Attachment D_EIR — San Marcos City Council, March 26, 2024 (part 2 of 3)

3.8 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.8-16
potential disturbances that may be experienced for future residents would be required pursuant to the City’s Municipal Code. Further the project would not impair implementation of or physically interfere with emergency response or evacuation plans. Lastly, the project site is not designated as a high fire severity zone, and the project would be constructed in accordance with all applicable fire codes. As such, project- level and cumulative-level impacts due to hazards and hazardous materials would be less than significant.

Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.9-1

3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
Introduction
This section identifies the existing hydrologic and water quality conditions on the project site and analyzes the potential impacts of the proposed project on hydrology and water quality. The analysis in this section is based upon the following reports whi ch are included as Appendix K and Appendix L of this Environmental Impact Report (EIR):12:
• Priority Project Hydrology Study for Capalina Apartments, prepared by Excel Engineering, June 12, 2023 (Excel 2023a).
• Priority Development Project Stormwater Quality Management Plan (SWQMP) for Capalina Apartments, Capalina Road, San Marcos, CA 92069, prepared by Excel Engineering, June 12, 2023 (Excel 2023b).

The preliminary drainage report and SWQMP discusses applicable hydrologic volume and storm water requirements and analyzes peak flow anticipated for preliminary design of the on- site storm drain system. The analysis in this section also considers the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Appendix G and applicable State and Local regulations, including the City of San Marcos General Plan.

In the Initial Study prepared for the proposed project ( Appendix B.1), it was determined to have no impact on the following hydrology/water quality-related issue areas: groundwater supplies depletion, risk release of pollutants due to project inundation in flood hazard, tsunami or seiche zones. Therefore, these issues are not discussed further in this EIR section. Section 5.5, Environmental Effects Found Not to be Significant – Hydrology and Water Quality, this EIR provides additional information on these topics.

Table 3.9-1 summarizes the project- and cumulative-level hydrology and water quality impact analysis by threshold.

Table 3.9-1. Hydrology/Water Quality Summary of Impacts Threshold of Significance Project-Level
Impact
Cumulative-
Level
Impact
Impact After
Mitigation
#1: Violate any water quality standards or waste
discharge requirements or other substantially
degrade surface or groundwater quality?
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Without
Mitigation
#2: Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including through the
alteration of the course of a stream or river or
through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a
manner which would: result in substantial
erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Without
Mitigation

12 Full references for documents cited in this section are included in Chapter 7, References, of this EIR.

3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.9-2
Threshold of Significance Project-Level
Impact
Cumulative-
Level
Impact
Impact After
Mitigation
#3: Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including through the
alteration of the course of a stream or river or
through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a
manner which would: substantially increase the
rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner
which would result in flooding on- or off-site?
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Without
Mitigation
#4: Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including through the
alteration of the course of a stream or river or
through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a
manner which would: create or contribute to
runoff water which would exceed the capacity of
existing or planned stormwater drainage systems
or provide substantial additional sources of
polluted runoff?
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Without
Mitigation
#5: Substantially alter the existing drainage
pattern of the site or area, including through the
alteration of the course of a stream or river or
through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a
manner which would: impede or redirect flood
flows?
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Without
Mitigation
#6: Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a
water quality control plan or sustainable
groundwater management plan?
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Without
Mitigation
#7: Result in significant alteration of receiving
water quality during or following construction?
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Without
Mitigation
#8: Result in an increase in pollutant discharges
to receiving waters? Consider water quality
parameters such as temperature, dissolved
oxygen, turbidity, and other typical storm water
pollutants (e.g., heavy metals, pathogens,
petroleum derivatives, synthetic organics,
sediment, nutrients, oxygen-demanding
substances, and trash).

Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Without
Mitigation
#9: Be tributary to an already impaired water
body as listed on the Clean Water Act Section
303(d) list? If so, can it result in an increase in
any pollutant for which the water body is already
impaired?
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Without
Mitigation

3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.9-3
Threshold of Significance Project-Level
Impact
Cumulative-
Level
Impact
Impact After
Mitigation
#10: Be tributary to environmentally sensitive
areas (e.g., MSCP, RARE, Areas of Special
Biological Significance, etc.)? If so, can it
exacerbate already existing sensitive conditions?
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Without
Mitigation
#11: Have a potentially significant environmental
impact on surface water quality, to either
marine, fresh or wetland waters?
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Without
Mitigation

3.9.1 Existing Conditions
This section details the existing hydrology, water quality and groundwater conditions on the project site.

Site Hydrology
The project site is currently vacant and undeveloped. The project fronts on W. Mission Road to the north and Capalina Road to the south. Per the hydrology report, the property drains primarily by overland flow to W. Mission Road then easterly along the W. Mission Road curb and gutter to an existing storm drain system located at North Pacific Street (Excel 2023a).

Water Quality
The proposed project is located within the jurisdiction of the San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The San Diego Region is divided into eleven hydrologic units. The project site is located in the Richland Hydrologic Subarea (904.52) wit hin the San Marcos Hydrologic Area (904.5) of the Carlsbad Watershed (Hydrologic Unit (904). The project site discharges to a public storm drain system which flows to an un -named tributary that flows to San Marcos Creek (passing through Lake San Marcos) to Batiquitos Lagoon, which discharges to the Pacific Ocean.

The Carlsbad Watershed Management Area (WMA) is approximately 211 square miles and is formed by a group of six individual watersheds in northern San Diego County. The WMA is bordered by the San Luis Rey River WMA to the north and by the San Dieguito River WMA to the south. It reaches inland nearly 24 miles to just northeast of Lake Wohlford. The maximum elevation of the WMA is approximately 2,400 feet and it extends to sea level at the Pacific Ocean. The Carlsbad WMA is made up of six distinct Hydrologic Areas (HA)s: Loma Alta, Buena Vista Creek, Agua Hedionda, Encinas, San Marcos Creek, and Escondido Creek. The WMA includes the entire Cities of Carlsbad, San Marcos and Encinitas and portions of the cities of Oceanside, Vista, Escondido, Solana Beach, and Sa n Diego County unincorporated areas.

The San Marcos Hydrologic Area is the second largest within the WMA. It is about 36,000 acres in area and comprises approximately 28% of the Carlsbad WMA. The major receiving waters within the Hydrologic Area are San Marcos Creek, Encinitas Creek, Batiquitos Lagoon, and the Pacific Ocean. San Marcos Creek originates on the western slopes of the Merriam Mountains in west central San Diego County and discharges to the Pacific Ocean, 14.6 miles away, via Batiquitos Lagoon. Encinitas Creek is another one of the major tributaries in the HA, originating in the hills southwest of Questhaven Road

3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.9-4
and paralleling El Camino Real before it converges with San Marcos Creek at the southeastern corner of Batiquitos Lagoon. The highest elevation within the HA is approximately 1,540 feet above mean sea level (amsl). Lake San Marcos is the largest impoundmen t within the HA. The San Marcos HA is primarily located in the cities of San Marcos, Carlsbad, Encinitas, and the County of San Diego, with a small portion in Escondido.

The San Marcos HA has two distinctive areas separated by the Lake San Marcos impoundment – the Upper and Lower San Marcos HA areas. The Upper Hydrologic Area includes drainage areas in the County of San Diego, and the cities of San Marcos and Escondido, th at runoff through Upper San Marcos Creek to Lake San Marcos. The Lower Hydrologic Area consists of portions of the cities of Carlsbad, Encinitas, San Marcos, and Vista (Carlsbad Watershed Management Area 2022).

Within the Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (San Diego Basin Plan), San Marcos Creek and Batiquitos Lagoon, located downstream of the project site, are identified as having numerous beneficial uses. For San Marcos Creek, these beneficial uses are: Agricultural Supply (AGR), Contact Water Recreation (REC1), Non -Contact Water Recreation (REC2), Warm Freshwater Habitat (WARM) and Wildlife Habitat (WILD). For Batiquitos Lagoon, these uses are: REC1, REC2, Preservation of Biological Habitats of Special Significance (BIOL), Estuarine Habitat (EST), WILD, Rare, Threatened, or Endangered Species (RARE), Marine Habitat (MAR), Migration of Aquatic Organisms (MIGR), and Spawning, Reproduction, and/or Early Development (SPWN). The Basin Plan includes i dentifies numerical and qualitative water quality objectives to protect the listed beneficial uses for each water body.

The San Marcos Creek system consists of a number of water bodies that are listed as impaired under Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act. In accordance with Section 303(d) of the 1972 Federal Clean Water Act (CWA), the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) has established a list of “impaired water bodies.” San Marcos Creek is listed on the 2020-2022 Integrated Report (CWA Section 303(d)/ 305(b)) List of Impaired Water Segments as being impaired for Nutrients (nitrogen and phosphorus), Metals (selenium), Total Toxics (toxicity), Other Causes (Benthic Community Effects), Pesticides (bifenthrin, dichlorodiphenyldichloroethylene (DDE) and pyrethroids), Pathogens (indicator bacteria), and total dissolved solids. Further downstream, Batiquitos Lagoon is also listed as being impaired for toxicity. Furthermore, San Marcos Lake was identified under Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act as impaired due nutrients (ammonia as nitrogen and phosphorous, and metals (copper) (SWRCB 2022).

3.9.2 Regulatory Setting
This section details the applicable federal, state, and local regulations pertaining to hydrology and water quality.

Federal
Federal Emergency Management Agency
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) administers the National Flood Insurance Program to provide subsidized flood insurance to communities that comply with FEMA regulations limiting development in floodplains. FEMA also issues Flood Insurance Rate Maps that identify which land areas are subject to flooding. These maps provide flood information and identify flood hazard zones in the community. The standard for flood protection is established by FEMA, with the minimum level of flood protection for n ew development determined to be the one percent -annual exceedance probability (i.e., the 100 -year flood event). Per FEMA’s Flood Insurance Rate Map Number 06073C0789H, the project site is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area (FEMA 2012).

3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.9-5
Federal Clean Water Act
The Clean Water Act (CWA) establishes the basic structure for regulating discharges of pollutants into the waters of the U.S. and regulating quality standards for surface waters. The basis of the CWA was enacted in 1948 and was called the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, but the Act was significantly reorganized and expanded in 1972. “Clean Water Act” became the Act’s common name with amendments in 1977.

