RESOLUTION NO. 2023-9158
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN MARCOS CERTIFYING A FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR 120 RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUMS IN THE GRAN VISTA SPECIFIC PLAN AREA (SPA) ZONE EIR22-002
Meritage Homes
WHEREAS, on October 19, 2021, the City received an application from Meritage Homes requesting a Specific Plan (SP21-0003) to establish rules and regulations for the development of the project site; a General Plan Amendment (GPA21-0007) to change the land use from “Commercial” to “Specific Plan Area”; a Rezone (R21-0003) to change the zone from Commercial (C) to Specific Plan Area (SPA); a Multi-Family Site Development Plan (MFSDP21-0001) for design review of a residential condominium complex; and a Tentative Subdivision Map (TSM21-0003) for an 120-unit condominium map; and WHEREAS, the Project requires approval of a discretionary action by the City, which is subject to compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Sections 21000 et. seq) (CEQA), the California Guidelines for the Implementation of CEQA (14 Cal. Code of Regs. Sections 15000-15387) (State CEQA Guidelines), and the City’s environmental review ordinance (San Marcos Municipal Code Chapter 18.04) (City CEQA Guidelines); and WHEREAS, the City is the lead agency, as defined by CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines, responsible for the preparation, consideration and approval of environmental documents for the Project; and WHEREAS, on May 12, 2022, the City held an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) Scoping Meeting to provide an overview of the project Notice of Preparation, in accordance with CEQA Guideline Section 15083, and Public Workshop with the general public; and WHEREAS, the Draft EIR was available to the general public and other public agencies for a 45-day review and comment period from April 3, 2023 to May 18, 2023; and WHEREAS, the City issued a Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR22-002, State Clearinghouse No. 2022040440) (Final EIR) on June 5, 2023, incorporating the April 2023 Draft EIR; comments and recommendations received by the City on the Draft EIR, either verbatim or in summary, and a list of private individuals or entities and public agencies that submitted comments; City responses to significant environmental points raised in the review and consultation process; modifications made to the text of the Draft EIR that are also included in the Final EIR; and appendices to the Draft and Final EIRs; and WHEREAS, the Final EIR evaluates the possible environmental impacts of the proposed Specific Plan (SP21-0003); General Plan Amendment (GPA21-0007), Rezone (R21-0003), Multi-Family Site Development Plan (MFSDP21-0001), and Tentative Subdivision Map (TSM21-0003); and WHEREAS, to the extent authorized by law, the City desires and intends to use the Final EIR and the documents incorporated by reference therein, to comply with the environmental documentation requirements pursuant to CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines and the City CEQA Guidelines for each of the above-referenced discretionary actions for the Project; and WHEREAS, the City prepared the Findings of Fact as specified in Exhibit A in accordance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines and San Marcos Municipal Code Chapter 18.04 (City CEQA Guidelines); and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission is responsible pursuant to San Marcos Municipal Code Chapter 18.04 for reviewing the Final EIR and making a recommendation to the City Council as to whether the Final EIR should be certified if prepared in compliance with all applicable requirements; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recommended certification of the Final EIR to the City Council on June 5, 2023 by a 7-0 vote, in favor; and WHEREAS, the required public hearing held on June 27, 2023 was duly noticed and held in the manner prescribed by law.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council resolves as follows:
The foregoing recitals are true and correct, and are hereby incorporated by reference into this Resolution.
The Final EIR indicates that the Project would have direct and/or cumulative impacts in the following areas which can be reduced to less than significant levels with implementation of the mitigation measures in the Final EIR:
Biological Resources (impacts to sensitive species/habitats) Cultural Resources (unknown cultural resources during project excavation) Tribal Cultural Resources (unknown tribal cultural resources during excavation) The Final EIR indicates that the Project would have no impact or less than significant impacts in the following areas without the implementation of mitigation measures:
Aesthetics
Agricultural and Forestry Resources
Air Quality
Energy
Geology and Soils
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Hydrology and Water Quality
Land Use and Planning
Mineral Resources
Noise
Population and Housing
Public Services
Recreation
Utilities and Service Systems
Wildfire
The Final EIR indicates the Project will have significant and unavoidable impacts on the environment after all feasible mitigation measures recommended in the Final EIR are implemented:
Transportation (Vehicle Miles Travelled (VMT)), due to impacts remaining following exhaustion of feasible mitigation measures.
The Final EIR reflects the independent judgment of the City, as required by Section 21082.1(c)(3) of CEQA; and The Final EIR was prepared and completed in compliance with CEQA and all applicable requirements, as required by Section 15090 of the State CEQA Guidelines, including the Findings of Facts to be considered.
Upon consideration of the Finding of Facts, together with the staff report (copies of which are on file in the Planning Division), public testimony presented at the hearing, and all other oral and written evidence received by the City on this Project, the City Council hereby certifies the Final EIR.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of San Marcos, California, at a regular meeting thereof, held on this 27th day of June, 2023, by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
APPROVED:
Rebecca D. Jones, Mayor
ATTEST:
Phillip Scollick, City Clerk
Attachment(s):
Exhibit A –Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
EXHIBIT A
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-9158
EIR 22-002
CEQA Findings Regarding Significant Effects and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the Gran Vista Specific Plan Project
Final EIR SCH No. 2022040440
SP 21-0003, GPA 21-0007, R 21-0003, MFSDP 21-0001, TSM 21-0003 The City of San Marcos has prepared an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed Gran Vista 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 potential effects for the following environmental areas of potential concern: Aesthetics, Agriculture and Forest Resources, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Energy, Geology and Soils, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality, Land Use and Planning, Mineral Resources, Noise, Population and Housing, Public Services, Recreation, Transportation, Tribal Cultural Resources, Utilities and Service Systems, and Wildfire.
The Final EIR identified no impact or less than significant impacts related to Aesthetics, Agriculture and Forest Resources, Air Quality, Energy, Geology and Soils, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality, Land Use and Planning, Mineral Resources, Noise, Population and Housing, Public Services, Recreation, Utilities and Service Systems, and Wildfire.
