures: The Project includes mitigation measures in the MMRP that are to be adopted concurrently with these findings.

14 All noise impacts and mitigation measures are detailed in Attachment A at the end of this document.

Mitigation measure MM-N-1 will mitigate Impact N-1 (exterior noise levels related to rock drill) to below a level of significance . Mitigation measure MM -N-2 will mitigate I mpact N-2 (rock crushing noise) to below a level of significance. Mitigation Measures N-3, N-4 and N-5 will mitigate Impacts N-3 and N-4 (future onsite roadway noise) to below a level of significance.

To mitigate potential noise impacts related to rock-drilling, implementation of the following mitigation measure will be required:

MM N-1 If a rock drill is proposed within 160 feet of any occupied noise sensitive land use, a noise mitigation plan based upon the location of the construction equipment, topography and construction schedule shall be prepared by an acoustical engineer. If noise levels are determined to exceed City’s noise threshold of 60 dBA at any existing sensitive receptor, a mitigation plan shall be developed that may include a temporary noise barrier along any property line where the impacts could occur. A barrier ranging from 8 to 12 feet in height may be needed. The proposed noise barrier shall be of solid non-gapping material to adequately reduce construction noise levels below the noise threshold. The mitigation plan may also incorporate the usage of the equipment (amount of time used and/or the location in respect to the property line). The mitigation plan shall determine the final height and location of a temporary barrier if one is necessary. The final mitigation design shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Division Manager.

To mitigate potential noise impacts related to proposed rock crushing activities, implementation of the following mitigation measure will be required:

MM N-2 To minimize exterior noise levels related to rock crusher operation during construction and to comply with the City of San Marcos noise standards limiting noise levels to 60 dBA Leq at residences and 65 dBA Leq at the nearby church and preschool, barriers shall be constructed to break the line of sight from the rock crusher to a receptor.

Assuming the rock crusher is 10 feet in height, the barrier must be at least 11-12 feet in height to shield the crusher both visually and acoustically. The barrier may consist of an earthen berm, 5/8” plywood, 1 -inch acoustical blankets or any combination of these materials. The barriers shall be in place prior to the commencement of rock crushing activities. The locations of crusher and placement of the required barriers are presented in Figure 3.11-3. The design of the barriers, including materials and color for any sound walls shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Division Manager.

To ensure compliance with the City’s thresholds, noise measurements of the rock crusher should be conducted to determine the hourly noise level within the first week of operation once the final crusher type and location are determined. If noise levels are found to be above the established thresholds of 60 dBA Leq at any existing single family residential use, 65 dBA Leq for any multifamily use or 65 dBA Leq at a commercial use then additional mitigation in the form of higher barriers, sound absorbing materials or operational limits on the crusher usage shall be incorporated.

15 To mitigate potential noise impacts related to future onsite roadway noise, implementation of the following mitigation measures will be required:

MM-N-3 To minimize on-site exterior ground floor noise levels and to comply with the City of San Marcos noise standards, 6 -8-foot barriers shall be constructed along the units adjacent to E. Barham Drive. The barriers shall be in place prior to project occupancy and must be constructed of a non-gapping material consisting of masonry, ½ inch thick glass, earthen berm or any combination of these materials. The locations of barriers are presented in Figure 3.11 -4. The design of the barriers, including materials and color for any sound walls shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Division Manager.

MM-N-4 To minimize on-site exterior second and third floor balcony noise levels and to comply with the City of San Marcos noise standards, 5 -7-foot barriers shall be constructed along the units adjacent to E. Barham Drive and farther back (see Figure 3.11-5). The barriers shall be in place prior to project occupancy and must be constructed of a non- gapping material consisting of masonry, ½ inch thick glass, earthen berm or any combination of these materials. The locations of barriers, presented in Figure 3.11 -5, and design of the barriers, including materials and color for any sound walls shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Division Manager.

MM-N-5 To ensure compliance with the CCR Title 24 interior noise threshold of 45 dBA CNEL, a final noise assessment shall be performed prior to the issuance of building permits.

This final report shall identify the interior noise requirements based on architectural and building plans to meet the City’s established interior noise limit. The identified interior noise requirements, which may include conventional building construction methods and providing a closed window condition requiring a means of mechanical ventilation (e.g., air condition) for each building and upgraded windows for all sensitive rooms (e.g., bedrooms and living spaces), shall also be in place prior to occupancy of the residences adjacent to E. Barham Drive.

Finding

Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project as mitigation measures MM-N-1 through MM -N-5, which are feasible, and will mitigate, avoid or substantially lessen the significant effects as identified in the Final EIR resulting from exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the General Plan or Noise Ordinance.

Facts in Support of Finding:

Implementation of the Project would increase ambient noise levels in the Project vicinity both temporarily and permanently. General Project construction and grading would not exceed stated noise thresholds (75dBA). However, potential noise impacts could occur depending on the staging location of a rock driller and during rock crushing. Implementation of mitigation measure MM -N-1 and N -2 would reduce noise levels to below a level of significance by breaking line of sight from the noise source to ensure rock drilling and crushing operations comply with City standards.

Operational noise impacts at the Project site would exceed the City’s General Plan Noise Element 65 dBA exterior noise threshold at the proposed units located along E. Barham Drive at the ground floor levels and second and third floor balconies. Incorporation of miti gation measure MM-N-3 and MM-N- 4 would ensure exterior noise levels at the Project site are compliant with the City’s thresholds by 16 constructing noise barriers to reduce on -site noise. Additionally, since noise levels are modeled to exceed the City’s Gener al Plan Noise Element 65 dBA exterior noise threshold, an interior noise assessment is required per CCR Title 24 to ensure the interior noise threshold of 45 dBA CNEL is met.

Incorporation of mitigation measure MM-N-5 would ensure interior noise levels would meet the City’s threshold. With incorporation of these mitigation measures, noise impacts related to Project implementation will be reduced to below a level of significance.

TRANSPORTATION

Implementation of the Project would result in an inconsistency with Mobility Element Policies M -1-1 and M -1-4, which identify preferred level of service for roadways and intersections. Specifically, a significant LOS related impact would occur at the northbound left-turn movements out of the Project’s western and eastern driveways (E. Barham Drive/Project Driveway) during the PM peak hour of the Near Term 2025 and 2050 With Project scenarios (Impact T R-1, Conflict with Policies Addressing Roadways).

Mitigation Measures: The Project includes mitigation measures in the MMRP that are to be adopted concurrently with these findings.

All transportation impacts and mitigation measures are detailed in Attachm ent A at the end of this document. Implementation of mitigation measures MM-LU-2 and MM-LU-3 will reduce Impacts related to northbound left-turn movements out of E. Barham Drive/ Project Driveway [East and West] in Near Term 2025 and 2050 (Impact TR-1) to below a level of significance.

In order to mitigate potential transportation impacts, implementation of the following mitigation measures will be required:

Northbound left-turn movement out of the E. Barham Drive/ Project Driveway (West) Near Term 2025 (Impact LU-2a) and Horizon Year 2050 (Impact LU-2b) during PM Peak Hour.

Northbound left-turn movement out of the E. Barham Drive/ Project Driveway (East) Near Term 2025 (Impact LU-3a) and Horizon Year 2050 (Impact LU-3b) during PM Peak Hour.

Finding

17 Facts in Support of Finding:

The northbound left-turn movement out of the Project’s western and eastern driveways are calculated to operate at LOS E during the PM peak hour. A significant LOS related effect is identified at th ese approaches due to the deficient LOS E during Near Term (Year 2025) and Horizon Year (2050) during PM Peak Hour (Impact TR-1). Mitigation Measures MM -LU-2 and MM -LU-3 requires the Project to restrict left -turns out of the Project site between the hours of 4 PM and 6 PM in order to improve operations at these intersections. Implementation of these mitigation measures will reduce the Project’s LOS related effects to the E. Barham Drive/ Project Driveway (East and West) to less than significant.

Section IV Significant and Unavoidable Environmental Effects

LAND USE AND PLANNING

Implementation of the Project would conflict with Mobility Element Policies M-1.1: Safely and efficiently accommodate traffic generated by development and redevelopment associated with implementation of the General Plan Land Use Policy Map (related to LOS) and M -1.4: Utilize multi- modal LOS techniques to evaluate transportation facilities. Specifically, project-related traffic would result in a significant increase in delay (greater than two seconds) at the Rancheros Drive/ SR-78 WB intersection in the AM and PM peak hours under Near Term 2025 With Project condition (Impact LU-1).

Mitigation Measures: The Project includes a mitigation measure in the MMRP that is to be adopted concurrently with these findings.

All land use impacts and mitigation measures are detailed in Attachment A at the end of this document.

Implementation of mitigation measure MM-LU-1 would mitigate Impact LU-1 (Rancheros Drive/ SR-78 WB- Near Term 2025) were it to be implemented.

In order to mitigate potential land use impacts, implementation of the following mitigation measures will be required:

Rancheros Drive/ SR-78 WB Ramp - Near Term 2025 during AM and PM peak hour (Impact LU-1).