Under the CWA, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) has implemented pollution control programs such as setting wastewater discharge standards for industry. The USEPA has also set water quality standards for contaminants in surface waters. The CWA made it unlawful to discharge any pollutant from a point source into navigable waters unless a permit was obtained.

Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act
Under Section 303(d) of the CWA, states are required to develop lists of water bodies that would not attain water quality objectives after implementation of required levels of treatment by point -source dischargers (municipalities and industries). Section 3 03(d) requires that the state develop a total maximum daily load (TMDL) for each of the listed pollutants. The TMDL is the amount of loading that the water body can receive and still be in compliance with water quality objectives. The TMDL can also act as a plan to reduce loading of a specific pollutant from various sources to achieve compliance with water quality objectives. The TMDL prepared by the state must include an allocation of allowable loadings to point and non -point sources, with consideration of background loadings and a margin of safety. The TMDL must also include an analysis that shows the linkage between loading reductions and the attainment of water quality objectives. USEPA must either approve a TMDL prepared by the state or, if it disapprov es the state’s TMDL, issue its own. National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit limits for listed pollutants must be consistent with the waste load allocation prescribed in the TMDL. After implementation of the TMDL, it is anticipated that the problems that led to placement of a given pollutant on the Section 303(d) list would be remediated.

National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
The NPDES permit system was established in the federal CWA to regulate municipal and industrial discharges to surface waters of the U.S. Sections 401 and 402 of the CWA contain general requirements regarding NPDES permits. Section 307 of the CWA describes the factors that USEPA must consider in setting effluent limits for priority pollutants.

Non-point sources are diffuse and originate from a wide area rather than from a definable point. Non- point pollution often enters receiving waters in the form of surface runoff, but is not conveyed by way of pipelines or discrete conveyances. As defined in the federal regulations, such non-point sources are generally exempt from federal NPDES permit program requirements. However, three types of non-point source discharges are controlled by the NPDES program: non -point source discharge caused by general construction activities, the general quality of stormwater in municipal stormwater systems, and discharges associated with industrial operations. The 1987 amendments to the CWA directed USEPA to implement the stormwater program in two phases. Phase I addressed discharges from large (population 250,000 or above) and medium (population 100,000 to 250,000) municipalities and certain industrial activities. Phase II addresses all other discharges defined by USEPA that are not included in Phase I.

In accordance with NPDES regulations, in order to minimize the potential effects of construction runoff on receiving water quality, the State requires that any construction activity that disturbs one acre or

3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.9-6
more must obtain a General Construction Activity Stormwater Permit. Permit applicants are required to prepare a stormwater pollution prevention plan (SWPPP) and implement best management practices (BMPs), such as erosion and sediment control and non-stormwater management measures, to reduce construction effects on receiving water quality.

Examples of typical BMPs implemented in SWPPPs include using temporary mulching, seeding, or other suitable stabilization measures to protect uncovered soils; storing materials and equipment to ensure that spills or leaks cannot enter the storm drain syste m or surface water; developing and implementing a spill prevention and cleanup plan; installing traps, filters, or other devices at drop inlets to prevent contaminants from entering storm drains; and using barriers, such as straw bales or plastic, to minimize the amount of uncontrolled runoff that could enter drains or surface water.

State
California Water Code Division 7 (Porter-Cologne Act)
The California Water Code contains provisions regulating water and its use. Division 7 establishes a program to protect water quality and beneficial uses of the state water resources including groundwater and surface water. The SWRCB and RWQCB administer the program and are responsible for control and water quality. They establish waste discharge requirements, oversee water quality control planning and monitoring, enforce discharge permits, and establish ground and surface water quality objectives.

State Water Resources Control Board
In California, the SWRCB has broad authority over water -quality control issues for the State. The SWRCB is responsible for developing statewide water quality policy and exercises the powers delegated to the State by the Federal government under the CWA. Other State agencies with jurisdiction over water quality regulati on in California include California Department of Public Health (for drinking water regulations), the California Department of Pesticide Regulation, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and the Office of Environmental Health and Hazard Assessment.

In accordance with Section 303(d) of the CWA, the SWRCB has established a list of “impaired water bodies.” Impaired water bodies in this watershed, as listed in the SWRCB 303(d) impaired waters list, include San Marcos Creek. San Marcos Creek is listed on the 2014-2016 CWA Section 303(d) List of Impaired Water Segments as being impaired for DDE, phosphorus, sediment, toxicity, and selenium.

Batiquitos Lagoon is also listed as being impaired for eutrophic, indicator bacteria, sediment, siltation, and toxicity. San Marcos Lake was identified under Section 303(d) of the Clean Water Act as impaired due to high concentrations of nitrogen and nutrients.

Regional Water Quality Control Board
The project site is situated within the jurisdiction of the San Diego RWQCB (Region 9). The San Diego RWQCB has the authority to implement water quality protection standards through the issuance of permits for discharges to waters at locations within its jurisdiction.

The project site is located within the Richland Hydrologic Subarea (904.52) of the San Marcos Hydrologic Area (904.5) of the Carlsbad Watershed Hydrologic Unit (904). Water quality objectives for San Marcos Creek and Batiquitos Lagoon are specified in the Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (Basin Plan) prepared by the RWQCB in compliance with the federal CWA and the Porter- Cologne Act. The Basin Plan establishes water quality objectives and implementation programs to

3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.9-7
meet stated objectives and to protect the beneficial uses of water in the lagoon and creek. Because the City of San Marcos is located within the RWQCB’s jurisdiction, all discharges to surface water or groundwater are subject to the Basin Plan requirements (RWQCB 1994).

In May 2013, the San Diego RWQCB adopted Order R9-2013-0001, the new municipal NPDES permit for 39 municipal, county government, and special district entities located in southern Orange County, southwestern Riverside County, and San Diego County who own and operate large municipal separate storm sewer systems (MS4s) which discharge storm water runoff and non -storm water runoff to surface waters throughout the San Diego Region. This permit has requirements for development projects to minimize or eliminate th e impacts of such development on water quality. The proposed project is subject to the requirements of the municipal permit as it is implemented via the Carlsbad Watershed Jurisdictional Urban Runoff Management Program. The specific requirements include th e selection of appropriate BMPs to avoid, prevent, or reduce the pollutant loads entering the storm drain system and receiving waters. The permit was amended in February 2015 by Order R9-2015-0001 and in November 2015 by Order R9-2015-0100.

Provision D.1.a of Order R9-2013-0001 requires the San Diego Stormwater Co-permittees to continue water monitoring programs established within previous Orders and pursuant to the approved Hydromodification Management Plan (HMP) (January 2011). The City of San Marcos is one of the co- permittees.

To comply with Order R9-2013-0001, as amended, the 2016 Regional Model BMP Design Manual was developed to provide San Diego Region-specific project design and post -construction storm water requirements for development projects and replace the prior San Diego Regional Model Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan (SUSMP). The City of San Marcos adopted its own BMP Design Manual in February 2016 and updated it in February 2023. The BMP Design Manual was used to recommend BMPs and low impact development (LID ) features for the proposed project. LID is an approach to land development that uses multiple small-scale natural detention and filtration features to manage stormwater as close to its source as possible. LID employs principles such as preserving and re-creating natural landscape features, minimizing effective imperviousness to create functional and appealing site drainage that treats stormwater as a resource rather than a waste product.

Local
Carlsbad Watershed Management Area Water Quality Improvement Plan The Carlsbad Watershed Management Area (WMA) Water Quality Improvement Plan (WQIP) is a requirement of stormwater regulations adopted by the RWQCB according to Order No. R9-2013-0001, as amended by Order Nos. R9 2015-0001 and R9 -2015-0100. The goal of the WQIP is to protect, preserve, enhance, and restore water quality of receiving water bodies. These improvements in water quality will be accomplished through an adaptive planning and management process that identifies the highest priority water quality conditions within the watershed and implements strategies to address them. Agencies involved in the development of the WQIP include the County of San Diego and the cities of Carlsbad, Encinitas, Escondido, Oceanside, San Marcos, Solana Beach, and Vista. The purpose of the Carlsbad WMA WQIP is to guide the Responsible Agencies’ Jurisdictional Runoff Management Programs (JRMP)s toward achieving improved water quality in MS4 discharges and receiving waters. Through the WQIP, priorities and goals are established an d strategies selected for implementation through the Responsible Agencies’ JRMPs to progress toward improvements in water quality. This approach establishes the WQIP as the overarching plan that each Responsible Agency will use to develop and implement their jurisdictional programs. Responsible Parties’ JRMPs contain the

3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.9-8
strategies, standards, and protocols by which each Responsible Agency will implement their individual program in response to the priorities and goals established in the WQIP. The WMA collective watershed strategy identifies nutrients as high priority water quality pollutants in the San Marcos Creek Hydrologic Area (Carlsbad Watershed Management Area Responsible Agencies 2022).

The Carlsbad WMA WQIP includes several major components:
• Priority Water Quality Conditions: after assessing available data sets, the water quality conditions in the watershed were prioritized and several were identified as those on which Responsible Agencies would focus their program efforts. These are identified as highest and priority water quality conditions. This does not mean that other water quality conditions or pollutants are to be ignored. On the contrary, many water quality conditions are related to one another in terms of the strategies selected to add ress them. Selected strategies to address priority water quality conditions are also effective at addressing many other pollutants and water quality conditions. The highest priority water quality condition for Escondido Creek and San Elijo Lagoon are indicator bacteria.
• Numeric Goals and Schedules: the WQIP establishes goals related to the highest priority water quality conditions. Furthermore, schedules for achieving these goals are included in the WQIP.

Together, the goals and schedules establish the targets that the Responsible Agencies use for both establishing their programs as well as measuring progress and achievement. Each highest priority water quality condition has established interim and final goals and schedules. • Strategies and Schedules: the WQIP identifies the strategies, or activities/BMPs, that the Responsible Agencies will implement to address the priority water quality conditions to progress towards achieving the numeric goals within the schedules identified. In addition to identifying the strategies, the WQIP identifies schedules for development (in some cases) and implementation of the strategies.