The Final EIR identified potentially significant environmental effects related to Biological Resources (potential for project construction activities to cause disturbances that would result in impacts to adjacent habitats and nesting birds); Cultural Resources (unknown cultural resources during project excavation); Transportation (exceed VMT per resident threshold); and Tribal Cultural Resources (potentially impact unknown tribal cultural resources during project construction).
The Final EIR determined that the potentially significant environmental impacts have been reduced to less than significant levels with implementation of the mitigation measures, with exception of transportation impact which are significant, and unavoidable, and hereby recommended to the City Council for certification pursuant to CEQA with adoption of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program designed to ensure compliance with mitigation measures throughout implementation of the project, and Findings Regarding Significant Effects and Statement of Overriding Considerations.
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.
Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(b) and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(3), the City finds that the project will have significant and unavoidable impacts to transportation (exceed VMT per resident threshold) after all feasible mitigation measures recommended in the Final EIR are implemented. 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 Development Services Department, 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 approximately 7.6-acre vacant project site is located west of the intersection of N. Las Posas Road and Palm Road in the City of San Marcos, California. The project site is comprised of Assessor’s Parcel Numbers (APNs) 219-121-15-00 and 219-121-16-00. The project is considered an infill site within a transit priority area pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21099.
The following project approvals are needed to authorize development of the planned residential community within the project site: Specific Plan; General Plan Amendment; Rezone; Multi-Family Site Development Plan; and Tentative Subdivision Map. The proposed project would allow for the development of approximately 120 multi-family residential dwelling units, resulting in a gross density of approximately 15.8 dwelling units per acre. The project also includes open space, active recreational areas, bio-retention areas, circulation improvements, and a public services and facilities plan.
The Specific Plan is the comprehensive planning document that establishes development guidelines for the project site. The document will serve as the primary land use, policy, and regulatory document for the project by providing a development planning review process, as authorized by California Government Code Section 65450, in conjunction with the San Marcos Municipal Code Zoning Ordinance, Chapter 20.535. Under the proposed Specific Plan, the only permitted uses within the project site are multi-family residential and open space.
The project would include 120 multi-family residential dwelling units on 7.6 acres for an approximate total density of 15.8 dwelling units per acre. The project would include approximately 92,645 square feet of recreation areas and an average of 146 square feet of private open space per unit. Amenities on site would include tot lots and recreational areas, a dog park, a community garden, and a landscaped pedestrian path along the N. Las Posas Road frontage. The proposed project includes landscaping, bio-retention areas, and circulation improvements. The project would include two points of entry that are shared with the neighboring CVS parcel.
The primary entry to the project site would be via a driveway at the signalized intersection of N. Las Posas Road and Palm Road and the secondary access point is from a driveway on W. Mission Road that includes a left-turn and right-in/right-out traffic movements. Both driveways have been improved with enhanced paving and landscaping. Shared use of these driveways is controlled through covenants, conditions, and restriction that cover the project site and the CVS parcel. Three external public roadways provide access to the project site. N. Las Posas Road forms the project site’s eastern boundary. Palm Road intersects with N. Las Posas Road at the project’s main entrance, which is signalized. W. Mission Road forms a portion of the project site’s southern boundary and provides additional access to the site. The internal circulation system for the proposed development would consist of a combination of private drives and private drive aisles. Private drives are low-speed streets designed with a minimum curb-to-curb width of 24-feet. This width is adequate to accommodate vehicles, emergency vehicles, and other service vehicles. This cross section allows for two lanes of travel (one in each direction), as well as adequate back-up space where parking spaces are provided. Private drive aisles provide access to private garages, and are designed with a minimum width of 24-feet. A minimum dimension of 30-feet is required between garages to provide adequate back up for vehicles exiting private garages. Parking would be prohibited in private drive aisles by signage and/or striping and enforced by the HOA. The 38 existing onsite parking spaces constructed with the adjacent CVS Pharmacy development would be available for guest parking and shared with CVS. Also, 20 additional guest spaces would be constructed throughout the project. The CVS property provides approximately twice as many parking spaces than the minimum required for the pharmacy. The project requires a minimum of 40 guest parking spaces (one space per three units) which the proposal exceeds. As required, two of the 20 new guest parking spaces would include electric vehicle charging stations. The project also includes 240 garage spaces which would provide a 2-car garage space per unit which would comply with the City’s Parking Ordinance. Garage spaces would be EV capable in accordance with the latest Title 24 Building Code Requirements.
The project would include a variety of floorplans for the proposed townhomes. Floorplans include two and three-bedroom units that vary in size from approximately 1,200 square-feet to 1,800 square-feet with differing garage configurations. All townhomes would be three stories high. The number of townhomes per building would vary from four to ten. Proposed residential units are designed as entry-level market-rate housing with a range of unit sizes and price points in order to create opportunities for home ownership that would be attractive to varying income levels. The proposed townhomes would also provide for a transition between single-family homes to the north and high-density apartments to the southeast across W. Mission Road. All proposed buildings would be equipped with photovoltaic panels (solar panels) on the rooftops to provide solar energy to the proposed homes, in accordance with current California Building Code.
The project site is designated as a High-Quality Transit Area due to its proximity to transit and other facilities and services that support alternatives to vehicle use. Palomar College, a public community college consisting of a 200-acre campus, is located east of the project site. Palomar College Transit Center, a North County Transit District hub, is located less than 0.25 miles from the project site. Palomar College Transit Center consists of a bus depot on the north side of W. Mission Road, near the main entrance to Palomar College, and a train station on the south side of W. Mission Road that serves the SPRINTER hybrid rail train. Rail service and bus transit service offered at the Transit Center provide local and regional connections to schools, employment, shopping, and entertainment options within the City, as well as San Diego and Riverside Counties. An existing bus turnout and stop are located on W Mission Road in front of CVS. The Inland Rail Trail, a proposed 21-mile Class I bikeway, runs along the south side of W. Mission Road and connects the Cities of Oceanside, Vista, San Marcos, and Escondido; as well us areas of unincorporated San Diego County.