MM-LU-1 Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the Project Developer shall pay the local and regional Public Facility Fees (PFF) development fees assessed to address the impact to the City of San Marcos’ SR 78 Interchanges.

Finding

However, because the improvement would fall under Caltrans jurisdiction, neither the City nor the applicant can ensure it will be implemented. Therefore, t he impact remains significant and unavoidable.

Facts in Support of Finding:

The Project is forecast to generate 1,208 average daily trips, with 97 AM peak hour trips and 121 PM peak hour trips during the week. The Local Mobility Analysis (LLG 2021) shows that all study intersections and street segments are calculated to operate acceptably at LOS D or better with the 18 addition of Project traffic, with the exception of Rancheros Drive / SR -78 WB Ramps, which is calculated to operate at LOS F under both “Without” and “With Project” conditions during Near Term 2025. A significant LOS related effect is identified at this intersection since the Project-related increase in delay exceeds the LOS standard threshold maximum of 2.0 seconds (Impact LU -1). The existing traffic conditions at this location are already substa ndard and warrant a traffic signal. Provision of a traffic signal alone would be sufficient to reduce the Project’s LOS related effect to less than significant. In addition, MM -LU-1 requires payment of local and regional PFF development fees prior to the i ssuance of the first building permit to address the impact to the City of San Marcos’ SR 78 Interchanges.

The Project site is currently zoned MU -3, which is intended to support a job -based mixed-use area combining a variety of commercial and office uses. The Project will result in reduced trip generation as compared to the current MU-3 zoning considered in the Capital Improvement Program (CIP). Therefore, no additional payment is required based on the proposed zone change. A comparison of the Project’s trip generation calculations and the MU -3 zoning trip generation calculations (Table 3.10-10 in the Final EIR ) shows that the Project is calculated to generate approximately 900 fewer ADT , which represents a 43% reduction, as compared to the land uses assumed in the General Plan.

It should be noted that the improvement would be a Capital Improvement Project (CIP) located within the jurisdiction and control of the State of California (Caltrans), and neither the developer nor the City of San Marcos can ensure that Caltrans will permit the improvement to be made. Based on regional standards of practice, the near -term direct Project impacts at this location would be considered significant and unavoidable for the purposes of CEQA. However, inter-jurisdictional coordination would be expected to occur to permit the implementation of this mitigation measure and the intersection and impacts would be less than significant in the Horizon Year.

Overriding Considerations

The environmental, economic, social and other bene fits of the Project, as stated more fully in the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Section V, override any remaining significant adverse impact of the Project associated with transportation related land use impacts.

TRANSPORTATION

Additionally, the Project’s per capita Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) exceeds the significance threshold as detailed in Section 3.15 Transportation (Impact TR-2). The regional average baseline VMT per resident is 17.6 miles per resident. To be less than significant, the project VMT per capita would need to be 15% below the regional average, which equates to 14.96 VMT per resident. Based on the Project site’s Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) 1026, the average VMT per resident would be 18.2, which exceeds the VMT significance threshold of 14.96 by 21.66%. With California Air Pollution Control Officer’s Association (CAPCOA) Reduction Measure LUT-1 (Increase Density) the project’s net- VMT reduction is calculated to be 6.2%. This 6.2% reduction in the project’s unadjusted VMT per capita of 18.2 results in a project VMT per capita of 17.07. Even with this adjustment, the project still exceeds the 14.96 VMT per capita significance threshold and results in a VMT-related significant impact (Impact TR-2). 19 Mitigation Measures: The Project includes a land use and planning mitigation measure in the MMRP that is to be adopted concurrently with these findings (MM-LU-1). All tr ansportation impacts and mitigation measures are detailed in Attachment A at the end of this document under the Land Use and Planning section. Implementation of mitigation measure MM-LU-1 is intended to mitigate Impact TR-1 (Rancheros Drive/ SR-78 WB- Near Term 2025).

In order to mitigate potential transportation impacts, implementation of the following mitigation measure will be required:

Rancheros Drive/ SR-78 WB Ramp - Near Term 2025 during AM and PM peak hour (Impact LU-1).

For reducing VMT, CAPCOA VMT reduction measure LUT-1 (Increase Density) was identified as a design measure that would be applicable to the Project, as a residential project located in a suburban area.

Per LUT -1, designing the project with increased densities (i.e., dwellings per unit area) affects the distance people travel and provides greater options for the mode of travel they choose. The project’s net-VMT reduction associated with LUT -1 is calculated to be 6.2%. The following CAPCOA reduction measures are also fully or partially applicable to the project: The following VMT reduction strategies were determined to be fully or partially applicable to the project: 1) Major Transit Accessibility; 2) Voluntary Employer Commute Program; 3) School Pool Program; 4) Pedestrian and Bicycle Facility and Network Improvements; and 5) Community-Based Travel Planning.

While the maximum 15% VMT reduction via CAPCOA measures is not achieved, the project includes additional design features that contribute to additional VMT reductions:

• Bicycle Network Improvements - The project applicant will provide bicycle network improvements in the project vicinity. These improvements are presented in figures at the end of the responses to the Caltrans letter. These include:
o Painting solid green bicycle lane improvements on Barham Drive at the intersection approach of Woodland Parkway
o Painting a dashed green bike lane on eastbound Barham Drive on the approach to La Moree Road.
• Provision of Bicycle Racks and Storage – The project design incorporates bicycle racks.

Each residential unit includes a two car garage which can accommodate storage of bicycles.
• Dedicated Parking for Carpool/Vanpools – The project design includes a designated parking space for carpool, school carpool, vanpool, EV and/or park-and-ride spaces on site.
• Information Sharing from Homeowner’s Association (HOA) – The project is conditioned so that the HOA Manager will provide transit information to project residents and inform community members of public transit options and carpool options (including 20 school carpool). The HOA will also make a good faith effort in offering transit fare subsidies.
• Workspace for Telecommuting – The community building has been designed to include a workspaces for telecommuting. Each home is also equipped with areas suitable for telecommuting.

The project site is also located near transit options, which can reduce vehicular trips. The project site is within one mile of the Cal State San Marcos S PRINTER light rail station and within 0.9 mile of the Nordahl Road SPRINTER light rail station. Bus stops serving the North County Transit District (NCTD) Routes 305 and Route 347 are located approximately 0.4 and 0.7 mile from the project site. There is a pedestrian pathway from the project site to these SPRINTER stations and bus stops. Additionally, there is a bike lane on Barham Drive between the project site and nearby transit stations.

Finding

Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the Project as mitigation measure MM-LU-1 that could mitigate, avoid or substantially lessen the significant effects as identified in the Final EIR resulting from impacts to Rancheros Drive/ SR -78 WB under Near Term 2025 c onditions, were it to be implemented. However, because the improvement would fall under Caltrans jurisdiction, neither the City nor the applicant can ensure it will be implemented. The impact remains significant and unavoidable.

There are no applicable or feasible mitigation measures to further reduce the Project ’s VMT impact below a level of significance. The impact remains significant and unavoidable.

Facts in Support of Finding:

The Project will result in a significant and unavoidable impact related to consistency with policies related to roadways. Based upon the analysis presented in Section 3.10 Land Use and Planning, the Project will result in an inconsistency with the Mobility Element of the City’s General Plan. Specifically, Mobility Element Policies M -1.1 and M -1.4 identify preferred level of service for roadways and intersections. If implemented, mitigation measure MM-LU-1 would reduce this impact to below a level of significance. However, because mitigation measure MM-LU-1 includes funding for improvements at a facility that is under Caltrans control, not the City’s control, it was concluded that the impact would be determined to be significant and unavoidable.

The Project will have a significant and unavoidable impact related to VMT. For the purpose of determining the significance of VMT impacts, the Project VMT per capita would need to be a maximum of 14.96 VMT per reside nt, which is 15% below the Regional average of 17.6 miles per resident. In Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) 1026, the average is 18.2 VMT per resident. The Project would exceed the significance threshold by 21.66%, requiring mitigation of 21.66% or more to reduce the VMT impact to less-than-significant. Implementation of CAPCOA Measure LUT-1 (increasing Project density beyond the residential density in TAZ 1026) reduces the Project VMT per resident by only 6.2%, which leaves an unmitigated balance of 14.96 VMT beyond the significance threshold.

VMT-reducing mitigation measures can include modifying project characteristics, implementing on- or off-site improvements to transit, pedestrian and bicycle facilities, parking management strategies, and Transportation Demand Management (TDM) strategies to either reduce or shorten vehicular trips.

Project design features that would contribute to additional VMT reductions include: 1) bicycle network improvements; 2) provision of bicycle racks and storage; 3) dedication parking for carpool/vanpool/school carpools; 4 the CC&Rs will include a requirement that the HOA inform community members about public transit and carpool options; and 5 ) a telecommute workspace will be available in the community room building.

It should be noted that there is a limit to the amount of VMT reduction that can be applied to a development project. Within the City, with its suburban land use and transportation context, CAPCOA indicates that the maximum feasible total reduction combinin g all measures is 15%. So even if there were additional feasible mitigation measures beyond CAPCOA Measure LUT -1 and project design features, and all were implemented, the Project would still be unable to reduce impacts to below a level of significance.