The Carlsbad WQIP was originally submitted to the RWQCB in June 2015 and after revisions based on RWQCB comments, an acceptance letter from the Regional Board was issued on November 22, 2016.

A 2021 update has been initiated, primarily to incorporate an as sessment of bacteria data for Agua Hedionda Lagoon and revisions noted in prior Annual Reports. The 2021 WQIP was submitted to the Regional Board in January 2021 and the revised WQIP was accepted in December 2021.

City of San Marcos Jurisdictional Runoff Management Plan The Order (NPDES Permit CAS0109266) requires the City of San Marcos to develop and implement a Jurisdictional Runoff Management Plan (JRMP) that identifies and describes the methods that the City will use to eliminate significant pollutants from the City’s Storm Water Conveyance System. The purpose of the City’s JRMP is to implement strategies that effectively prohibit non -stormwater discharges to the MS4 and reduce the discharge of pollutants in stormwater to the maximum extent practicable (MEP). Improving the quality of the discharge from the MS4 should have beneficial effects on the local receiving water bodies (City of San Marcos 2017).

San Marcos Storm Water Standards
The City has adopted its own BMP Design Manual (updated in February 2023) and the proposed project must comply with the standards and regulations contained therein.

3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.9-9
San Marcos General Plan
Conservation and Open Space Element
The following are applicable goals and policies from the City of San Marcos General, Conservation and Open Space Element related to hydrology and water quality:
• Goal COS-6: Protect and restore appropriate surface water and groundwater beneficial uses through prioritizing the improvement of locally impaired water bodies within the City of San Marcos subwatersheds.
o Policy COS-6.2: Promote watershed stewardship as the community norm. • Goal COS-7: Achieve sustainable watershed protection for surface and ground water quality that balances social, economical, and environmental needs. • Goal COS-8: Focus watershed protection, surface and groundwater quality management on sources and practices that the City has the ability to affect. o Policy COS-8.1: Identify pollutants of concern in each subwatershed for groundwater and surface water.
o Policy COS -8.4: Require new development and redevelopment to protect the quality of water bodies and natural drainage systems through site design, source controls, storm water treatment, runoff reduction measures, BMPs, LID, hydromodification strategies consistent with the Current San Diego RWQCB Municipal Stormwater NPDES Permit, and all future municipal stormwater permits.

Safety Element
The following goal and policy in the City of San Marcos General Plan, Safety Element are applicable to flooding and flood control:
• Goal S-2: Minimize the risk to people, property, and the environment due to flooding hazards. o Policy S-2.2: Require existing private development to take responsibility for maintenance and repair of structures to resist flood damage.

Land Use and Community Design Element
The following goal and policies in the City of San Marcos General Plan, Land Use and Community Design Element are applicable to storm water drainage facilities:
• Goal LU-2: Promote development standards and land use patterns that encourage long -term environmental sustainability.
o Policy LU-2.7: Promote the installation of trees to reduce the urban heat-island effect and green infrastructure to reduce storm water runoff.
• Goal LU-15: Flood control and storm water drainage facilities: ensure adequate flood control and storm water drainage is provided by the community.
o Policy LU-15.1: Implement activities, practices, procedures, or facilities that avoid, prevent, or reduce pollution of the San Marcos Storm Water Conveyance System and receiving waters.

3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.9-10
o Policy LU-15.2: Improve inadequate or undersized drainage/flood control facilities to solve both small neighborhood and large regional drainage and flood control problems. o Policy LU-15.3: Avoid, to the extent possible, development in floodplain and flood prone areas.
o Policy LU-15.4: Retain drainage courses in their natural condition, to the extent possible.

Consider smaller -scale drainage improvements to protect the environment and avoid disturbing natural drainage courses; consider detention areas and raised building pads.

Environmental Justice Element
The following goal and policies in the City of San Marcos General Plan, Environmental Justice Element are applicable to storm water drainage facilities:
• Goal EJ -1: Reduce greenhouse gas emissions, enhance air quality, and reduce impacts associated with climate change.
o Policy EJ-.1.5: Promote the installation of trees to reduce the urban heat-island effect and green infrastructure to reduce stormwater runoff (See Policy LU-2.7). o Policy EJ-1.17: Identify pollutants of concern in each subwatershed for groundwater and surface water (See Policy COS-8.1).

The proposed project’s consistency with applicable General Plan goals and policies is discussed in Section 3.10, Land Use and Planning. As detailed in Table 3.10 -7 in Section 3.10, the project is consistent with the applicable goals and policies.

City of San Marcos Ordinances
The Storm Water Management and Discharge Control Ordinance (San Marcos Municipal Code Chapter

14.15) requires that all new development and redevelopment activities comply with the stormwater pollution prevention requirements. These stormwater pollution pre vention requirements, which are described in detail in Section 14.15.050 of the Municipal Code “Reduction of Pollutants in Storm Water,” include construction, development, and redevelopment, and residential BMPs.

3.9.3 Thresholds of Significance
Appendix G of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines provides thresholds for determining significant environmental impacts related to hydrology and water quality. A project may be deemed to have a significant impact on hydrology/water quality if the project would:
• Threshold #1: Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or other substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality.
• Threshold #2: Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would: result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site. • Threshold #3: Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would: substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site.

3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.9-11
• Threshold #4: Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would: create or contribute to runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff.
• Threshold #5: Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would: impede or redirect flood flows. • Threshold #6: Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan.
• Threshold #7: Result in significant alteration of receiving water quality during or following construction.
• Threshold #8: Result in an increase in pollutant discharges to receiving waters? Consider water quality parameters such as temperature, dissolved oxygen, turbidity, and other typical storm water pollutants (e.g., heavy metals, pathogens, petroleum derivati ves, synthetic organics, sediment, nutrients, oxygen-demanding substances, and trash). • Threshold #9: Be tributary to an already impaired water body as listed on the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) list? If so, can it result in an increase in any pollutant for which the water body is already impaired?
• Threshold #10: Be tributary to environmentally sensitive areas (e.g., MSCP, RARE, Areas of Special Biological Significance, etc.)? If so, can it exacerbate already existing sensitive conditions?
• Threshold #11: Have a potentially significant environmental impact on surface water quality, to either marine, fresh or wetland waters?
As identified earlier in this section, impacts related issue area: risk release of pollutants due to project inundation in flood hazard, tsunami or seiche zones as well as impacts to groundwater recharge are not discussed in this section. Chapter 5.0, Environmental Issues Found Not to be Significant, provides additional information on this topic.

3.9.4 Project Impact Analysis
The following analysis discusses the potential for the proposed project to result in impacts to hydrology and water quality. A Hydrology Study and Priority Development Project (PDP) Storm Water Quality Management Plan were prepared for the project by Excel Engineering (2023a and 2023b ) and are included in Appendices K and L.

Post-Development Drainage Pattern
This proposed project is a mixed-use multifamily residential development containing two buildings and associated surface parking and supporting utilities. Proposed drainage facilities include two biofiltration basins, an underground storage tank used to re duce the project’s peak flow and associated storm drain systems which outlet to W. Mission Road. Two biofiltration basins are proposed to mitigate the storm water quality for the project (BMP -A and BMP -B). BMP-A is located near the northeast corner of the site and BMP-B is located near the northwest corner of the site. The biofiltration basins will collect the storm water runoff from the building and proposed parking lots and convey the

3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.9-12
storm water through storage tanks, storm drain systems and curb and gutters to the point of confluence (POC) (Excel 2023a).

At the center of the project site, the proposed impervious area runoff will be routed northerly to BMP- A. From BMP-A, runoff will flow through the catch basin at the southern end of BMP-A to act as a control structure to divert water to the proposed 48 -inch storage pipe system (BMP C). After detention in this storage pipe system, the system will outflow through a 12-inch storm drain to discharge point 1, which is located at the northeast corner of the project site. BMP-A will also have an emergency overflow which exits through a 12-inch storm drain to the same discharge point 1.

At the northwest part of the project site, surface runoff will follow the proposed grades through curb cuts to BMP-B. BMP-B then drains through a 12-inch storm drain to a curb outlet at W. Mission Road.

These flows confluence with the existing surface flow along W. Mission Road and drains easterly along the curb and gutter to the discharge point 1.

The south portion of the project site and the proposed right-of-way improvements along Capalina Road (including curb and gutter) will drain easterly along the proposed curb and gutter, to discharge point 2, located at the southeast corner of the project site. After runoff leaves discharge point 1 and discharge point 2, the drainage will follow the existing curb and gutter to the east to the inlet in North Pacific Street, the project’s POC (Excel 2023a).

Biofiltration and Site BMPs
As discussed above, two biofiltration basins are proposed to mitigate the storm water quality for the project (BMP-A and BMP-B). Biofiltration facilities are vegetated surface water systems that filter water through vegetation, and soil or engineered media prior to discharge via underdrain or overflow to the downstream conveyance system. Biofiltration facilities have limited or no infiltration. They are typically designed to provide enough hydraulic head to move flows through the underdrain connection to th e storm drain system. Nutrient sensitive media will be used in the biofiltration basin to provide treatment as San Marcos Creek is a 303(d) listed water body impaired by nutrient pollutant sources (Excel 2023b).

The biofiltration basin would be subject to regular inspection and maintenance. The property owner is required, pursuant to the City’s Municipal Code Section 14.15 and the BMP Design Manual, to enter into a stormwater management and discharge control maintenance agreement for the installation and maintenance of permanent BMPs prior to issuance of permits. A maintenance agreement shall be recorded with the County of San Diego Recorder’s Office, clarifying maintenance roles and responsibilities. These comprehensive inspection and maintenance requirements will be included as conditions of approval for the proposed project.

A green street vegetated swale (BMP-D) is proposed at the south side of the project site on Capalina Road. Green street infrastructure reduces stormwater runoff and helps improve water quality. Green streets provide source control of stormwater by biofiltr ation, and limit stormwater transport and pollutant conveyance to the collection system through storage layer and filter media. Per the County of San Diego 2020 BMP Manual, green streets restore predevelopment hydrology to the extent possible by slowing th e runoff down and allowing for infiltration; and provide environmentally enhanced roads (County of San Diego 2020).