For the purposes of analysis, it was assumed that construction of the proposed project would last approximately 14 months. It is expected that the proposed grading will generate approximately 9,335 cubic yards of cut and 9,335 cubic yards of fill, resulting in balanced earthwork that does not require any import or export of dirt. It is anticipated that off-site improvements would occur concurrently with the construction on the project site. Construction would require the use of typical construction equipment, including dozers, tractors, excavators, graders, pavers, rollers, and air compressors.
Water service for potable residential use and fire service for the proposed project would be provided by the Vallecitos Water District (VWD). Wastewater service for the proposed project would also be provided by VWD. The distribution of potable water to each home would be provided by a series of 8-inch public pipes and related infrastructure. The proposed water system would connect to an existing 8-inch pipe in N. Las Posas Road. Pipes would be located within private drives and private drive aisles to create a loop system that serves the entire project site. Individual services to homes would be provided by a lateral from the main pipe to the water meter for each home. A dedicated fire main would provide fire service to a series of new and existing fire hydrants and to the individual units for firefighting purposes. There are two existing fire hydrants on the project site that are already in service and would remain in place. In accordance with current California Building Code, all buildings would be equipped with fire sprinklers and water conservation features, such as water efficient faucets and shower heads and high-performance toilets. Homes would be Water Sense Certified to meet U.S. Environmental Protection Agency standards. Irrigation for the site would tie into the proposed loop system and irrigation of landscaping throughout the project site would be required to comply with the City’s Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance and the City’s Landscape Manual. There are currently no existing gravity sewer lines on the project site. A wastewater system would be incorporated into the project site design, which would include an 8-inch PVC sewer main to adequately service individual homes and community areas discharging wastewater. Pipes would be located underneath internal private drives and private drive aisles. The on-site system would collect wastewater and direct flows into an existing 15-inch pipe in N. Las Posas Road.
The proposed project’s overall design will meet California’s Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen; California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 11), which requires implementation of energy efficient light fixtures and building materials. The Project would install two electric vehicle charging stations (Level 2) in the common use parking lot and bicycle racks would be provided throughout the site. Furthermore, the project will comply with the 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards (CBC Title 24, Part 6), which requires newly constructed buildings to meet energy performance standards set by the California Energy Commission. The project would install a listed raceway to accommodate a dedicated 208/240-volt branch circuit in each residential garage for future installation of an electric vehicle (EV) charger. Additionally, in accordance with current California Building Code, all proposed buildings will include rooftop solar panels to provide solar energy to the proposed homes.
All construction activities will comply with San Marcos Municipal Code Chapter 10.24.010 and 17.32.180. The project is processing the following entitlements:
General Plan Amendment is required to re-designate the project site (APN 219-121-15-00 and 219-121-16-00) from Commercial (C) (as designated by the City) and to Specific Plan Area (SPA). This General Plan Amendment would allow the Specific Plan to provide rules and regulations for development of the project site.
Rezone is required to re-designate the project site (APN 219-121-15-00 and 219-121-16-00) from Commercial (C) (as currently designated by the City) to Specific Plan Area (SPA). This Rezone would allow the Specific Plan to provide rules and regulations for development of the project site.
Specific Plan is required to be reviewed and approved concurrently with the Site Development Plan application. The Specific Plan establishes the development 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.
Multi-Family Site Development Plan is required to ensure the development of multi-family structures and conserves the value of adjacent properties by respecting adjacent design standards and aesthetics.
Tentative Subdivision Map is required for the development of 120 multi-family residential units, open space, active recreational areas, bio-retention areas, and circulation improvements.
The project will require the following approvals and permits from other agencies, as indicated:
San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Construction General Permit (State Water Resources Control Board Order 2009-0009-DWQ).
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 follows:
Maximize residential densities, to the extent feasible, within proximity to major transit, education facilities, commercial uses, and trails to reduce reliance on automobiles and potentially minimize greenhouse gas emissions.
Create a highly connected and efficient system of sidewalks and pathways supported by pedestrian friendly architecture and landscaping to promote walkability and connect people to surrounding transit and destinations.
Design a vehicular circulation system that adequately accommodates traffic and minimizes traffic impacts in and around the project site.
Support the housing needs of the City of San Marcos (City) and the region by developing high-quality workforce housing that balances density with price-points and long-term maintenance costs, such that new homes remain financially attainable to entry-level home buyers.
Establish development standards and design guidelines that ensure distinctive architecture, landscaping, and recreational amenities that complement and enhance the existing surrounding neighborhood while providing a desirable living environment.
Identify a program for the long-term maintenance of the community to ensure all facilities are adequately maintained to City standards.
Finance or contribute a fair share of funding to all community services and infrastructure needed to support development proposed by the project to promote economic stability.
These objectives have been considered in preparing the findings discussed below.
Section I Findings Regarding Certification of Final EIR Pursuant to CEQA and the State CEQA 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:
The City Council has reviewed and considered the information in the Final EIR, which has been completed in compliance with CEQA; The Final EIR reflects the City’s, as lead agency, independent judgment and analysis; and, The City Council adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Attachment A) to reduce or avoid the significant and mitigable impacts of the project.
Any finding made by the City shall be deemed made, regardless of where it appears in this document. All of the language included in this document constitutes findings by the City, whether or not any particular sentence or clause includes a statement to that effect. The City intends that these findings be considered as an integrated whole and, whether or not any part of these findings fail to cross-reference or incorporate by reference any other part of these findings, that any finding required or committed to be made by the City with respect to any particular subject matter of the Final EIR, shall be deemed to be made if it appears in any portion of these findings.