As such, there are no mitigation measures identified to fully reduce the Project’s VMT below the City’s threshold. VMT impacts remain significant and unavoidable.

Overriding Considerations

The environmental, economic, social and other benefits of the Project, as stated more fully in the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Section V, override any remaining significant adverse impact of the Project associated with roadway and VMT impacts.

Section IV Findings Regarding Project Alternatives

The CEQA Guidelines states that the “range of potential alternatives to the Project shall include those that could feasibly accomplish most of the basic objectives of the project and could avoid or substantially lessen one or more of the significant effects” (Section 15126[c]). The Final EIR evaluated a reasonable range of alternatives to the Project. These alternatives are:

• No Project/No Development Alternative
• No Project/ Existing Land Use Designation Alternative • Reduced Density Alternative
• Reduced Footprint Alternative

When a lead agency has determined that, even after the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures, a project as proposed will still cause one or more significant environmental effects that cannot be substantially lessened or avoided, the agency, prior to approving the project as mitigated, must first determine whether, with respect to such impacts, there remain any project alternatives that are both environmentally superior and feasible within the meaning of CEQA. An alternative may be “infeasible” if it fails to achieve the most basic project objectives identified within the EIR.

Table 1 provides a qualitative comparison of each alternative’s conformance to the Project objectives.

22 Further, “feasibility” under CEQA encompasses the desirability of the project based on a reasonable balancing of relevant economic, environmental, social, or other considerations which make infeasible the Project alternatives identified in Section 3.0 of the Final EIR.

No Project/No Development Alternative

CEQA requires a No Project Alternative to be addressed in an EIR. Under the No Project/No Development Alternative, the Project would not be implemented, and the Project site would remain undeveloped and in its current condition. No grading or construction would occur on the Project site under this alternative. The Project site is currently undeveloped and supports the following vegetation communities/land covers: non -native grassland with smaller areas of Diegan coastal sage scrub, Diegan coastal sage scru b – Baccharis dominated, developed, disturbed, ornamental and ruderal vegetation. Habitat on the Project site would not be impacted under this alternative.

Feasibility of Alternative

Since the No Project/No Development Alternative would not develop any h omes on the Project site, overall impacts would be less than with the Project or eliminated entirely. There are some benefits of the Project that would not be realized under this alternative, including providing additional housing units as identified in the General Plan and a reduction of wildfire risk through vegetation removal and fire fuels management. Under this alternative there would not be any payment of Public Facilities Fees (PFF), which goes toward supporting a variety of services and improvements in the City, including but not limited to Circulation Streets, SR -78 Interchanges, National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ( NPDES), Tech nology Improvements, Parks, and Habitat Conservation. Similarly, this alternative would not contribute any scho ol fees. This alternative would not realize the benefit of the looped water line that would be constructed by Rincon del Diablo Municipal Water District (RDDMWD) as part of the Project. This water line extension and connection to VWD infrastructure would provide a backup water source for the Mira Lago community, located immediately east of the Project site.

Additionally, there is no certainty that the Project site would remain undeveloped in perpetuity. Finally, this alternative would not meet any of the Project objectives (see Table 1).

The No Project/No Development Alternative was rejected in favor of the Project , because it does not meet any of the Project objectives.

No Project/ Existing Land Use Designation Alternative

CEQA Guidelines Section 15126.6(e)(3), states that when the project is a revision of an existing land use plan, the no project alternative will be the continuation of the existing plan in the future. Under the No Project/Existing Land Use Alternative, the Project site would be developed consistent with the site’s existing land use. Per the City’s General Plan, the Project site has an existing General Plan Land Use designation of Mixed Use 3 (MU3), which is a mixed-use non-residential designation with a maximum floor area ratio (FAR) of 1.50. According to Table 2 -3 of the Land Use Element of the City’s General Plan, this designation “Provides for a variety of commercial and office uses integrated as a cohesive development. These uses may be mixed ‘vertically’ (on separate floors of a building) or ‘horizonta lly’ (on a single site or adjacent parcels). Structured parking, while not required to achieve the maximum FAR, may be allowed. Shared parking arrangements may also be allowed consistent with the nature of mixed uses. Typical uses include retail, commercial services, administrative and office uses, institutional and government uses, business support and financial uses, restaurants, and health care facilities. To maintain a pedestrian scale and orientation, retail and other active services are 23 encouraged at street level. This designation does not allow residential uses. A Specific Plan is required for development” (City of San Marcos 2012).

A development scenario that would be consistent with the MU3 zoning could include three 3 -story buildings on the Project site for a total of 275,067 square feet (s.f.) of office use, 18,344 s.f. of retail use and 879 parking spaces. The southern portion of the Project site would be reserved for a minimum 150-foot fire fuel modification buffer. Overall, the development footprint and area of disturbance would be similar to that of the Project, but with different uses. Vehicular trips under the No Project/Existing Land Use Alternative would be approximately four times higher than the Project. This alternative would generate approximately 5,410 ADT compared to the 1,208 ADT anticipated for the Project.

Feasibility of Alternative

The No Project/Existing Land Use Alternative would result in a more intensive use on the Project site, including four times the trip generation compared to the Project (5,410 ADT compared to 1,208 ADT).

This results in a corresponding increase in air and greenhouse gas emissions and noise from offsite vehicles compared to the Project . Footprint specific impacts, such as those related to biological resources, cultural and tribal cultural resources, and geology and soils would be similar to the Project as the same amount of area would be disturbed. This alternative would not generate any students for SMUSD. Depending on the mix of VMT reduction strategies an employer implements and the number of employees who participate, it could be possible to reduce the VMT impacts to below a level of significance. This alternative would fully meet objective 8 and could be designed in a manner that would meet objectives 4 through 7. It would not meet objectives 1 through 3, (see Table 1). Because this alternative wou ld increase the intensity of development on the project site, would increase impacts, and would not meet all of the project objectives, the No Project/Existing Specific Plan Alternative was rejected in favor of the Project.

Reduced Density Alternative

Under the Reduced Density Alternative, the Project site would be developed with 74 residential units for a density of 7 du/acre. Such a density could support a mix of single -family and multi -family residential units. The southern portion of the Project site would be reserved for a minimum 150-foot fire fuel modification buffer. Overall, the development footprint and area of disturbance would be similar to that of the Project, but with less density of residential units.

Vehicular trips under this alternative would be reduced compared to the Project. Depending on the type and number of units developed under this alternative (single family and multifamily), this alternative would generate between 592 and 740 ADT. Compared to the Project, which generates 1,208 ADT, this alternative would reduce ADT by at least 38% and up to 50%.

Feasibility of Alternative

The Reduced Density Alternative would reduce the number of residential units constructed on the Project site. This results in a corresponding decrease in ve hicular trips by approximately 38% to 50% and a corresponding decrease in air and greenhouse gas emissions and noise from offsite traffic compared to the Project. Public services, utilities and service systems, and energy demands would also proportionally decrease. Footprint specific impacts, such as those related to biological resources, cultural and tribal cultural resources, and geology and soils would be similar as the Project since a similar area of disturbance would occur under this alternative. This alternative would contribute less Public Facilities Fees (PFF) and school fees since fewer residential units would be constructed. As 24 shown in Table 1, this alternative would fully meet objective 1 and could be designed in a manner to meet objectives 3 thr ough 7. This alternative would not meet objective 2 related to maximizing opportunities to provide medium -density housing for the city and while it would meet objective 8 by contributing to community and citywide infrastructure, due to the reduced nature of the alternative, the contributions would be less than compared to the Project. Therefore, the Reduced Project Alternative was rejected in favor of the Proposed Project.

Reduced Footprint Alternative

A Reduced Footprint Alternative was analyzed as it would result in less grading and site disturbance compared to the Project . For the Reduced Footprint Alternative, the southernmost row of residential buildings proposed by the Project would be eliminated. This includes eight 7-plex buildings and one 3- plex building. Under the Reduced Foot Alternative, the site would be developed with 92 multifamily residential units. The southern portion of the Project site would still be subject to a minimum 150-foot fire fuel modification buffer.

Vehicular trips under this alternative would be reduced compared to the Project. This alternative would generate 736 ADT. Compared to the Project, which generates 1,208 ADT, this alternative would reduce ADT by 39%.

Feasibility of Alternative

The Reduced Footprint Alternative would reduce the number of residential units constructed on the Project site. This results in a corresponding decrease in vehicular trips by approximately 39% and a corresponding decrease in air and greenhouse gas emissions and noise from offsite traffic compared to the Project. Public services, utilities and service systems, and energy demands would also proportionally decrease. Footprint specific impacts, such as those related to biological resources, cultural and tribal cultural resources, and geology and soils would be less than the Project since less ground disturbing activities would be required. The amount of Public Facilities Fees (PFF) paid would be less than compared to the Project since fewer residential uses would be constructed. Similarly, the amount of school fees paid to SMUSD would be less under this alternative. This alternative would meet or could be designed in a way that would meet the majority of the Project objectives as detailed in Table 1. This alternative would not meet objective 2 which calls for maximizing medium -density housing in the 12.1-15.0 dwelling unit density range.