In addition to the biofiltration features, which are considered structural BMPs, the proposed project would also incorporate source control and site design BMPs as identified in the preliminary SWQMP for the proposed project (Appendix L). Source control BMPs include but are not limited to 1) preventing

3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.9-13
illicit discharges into the MS4; 2) stenciling the future on -site public road storm drain inlets; and 3) protecting trash storage areas from rainfall, run-on, runoff, and wind dispersal.

Site design BMPs include but are not limited to 1) maintaining natural drainage pathways and hydrologic features; 2) conserving natural areas, soils, and vegetation; 3) minimizing impervious areas; 4) minimizing soil compaction; 5) runoff collection through multiple private inlets; and 6) landscaping with native or drought tolerant species.

Threshold #1: Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or other substantially degrade surface or groundwater quality?
Pollutants generated by development projects could include sediments, nutrients, trash and debris, oxygen demanding substances, oil and grease, bacteria and viruses, and pesticides. These pollutants can make their way to drainages and watercourses where they can degrade surface water quality, and in some cases groundwater quality. The project would discharge to an un -named tributary that flows to San Marcos Creek, which discharges to Batiquitos Lagoon, which discharges to the Pacific Ocean (Excel 2023b).

The proposed project would comply with all applicable water quality standards and waste discharge requirements. The proposed project includes a comprehensive water quality management approach that includes the use of biofiltration features and source control and site design BMPs to ensure that there would not be an increase in pollutant discharge to receiving waters. No flow-thru treatment BMPs are proposed to be implemented on site in lieu of retention or biofiltration. The stormwater management design for the project was developed following the forms and checklists found in the BMP Design Manual for Permanent Site Design, Storm Water Treatment and Hydromodification Management (City of San Marcos 2023).

The BMP Design Manual provides the guidance necessary to comply with the performance standards presented in Order R9-2013-0001 as amended (RWQCB 2015). This order indicates that discharges from MS4s must not cause or contribute to the violation of water quality standards in any receiving water (RWQCB 2015, Page 18).

In accordance with NPDES regulations, the State requires that any construction activity that disturbs one acre or more must obtain a General Construction Activity Stormwater Permit. Permit applicants are required to prepare a SWPPP and implement BMPs, incl uding erosion and sediment control and non-stormwater management measures, to reduce construction effects on receiving water quality.

Since the proposed project includes disturbance to more than one acre, a General Construction Activity Stormwater Permit f rom the SWRCB would be required prior to the issuance of a grading permit. A SWPPP would also be developed and implemented in accordance with the appropriate Risk Level, as determined by the City Engineer. Preparation and implementation of the SWPPP would ensure compliance with the provisions of the NPDES General Permit.

As previously noted, the proposed project has been designed to comply with the land development requirements of Order R9-2013-0001 as amended and the BMP Design Manual. These requirements were used to recommend BMPs for the proposed project to ensure there would be no impacts. Long- term water quality and HMP requirements are mitigated through appropriate design requirements for commercial, parking lot, and street land uses. The proposed project is therefore in compliance with the RWQCB MS4 permit.

In summary, the proposed project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. Impacts would be less than significant.

3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.9-14
Threshold #2: Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would: result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? This section analyzes the potential for the proposed project to alter existing drainage patterns in a way that results in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site.

Short Term (Project Construction)
The project site would be graded to prepare the site for development. The project’s grading plan includes an erosion control plan that identifies appropriate construction BMPs, such as the use of gravel bags, construction fencing, hydroseed, silt fencing a nd construction entrances to be implemented during construction. The erosion control plan and SWPPP ensure that minimal sediment or erosion leave the construction site and reduced any stormwater pollutants during construction. The proposed project would not result in substantial erosion or siltation on - or off -site during project construction.

Long Term (Project Operation)
The proposed project would increase the area of impervious surface on the project site. If not carefully planned for, increased runoff from impervious surfaces could cause alterations to drainage courses, increases in erosion and siltation, and increases i n flooding due to increased runoff. However, the proposed project has been designed to carefully handle runoff and to meet regulatory requirements to ensure that post -development runoff quantities and rates are similar to or less than the pre - development condition.

The project site is currently vacant. Grading will consist of approximately 4,030 cubic yards (cy) of cut material and 12,270 cy of fill material requiring an import of approximately 8,240 cy of material. The proposed project would incorporate construction BMPs in compliance with the General Construction Permit and SWPPP. In addition to the biofiltration features, which are considered structural BMPs, the proposed project would also incorporate source control and site design BMPs as identified in the preliminary SWQMP for the proposed project (
Appendix L). Source control BMPs include but are not
limited to 1) preventing illicit discharges into the MS4; 2) stenciling the future on-site public road storm drain inlets; and 3) protecting trash storage areas from rainfall, run-on, runoff, and wind dispersal. Site design BMPs include but are not limited to 1) maintaining natural drainage pathways and hydrologic features; 2) conserving natural areas, soils, and vegetation; 3) minimizing impervious areas; 4) minimizing soil compaction; 5) runoff collection through multiple private inlets; and 6) landscaping with native or drought tolerant species. These BMPs have been designed in a manner to be consistent with the requirements of the BMP Design Manual (City of San Marcos 2023) which requires that no pollutants are discharged to the MS4s. Per the BMP Design Manual (Page 1 -4) all development projects, or phases of development projects, are required to implement temporary erosion, sediment, good housekeeping and pollution prevention BMPs to mitigate storm water pollutants during the construction phase. Short term, construction-related impacts would be less than significant.

The drainage study for the proposed project identifies the pre - and post-development conditions for runoff rates and quantities (Excel 2023 a, Table 1, Q100 Analysis Results). The 100 -year existing/predevelopment total flows from the project area are approximately 7.198 cubic feet per second (cfs). In the post development condition, the flows would increase to 21.136 cfs. However, with storage and retention, the flows would be 7.162 cfs. Runoff quantities and rates are less than in the post-development condition due to the incorporation of biofiltration and source control and site design BMPs.

3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.9-15
The project boundary was compared with the areas of the County with Potential Critical Coarse Sediment Yield Areas (CCSYA). No areas of potential CCSYA are present on this project (Excel 2023b).

In summary, implementation of the proposed project would not increase the rate or quantities of runoff beyond the pre-development condition. The proposed project therefore meets the applicable peak flow discharge requirements (Excel 2023a). The proposed project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on - or off-site (e.g., downstream ).

Long term impacts would be
less than significant.

Threshold #3: Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would: substantially increase the rat e or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site?
As identified in response to Threshold #2, the proposed project would increase the area of impervious surface on the project site which could increase runoff flow rates or volumes. However, the proposed project has been designed to carefully handle runoff and meet regulatory requirements to ensure that post-development runoff quantities and rates are similar or less than the pre-development condition.

Specifically, post-development runoff rates would be less than in the pre- development condition due to the incorporation of biofiltration, source control and site design BMPs (Excel 2023a). Therefore, the proposed project would not create a significant adverse environmental impact to drainage patterns due to changes in runoff flow rates or volumes. Impacts would be less than significant.

Threshold #4: Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would: create or contribute to runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? The project proposes a comprehensive approach to stormwater and drainage management. This includes two biofiltration basins, a green street vegetated swale and source control and site design BMPs that would detain and retain stormwater flows from the proje ct site. The treated stormwater from the biofiltration features (water quality and hydromodification) would be discharged to the storm drain system. Since the runoff will be treated for hydromodification before it enters the system, no changes to downstream flow rates or storm drain capacity are expected.

As described above, the proposed project would not generate increased runoff volumes. Additionally, project-related runoff would be adequately treated prior to discharge into planned drainage systems via biofiltration and BMPs such that the proposed project would not provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff (Excel 2023 a). Off-site storm drains will not be adversely affected by the proposed project as the project would mitigate all storm water flows to be less than existing conditions.

The proposed project would not contribute any increase in flows to existing storm drain infrastructure.

The proposed project meets all current storm water and hydrology requirements, including hydromodification. An expansion of existing facilities would not be required to serve the proposed project.

Therefore, the proposed project would not create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. Impacts would be less than significant.

3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.9-16
Threshold #5: Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river or through the addition of impervious surfaces, in a manner which would: impede or redirect flood flows?
As identified in response to Threshold #2, the proposed project would increase the area of impervious surface on the project site which could increase runoff flow rates or volumes; however, the project has been designed to carefully handle runoff and meet regulatory requirements to ensure that post - development runoff quantities and rates are similar or less than the pre -development condition.

Specifically, post-development runoff rates would be less than in the pre- development condition due to the incorporation of biofiltration, source control and site design BMPs (Excel 2023a). Therefore, the proposed project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a mann er which would impede or redirect flood flows. Impacts would be less than significant.

Threshold #6: Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan?
The project site is not located within a sustainable groundwater management plan area. It is located within the Carlsbad Management Area WQIP. The goal of the WQIP is to protect, preserve, enhance, and restore water quality of receiving water bodies. These improvements in water quality will be accomplished through an adaptive planning and management process that identifies the highest priority water quality conditions within the watershed and implements strategies to address them. The City of San Marco’s Ju risdictional Runoff Management Plan (JRMP)’s purpose is to implement strategies that reduce the discharge of pollutants in stormwater to the maximum extent practicable, leading to beneficial effects on the local receiving water bodies. If a project would n ot result in a significant alteration of receiving water through the discharge of pollutants, it would be consistent with the WQIP and JRMP.

Short Term
The proposed project would incorporate construction BMPs in compliance with the General Construction Permit and SWPPP. Potential construction -related impacts to receiving water quality could include siltation and erosion, the use of fuels for construction equipment, and the generation of trash and debris from the construction site. In accordance with NPDES regulations, the project will be required to secure a General Construction Activity Stormwater Permit, which will require the preparation of a SWPPP and implementation of BMPs. Examples of typical BMPs implemented in SWPPPs that could be applicable to the project include using temporary mulching, seeding, or other suitable stabilization measures to protect uncovered soils; storing materials and equipment to ensure that spills or leaks cannot enter the storm drain system or surface water; developing and implementing a spill prevention and cleanup plan; installing traps, filters, or other devices at drop inlets to prevent contaminants from entering storm drai ns; and using barriers, such as straw bales or plastic, to minimize the amount of uncontrolled runoff that could enter drains or surface water. These measures are designed to minimize the generation of pollutants, including sediment and trash/debris and would ensure that the proposed project would not result in significant alteration of receiving water quality during construction. Impacts would be
less than significant.