Section II Environmental Effects Found Not to be Significant The Final EIR determined , based upon substantial evidence in the record, the following impacts associated with the project are less than significant and no mitigation is required: Aesthetics, Agriculture and Forest Resources, Air Quality, Energy, Geology and Soils, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Hydrology and Water Quality, Land Use and Planning, Mineral Resources, Noise, Population and Housing, Public Services, Recreation, Utilities and Service Systems, and Wildfire. The Final EIR summarizes impacts that were found to be insignificant in Chapters 3 and 5. The City adopts the Final EIR’s determination of insignificance and no further findings are required for the impacts found to be insignificant.
Section III Environmental Effects Mitigated to Below a Level of Significance Pursuant to Section 21081(a) of the Public Resources Code and Section 15091(a)(1) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that, for each of the following significant effects identified in the Final EIR, changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which mitigate or avoid the identified significant effects on the environment to less than significant levels. The significant effects and mitigation measures are stated fully in the Final EIR and each of the mitigation measures have been imposed. These findings are explained below and are supported by substantial evidence in the record of proceedings.
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
The proposed project will result in potentially significant impacts related to the potential for project construction activities to cause disturbances that would result in impacts to adjacent habitats, and the potential for construction activities to result in indirect impacts to nesting birds.
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. Implementation of Mitigation Measure MM-BIO-1 would reduce impacts to adjacent habitat beyond the authorized work limits (Impact BIO-1) to a level below significance by requiring the Proposed Project to install temporary fencing around the Project limits of grading. Implementation of Mitigation Measure MM-BIO-2 would reduce potential impacts to nesting birds in the area (Impact BIO-2), to less than significant by requiring pre-construction nesting bird surveys to be completed if clearing and grubbing occur during the nesting season (typically February 15 through August 31). Implementation of Mitigation Measures MM-BIO-1 and MM-BIO-2 would reduce potential impacts to biological resources to a level below significance for the reasons described above.
In order to mitigate potential impacts to adjacent habitat (Impact BIO-1) and nesting birds (Impact BIO-2), implementation of the following mitigation measures will be required:
MM-BIO-1 Temporary Construction Fencing. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall provide the limits of grading, including staging areas, and plans shall be provided to the City of San Marcos (City) and a qualified biologist for review and approval. Temporary fencing shall be installed in accordance with the approved grading plan and inspected by a qualified biologist.
The project applicant shall temporarily fence the limits of project impacts and install appropriate sediment-trapping devices to prevent additional impacts to, and the spread of silt from, the construction zone into adjacent habitats to be avoided. Fencing and sediment trapping devices shall be installed in a manner that does not impact habitats to be avoided.
If work occurs beyond the fenced limits of impacts, all work shall cease until the problem has been remedied to the satisfaction of the City. Any habitat impacts that occur beyond the authorized work area shall be offset at ratios approved by the City. Temporary construction fencing and sediment trapping devices shall be removed upon project completion.
MM-BIO-2 Pre-Construction Nesting Bird Surveys. To avoid any direct impacts to raptors and/or any migratory birds protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (16 USC 703 et seq.) and California Fish and Game Code (3503 and 3503.5), removal of habitat shall occur outside of the nesting season for these species (i.e., outside of February 15 through August 31, annually). If, however, removal of habitat must occur during the nesting period, the proposed project applicant or its designee shall retain a biologist to conduct a pre-construction survey to determine the presence or absence of nesting birds in the proposed area of disturbance. The pre-construction survey must be conducted within 72 hours prior to the start of construction and shall be repeated if construction activities discontinue for more than 3 consecutive days.
Impacts to active nests are typically avoided as follows. Clearing and construction shall be postponed or halted within the following buffers to be established by the biologist: (1) no work within 50 feet of a non-listed and non-raptor avifauna nest and (2) no work within 500 feet of a raptor nest. Raptor nests are not anticipated within the immediate project site due to lack of suitable nesting habitat; however, trees within 500 feet of the project boundary could support raptor nesting. The construction avoidance area shall be clearly demarcated in the field with highly visible construction fencing or flagging, and construction personnel shall be instructed on the sensitivity of nest areas. To the extent possible, the no-construction buffer zones shall be avoided until the nesting cycle is complete. However, it may be reasonable for the City of San Marcos to reduce these buffer widths depending on site conditions. If construction-related activities must take place within an active nest buffer area, the proposed project applicant or its designee shall present a plan to the City of San Marcos with measures to monitor and minimize impacts to nesting birds. No ground-disturbance activities shall occur within the avoidance buffer zone until the qualified biologist has determined that the nest is no longer active and the young are not dependent on the nest.
Finding
The City Council of the City of San Marcos finds that: The mitigation measures MM-BIO-1 and MM-BIO-2 recommended in the Final EIR to mitigate, avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects to adjacent habitat and nesting birds have been adopted as stated in the approval resolution and that these mitigation measures will mitigate the impact to species identified as a candidate, sensitive or special-status species and sensitive natural communities and cumulative impacts related to habitat loss to a less than significant level.
Facts in Support of Finding:
The project will result in significant direct impacts to the vegetation community if construction work inadvertently extends beyond the authorized work limits where impacts to sensitive communities are not anticipated. However, implementation of mitigation measure MM-BIO-1 will reduce this impact to below a level of significance by installing temporary fencing to ensure that impacts stay within the project limits.
The project could result in direct impacts to nesting birds, including species such as the house finch, mourning dove, and California towhee. Implementation of mitigation measure MM-BIO-2 will reduce this impact to below a level of significance by requiring nesting bird surveys to be completed if clearing and grubbing occur during the nesting season.
Compliance with existing regulations and implementation of MM-BIO-1 and MM-BIO-2 would ensure that the proposed project would not result in significant impacts to sensitive vegetation communities, special-status species, and/or nesting birds. Implementation of proposed mitigation and City review of proposed project plans for the site would ensure impacts to biological resources would be reduced to a level of less than significant.
With the incorporation of the above mitigation measures, significant environmental effects to biological resources will be less than significant.