Among the other alternatives, not including the Project , the Reduced Footprint Alternative is the environmentally superior alternative because it would provide a reduced level of impact in some environmental analysis areas including air quality, greenhouse gas, noise, public services, recreation, and utilities/service systems. Additionally, footprint specific impacts, such as those related to cultural and tribal cultural resources, biological resources, and geology and soils would be reduced compared to the Project , since less ground disturbing activities would be required. Mitigation measures would still be requir ed to mitigate impacts to biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, noise, tribal cultural resources, and land use (partially mitigated).

Due to the Project site being located in a suburban setting and the limited options available to mitigate Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) impacts for residential projects, the Reduced Footprint Alternative would still result in significant and unavoidable transportation impacts due to VMT. Similarly, due to existing degraded LOS at the intersection of Rancheros Drive/ SR -78 WB, this alternative would still result in significant and unavoidable impacts in the AM and PM peak hours under Near Term 2025 With Project condition. Even though payment of fun ds to the City’s Congestion Management Community Facilities 25 District (CFD) and Public Facilities Fees (PFF) that addresses congestion would occur, the needed improvements at this intersection to improve LOS are within Caltrans jurisdiction, not the City’s.

Therefore, the City cannot control the timing of the installation of the improvements and it cannot be conclusively stated that the intersection improvements would be in place in time. Thus, the inconsistency with policies in the Mobility Element related to LOS will remain and the significant and unavoidable land use and transportation impacts would still occur under the Reduced Footprint Alternative.
26 Table 1. Summary of Project Objectives and Alternatives Objective Proposed
Project
No Project/No
Development
No Project/
Existing Land Use
Alternative
Reduced Density
Alternative
Reduced
Footprint
Alternative

1. Provide a multi-family housing opportunity
through a range of unit types, sizes, and
number of different bedroom counts,
including one, two, three, and four-bedroom
units, as well as a range of affordability to
accommodate a full spectrum of family
demographics to contribute to the growing
housing needs of the region.

Meets
objective
Does not meet
this objective
Does not meet
this objective
Meets objective Meets objective

2. To the extent possible given the site
constraints, maximize the opportunity to
provide medium-density housing for the City
of San Marcos in the 12.1-15.0 dwelling
unit density range which comparable to
other medium-density housing
developments near the Specific Plan Area.

Meets
objective
Does not meet
this objective
Does not meet
this objective
Does not meet
this objective
Does not meet
this objective

3. Create a development which
accommodates appropriate recreational
open space for the anticipated residents
expected to reside within the Specific Plan
Area.

Meets
objective
Does not meet
this objective
Does not meet
this objective
Could be
designed in a
manner that
meets this
objective
Could be
designed in a
manner that
meets this
objective

4. Provide development standards to regulate
the nature and appearance of all
construction within the Hallmark-Barham
Specific Plan Area through integration of
landform use, architectural design, unified
landscape theme, and recreation areas.

Meets
objective
Does not meet
this objective
Could be
designed in a
manner that
meets this
objective
Could be
designed in a
manner that
meets this
objective
Could be
designed in a
manner that
meets this
objective

5. Design a safe and efficient circulation
system that adequately supports the
appropriate level of traffic within the
Specific Plan Area as well as connections to
public roadways and improvements to
Meets
objective
Does not meet
this objective
Could be
designed in a
manner that
meets this
objective
Could be
designed in a
manner that
meets this
objective
Could be
designed in a
manner that
meets this
objective
27 Objective Proposed
Project
No Project/No
Development
No Project/
Existing Land Use
Alternative
Reduced Density
Alternative
Reduced
Footprint
Alternative
public streets and rights-of-way inclusive of
vehicular, bicycle, pedestrian modes of
travel.

6. Develop a financing plan that provides for
the efficient and timely provision of
infrastructure and public services prior to
and as development occurs.

7. Implement a maintenance program which
will ensure all common areas are
maintained to standards set forth in the
City’s General Plan.

8. Finance and/or contribute to all appropriate
community and citywide infrastructure as
warranted.

Meets
objective
Does not meet
this objective
Meets objective Meets objective
but would
contribute less
compared to the
Project.

Meets objective
but would
contribute less
compared to the
Project.

28 Section V Statement of Overriding Considerations

Pursuant to CEQA Section 21081(b) and the CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, the City of San Marcos has balanced the benefits of the proposed General Plan against the following unavoidable adverse impacts associated with the proposed Hallmark- Barham Specific Plan and has included all feasible mitigation measures as policies and action items within the Project . The City has also examined alternatives to the Project and has determined that adoption and implementation of the Hallmark - Barham Specific Plan is the most desirable, feasible, and appropriate action. The other alternatives are rejected as infeasible based on consideration of the relevant factors discussed in Chapter 4.0 of the Draft EIR.

Significant Unavoidable Impacts

Based on the information and analysis set forth in the EIR and reiterated in Section III of these Findings, implementation of the Project would result in the following Project -specific significant impacts related to: Land Use and Planning and Transportation.

• Impact LU-1 Project-related traffic results in a significant increase in delay (greater than 2.0 seconds) at the Rancheros Drive/ SR- 78 WB intersection in the AM and PM peak hours under Near Term 2025 With Project condition.

• Impact TR-1 Project-related traffic results in a significant increase in delay (greater than 2.0 seconds) at the Rancheros Drive/ SR- 78 WB intersection in the AM and PM peak hours under Near Term 2025 With Project condition.
• Impact TR-2 The Project’s per capita VMT is 17.07, which exceeds the threshold of 14.96 VMT per capita.

LAND USE AND PLANNING

Implementation of the Project would conflict with the Mobility Element Policies M -1.1: Safely and efficiently accommodate traffic generated by developm ent and redevelopment associated with implementation of the General Plan Land Use Policy Map (related to LOS) and M -1.4: Utilize multi- modal LOS techniques to evaluate transportation facilities.

Added traffic from the Project is forecast to generate 1,208 average daily trips, with 97 AM peak hour trips and 121 PM peak hour trips during the week. The Local Mobility Analysis shows that all study intersections and street segments are calculated to operate acceptably at LOS D or better with the addition of Pro ject traffic, with the exception of Rancheros Drive / SR -78 WB Ramps, which is calculated to operate at LOS F under both “Without” and “With Project” conditions during Near Term 2025. A significant LOS related effect is identified at this intersection since the Project-related increase in delay exceeds the LOS standard threshold maximum of 2.0 seconds (Impact LU-1).

The existing traffic conditions at this location are already substandard and warrant a traffic signal.

Provision of a traffic signal alone would be sufficient to reduce the Project’s LOS related effect to less than significant. In addition, MM -LU-1 requires payment of local and regional PFF development fees prior to the issuance of the first building permit to address the impact to the City of S an Marcos’ SR- 78 Interchanges.
29 It should be noted that the improvement would be a Capital Improvement Project (CIP) located within the jurisdiction and control of the State of California (Caltrans). While inter-jurisdictional coordination would be expected to occur to permit the implementation of mitigation MM-LU-1, and the intersection and impacts would be less than significant in the Horizon Year , neither the developer nor the City of San Marcos can ensur e that Caltrans will permit the improvement to be made. Based on regional standards of practice, the near -term direct Project impacts at this location would be considered significant and unavoidable for the purposes of CEQA.

TRANSPORTATION

The Project would result in potentially significant impacts related to conflicts with the City’s General Plan Mobility Element by contributing significant traffic to the area’s circulation network Specifically, Project-related traffic would result in a significant increase in delay (greater than 2.0 seconds) at the Rancheros Drive/ SR- 78 WB intersection in the AM and PM peak hours under Near Term 2025 With Project condition (Impact TR-1). The existing traffic conditions at this location are already substandard and warrant a traffic signal. Provision of a traffic signal alone would be sufficient to reduce the Project’s LOS related effect to less than significant. In addition, MM-LU-1 requires payment of local and regional PFF development fees prior to the issua nce of the first building permit to address the impact to the City of San Marcos’ SR 78 Interchanges.

However, because the mitigation measure MM -LU-1 includes funding for improvements at a facility that is under Cal Trans control, not the City’s control, it was concluded that the impact would be determined to be significant and unavoidable.

The Project will also have a significant and unavoidable impact related to VMT. While the Project represents an increase in residential density on the Project site compared to the residential density in Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) 1026 (CAPCOA Measure LUT -1 [Increase Density]) , this is not enough to offset the Project’s increase in VMT in light of the City’s threshold. With CAPCOA Measure LUT-1 (Increase Density) the project’s net- VMT reduction is calculated to be 6.2%. This 6.2% reduction in the project’s unadjusted VMT per capita of 18.2 results in a project VMT per capita of 17.07. Even with this adjustment, the project still exceeds the 14.96 VMT per capita significance threshold.

Project design features that would contribute to additional VMT reductions include: 1) bicycle network improvements; 2) provision of bicycle racks and storage; 3) dedication parking for carpool/vanpool/school carpools; 4) the CC&Rs will include a requirement that the HOA inform community members about public transit and carpool options; and 5 ) a telecommute workspace will be available in the community room building.