Long Term (Project Operation)
Buildout of the proposed project would increase the amount of imperviousness at the project site; however, based upon the analysis in the preliminary SWQMP prepared for the proposed project, the

3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.9-17
proposed project includes a comprehensive water quality management approach that incorporates biofiltration features and source control and site design BMPs to ensure that there would not be an increase in pollutant discharge to receiving waters. The biofiltration features and BMPs would also be subject to regular inspection and maintenance as per the preliminary SWQMP ( Appendix L).

As identified above, impaired water bodies in the Carlsbad Watershed, within which the project site is located, include San Marcos Creek, Batiquitos Lagoon, and the Pacific Ocean. Potential pollutants to be generated by development projects include sediment, nutrients, trash and debris, oxygen demanding substances, oil and grease, bacteria and viruses, and pesticides.

The BMP Design Manual (Page 2 -8) requires Biofiltration BMPs be designed to have an appropriate hydraulic loading rate to maximize storm water retention and pollutant removal, as well as to prevent erosion, scour, and channeling within the BMP (City of San Marcos 2023). This requirement results in reductions in pollutants. Biofiltration has a high efficiency for removal of sediments, nutrients, trash, metals, oil/grease, organics, and oxygen demanding substances and has a medium efficiency for removal of ba cteria. No flow -thru BMPs are proposed in lieu of retention or biofiltration BMPS.

Therefore, the project’s water quality management approach would effectively treat stormwater runoff prior to discharge from the site and to receiving waters. The proposed p roject would not result in significant alteration of receiving water quality following construction and would be consistent with the Carlsbad Management Area WQIP and the City of San Marcos JRMP. Impacts would be less than
significant.

Threshold #7: Result in significant alteration of receiving water quality during or following construction?
As identified in response to Threshold #2, short -term, construction -related impacts resulting from siltation and erosion, the use of fuels for construction equipment, and the generation of trash and debris from the construction site would be minimized through project design features and construction-related water quality BMPs identified in the project’s SWPPP. For long-term impacts, and in compliance with the BMP Design Manual, the proposed project includes a comprehensive water quality approach, including biofiltration features and source control and site design BMPs that would pre-treat storm water discharge from impervious areas to a medium pollutant removal efficiency or better, to ensure that there would not be an increase in pollutant discharge to rece iving waters.

Therefore, the proposed project would not result in an increase in pollutant discharges to receiving waters. Impacts would be
less than significant.

Threshold #8: Result in an increase in pollutant discharges to receiving waters? Consider water quality parameters such as temperature, dissolved oxygen, turbidity, and other typical storm water pollutants (e.g., heavy metals, pathogens, petroleum derivatives, synthetic organics, sediment, nutrients, oxygen- demanding substances, and trash).

The proposed project includes a comprehensive water quality management approach to ensure that there would not be an increase in pollutant discharge to receiving waters. The comprehensive use of biofiltration and source control and site design BMPs would effectively treat stormwater runoff prior to discharge from the site and to receiving waters in compliance with the requirements of the BMP Design

3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.9-18
Manual. No flow-thru treatment BMPs are proposed to be implemented on site in lieu of retention or biofiltration. As identified above, biofiltration has a medium to high efficacy for pollutant removal.

Therefore, the project would not result in an increase in pollutant discharges to receiving waters.

Impacts would be less than significant.

Threshold #9: Be tributary to an already impaired water body as listed on the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) list? If so, can it result in an increase in any pollutant for which the water body is already impaired?
As identified above, impaired water bodies in the Carlsbad Watershed, within which the project site is located, include San Marcos Creek, Batiquitos Lagoon, and the Pacific Ocean. Potential pollutants to be generated by development projects include sediment, nutrients, trash and debris, oxygen demanding substances, oil and grease, bacteria and viruses, and pesticides.

The proposed project includes a comprehensive water quality management approach to ensure that there would not be an increase in pollutant discharge to receiving waters. Nutrient sensitive media will be used in the biofiltration basin to provide treatment. The comprehensive use of biofiltration and source control and site design BMPs would effectively treat stormwater runoff prior to discharge from the site and to receiving waters in compliance with the requirements of the BMP Design Manual. As identified above, biofiltration has a medium to high efficacy for pollutant removal. Therefore, while the project site is tributary to already impaired water bodies as listed on the CWA Section 303(d) list, the project would not result in an increase in any pollutant for which those water bodies are already impaired. Impacts would be
less than significant.

Threshold #10: Be tributary to environmentally sensitive areas (e.g., MSCP, RARE, Areas of Special Biological Significance, etc.)? If so, can it exacerbate already existing sensitive conditions? As discussed in Section 3.3 Biological Resources, the project site is located within the MHCP. However, the project site is not located within a Focused Planning area as defined in the MHCP and the draft San Marcos Subarea Plan. From a water quality and hydrology perspective, conditions in environmentally sensitive areas could be exacerbated by increases in erosion, increases in pollutants, and impacts related to hydrology and flooding.

Erosion – As identified above, w ith the proposed development and incorporation of biofiltration and BMPs, the runoff would be reduced compared to existing conditions. The proposed biofiltration features and BMPs would also minimize the potential for erosion and siltation. Thus, through a combination of reduced runoff and adequately stabilized soils as required by provisions in the NPDES General Permit, Order R9-2013-0001 as amended and the BMP Design Manual, the proposed project would not increase erosion on or offsite and would not exacerbate already existing sensitive conditions at environmentally sensitive areas.

Pollutants/Water Quality – the proposed project includes a comprehensive water quality management approach to ensure that there would not be an increase in pollutant discharge to receiving waters. The use of biofiltration features and source control and site design BMPs would effectively treat stormwater runoff prior to discharge from the site and to receiving waters. As identified above, biofiltration has a high efficiency for removal of sediments, nutrients, trash, metals, oil/grease, organics, and oxygen demanding substances and has a medium efficiency for removal of bacteria. The biofiltration features would be subject to regular inspection and maintenance as per the preliminary SWQMP (Appendix L).

Furthermore, the property owner would also enter into a stormwater management and discharge

3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.9-19
control maintenance agreement for the installation and maintenance of permanent BMPs prior to issuance of permits.

Hydrology/Flooding - The proposed project has been designed such that the proposed project would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rat e or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on or off site. Per the FEMA Flood Insurance Rate Map Number 06073CO789H, the project site is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area (FEMA 2012).

Additionally, as identified above, the runoff would be reduced from existing conditions under post - development conditions. Therefore, the proposed project would adequately attenuate stormwater runoff during storm events and not contribute to flooding or hydrology disruptions in sensi tive environments.

In conclusion, the proposed project will control erosion, pollutants, and flooding and would not exacerbate already existing sensitive conditions at environmentally sensitive areas. Impacts would be less than significant.

Threshold #11: Have a potentially significant environmental impact on surface water quality, to either marine, fresh or wetland waters?
To reduce potential impacts to marine, fresh, or wetland waters downstream, the proposed project includes a comprehensive water quality management approach that includes the use of biofiltration and source control and site design BMPs to effectively treat stormwater runoff prior to discharge into San Marcos Creek and Batiquitos Lagoon. Biofiltration has a high efficiency for removal of sediments, nutrients, trash, metals, oil/grease, organics, and oxygen demanding substances and a medium efficiency for removal of bacteria. The biofiltration features would be subject to regular inspection and maintenance as per the preliminary SWQMP (Appendix L). Furthermore, the property owner would also enter into a stormwater management and discharge control maintenance ag reement for the installation and maintenance of permanent BMPs prior to issuance of permits. Therefore, the proposed project would not have a potentially significant environmental impact on surface water quality, to either marine, fresh, or wetland waters. Impacts would be less than significant.

3.9.5 Cumulative Impact Analysis
A “cumulative impact” refers to two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable or which compound or increase other environmental effects. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15130(b)(1)(A)(B), an adequate discussion of a p roject’s significant cumulative impact, in combination with other closely related projects, can be based on either: (1) a list of past, present, and probable future producing related impacts; or (2) a summary of projections contained in an adopted local, regional, or statewide plan, or a related planning document that describes conditions contributing to the cumulative effect. For purposes of assessing the proposed project’s cumulative impact with respect to hydrology/water quality, the cumulative analysis is based upon a list approach to determine the proposed project’s contributing effect on potential cumulative impacts on hydrology/water quality. All of the cumulative projects identified in Table 2 -3 are considered in this cumulative analysis.

Hydrology
Development of the proposed project, along with the related projects, could incrementally increase the cumulative amount of impervious surfaces in the project area. This would potentially result in

3.9 Hydrology and Water Quality
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.9-20
increased surface runoff, alteration of the regional drainage pattern, and flooding. However, like the proposed project, each individual project applicant would be required to hydrologically engineer the respective project sites to ensure that post-development surface runoff flows can be accommodated by the regional drainage system. Similar to the related projects, runoff volume from the project site in the post -development condition is less than in the pre -development condition due to the implementation of a comprehensive drainage plan, including the use of biofiltration facilities and BMPs. Therefore, the proposed project’s contribution to a cumulative impact from a hydrology perspective is
less than significant.

Water Quality
Development of the proposed project, in conjunction with cumulative projects that drain to the San Marcos Hydrologic Area, has the potential to increase the concentration of pollutants in surface runoff and downstream water quality. However, all of the identified related projects would be subject to the same federal water quality standards and state waste discharge requirements as the proposed project. This includes preparation of project -specific SWPPPs per the NPDES permit program and implementation of as sociated BMPs to prevent construction -related runoff from polluting receiving waters. Additionally, similar to related projects, the proposed project has been designed to incorporate biofiltration and BMPs to limit the potential for water quality impacts t o the greatest extent feasible.