CULTURAL RESOURCES
Implementation of the proposed project will not impact any identified archaeological resources, historical resources, or any known human remains interred outside a formal cemetery. Construction of the project will involve ground-disturbing activities with the potential to unearth or adversely impact previously unidentified archaeological resources. In addition, no known human remains are present on the project site. However, construction of the project will involve ground-disturbing activities, such as grading and surface excavation, with the potential to unearth or adversely impact previously unidentified human remains.
Mitigation Measures: The project includes mitigation measures in the MMRP that is 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-1 through MM-CR-4 will mitigate Impacts CR-1 and CR-2 (potential impact to unidentified cultural resources and human remains). Mitigation measures MM CR-1 through MM CR-4 will also substantially lessen impacts to tribal cultural resources which are discussed later in this document.
In order to mitigate potential impacts to unidentified subsurface cultural resources and human remains (Impacts CR-1 and CR-2), implementation of the following mitigation measures will be required:
MM-CR-1 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 of San Marcos. 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 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-2 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 of San Marcos (City) Planning Division stating that a Qualified Archaeologist and Traditionally and Culturally Affiliated (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 Tribal Cultural Resources Treatment and Repatriation 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 site during grubbing, grading, trenching, and/or other ground disturbing activities that have the potential to disturb more than 6 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 from existing commercial (previously permitted) sources of materials or 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 and grading plans. The Applicant/Owner or Grading Contractor shall provide written notice to the Planning Division and the TCA Tribe, preferably through email, of the start and end of all ground disturbing activities.
Prior to the release of any grading bonds, or prior to the issuance of any project Certificate of Occupancy, an archaeological monitoring report that 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 52 consultation to Pechanga Band of Indians, Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians, San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians, and San Pasqual Band of Mission Indians, 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 of San Marcos.
MM-CR-3 Unanticipated Discovery Procedures: Both the Qualified Archaeologist and the Traditionally and Culturally Affiliated (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 Tribal Cultural Resources Treatment and Repatriation Agreement (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 of San Marcos (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 Resources, Sections 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.
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.
MM-CR-4 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 remains (as determined by the Qualified Archaeologist and/or the Traditionally and Culturally Affiliated [TCA] Native American monitor) shall occur until the Medical Examiner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to California Public Resources Code, Section 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 2 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 place until after the Medical Examiner makes their 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 constitutes 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 disagreement regarding the disposition of the remains, state law will apply, and the mediation process will occur with the Native American Heritage Commission. In the event that mediation is not successful, the landowner shall rebury the remains at a location free from future disturbance (see California Public Resources Code, Sections 5097.98[e] and 5097.94[k]).
Finding
The City Council of the City of San Marcos finds that mitigation measures MM-CR-1 through MM-CR-4, recommended in the Final EIR to mitigate, avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects to archaeological resources and human remains have been adopted as stated in the approval resolution and that these measures will mitigate the impact to archaeological resources and human remains to a less than significant level.
Facts in Support of Finding:
Implementation of the proposed project will not impact any identified archaeological resources, historical resources, or any known human remains interred outside a formal cemetery. However, the potential exists for impacts to unknown cultural resources during project grading. These potentially significant impacts to archaeological resources and human remains will be mitigated to below a level of significance through implementation of Mitigation Measures MM-CR-1 through MM-CR-4.
Specifically, implementation of mitigation measures MM-CR-1 through MM-CR-3 provide for the presence of archaeological and Native American monitors during ground disturbing activities that would be able to identify any previously unidentified cultural resources and to prevent inadvertent disturbance of any intact cultural deposits that may be present. Should any resources be identified, implementation of mitigation measures MM-CR-1, MM-CR-2, and MM-CR-3 will require proper handling and treatment of such resources by providing for a proper evaluation to determine whether additional archaeological work is necessary.
Finally, potential impacts to human remains will be mitigated through implementation of Mitigation Measure MM-CR-4, which includes the requirement that any remains uncovered during ground disturbing activities shall not be further disturbed 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. Therefore, with incorporation of these measures, potential impacts to cultural resources will be reduced to below a level of significance.
TRIBAL CULTURAL RESOURCES
Additionally, construction of the project would involve ground-disturbing activities such as grading and surface excavation, with the potential to unearth or adversely impact previously unidentified tribal cultural resources.
Mitigation Measures: The project includes mitigation measures in the MMRP that is to be adopted concurrently with these findings.
All tribal cultural resources impacts and mitigation measures are detailed in Attachment A at the end of this document. Implementation of mitigation measures MM-CR-1 through MM-CR-4 discussed above under cultural resources will impacts reduce to tribal cultural resources (Impact TCR-1) to a level below significance.
In order to mitigate potential impacts to tribal cultural resources (Impact TCR-1), implementation of the following mitigation measures will be required:
MM-CR-1 through MM-CR-4, discussed above under Cultural Resources.
Finding
The City Council of the City of San Marcos finds that mitigation measures MM-CR-1 through MM-CR-4, recommended in the Final EIR to mitigate, avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effects to tribal cultural resources have been adopted as stated in the approval resolution and that these measures will mitigate the impacts to tribal cultural resources to a less than significant level.
Facts in Support of Finding:
For reasons described under Cultural Resources above, implementation of mitigation measures MM-CR-1 through MM-CR-4 would reduce potentially significant impacts to tribal cultural resources to a level below significance.
Section IV Environmental Effects that Cannot be Mitigated to Below a Level of Significance This section identifies the significant unavoidable impacts that require a Statement of Overriding Considerations to be issued by the City upon approval of the project. Based on the analysis contained in the Final EIR, the following impacts to transportation have been determined to fall within this “significant unavoidable impact” category. These unavoidable impacts are overridden by project benefits set forth in the Statement of Overriding Considerations in Section VI, below.
Pursuant to Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code and Section 15091(a)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City of San Marcos finds that, for each of the following significant effects, specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, make infeasible the mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR. These findings are explained below and are supported by substantial evidence in the record of proceedings.