Specific VMT mitigation strategies applicable to projects in the City have been developed based on a review of relevant literature and research. The selected strategies, as well as the applicable VMT reduction percentages and other attributes are included in Appendix K of the Final EIR. Of the various mitigation strategies that are presented in the VMT Mitigation Measures Memorandum (Kittelson & Associates 2020) as options for projects in the City, the following measures are also partially applicable to the project: 1) Major Transit Accessibility; 2) Voluntary Employer Commute Program; 3) School Pool Program; 4) Pedestrian and Bicycle Facility and Network Improvements; and 5) Community-Based Travel Planning.
30 It should be noted that there is a limit to the amount of VMT reduction that can be applied to a development project. Within the City, with its suburban land use and transportation context, CAPCOA indicates that the maximum feasible total reduction combining all measures is 15%. So even if there were additional feasible mitigation measures those identified in the City’s TIA Guidelines and project design features, and all were implemented, the Project would still be unable to reduce impacts to below a level of significance.

As such, there are no mitigation measures identified to fully reduce the Project’s VMT below the City’s threshold. VMT impacts remain significant and unavoidable.

Benefits of the Project/ Overriding Considerations
The City of San Marcos has (i) independen tly reviewed the information in the EIR and the record of proceedings; (ii) made a reasonable and good faith effort to eliminate or substantially lessen the impacts resulting from the Project to the extent feasible by including mitigation measures that effectively mitigate potential environmental impacts to the greatest extent feasible; and (iii) balanced the Project’s benefits against the significant unavoidable impacts.

Adoption and implementation of the proposed Hallmark -Barham Specific Plan would prov ide the following economic, social, legal, and other considerable benefits.

1. Creation of jobs. Implementation of the Project would result in the creation of 371 construction jobs. Construction would be done in a single phase and is expected to start in late 2022 with occupancy in 2025.

2. Provide Multi-Family Housing. The Project provides a 151-unit multi-family housing opportunity through a range of unit types, sizes, and number of different bedroom counts, including one, two, three, and four-bedroom units, as well as a range of affordability to accommodate a full spectrum of family demographics to contribute to the growing housing needs of the region. Per the City’s recently adopted Housing Element (2021), the City has received a Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) of 3,116 units for the 2021 -2029 RHNA period. After credits for construction and approved units, the City has a remaining RHNA of 1,585 units. The residential sites inventory consisted of vacant land designated for residential development as well as Mixed Use areas, for areas that could contribute to the City’s RHNA needs.

3. Payment of Funds toward Needed City and Region-wide infrastructure. The project applicant will contribute funds toward a variety of Public Facilities Fees ( PFF), Community Facilities Districts (CFD), and Capital Facility Fees. The City’s PFF goes toward supporting a variety of services and improvements in the City, including but not limited to circulation streets, SR -78 interchanges, National Pollutant Disch arge Elimination System (NPDES), technology improvements, parks and habitat conservation fees. The project would also annex into and contribute toward CFD 2001 -01 for fire and paramedic services and infrastructure and CFD 98-01, Improvement Area No. 1 for police protection. The applicant will also pay Wastewater Capital Facility fees to Vallecitos Water District (VWD) and Water Capital Facility (Capacity) to Rincon del Diablo Municipal Water District (RDDMWD).

4. RDDMWD Looped Water Line. As part of the Project, RDDMWD will extend an existing 8-inch water line that currently terminates within the Mira Lago community, through a portion of the Project site and connect to an existing 10-inch VWD water line in E. Barham Drive. Once operational the project would connect to this new on -site line. RDDMWD’s connection to the VWD waterline also provides a backup water source for the Mira Lago community, located immediately east of the Project site.

31 5. Environmental Benefits compared to existing land use designation. The project includes a land use and zone change from Mixed -Use 3 to Specific Plan. The MU -3 zone was intended to include a variety of commercial and office uses. The change to residential uses within the Specific Plan would result in a reduced trip genera tion as compared to the current MU -3 zoning. The project will generate approximately 1,208 ADT compared to 5,410 ADT which would be expected under the MU-3 Zone. This reduction in ADT translates into a reduction in air and GHG emissions, as well as a reduction in expected vehicular-related noise.

6. Improved Compatibility with Adjacent Uses. The project’s land use and zone change from Mixed Use-3 to Specific Plan would improve the site’s compatibility with adjacent residential uses. The proposed medium dens ity residential development would result in less traffic, air and GHG emissions. Residential developments also produce less noise than mixed use commercial and office developments would.

7. Wildfire Risk Reduction. The project design incorporates a 150 -foot fuel modification buffer, removal of vegetation/fire fuels, and fire resistive building materials which reduces the wildfire risk for the surrounding neighborhoods.

8. Landscape Design. The project design includes implementation of the landscape plan that will provide a cohesive and visually-appealing planting scheme.

9. Bicycle Network Improvements. The project applicant will provide bicycle network improvements in the project vicinity. These include: 1) painting s olid green bicycle lane improvements on Barham Drive at the intersection approach of Woodland Parkway; and 2) painting a dashed green bike lane on eastbound Barham Drive on the approach to La Moree Road.

Conclusion

After balancing the specific economic, legal, social, technological, and other benefits of the Project , the Council finds that the unavoidable adverse environment al impacts identified may be considered “acceptable” due to the specific considerations listed above which outweigh the unavoidable, adverse environmental impacts of the Project.

The City of San Marcos City Council has considered information contained in the EIR prepared for the proposed Hallmark -Barham Specific Plan Project as well as the public testimony and record of proceedings in which the Project was considered. Recognizing that significant unavoidable land use and planning and transportation impacts may result from implementation of the Project, the Council finds that the benefits of the Specific Plan and overriding considerations outweigh the adverse effects of the Project. Having included all feasible mitigation measures, and recognized all unavoidable significant impacts, the Council hereby finds that each of the separate benefits of the proposed Specific Plan Project, as stated herein, is dete rmined to be unto itself an overriding consideration, independent of other benefits, which warrants adoption of the proposed General Plan and outweighs and overrides its unavoidable significant effects, and thereby justifies the adoption of the proposed Specific Plan Project.

Based on the foregoing findings and the information contained in the record, the Council hereby determines that:

32 1. All significant effects on the environment due to implementation of the proposed Project have been eliminated or substantially lessened where feasible;

2. There are no feasible alternatives to the proposed Project which would mitigate or substantially lessen the impacts; and

3. Any remaining significant effects on the environment found to be unavoidable are acceptable due to the factors described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations above.

1 Attachment A

Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
1 Hallmark-Barham Specific Plan Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Impact Mitigation Measure Action Timing Responsibility

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
BIO-1 The Project has
the potential to directly
impact nesting birds
protected under the
MBTA through removal or
disturbance of habitat
that supports active
nests.

MM-BIO-1a To avoid direct impacts on raptors and/or
native/migratory birds, removal of habitat that supports active nests in the proposed area of disturbance should occur outside of the breeding season for these species
(February 1 to September 15). If removal of habitat in the proposed area of disturbance must occur during the
breeding season, a qualified biologist shall conduct a
preconstruction survey to determine the presence or
absence of nesting birds in the proposed area of
disturbance. The pre-construction (precon) survey shall be conducted within ten (10) calendar days prior to the start of construction activities (including removal of vegetation). If nesting birds are observed, a letter report or mitigation plan in conformance with applicable State and Federal Law (i.e., appropriate follow up surveys, monitoring schedules,
construction and noise barriers/buffers, etc.) shall be prepared and include proposed measures to be
implemented to ensure that take of birds or eggs or
disturbance of breeding activities is avoided. The report or mitigation plan shall be submitted to the CDFW and/or
USFWS as applicable for review and approval and
implemented to the satisfaction of those agencies. The
project biologist shall verify and approve that all measures identified in the report or mitigation plan are in place prior to and/or during construction. If nesting birds are not detected during the preconstruction survey, no further mitigation is required.

If construction is
proposed during the
breeding season,
conduct a pre-
construction survey.

If nesting birds are
present, implement
avoidance measures
outlined in approved
letter report/
mitigation plan.

If nesting birds are
not detected during
the preconstruction
survey, no further
mitigation is
required.

For construction
activities proposed
for the period of
February 1 through
September 15,
conduct survey
within ten days prior
to the start of
construction
activities.

Applicant/Landow
ner, Project
Biologist,
Contractor
BIO-2 Direct impact to

0.61 acre of Diegan
coastal sage scrub, 0.03
acre of Diegan coastal
sage scrub – Baccharis
dominated, and 9.50
acres of non-native
grassland.

MM-BIO-2 Direct impact to 0.61 acre of Diegan coastal
sage scrub and 0.03 acre of Diegan coastal sage scrub – Baccharis dominated shall be mitigated at a 2:1 ratio for a total of 1.28 acres. Direct Impact to 9.50 acres of non- native grassland shall be mitigated at a 0.5:1 ratio for a total of 4.75 acres. These mitigation ratios are consistent with Tables 4-6 and 4-7 of the MHCP (SANDAG 2003) and Table
4 in Section 5.2.1 of the City’s Draft Subarea Plan (City of San Marcos 2001).