By incorporating these features into the project design, the proposed project would not substantially contribute to a significant cumulative impact to water quality. Impacts would be less than significant.

3.9.6 Mitigation Measures
Based upon the analysis presented in Sections 3.9.4 and 3.9.5, no impacts were identified and no mitigation measures are required.

3.9.7 Conclusion
The proposed project would increase the number of impervious surfaces at the project site; however, the project site would be hydrologically engineered such that post-development runoff would be less than in the pre -development condition. Therefore, hydrologic impacts resulting from the proposed project would be less than significant. Additionally, with incorporation of regulatory measures, such as biofiltration fa cilities and BMPs that would treat and eliminate the pollutants of concern prior to discharging to San Marcos Creek, as well as implementation of a project specific SWPPP, construction and operation of the proposed project would not result in substantial adverse water quality impacts and potential impacts would be less than significant.

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-1

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Introduction
This section analyzes the potential for the proposed project to have impacts related to land use and planning. This section considers consistency with applicable land use plans and habitat conservation plans. The transportation portion of the analysis is based on the following report, which is included as Appendix N of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR)13:
• Capalina Development Local Transportation Analysis (LTA), prepared by CR Associates (CRA) (August 2023).

Although not required under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Local Transportation Analysis focuses on automobile delay/Level of Service (LOS), consistent with the City’s Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (TIAG) (San Marcos 2020). The LOS analysis was conducted to identify roadway deficiencies in the project study area and to recommend project improvements to address such deficiencies. The Local Transportation Analysis is incorporated and addressed in this section as it relates to consistency with the City’s Mobility Element policies in the General Plan. A vehicle miles traveled (VMT) analysis, which is required under CEQA, is included as Appendix M of the EIR and summarized in Section 3.15, Transportation.

In the Initial Study prepared for the proposed project ( Appendix B.1), it was determined that there would be no potential for the project to have an adverse impact related to physical division of an established community. Therefore, this issue is not discussed further in this EIR section. Section 5.7, Environmental Effects Found not to be Significant - Land Use, provides additional information on this topic.

Table 3.10-1 summarizes the project- and cumulative-level land use impact analysis for the proposed project.

Table 3.10-1. Land Use Summary of Impacts
Threshold of Significance Project-Level
Impact
Cumulative-Level
Impact
Impact After
Mitigation
Threshold #1: Cause a significant
environmental impact due to a conflict
with any land use plan, policy, or
regulation adopted for the purpose of
avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant Without
Mitigation

3.10.1 Existing Conditions
This section describes the existing planning context for the project site, including the General Plan and Zoning designations that currently apply to the site.

13 Full references for documents cited in this section are included in Chapter 7, References, of this EIR.

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-2
Project Site
As shown in Figure 2-1 in Chapter 2, the 2.51-acre project site is located in the City of San Marcos in northern San Diego County. Specifically, the project site is located on the north side of Capalina Road, between N. Rancho Santa Fe Road and N. Pacific Street in the Business/industrial District. The project area is developed with a mix of commercial and residential uses.

The project site is currently undeveloped, vacant land. Per the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment prepared for the project (Appendix J), the project site appeared to be vacant pasture land from prior to 1939 until approximately 1974, when the northwest ern perimeter of the property appeared to be vacant, rough-graded land. By 1980, the project site appeared to be vacant, rough -graded land with what appeared to be an area graded for uses as a vehicle parking area on the southeastern portion of the property. By 1996, the property appeared to be vacant, weed -abated land. By 2005, a vehicle parking area appears to be to be located on the southeastern perimeter of the subject property. By 2012, the vehicle parking area was removed, and the property appeared to be vacant, weed-abated land (The Phase 1 Group 2022). The entire site is occupied with disturbed habitat with a few ornamental trees (Dudek 2023a).

Existing General Plan Designation
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 minimum floor area ratio (FAR) of 1.0 and a maximum 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 ‘horizontally’ (on a single site or adjacent parcels). Structured parking, while not required to achieve the maximum FAR, may be allowed in the MU3 designation. Shared parking arrangements may also be allowed consistent with the nature of mixed uses. Typical uses include retail, commercial service s, 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 encouraged at street level. This designation does not allow residential uses. A Specific Plan is required for development” (City of San Marcos 2012).

Existing Zoning Designation
The project site has a zoning designation of MU-3 (SP). According to Section 20.225.060 of the City’s Zoning Ordinance, this zone is intended to “support a job -based mixed use area combining a variety of commercial and office uses integrated as a cohesive development. This business -oriented area shall be complementary to the MU-1 and MU-2 Zones; residential uses are not permitted in the MU-3 (SP) Zone. Typical uses include commercial retail, business services, administrative and office uses, institutional and government uses, business support and financial uses, restaurants, and health care facilities. Horizontal and vertical mixed use is permitted” (City of San Marcos 2021).

Surrounding Land Uses
To the east of the project site is the Crossroad Shopping retail center with various strip commercial establishments such as restaurants and salon services (MU-3 zone). To the south on the opposite side of Capalina Road is a church (B-P zone) and the El Dorado mobile home community (R-MHP zone). To the west is an adjacent parcel (APN 219 -115-35) which is zoned MU -3, containing various existing strip commercial establishments, abandoned/demolished commercial buildings, and parking areas.

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-3
This 3.61- acre parcel is subject to a San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA) easement, and additionally a 1987 reciprocal easement agreement which grants the project parcel an express easement for ingress, egress, and parking across the entirety of APN 2 19-115-35. The project applicant is proposing to accommodate all parking onsite and does not anticipate using this area, under the terms of the reciprocal easement agreement, as part of the project. To the north of the project site is W. Mission Road, the SPRINTER rail line, and the Inland Rail Trail. North of that is an undeveloped area zoned MU-1 and then single family residential uses (R-1-7.5 zone).

Roadway Circulation System
The study area includes ten intersections and nine roadway segments based on guidance provided in the TIAG (San Marcos 2020). Per the City’s TIAG, the study area was defined using the following criteria:
• Signalized and unsignalized intersection along and adjacent to the project site; • Site access driveways; and
• Any classified (non-residential) roadway segments that are linked to the intersections that are being studied
Figure 3.10-1 shows the project study area roadway segments and intersections.

Study Intersections
• #1 - N. Rancho Santa Fe Road & W. Mission Road (Signal) • #2 - N. Pacific Street (west) & W. Mission Road (Signal) • #3 - N. Pacific Street (east) & W. Mission Road (Signal) • #4 - N. Rancho Santa Fe Road & Capalina Road (Signal) • #5 - N. Pacific Street & Capalina Road (Side-Street Stop-Controlled) • #6 - N. Rancho Santa Fe Road & SR-78 Westbound Ramps (Signal) • #7 - N. Rancho Santa Fe Road & SR-78 Eastbound Ramps (Signal) • #8 - N. Las Posas Road & Descanso Avenue (Signal)
• #9 - Project Driveway #1 & Capalina Road (Side-Street Stop-Controlled) • #10 - Project Driveway #2 & Capalina Road (Side-Street Stop-Controlled) Study Roadway Segments
• N. Rancho Santa Fe Road, between W. Mission Road and Capalina Road • N. Rancho Santa Fe Road, between Capalina Road and SR-78 Westbound Ramps • N. Rancho Santa Fe Road, between SR-78 Westbound and SR-78 Eastbound Ramps • N. Rancho Santa Fe Road, between SR-78 Eastbound Ramps and Descanso Avenue • N. Pacific Street, between W. Mission Road and Capalina Road • N. Pacific Street, between Capalina Road and Descanso Avenue • W. Mission Road, between N. Rancho Santa Fe Road and N. Pacific Street • Capalina Road, between N. Rancho Santa Fe Road and N. Pacific Street • Descanso Avenue, between N. Pacific Street and N. Las Posas Road

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-4
Existing Level of Service for Intersections and Roadway Segments Table 3.10-2 summarizes the LOS criteria for signalized intersections and Table 3.10-3 summarizes the LOS criteria for stop -controlled unsignalized intersections. Table 3.10 -4 summarizes roadway segments daily capacity and LOS standards. Section 3.10.4 below provides additional information regarding the LOS analysis and methodology.

Table 3.10-2. Signalized Intersection LOS Operational Analysis Method LOS
Average Stopped
Delay Per Vehicle
(Seconds)
Description
A <10
Operations with very low delay. This occurs when the
progression is extremely favorable and most vehicles do not stop. Short cycle lengths may also contribute to low delay.

B >10 and <20
Operations with generally good progression and/or short cycle lengths. More vehicles stop than for LOS A, causing higher levels of average delay.

C >20 and <35
Operations with higher delays, which may result from fair progression and/or longer cycle lengths. Individual cycle failures may begin to appear at this level. The number of vehicles stopping is significant at this level, although many still pass through the intersection without stopping.

D >35 and <55
Operations with high delay, resulting in some combination of unfavorable progression, long cycle lengths, or high volumes.

The influence of congestion, and individual cycle features is noticeable.

E >55 and <80 The limit of acceptable delay. Individual cycle failures are frequent occurrences.

F >80
Excessively high delays considered unacceptable to most drivers. Poor progression and long cycle lengths may also be major contributing factors to such delays.

Source: Highway Capacity Manual, 7th edition.

Table 3.10-3. LOS Criteria for Stop-Controlled Unsignalized Intersections Average Stopped Delay Per Vehicle (Seconds) LOS
<10 A
>10 and <20 B
>20 and <35 C
>35 and <55 D
>55 and <80 E
>80 F
Source: Highway Capacity Manual, 6thth edition.