TRANSPORTATION
The project will conflict with CEQA Guidelines section 15064.3, subdivision (b). The project will result in a potentially significant direct and cumulative impact due to the project exceeding the VMT per resident threshold. Since the project proposes residential land uses, this EIR evaluates whether the project VMT per resident would exceed a significance threshold of 15% below the existing countywide average. The project is estimated to generate 960 ADT. The project VMT per resident is 17.10, above the significance threshold of 15% below the region-wide average, or 14.9 VMT per resident. Because the project’s VMT per resident is more than 15% above the region-wide average, impacts would be potentially significant.
Mitigation Measures: The project includes mitigation measures in the MMRP that is to be adopted concurrently with these findings.
All transportation impacts and mitigation measures are detailed in Attachment A at the end of this document. The proposed project would have a significant VMT impact and mitigation measures are required to reduce the VMT per resident. The proposed project’s total VMT per resident is 17.1 miles. To mitigate the proposed project’s VMT to less-than-significant levels, mitigation measures would need to reduce the total VMT per resident by 6.02% from 17.1 miles to 16.07 miles. To reduce the average VMT per resident, it is recommended that the proposed project implement a TDM Program. A TDM program would facilitate increased opportunities for walking and bicycling, as well as provide the resources, means, and incentives for ridesharing and carpooling. The SANDAG Mobility Management Guidebook/VMT Reduction Tool was taken into consideration initially; however, this tool does not provide strategies that are applicable to project. Therefore, the methods and strategies contained in the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association Handbook for Analyzing Greenhouse Gas Emission Reductions, Assessing Climate Vulnerabilities, and Advancing Health and Equity were considered. Mitigation measures MM-TRA-1 through MM-TRA-3 proposed for the project are anticipated to reduce the VMT per capita generated by 0.10%. Thus, with implementation of the TDM program, the proposed project is anticipated to generate 17.08 VMT per resident (17.1 VMT per resident × (1−0.001)). The resulting 17.08 miles per resident exceeds the 16.07 miles threshold. Therefore, since the mitigation measures would not reduce the VMT per resident to less-than-significant levels, the impact is only partially mitigated, and the proposed project would have a significant and partially mitigated impact. Therefore, despite the implementation of MM-TRA1 through MM-TRA-3, impacts would be significant and unavoidable.
MM-TRA-1 Provide subsidized transit passes (10%) for 100% of all residents (CAPCOA T-9: Implement Subsidized or Discounted Transit Program = 0.10% VMT reduction).
MM-TRA-2 Creation and distribution of a “new resident” information packet addressing alternative modes of transportation (CAPCOA T-7: Implement Commute Trip Reduction Marketing).
MM-TRA-3 Provide on-site bike parking (CAPCOA T-10: Provide End-of-Trip Bicycle Facilities).
In addition to MM-TRA-1 through MM-TRA-3, the following improvement recommendation proposed by the LTA would be incorporated as a condition of approval, which has the potential to further reduce VMT; however, it is not considered a mitigation measure as it does not meet CAPCOA’s minimum requirements:
Install electric vehicle charging stations at each electric vehicle guest parking space (CAPCOA T-14: Provide Electric Vehicle Charging Infrastructure).
Finding
The City Council of the City of San Marcos finds that direct and cumulative impacts to VMT levels to be significant. The above mitigation measures, MM-TRA-1 through MM-TRA-3 recommended in the Final EIR have been adopted and will reduce the impacts but not to a level below significance. The impacts are overridden by project benefits as set forth in the statement of overriding considerations.
Facts in Support of Finding:
MM-TRA-1 through MM-TRA-3 outlined above would reduce impacts related to the VMT per resident. However, even with implementation of these mitigation measures, project VMT would remain significant. The proposed project’s VMT per resident is not anticipated to fall under the significance threshold as the project site is located in a suburban area that includes single-family homes with higher automobile ownership as compared to the region. While the proposed project is located on an infill site and is consistent with Climate Action Plan and SANDAG’s Regional Plan, impacts related to VMT per resident would not be reduced to 85% of the regional average. This impact is primarily a result of the geographic location of the proposed project in a suburban neighborhood, as trip characteristics of the surrounding residential land uses are used as a surrogate to estimate proposed project trip characteristics, regardless of the inherent differences between the land uses.
As described previously, mitigation measures MM-TRA-1 through MM-TRA-3 proposed for the project are anticipated to reduce the VMT per capita generated by 0.10%. Thus, with implementation of the TDM program, the proposed project is anticipated to generate 17.08 VMT per resident (17.1 VMT per resident × (1−0.001)). The resulting 17.08 miles per resident exceeds the 16.07 miles threshold. Therefore, since the mitigation measures would not reduce the VMT per resident to less-than-significant levels, the impact is only partially mitigated, and the proposed project would have a significant and partially mitigated impact. Therefore, despite the implementation of MM-TRA1 through MM-TRA-3, impacts would be significant and unavoidable.
Section V Findings Regarding Project Alternatives
The State CEQA Guidelines section 15126.6(a) requires the discussion of a “a reasonable range of alternatives to a project, or the location of a project, which would feasibly attain most of the basic objectives of the project but would avoid or substantially lessen any of the significant effects of the project, and evaluate the comparative merits of the alternatives.” The Guidelines states that the “range of potential alternatives to the proposed 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 proposed project. These alternatives are:
No Project Alternative
Existing Land Use Designation Alternative
Reduced Density Alternative
When a lead agency has determined that a proposed project will still cause one or more significant environmental effects that cannot be substantially lessened or avoided after the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures, prior to approving the project as mitigated, the agency must determine whether there remain any project alternatives that are both environmentally superior with respect to such impacts and feasible within the meaning of CEQA.
An alternative may be rejected if it is “infeasible” or if it fails to achieve the most basic project objectives identified within the EIR. “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.
Table 1 below provides a list of the project objectives and offers a qualitative comparison of each alternative’s conformance to the project objectives.