Proof of off-site
acquisition, in lieu
fees, purchase of
credits from
mitigation bank, or
combination thereof
submitted to
Planning Manager.

Prior to issuance of
grading permit.

Applicant/Landow
ner, Project
Biologist
2 Impact Mitigation Measure Action Timing Responsibility This mitigation shall be accomplished by the project
applicant through off-site acquisition, in lieu fees, a purchase of credits from an approved mitigation bank, or a combination thereof as approved by the Planning Manager.

Proof of off-site acquisition, payment of in lieu fees, purchase of credits from an approved mitigation bank or a combination thereof shall be provided to the Planning
Manager prior to issuance of a grading permit.

BIO-3 Potential for
indirect impacts to
sensitive habitats during
Project construction.

MM-BIO-3 A biologist shall be contracted to perform
regular random checks (at minimum once a month) to
ensure implementation of the following monitoring
requirements and BMPs. Monitoring reports and a post-
construction monitoring report will be prepared to document compliance with these requirements and shall be submitted to the Planning Manager.

• Spoils, trash, and any excavation-generated debris
will be removed to an approved offsite disposal
facility. Trash and food items will be contained in
closed containers and removed daily to reduce the
attraction of opportunistic predators to the site,
such as common ravens, coyotes, and feral cats
and dogs that may prey on listed species.

• Raw cement/concrete or washings thereof, asphalt,
paint or other coating material, oil, or other
petroleum products, or any other substances that
could be hazardous to vegetation or wildlife
Biological monitoring
and implementation
of BMPs during
construction.

Prior to and during
construction
Applicant/Landow
ner, Project
Biologist,
Contractor
3 Impact Mitigation Measure Action Timing Responsibility resources, resulting from project-related activities,
will be prevented from contaminating the soil.

• Construction activities will be limited to daylight
hours to the extent feasible. If nighttime work is
necessary, lighting will be shielded away from
surrounding natural areas. Fixtures will be shielded
to downcast below the horizontal plane of the fixture
height and mounted as low as possible.

BIO-4 Potential for
indirect impacts to
sensitive habitats during
Project operation.

MM-BIO-4 To avoid indirect impacts on adjacent sensitive habitats, final landscape plans will be reviewed and
approved by a qualified biologist to ensure that no invasive plant materials are included in planting plans.

Review/approve
landscape plans
Prior to construction Applicant/Landow
ner, Project
Biologist

CULTURAL RESOURCES/TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
CR-1a Due to grading
and ground disturbing
activities, the Project has
the potential to impact
unidentified historical
resources underneath
the Project site.

CR-1b Due to grading
and ground disturbing
activities, the Project has
the potential to impact
unidentified historical
resources underneath
the Project site.

MM-CR-1a Pre-Excavation Agreement. Prior to the
issuance of a Grading Permit, or ground disturbing activities, the Applicant/Owner shall enter into a Tribal Cultural
Resources Treatment and Repatriation Agreement (Pre-
Excavation Agreement) with a Traditionally and Culturally Affiliated Native American Tribe (TCA Tribe), identified in consultation with the City. The purpose of the Pre-Excavation Agreement shall be to formalize protocols and procedures between the Applicant/Owner and the TCA Tribe for the
protection, treatment, and repatriation of Native American human remains, funerary objects, cultural and/or religious landscapes, ceremonial items, traditional gathering areas, and other tribal cultural resources. Such resources may be located within and/or discovered during ground disturbing and/or construction activities for the proposed project, including any additional culturally appropriate archaeological studies, excavations, geotechnical investigations, grading, preparation for wet and dry infrastructure, and other ground disturbing activities. Any project-specific Monitoring Plans and/or excavation plans prepared by the project
archaeologist shall include the TCA Tribe requirements for Enter into Tribal
Cultural Resources
Treatment and
Repatriation
Agreement.

Prior to issuance of
Grading Permit
and/or during all
earth moving and
ground disturbing
activity.

Applicant/
Landowner, TCA
Tribe
4 Impact Mitigation Measure Action Timing Responsibility protocols and protection of tribal cultural resources that were agreed to during the tribal consultation.

The landowner shall relinquish ownership of all non-burial related tribal cultural resources collected during construction monitoring and from any previous archaeological studies or excavations on the project site to the TCA Tribe for proper treatment and disposition per the Pre-Excavation Agreement, unless ordered to do otherwise by responsible agency or court of competent jurisdiction. The requirement and timing of such release of ownership, and the recipient thereof, shall be reflected in the Pre-Excavation Agreement. If the TCA Tribe does not accept the return of the cultural resources, then the cultural resources will be subject to curation.

MM-CR-1b Construction Monitoring. Prior to the
issuance of a Grading Permit or ground disturbing activities, the Applicant/Owner or Grading Contractor shall provide written documentation (either as signed letters, contracts, or emails) to the City’s Planning Division stating that a Qualified Archaeologist and Traditionally and Culturally Affiliated Native American monitor (TCA Native American monitor)
have been retained at the Applicant/Owner or Grading
Contractor’s expense to implement the construction
monitoring program, as described in the Pre-Excavation
Agreement.

Monitoring of earth
moving and ground
disturbing activities.

Prior to issuance of
Grading Permit
and/or during all
earth moving and
ground disturbing
activity.

Archaeologist,
Tribal Monitor
If potential
archaeological
resources are found,
halt ground
disturbance and
follow procedures
listed for discovery.

During all earth
moving and ground
disturbing activity.

Archaeologist,
Tribal Monitor
5 Impact Mitigation Measure Action Timing Responsibility The Qualified Archaeologist and TCA Native American
monitor shall be invited to attend all applicable pre-
construction meetings with the General Contractor and/or associated subcontractors to present the construction
monitoring program. The Qualified Archaeologist and TCA Native American monitor shall be present on site during grubbing, grading, trenching, and/or other ground disturbing activities that occur in areas of native soil or other
permeable natural surfaces that have the potential to
unearth any evidence of potential archaeological resources or tribal cultural resources. In areas of artificial paving, the Qualified Archaeologist and TCA Native American monitor shall be present on the site during grubbing, grading,
trenching, and/or other ground disturbing activities that have the potential to disturb more than six inches below the original pre-project ground surface to identify any evidence of potential archaeological or tribal cultural resources. No monitoring of fill material, existing or imported, will be required if the General Contractor or developer can provide documentation to the satisfaction of the City that all fill materials being utilized at the site are either: 1) from existing commercial (previously permitted) sources of materials; or 2) are from private or other non-commercial sources that have been determined to be absent of tribal cultural resources by the Qualified Archaeologist and TCA Native American
monitor.

The Qualified Archaeologist and TCA Native American
monitor shall maintain ongoing collaborative coordination with one another during all ground disturbing activities. The requirement for the construction monitoring program shall be noted on all applicable construction documents, including demolition plans, grading plans, etc. The Applicant/Owner or Grading Contractor shall provide written notice to the
Planning Division and the TCA Tribe, preferably through e- mail, of the start and end of all ground disturbing activities.

6 Impact Mitigation Measure Action Timing Responsibility monitoring shall be submitted by the Qualified Archaeologist, along with any TCA Native American monitor’s notes and
comments received by the Qualified Archaeologist, to the Planning Division Manager for approval. Once approved, a final copy of the archaeological monitoring report shall be retained in a confidential City project file and may be released, as a formal condition of Assembly Bill (AB) 52 consultation, to the Rincon Band, the San Luis Rey Band or any parties involved in the project specific monitoring or consultation process. A final copy of the report, with all confidential site records and appendices, will also be
submitted to the South Coastal Information Center after approval by the City.

MM-CR-1c Unanticipated Discovery Procedures. Both
the Qualified Archaeologist and the TCA Native American monitor may temporarily halt or divert ground disturbing activities if potential archaeological resources or tribal cultural resources are discovered during construction
activities. Ground disturbing activities shall be temporarily directed away from the area of discovery for a reasonable amount of time to allow a determination of the resource’s potential significance. Isolates and clearly non-significant archaeological resources (as determined by the Qualified Archaeologist, in consultation with the TCA Native American monitor) will be minimally documented in the field. All unearthed archaeological resources or tribal cultural
resources will be collected, temporarily stored in a secure location (or as otherwise agreed upon by the Qualified
Archaeologist and the TCA Tribe) and repatriated according to the terms of the Pre-Excavation Agreement, unless
ordered to do otherwise by responsible agency or court of competent jurisdiction.

If a determination is made that the archaeological resources or tribal cultural resources are considered potentially significant by the Qualified Archaeologist, the TCA Tribe, and the TCA Native American monitor, then the City and the TCA Tribe shall determine, in consultation with the
7 Impact Mitigation Measure Action Timing Responsibility Applicant/Owner and the Qualified Archaeologist, the
culturally appropriate treatment of those resources.