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-5

Table 3.10-4. Roadway Segment Daily Capacity and LOS Standards Street Classification
LOS/ADT Threshold

A B C D E
Expressway (6-lane) < 30,000 < 42,000 < 60,000 < 70,000 < 80,000 Prime Arterial (6-lane) < 25,000 < 35,000 < 50,000 < 55,000 < 60,000 Major Arterial (6-lane, divided) < 20,000 < 28,000 < 40,000 < 45,000 < 50,000 Major Arterial (4-lane, divided) < 15,000 < 21,000 < 30,000 < 35,000 < 40,000 Major Arterial (3-lane, one-way) < 12,500 < 16,500 < 22,500 < 25,000 < 27,500 Major Arterial (2-lane, one-way) < 10,000 < 13,000 < 17,500 < 20,000 < 22,500 Secondary Arterial / Collector (4 -lane w/
center lane) < 10,000 < 14,000 < 20,000 < 15,000 < 30,000 Collector (4-lane w/o center lane) < 5,000 < 7,000 < 10,000 <13,000 < 15,000 Collector (2 -lane w/ continuous left -turn
lane) < 5,000 < 7,000 < 10,000 < 13,000 < 15,000
Collector (2-lane no fronting property) < 4,000 < 5,500 < 7,500 < 9,000 < 10,000 Collector (2-lane w/ commercial fronting) < 2,500 < 3,500 < 5,000 < 6,500 < 8,000 Collector (2-lane w/ multi-family) < 2,500 < 3,500 < 5,000 < 6,500 < 8,000 Collector (3-lane, one-way) < 11,000 < 14,000 < 19,000 < 22,500 < 26,000 Collector (2-lane, one-way) < 7,500 < 9,500 < 12,500 < 15,000 < 17,500 Collector (1-lane, one-way) < 2,500 < 3,500 < 5,000 < 6,500 < 7,500 Sub-Collector (2-lane single family) - - < 2,200 - -
Source: City of San Marcos Transportation Impact Guidelines (San Marcos 2020).

Note: Bold number indicates the ADT threshold for acceptable LOS.

Traffic Counts
The study area intersections and roadway traffic counts were conducted on September 27, 2022 and March 9, 2023, by Counts Unlimited, Inc. Traffic count worksheets are provided in Appendix C of the LTA which is included as Appendix N of this EIR.

Intersections
Table 3.10 -5 displays intersection LOS and average vehicle delay results for the key study area intersections under existing conditions. As shown in Table 3.10-5 , all intersections are calculated to currently operate at LOS D or better during both the AM and PM peak hours.

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-6
Table 3.10-5. Peak Hour Intersection LOS – Existing Conditions # Intersection Control
Type Peak Hour
Existing
Avg. Delay
(seconds) LOS(2)
1 N. Rancho Santa Fe / W. Mission Road Signal
AM 12.8 B
PM 13.8 B
2 N. Pacific Street (West) / W. Mission Road Signal(1)
AM 7.0 A
PM 7.9 A
3 N. Pacific Street (East) / W. Mission Road Signal(1)
AM 11.1 B
PM 8.6 A
4 N. Rancho Santa Fe / Capalina Road Signal
AM 25.7 C
PM 41.6 D
5 N. Pacific Street / Capalina Road SSSC(2)
AM 10.9 B
PM 12.0 B
6 N. Rancho Santa Fe / SR-78 Westbound
Ramps Signal
AM 44.4 D
PM 33.8 C
7 N. Rancho Santa Fe / SR-78 Eastbound
Ramps Signal
AM 22.7 C
PM 21.4 C
8 Las Posas Road / Descanso Avenue Signal
AM 21.4 C
PM 21.1 C
Source: CRA 2023a.

Notes: (1) Intersections function as a single intersection with one controller. (2) SSSC – Side-Street Stop Controlled. For SSSC intersections, the delay is shown as the worst delay experience by any of the movements.

Roadway Segments
Table 3.10 -6 shows the classification of each project area roadway and the current operating conditions for the study area roadway segment. As shown in Table 3.10-6, the study area segments are calculated to currently operate at an acceptable LOS with the exception of the following roadway segment:
• N. Rancho Santa Fe Road, between SR-78 Eastbound Ramps and Descanso Avenue (LOS E)

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-7
Table 3.10-6. Roadway Segment LOS Results – Existing Conditions Roadway Segment Classification Daily
Volume
LOS
Threshold
(LOS E)
V/C(1) LOS(1
N. Rancho
Santa Fe Road
W. Mission Road to
Capalina Road 4-Lane Major Arterial 13,297 40,000

0.332 A
Capalina Road to SR-
78 Westbound Ramps 4-Lane Major Arterial 18,803 40,000 0.470 B SR-78 Westbound
Ramps to SR-78
Eastbound Ramps
4-Lane Major Arterial 26,785 40,000 0.670 C
SR-78 Eastbound
Ramps to Descanso
Avenue
4-Lane Major Arterial 35,911 40,000 0.898 E
N. Pacific Street
W. Mission Road to
Capalina Road
2-Lane Collector
(commercial fronting) 1,219 8,000 0.152 A
Capalina Road to
Descanso Avenue
2-Lane Collector with
CTLT 2,837 15,000 0.189 A
W. Mission
Road
N. Rancho Santa Fe
Road to N. Pacific
Street
4-Lane Major Arterial 16,378 40,000 0.409 B
Capalina Road
N. Rancho Santa Fe
Road to N. Pacific
Street
2-Lane Collector with
CTLT 4,262 15,000 0.284 A
Descanso
Avenue
N. Pacific Street to N.

Las Posas Road
2-Lane Collector with
CTLT 3.626 15,000 0.242 A
Source: CRA 2023a.

Notes: (1) VC = Volume/Capacity
(2) LOS = Level of Service
(3) CLTL = Continuous Left-Turn Lane

3.10.2 Regulatory Setting
This section provides an overview of the regulatory setting related to planning and land use that apply to the project, including state, regional, and local regulation and planning documents.

State
California Planning and Zoning Law
The legal framework in which California cities and counties exercise local planning and land use functions is provided in the California Planning and Zoning Law, Government Code Sections 65000 et seq. Under state planning law, each city and county is required to adopt a General Plan “for the physical development of the county or city, and any land outside its boundaries which bears relation to its planning” (Section 65300). The California Supreme Court has called the General Plan the “constitution for futur e development.” The General Plan expresses the community’s development goals and embodies public policy relative to the distribution of future land uses, both public and private. A General Plan consists of several elements, including land use, circulation, housing, conservation, open

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-8
space, noise, and safety; other elements may be included at the discretion of the jurisdiction that relate to the physical development of the county or city.

Senate Bill 743
California Senate Bill (SB) 743 mandated specific types of CEQA analysis of transportation projects effective July 1, 2020. Prior to implementation of SB 743, CEQA transportation analyses of individual projects typically determined impacts on the circulation system in terms of LOS roadway delay and/or capacity usage at specific locations, such as street intersections or roadway segments. SB 743, signed into law in September 2013, required changes to the guidelines for CEQA transportation analysis. The changes include the elimination of auto delay, LOS, and other similar measures of vehicular capacity or traffic congestion as a basis for determining significant impacts . The purpose of SB 743 is to promote the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions, the development of multimodal transportation networks, and a diversity of land uses.

Under SB 743, a project’s effect on automobile delay shall not constitute a significant environmental impact. Therefore, LOS and other similar vehicle delay or capacity metrics may no longer serve as transportation impact metrics for CEQA analysis. The California Office of Planning and Research (OPR) has updated the CEQA Guidelines and provided a final technical advisory in December 2018, which recommends VMT as the most appropriate measure of transportation impacts under CEQA. The California Natural Resour ces Agency certified and adopted the CEQA Guidelines including the Guidelines section implementing SB 743. The changes have been approved by the Office of Administrative Law and are now in effect. Section 3.15, Transportation, of this EIR analyzes potential VMT impacts related to the proposed project.

While VMT is the preferred quantitative metric for assessing potentially significant transportation impacts under CEQA, it should be noted that SB 743 does not prevent a city or county from using metrics such as LOS as part of the application of local gene ral plan policies, municipal and zoning codes, conditions of approval, or any other planning requirements through a city’s planning approval process. Cities can still ensure adequate operation of the transportation system in terms of transportation congestion measures related to vehicular delay and roadway capacity. As such, the City can continue to require congestion -related transportation analysis and mitigation projects through planning approval processes outside of CEQA.

To comply with the requirements of SB 743, the City of San Marcos has prepared its TIAG to provide guidance on conducting transportation impact analyses in the city as follows:
• CEQA Analysis Requirements: Requirements for conducting CEQA analysis, which consists of SB 743-consistent VMT analysis as well as assessing impacts to pedestrians, bicyclists, transit, hazards, emergency access, and other impacts (See Section 3.15 Transportation). • Local Transportation Analysis Requirements: Requirements for conducting LOS analysis, site access assessments, and other local transportation analyses for non-CEQA purposes (Section

3.10 Land Use and Planning).

Regional/Local
SANDAG San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan
The Regional Comprehensive Plan (RCP), adopted in 2021 by the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), provides a long -term blueprint for the San Diego region that seeks to meet

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-9
regulatory requirements, address traffic congestion, and create equal access to jobs, education, healthcare, and other community resources. The plan is the result of years of planning, data analysis, and community engagement to reimagine the San Diego regi on with a transformative transportation system, a sustainable pattern of growth and development, and innovative demand and management strategies.

The Regional Plan combines the Regional Comprehensive Plan and the Regional Transportation Plan/ Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS). By integrating land use and transportation plans, the Regional Plan is intended to achieve greenhouse gas emission reduction targets set by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) as required by the 2008 Sustainable Communities Act.

The Regional Plan updates growth forecasts and is based on the most recent planning assumptions considering currently adopted land use plans, including the City’s General Plan and other factors from the cities in the region and the County. SANDAG’s Regional Plan will change in response to the ongoing land use planning of the City and other jurisdictions. For example, the City’s General Plan, and other local General Plans of cities, may change based on General Plan amendments initiated by the jurisdiction or landowner applicants. The General Plan amendments may result in increases in development densities by amending the regional category designations or zoning classifications.

Accordingly, SANDAG’s RTP/SCS latest forecasts of future development in the San Di ego region, including location, must be coordinated closely with each jurisdiction’s ongoing land use planning because that planning is not static, as recognized by the need for updates to SANDAG’s RTP/SCS every 4 years.