Alternative 1: No Project Alternative
CEQA requires a No Project Alternative to be addressed in an EIR. Under the No Project Alternative, the proposed project would not be implemented and the project site would remain undeveloped in its existing condition. This alternative would eliminate all the significant impacts identified for the proposed project. Since the No Project Alternative would not provide any development, overall impacts would be reduced compared to the proposed project. However, certain benefits would not be realized under this alternative, including the provision of housing units as identified in the General Plan in an infill and transit area, and enhanced uses and connectivity in the surrounding area. As the No Project Alternative would not develop the site or allow for housing, this alternative would not fulfill any of the project objectives.
Finding and Facts in Support of Finding
The City Council of the City of San Marcos rejects the No Project/No Development Alternative for the following reasons:
1. The project will provide additional housing units as identified in the General Plan to accommodate various family demographics and to contribute to the growing housing needs of the region by providing livable development in proximity to SR-78 and the transit.
2. The opportunity to develop recreational open space at the project site and to contribute to public infrastructure such as roadways and utilities would not be provided if this alternative were adopted.
3. The No Project/No Development Alternative does not meet any of the project objectives, as shown in Table 1, below.
The No Project/No Development Alternative is therefore rejected in favor of the proposed project.
Alternative 2: Existing Land Use Designation Alternative Under the Existing Land Use Designation Alternative, the project site would be developed per the City’s General Plan as a Commercial (C) land use. The project site would be developed as previously processed with the existing CVS Conditional Use Permit. The Existing Land Use Designation Alternative would include 69,000 square feet (sf) of grocery store and gas station uses and 23,000 sf of office space. This alternative would include 276 parking spaces. This alternative could be processed with a Conditional Use Permit and Site Development Plan and would not require a GPA or Rezone of the site. Other improvements, such as circulation, landscaping, and utility connections would occur as required. Off-site improvements beyond those required by mitigation measures would not occur under this alternative. No open space uses would occur on site.
Because development of the Existing Land Use Designation Alternative would include grading and development of the same site, construction-related impacts would be similar to the proposed project and would require similar mitigation for impacts to biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, tribal cultural resources, and traffic. However, the commercial use of the site would be expected to result in greater impacts to air quality, energy, GHG emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, transportation, and utilities, in comparison to the impacts resulting from the proposed project’s residential use, and additional mitigation may be required.
This alternative would promote infill development on site; however, it would not fulfill any of the basic project objectives and would also not aid the City in achieving its Regional Housing Needs Assessment allocation. Furthermore, the project site has been designated for commercial development under the existing and previous General Plans but has remained vacant, evidencing that it is not marketable or feasible for commercial uses.
Although this alternative would be consistent with the existing designated land use and zoning for the site and adjacent land uses to the south, this alternative would not reduce or avoid significant environmental impacts and would not meet any project objectives.
Finding and Facts in Support of Finding
The City Council of the City of San Marcos rejects the Existing Land Use Designation Alternative for the following reasons:
1. This alternative would promote infill development on site; however it would not fulfill any of the basic project objectives and would also not aid the City in achieving its Regional Housing Needs Assessment allocation, as no residential uses would be provided under this alternative.
2. The project site has been designated for commercial development under the existing and previous General Plans but has remained vacant, evidencing that it is not marketable or feasible for commercial uses.
3. Construction-related impacts would be similar to the proposed project, requiring the same mitigation measures, but the commercial use of the site would be expected to result in greater impacts to air quality, energy, GHG emissions, hazards and hazardous materials, transportation, and utilities. Additional mitigation may be required to combat these impacts.
For these reasons, the Existing Land Use Designation Alternative is rejected by the City as undesirable and infeasible.
Alternative 3: Reduced Density Alternative
The Reduced Density Alternative would reduce the density on site in comparison to the project by changing the General Plan land use designation to Low Density Residential (LDR) and changing the zoning to Residential 1 (R1-7.5), which “provides for low-density, single family detached homes that are suitable in massing and character or inclusion in single-family detached neighborhoods,” as outlined in the Municipal Code. Under this alternative, the site would accommodate approximately 33 single-family homes for a total residential density of 4.34 dwelling units per acre. The Reduced Density Alternative would not incorporate private useable open space area within the residential community since each single-family home would have a backyard. The access points and internal streets would be configured to fit the 33 single-family home layout. This alternative would utilize the entire 7.6acre site.
The Reduced Density Alternative would reduce the total unit and population density on site, but retain the same development footprint as the proposed project. Development of single-family homes would be more consistent with the adjacent single-family homes to the west. However, the 33 single-family homes under this alternative would not be consistent with the urban setting of the area and other adjacent land uses, and would not maximize development of the site near transit, schools, and commercial uses.
While this alternative would develop infill housing on an urbanized site and rezone the site to residential to assist the City to implement its housing goals, it would less efficiently promote infill development and would not enhance connectivity. Due to the site configuration and single-family units, communal recreational amenities would not be incorporated into this alternative. Furthermore, due to the project site being located in an urban setting and the limited options available to mitigate VMT impacts for residential projects, the Reduced Density Alternative would still result in a significant and unavoidable transportation impact due to VMT.
However, the Reduced Density Alternative would potentially provide a slightly reduced level of impact in some environmental analysis areas including aesthetics, air quality, energy, GHG, and noise. As described above, mitigation measures would still be required to mitigate impacts to biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, and tribal cultural resources. This alternative would not meet most of the project objectives.
The EIR determined that the Reduced Density Alternative would be considered the environmentally superior alternative because it would potentially provide a reduced level of impact in some environmental analysis areas including air quality, GHG, and noise. However, such impacts under this alternative would still remain as less than significant, similar to the proposed project. As described previously, the Reduced Density Alternative would cover the same development footprint as the proposed project but would result in decreased unit count and population count on site. Because the Reduced Density Alternative would cover the same development footprint as the project, impacts to biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, and tribal cultural resources would remain the same as the proposed project and mitigation measures would still be required to mitigate impacts to these environmental resources. The Reduced Density Alternative would not meet project objectives 1, 2, and 4. Furthermore, due to the project site being located in an urban setting and the limited options available to mitigate VMT impacts for residential projects, the Reduced Density Alternative would still result in a significant and unavoidable transportation impact due to VMT.