If the Qualified Archaeologist, the TCA Tribe, and the TCA Native American monitor cannot agree on the significance or mitigation for such resources, these issues will be presented to the Planning Division Manager for decision. The Planning Division Manager shall make a determination based upon
the provisions of CEQA and California Public Resources Code Section 21083.2(b) with respect to archaeological resources and California Public Resources Section 21704 and
21084.3 with respect to tribal cultural resources, and shall take into account the religious beliefs, cultural beliefs, customs, and practices of the TCA Tribe.

All sacred sites, significant tribal cultural resources, and/or unique archaeological resources encountered within the
project area shall be avoided and preserved as the preferred mitigation. If avoidance of the resource is determined to be infeasible by the City as the Lead Agency, then the City shall require additional culturally appropriate mitigation to address the negative impact to the resource, such as, but not limited to, the funding of an ethnographic study and/or a data recovery plan, as determined by the City in consultation with the Qualified Archaeologist and the TCA Tribe. The TCA Tribe shall be notified and consulted regarding the
determination and implementation of culturally appropriate mitigation and the drafting and finalization of any
ethnographic study and/or data recovery plan, and/or other culturally appropriate mitigation. Any archaeological isolates or other cultural materials that cannot be avoided or
preserved in place as the preferred mitigation shall be temporarily stored in a secure location on site (or as
otherwise agreed upon by the Qualified Archaeologist and TCA Tribe) and repatriated according to the terms of the Pre- Excavation Agreement, unless ordered to do otherwise by responsible agency or court of competent jurisdiction. The removal of any artifacts from the project site will be
inventoried with oversight by the TCA Native American
monitor.
8 Impact Mitigation Measure Action Timing Responsibility

If a data recovery plan is authorized as indicated above and the TCA Tribe does not object, then an adequate artifact sample to address research avenues previously identified for sites in the area will be collected using professional
archaeological collection methods. If the Qualified
Archaeologist collects such resources, the TCA Native
American monitor must be present during any testing or
cataloging of those resources. Moreover, if the Qualified Archaeologist does not collect the cultural resources that are unearthed during the ground disturbing activities, the TCA Native American monitor may, at their discretion, collect said resources for later reburial or storage at a local curation facility, as described in the Pre-Excavation Agreement.

In the event that curation of archaeological resources or tribal cultural resources is required by a superseding
regulatory agency, curation shall be conducted by an
approved local facility within San Diego County and the curation shall be guided by California State Historical Resources Commission’s Guidelines for the Curation of
Archaeological Collections. The City shall provide the
Applicant/Owner final curation language and guidance on the project grading plans prior to issuance of the grading permit, if applicable, during project construction. The Applicant/Owner shall be responsible for all repatriation and curation costs and provide to the City written documentation from the TCA Tribe or the curation facility, whichever is most applicable, that the repatriation and/or curation have been completed.

CR-2 There is a
potential for Project
construction activities to
disturb previously
unidentified human
MM-CR-2 Human Remains. As specified by California
Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, if human remains, or remains that are potentially human, are found on the project site during ground disturbing activities or during archaeological work, the person responsible for the
excavation, or his or her authorized representative, shall If human remains
are found, halt
ground disturbance
and follow
procedures listed for
discovery.

During all earth
moving and ground
disturbing activity.

Archaeologist
9 Impact Mitigation Measure Action Timing Responsibility remains on the Project
site.
immediately notify the San Diego County Medical Examiner’s Office by telephone. No further excavation or disturbance of the discovery or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains (as determined by the Qualified Archaeologist and/or the TCA Native American monitor) shall occur until the Medical Examiner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code 5097.98.

If such a discovery occurs, a temporary construction
exclusion zone shall be established surrounding the area of the discovery so that the area would be protected (as
determined by the Qualified Archaeologist and/or the TCA Native American monitor), and consultation and treatment could occur as prescribed by law. As further defined by State law, the Medical Examiner will determine within two working days of being notified if the remains are subject to his or her authority. If the Medical Examiner recognizes the remains to be Native American, and not under his or her jurisdiction, then he or she shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission by telephone within 24 hours. The Native
American Heritage Commission will make a determination as to the Most Likely Descendent, who shall be afforded 48 hours from the time access is granted to the discovery site to make recommendations regarding culturally appropriate
treatment.

If suspected Native American remains are discovered, the remains shall be kept in situ (in place) until after the Medical Examiner makes its determination and notifications, and until after the Most Likely Descendent is identified, at which time the archaeological examination of the remains shall only occur on site in the presence of the Most Likely
Descendent. The specific locations of Native American
burials and reburials will be proprietary and not disclosed to the general public. According to California Health and Safety Code, six or more human burials at one location constitute a cemetery (Section 8100), and disturbance of Native
American cemeteries is a felony (Section 7052). In the event that the Applicant/Owner and the Most Likely Descendant 10 Impact Mitigation Measure Action Timing Responsibility are in disagreement regarding the disposition of the
remains, State law will apply, and the mediation process will occur with the NAHC. In the event that mediation is not successful, the landowner shall rebury the remains at a location free from future disturbance (see Public Resources Code Section 5097.98(e) and 5097.94(k)).

Geology and Soils
GEO-1 The Project has
the potential to disturb
previously unknown
paleontological resources
during Project grading.

MM-GEO-1 Prior to project grading the project
applicant shall retain a qualified paleontologist to review the proposed project area to determine the potential for
paleontological resources to be encountered. If there is a potential for paleontological resources to occur, the
paleontologist shall identify the area(s) where these
resources are expected to be present, and a qualified
paleontological monitor shall be retained to monitor the initial cut in any areas that have the potential to contain paleontological resources.

Site review and if
potential for
paleontological
resources is
identified,
monitoring of initial
cut in any areas that
have the potential
for resources.
construction
activities and filing
of mitigation report.

Prior to grading and if
applicable during
initial cut.

Paleontologist
Land Use and Planning
LU-1 Project-related
traffic results in a
significant increase in
delay (greater than 2.0
seconds) at the
Rancheros Drive/ SR- 78
WB intersection in the
AM and PM peak hours
under Near Term 2025
With Project condition.

MM LU-1 Prior to the issuance of the first building
permit, the Project Developer shall pay the local and regional Public Facility Fees (PFF) development fees assessed to address the impact to the City of San Marcos’ SR 78
Interchanges.

Payment of Public
Facility Fees
Prior to issuance of
first building permit.

Applicant
LU-2a Northbound left-
turn movement out of the
E. Barham Drive/ Project
Driveway (West), the
Project’s western
driveway, is calculated to
operate at LOS E during
MM LU-2 The project shall restrict left-turns out of the western project driveway between the hours of 4 PM and 6 PM. Signage shall be placed at the western project driveway identifying the turning movement timing restriction. The signage requirement shall be noted on the final project plans and shall be put in place prior to project operation.

Note signage
restricting left-turns
on final Project plans
and install sign.

Prior to Project
occupancy.

Applicant
11 Impact Mitigation Measure Action Timing Responsibility the PM peak hour under
Near Term 2025 With
Project condition.

LU-2b Northbound left-
turn movement out of the
E. Barham Drive/ Project
Driveway (West) (the
Project’s western
driveway) is calculated to
operate at LOS E during
the PM peak hour under
Horizon Year 2050 with
Project condition. The
significant effect is only
for the outbound left-
turns during PM peak
hour.

LU-3a Northbound left-
turn movement out of the
E. Barham Drive/ Project
Driveway (East), the
Project’s eastern
driveway, is calculated to
operate at LOS E during
the PM peak hour under
Near Term 2025 With
Project condition.

LU-3b Northbound left-
turn movement out of the
E. Barham Drive/ Project
Driveway (East) (the
Project’s eastern
driveway) is calculated to
operate at LOS E during
the PM peak hour under
Horizon Year 2050 with
Project condition. The
significant effect is only
MM LU-3 The project shall restrict left-turns out of the eastern project driveway between the hours of 4 PM and 6 PM. Signage shall be placed at the eastern project driveway identifying the turning movement timing restriction. The signage requirement shall be noted on the final project plans and shall be put in place prior to project operation.

Note signage
restricting left-turns
on final Project plans
and install sign.

Prior to Project
occupancy.

Applicant
12 Impact Mitigation Measure Action Timing Responsibility for the outbound left-
turns during PM peak
hour.

NOISE
N-1 Depending on
the staging location of a
rock drill, noise levels
may exceed the 75 dBA
exterior noise threshold.

MM-N-1 If a rock drill is proposed within 160 feet of
any occupied noise sensitive land use, a noise mitigation plan based upon the location of the construction equipment, topography and construction schedule shall be prepared by an acoustical engineer. If noise levels are determined to exceed City’s noise threshold of 60 dBA at any existing sensitive receptor, a mitigation plan shall be developed that may include a temporary noise barrier along any property line where the impacts could occur. A barrier ranging from 8 to 12 feet in height may be needed. The proposed noise
barrier shall be of solid non-gapping material to adequately reduce construction noise levels below the noise threshold.

The mitigation plan may also incorporate the usage of the equipment (amount of time used and/or the location in
respect to the property line). The mitigation plan shall determine the final height and location of a temporary
barrier if one is necessary. The final mitigation design shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Division Manager.

Preparation of noise
mitigation plan and
implementation of
identified measures
including
construction of
temporary noise
barriers.