Finding and Facts in Support of Finding
The City Council of the City of San Marcos rejects the Reduced Density Alternative for the following reasons:
1. This alternative would decrease the number of residential dwelling units from 120 to 33 as compared to the proposed project. As shown in Table 1, this alternative would meet most of the project’s objectives, but to a lesser degree than the proposed project. However, by developing single-family units, this alternative would not be consistent with the urban setting of the area including some adjacent land uses, and would not maximize development of the site near transit, schools, and commercial uses.
This alternative would reduce impacts related to traffic and transportation, however, this alternative would still result in significant and unavoidable impact related to VMT.
For these reasons, the Reduced Density Alternative is rejected by the City as undesirable and infeasible.
Table 1. Summary of Project Objectives and Alternatives Objective
Alternative
No Project/No Development
Existing Land Use Designation
Reduced Density
Meets objectives?
Maximize residential densities, to the extent feasible, within proximity to major transit, education facilities, commercial uses, and trails to reduce reliance on automobiles and potentially minimize greenhouse gas emissions.
No
No
No
Create a highly connected and efficient system of sidewalks and pathways supported by pedestrian friendly architecture and landscaping to promote walkability and connect people to surrounding transit and destinations.
No
Partial
No
Design a vehicular circulation system that adequately accommodates traffic and minimizes traffic impacts in and around the project site.
No
Partial
Yes
Support the housing needs of the City of San Marcos (City) and the region by developing high-quality workforce housing that balances density with price-points and long-term maintenance costs, such that new homes remain financially attainable to entry-level home buyers.
No
No
No
Establish development standards and design guidelines that ensure distinctive architecture, landscaping, and recreational amenities that complement and enhance the existing surrounding neighborhood while providing a desirable living environment.
No
Partial
Yes
Identify a program for the long-term maintenance of the community to ensure all facilities are adequately maintained to City standards.
No
Yes
Yes
Finance or contribute a fair share of funding to all community services and infrastructure needed to support development proposed by the project to promote economic stability.
No
Yes
Yes
Section VI Statement of Overriding Considerations
The City Council of the City of San Marcos adopts and makes this statement of overriding considerations concerning the project’s unavoidable significant impacts to transportation to explain why the project’s benefits override and outweigh its unavoidable impacts.
The City Council of the City of San Marcos finds that the project’s significant environmental impacts are acceptable when balanced with the project’s benefits.
Each of the benefits cited below constitutes a separate and independent basis that justifies approval of the project and outweighs the unavoidable adverse environmental effects of approving the project, and thus make the adverse environmental effects acceptable. Thus, even in the absence of one or more of the reasons set forth below, the City has determined that each remaining reason, or any combinations of reasons, is a sufficient basis for approving the project, notwithstanding any significant and unavoidable impacts that may occur.
Increased Density in Proximity to Transit: The project will contribute to the growing housing needs of the region by increasing residential density and development in proximity to SR-78 and the Palomar College Transit Center. The project site is considered an in-fill site and is located within a designated as a High-Quality Transit Area due to its proximity to transit and other facilities and services that support alternatives to vehicle use. Palomar College Transit Center, a North County Transit District hub, is located less than 0.25 miles from the project site. Palomar College Transit Center consists of a bus depot on the north side of W Mission Road, near the main entrance to Palomar College, and a train station on the south side of W Mission Road that serves the SPRINTER hybrid rail train. Rail service and bus transit service offered at the Transit Center provide local and regional connections to schools, employment, shopping, and entertainment options within the City, as well as San Diego and Riverside Counties. An existing bus turnout and stop are also located on W Mission Road in front of CVS. The Inland Rail Trail, a proposed 21-mile Class I bikeway, runs along the south side of W Mission Road and connects the Cities of Oceanside, Vista, San Marcos, and Escondido, as well us areas of unincorporated San Diego County. The increase in density on-site proposed by the project will increase ridership/viability of the transit system, and reduce automobile dependence, emissions, and traffic, consistent with the goals of the City’s General Plan.
Range of Housing Types: The project will provide a multi-family housing opportunity with a range of unit types, sizes, prices, and number of different bedroom counts, including 2 and 3-bedroom units, to accommodate a full spectrum of family demographics. In so doing, the project will provide a range of housing opportunities for existing and future City residents. The project’s proposed townhomes and associated amenities would also support a reasonable share of the City’s projected regional population growth to help the City meet its required regional housing needs, as detailed in the City’s General Plan Housing Element and SANDAG’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment.
Tax and Public Facilities Financing: The project will provide a stable and significant source of property tax revenue for the City. The project will make a fair share contribution towards the financing of public improvements and services, including police, fire, parks and recreation, and roadway infrastructure.
Job Creation: The project will boost the local economy by supporting construction related jobs during the approximately 14 months of project construction.
Housing in Proximity to Jobs and Services: The project would provide an opportunity for workers to reside within in the City in close proximity to North County job centers within the City and surrounding municipalities. It would help correct the jobs-to-housing imbalance by developing demanded housing in the North County San Diego region near where job growth is projected to occur. By providing reasonably priced housing in the City, the project would also support the City's employers and their ability to attract quality employees.
Conclusion
In light of the foregoing, and the information contained within the Final EIR and other portions of the project record, the City concludes that implementation of the Gran Vista Specific Plan Project will result in the development of a beneficial project as outlined above. The City also finds that the benefits identified above outweigh and make acceptable the significant, unavoidable environmental impacts associated with the Gran Vista Specific Plan Project and, accordingly, adopts this Statement of Overriding Considerations.
Resolution No. 2023-9158
EIR22-002
June 27, 2023