Prior to
commencement of
rock drilling
activities.

Applicant/
Landowner,
Acoustical
Engineer, City
(Planning Division
Manager)
N-2 Noise levels
resulting from rock
crushing operations
would exceed the City’s
60 dBA Leq standard at
the single-family
residences and the City’s
65 dBA Leq standard at
the adjacent church and
preschool.

MM-N-2 To minimize exterior noise levels related to
rock crusher operation during construction and to comply with the City of San Marcos noise standards limiting noise levels to 60 dBA Leq at residences and 65 dBA Leq at the nearby church and preschool, barriers shall be constructed to break the line of sight from the rock crusher to a receptor.

Construct noise
barriers; Take noise
measurements
during first week of
rock crusher
operation to
determine hourly
noise levels.

If noise levels
exceed thresholds,
implement further
noise reduction
Prior to
commencement of
rock crushing
activities and during
first week of rock
crusher operations.

Applicant/
Landowner,
Acoustical
Engineer, City
(Planning Division
Manager)
13 Impact Mitigation Measure Action Timing Responsibility The locations of crusher and placement of the required
barriers are presented in Figure 3.11-3. The design of the barriers, including materials and color for any sound walls shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Division Manager.

To ensure compliance with the City’s thresholds, noise
measurements of the rock crusher should be conducted to determine the hourly noise level within the first week of operation once the final crusher type and location are
determined. If noise levels are found to be above the
established thresholds of 60 dBA Leq at any existing single family residential use, 65 dBA Leq for any multifamily use or 65 dBA Leq at a commercial use then additional mitigation in the form of higher barriers, sound absorbing materials or operational limits on the crusher usage shall be
incorporated.

measures to meet
noise standards.

N-3 Noise levels at
11 receptors at the top of
slopes along E. Barham
Drive facing SR-78 are
modeled to exceed the
City’s General Plan Noise
Element 65 dBA exterior
noise threshold.

N-4 Noise levels at
13 receptors on second
and third floor balconies
facing E. Barham Drive
and SR-78 are modeled
to exceed the City’s
General Plan Noise
Element 65 dBA exterior
noise threshold.

The locations of barriers are presented in
Figure 3.11-4. The
design of the barriers, including materials and color for any sound walls shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Division Manager.

Construct noise
barriers. Submit
location and design
of barriers to City
Planning Division
Manager for
approval.

Prior to Project
occupancy of
affected units
adjacent to E.

Barham Drive (Figure

3.11-4 in EIR).

Applicant/
Landowner,
Acoustical
Engineer, City
(Planning Division
Manager)
MM-N-4 To minimize on-site exterior second and
third floor balcony noise levels and to comply with the City of San Marcos noise standards, 5-7-foot barriers shall be
constructed along the units adjacent to E. Barham Drive and farther back (see Figure 3.11-5). The barriers shall be in place prior to project occupancy and must be constructed of a non-gapping material consisting of masonry, ½ inch thick glass, earthen berm or any combination of these materials.

The locations of barriers, presented in Figure 3.11-5, and Construct noise
barriers. Submit
location and design
of barriers to City
Planning Division
Manager for
approval.

Prior to Project
occupancy of
affected units
adjacent to E.

Barham Drive and
farther back (Figure

3.11-5 in EIR).

Applicant/
Landowner,
Acoustical
Engineer, City
(Planning Division
Manager).
14 Impact Mitigation Measure Action Timing Responsibility design of the barriers, including materials and color for any sound walls shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Division Manager.

MM-N-5 To ensure compliance with the CCR Title 24
interior noise threshold of 45 dBA CNEL, a final noise
assessment shall be performed prior to the issuance of
building permits. This final report shall identify the interior noise requirements based on architectural and building
plans to meet the City’s established interior noise limit. The identified interior noise requirements, which may include conventional building construction methods and providing a closed window condition requiring a means of mechanical ventilation (e.g., air condition) for each building and upgraded windows for all sensitive rooms (e.g., bedrooms and living spaces), shall also be in place prior to occupancy of the residences adjacent to E. Barham Drive.

Preparation of Final
Noise Assessment
and implement
identified interior
noise requirements
to meet City’s
interior noise limit.

Submit final noise
assessment prior to
issuance of building
permits for
residences adjacent
to E. Barham Drive.

Noise reduction
measures in place
prior to occupancy.

Applicant/
Landowner,
Acoustical
Engineer, City
(Planning Division
Manager). TRANSPORTATION
TR-1 Conflict with
Mobility Element Policies
Addressing Roadways
See Mitigation LU-1, LU-2, LU-3.

15 Project Design Features
Aesthetics
• Implementation of the Landscape Plan to provide a cohesive and visually-appealing planting scheme.
• Compliance with the City of San Marcos Street Lighting Standards and Specifications and San Marcos Municipal Code Title 20, Section 20.300.080, Light and Glare Standards.

Air Quality
• Compliance with the San Diego Air Pollution Control District’s (SDAPCD’s) fugitive dust rules and fugitive dust control measures outlined in Section 87.426 of the City’s Grading Ordinance. • In accordance with SDAPCD Rule 67.0 (Architectural Coatings), the project would utilize low-volatile organic compound (VOC) paint that does not exceed 100 grams of VOC per liter for interior surfaces and 150 grams of VOC per liter for exterior surfaces.
• Heavy diesel construction equipment shall be rated Tier IV or better.

Geology and Soils
• Implementation of all remedial grading and drainage recommendations contained within Chapters 7 and 9 of the geotechnical report prepared for the project (GEOCON 2020).

Greenhouse Gas Emissions
• Each garage will be wired for EV charging stations.
• Provision of three Level 2 EV charging station in the community parking area. • Installation of rooftop solar consistent with Title 24. • The project design includes bicycle racks.
• The HOA manager will provide transit information to the owners and make a good faith effort in offering transit fare subsidies.
• The CC&Rs will have a requirement that the HOA will also inform community members about public transit and carpool options.
• The project will include a parking for carpool vehicles. • Provision of a workspace in the community building for telecommute employees. • The project’s landscaping plan incorporates shade trees. • Compliance with the City’s Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (WELO) and Municipal Code, Title 20.
• None of the units will have fireplaces.

Hazards
• Future residents shall be notified of potential annoyances commonly associated with proximity to airports (e.g., noise, vibrations, and overflights) through the recording of overflight notification documents as outlined in the McClellan-Palomar Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan and Chapter

20.265 of the City’s Municipal Code.

Hydrology/Water Quality
Source control BMPs include, but are not limited to:
• Preventing illicit discharges into the MS4
• Stenciling the future on-site public road storm drain inlets • Protecting trash storage areas from rainfall, run-on, runoff, and wind dispersal.

Site design BMPs include:
• Conserving natural areas, soils, and vegetation
• Minimizing impervious areas
• Runoff collection through multiple private inlets
• Landscaping with native or drought tolerant species.

Noise
• Grading, excavation and other earth moving activities would occur between 7:00 AM and 4:30 PM, Monday through Friday. No grading, excavation and other earth moving activities would occur on the weekends or holidays in accordance with the City’s Municipal Code, Section 17.32.180.

• Blasting activities shall comply with the City’s Municipal Code, Section 17.60.070 (Blasting Operations Procedures).

16 Public Services – Fire Protection, Police Protection and Schools • The applicant/developer/property owner shall submit an executed version of petition to annex into and establish, with respect to the property, the special taxes levied by the following Community Facility District: CFD 2001-01 (Fire and Paramedic).
• The applicant/developer/property owner shall submit an executed version of petition to annex into and establish, with respect to the property, the special taxes levied by the following Community Facility District: CFD98-01 (Police). The applicant shall pay the San Marcos Unified School District developer fees that are in effect at the time of building permit issuance. The current residential fee is $4.38 per square foot.

Transportation (Vehicle Miles Traveled)
• The project design results in a greater average residential density on the project site (14.3 dwelling units/acre) compared to the residential density for the Traffic Analysis Zone (TAZ) in which is located (TAZ 1026), which has a residential density of 7.03 dwelling units per acre. This allows for a reduction in vehicle miles traveled.
• The project design includes bicycle racks.
• The HOA manager will provide transit information to the owners and make a good faith effort in offering transit fare subsidies.
• The CC&Rs will have a requirement that the HOA will also inform community members about public transit and carpool options.
• The project will include parking for carpool vehicles. • Provision of a workspace in the community building for telecommute employees. • The applicant/developer/property owner shall submit an executed version of petition to annex into and establish, with respect to the property, the special taxes levied by the following Community Facility District: CFD2011-01 (Congestion Management).

Utilities
• The applicant shall pay Water Capital Facility (Capacity) Fees that are in effect at the time of building permit issuance to Rincon del Diablo Municipal Water District per Ordinance No. 21-98.21. • The applicant shall pay Wastewater Capital Facility Fees per Vallecitos Water District per Ordinance No. 176.

Wildfire
• 150-foot onsite fire fuel modification buffer is incorporated into the project design. • Designed per code for fire resistive building materials.

San Marcos City CouncilMay 10, 2022

San Marcos City Council
May 10, 2022