The Regional Plan also supports other regional transportation planning and programming efforts, including overseeing which projects are funded under the Regional Transportation Improvement Program and the TransNet program. SANDAG is applying data -driven strategies, innovative technologies, and stakeholder input to create a future system that is faster, fairer, and cleaner. Part of this data-driven approach includes the implementation of five key transportation strategies referred to as the 5 Big Moves. Thes e strategies provide the framework for the Regional Plan and consider policies and programs, changes in land use and infrastructure, take advantage of the existing transportation highway and transit networks, and leverage trends in technology to optimize use of the transportation system. Together, these initiatives will create a fully integrated, world -class transportation system that offers efficient and equitable transportation choices, meets state climate targets, and supports local jurisdictions’ achievements of Climate Action Plan goals.

In September 2022, the SANDAG Board directed staff to prepare an amendment to the 2021 Regional Plan without the regional road usage charge. In developing the amendment, SANDAG will refine the financial strategies used in the 2021 Regional Plan to achieve the region's greenhouse gas emissions target set by CARB, without the road usage charge. SANDAG will also assess the region's continued ability to meet air quality standards. The draft amendment will be released for public review and comment in June 2023.

SANDAG Smart Growth Opportunity Areas
The project site is located within the SM -7 Mixed Use Transit Corridor as identified in the SANDAG Smart Growth Concept Map for North County. The “Smart Growth Concept Map” identifies locations in the region that can support smart growth, transit, walking, and biking. The map serves as the foundation for prioritizing transportation investments and determining eligibility for local smart growth incentive funds. The Smart Growth Concept Area data includes just over 200 existing, planned, or potential smart growth locations. Planning professionals from the region’s jurisdictions — each of the

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-10
18 cities and the county — provided the recommendations for these specific locations. In addition to input from the cities and county, feedback from the public was also important in creating the data for inclusion in the Smart Growth Concept Map. The SANDAG Board of Directors accepted the initial Concept Map in 2006. The Board accepted the most recent technical update in 2016 (SANDAG 2016).

Multiple Habitat Conservation Program
The Multiple Habitat Conservation Program (MHCP) is a comprehensive conservation planning process that addresses the needs of multiple plant and animal species in northwestern San Diego County. The MHCP encompasses the cities of Carlsbad, Encinitas, Escond ido, Oceanside, San Marcos, Solana Beach, and Vista. Its goal is to conserve approximately 19,000 acres of habitat, of which roughly 8,800 acres (46%) are already in public ownership and contribute toward the habitat preserve system for the protection of more than 80 rare, threatened, or endangered species.

The City of San Marcos began preparing a draft of the City Subarea Plan of the MHCP in December 1999 and although the Subarea Plan has not yet been approved by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) , the plan is a component of the adopted MHCP and is currently being used as a guide for open space design and preservation within the city. The intent of the City’s Draft Subarea Plan is to identify a citywide preserve system that meets local and regional biological goals while minimizing fiscal and economic impacts to the City and adverse impacts on private property owners. To help achieve this goal, certain areas, known as Focused Planning Areas (FPA), have been designated with parcel -level preserve goals which would contribute to achieving local and regional conservation goals while minimizing adverse effects on property rights and property values. The project site is not located within an FPA.

San Diego County Regional Airport Authority/Airport Land Use Commission The nearest public airport is the McClellan-Palomar Airport, which is located approximately five miles southwest of the project site. The McClellan -Palomar Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan (ALUCP) contains policies to promote land use compatibility betw een the McClellan-Palomar Airport and adjacent and proximate land uses, to the extent these areas are not already developed with existing uses, and to protect the public health, safety, and welfare. Using airport -related forecasts and background data appro ved by the California Department of Transportation, Division of Aeronautics, the plan reflects anticipated growth of the airport over a 20 -year horizon. The plan includes land use compatibility criteria and identifies policies applicable to the airport and surrounding land uses.

According to the McClellan-Palomar ALUCP, the project site partially lies within Review Area 2 of the airport influence area. The influence area is regulated by the Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC), which regulates land uses in the area to be compatible with airport -related noise, safety, airspace protection, and over-flight factors through review of development proposals within the airport influence area. Review Area 2 consists of limits on heights of structures in areas of high terrain. Residential development in Review Area 2 may be subject to annoyances commonly associated with proximity to airports, such as noise, vibration, and overflights.

City of San Marcos General Plan
The San Marcos General Plan consists of the following elements:
• Land Use and Community Design Element - Describes the desired future physical composition of the planning area in terms of location, type, and intensity of new development and open

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-11
space to ensure balanced development that maximizes the long -term livability of the San Marcos community.
• Mobility Element - Describes the mobility strategy for the City, which identifies a network of options including streets, sidewalks, trails, and transit, that connects people with the City. • Conservation and Open Space Element – Recognizes the habitat and scenic value of natural and cultural open spaces within the City and lists goals and policies that ensure long -term stewardship of these resources. This element also addresses climate change, water conservation, energy conservation, air quality, watersheds, and water quality. • Parks, Recreation and Community Health Element – Identifies the recreational amenities and community service programs offered within the City and outlines goals for increased access to parks, trails, recreational facilities, and community service programs for all community members.
• Safety Element - Establishes policies and programs to protect public health, safety, and welfare of all residents and property. This element identifies and describes plans for response to natural and human-caused safety issues, including geologic, seismic, flood, and fire hazards. • Noise Element - Identifies problematic noise sources within the City and outlines strategies to reduce overall ambient noise levels. This element also includes measures to strategically distribute land uses throughout the City.
• Housing Element - Describes the strategy for developing a variety of housing opportunities to accommodate all residents and preserve the quality of existing housing in order to promote safe, decent, and affordable housing within the 2021-2029 planning period. • Environmental Justice - Addresses priorities related to a more equitable, safe, and healthy lifestyle for all City residents.

The City’s Land Use and Community Design Element identifies five goals and associated policies to guide well-balanced land use planning in the city. The following goals and policies from the City of San Marcos General Plan, Land Use Element pertain to planning:
• Goal LU -1: Achieve a balanced distribution and compatible mix of land uses to meet the present and future needs of all residents and the business community. o Policy LU-1.1: Ensure that adjacent land uses complement one another by considering compatibility of activities, development patterns and architectural character elements, and access to various mobility choices.
o Policy LU-1.3: Diversify land uses by providing mixed use land uses in strategic locations within the City that place housing adjacent to employment. o Policy LU -1.4: Maintain the natural integrity of open space preserves by ensuring development projects are sensitively integrated along the edges of preserved or protected areas.
• Goal LU-2: Promote development standards and land use patterns that encourage long -term environmental sustainability.
o Policy LU -2.1: Promote compact development patterns that reduce air pollution and automobile dependence and facilitate walking, bicycling, and transit use.

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-12
o Policy LU-2.2: Encourage new development to be sited to respond to climatic conditions, such as solar orientation, wind, and shading patterns.
o Policy LU -2.3: Require the incorporation of green building practices, technologies, and strategies into development projects per code standards. o Policy LU-2.5: Promote landscaping (e.g., native, drought -tolerant plants) that minimizes demands on water supply.
o Policy LU-2.7: Promote the installation of trees to reduce the urban heat island effect and green infrastructure to reduce storm water runoff.
• Goal LU-3: Develop land use patterns that are compatible with and support a variety of mobility opportunities and choices.
o Policy LU-3.1: Require that new development and redevelopment incorporate connections and reduce barriers between neighborhoods, transit corridors, and activity centers within the City.
o Policy LU -3.5: Provide an interconnected open space system that is accessible to the public, including pedestrian and equestrian links, bicycle paths, multi-use trails, recreation areas, and drainage-ways.
o Goal LU -5: Promote community design that produces a distinctive, high -quality built environment with forms and character that create memorable places and enrich community life.
o Policy LU-5.4: Require building and site design that respects the natural topography and iconic ridgelines that serve as the visual backdrop for San Marcos. o Policy LU -5.6: Require a specific plan for strategic areas/properties that require high - quality design, orientation, and development due to their location or visibility within the community.
o Policy LU-5.7: Architecture shall be enhanced with high-end building materials, varied roof lines, and decorative details.
• Goal LU-7: Direct and sustain growth and expansion in areas of San Marcos that can support a concentration of a variety of uses and are particularly suitable for multimodal transportation and infrastructure expansion and improvements.
o Policy LU-7.2: Coordinate pedestrian, transit and infrastructure upgrades with infill and redevelopment opportunities.

3.15, Transportation.
• Goal M-1: Provide a comprehensive multimodal circulation system that serves the City land uses and provides for the safe and effective movement of people and goods.

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-13
o 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 o Policy M -1.2: Require new development to finance and construct internal adjacent roadway circulation and City-wide improvements as necessary to mitigate project impacts, including roadway, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle facilities. o Policy M -1.3: Require new developments to prepare and implement Transportation Demand Management (TDM) programs to minimize vehicle trip generation and promote alternative modes of travel within the City.
o Policy M-1.4: Utilize multi-modal LOS techniques to evaluate transportation facilities. For identified prioritized modes (based on facility typology), provide the following minimum LOS as shown in Table 3-4 of the Mobility Element:
 LOS D or better for Vehicles as a prioritized mode
⸋ Generally, provides facilities that have minimum vehicle congestion during peak periods. Most motorists are delayed less than 55 seconds at a signal (or less than one signalized cycle).
 The City shall allow for flexible LOS where warranted (e.g., accepting a lower LOS than identified above).
o Policy M-1.6: Work to improve connectivity within the City by closing gaps in the existing bicycle, pedestrian, trail, transit, and roadway network. Work with new development to provide connectivity and redundancy in the mobility network. o Policy M-1.7: Strive to ensure that streets within San Marcos shall be complete streets where feasible; thereby providing accessibility, safety, connectivity, and comfort for all modes and users of the system. Appropriate new local streets and Main Streets will prioritize pedestrian and bicycle users through the corridor. • Goal M-2: Protect neighborhoods by improving safety for all modes of travel and calming traffic where appropriate.
o Policy M-2.1: Work with new development to design roadways that minimize traffic volumes and/or speed, as appropriate within residential neighborhoods, while maintaining the City’s desire to provide connectivity on the roadway network. o Policy M-2.3: Consider roundabouts, as appropriate, as an intersection control device with demonstrated air quality, traffic efficiency, and safety benefits. • Goal M-3: Promote and encourage use of alternative transportation modes, including transit, bicycles, neighborhood electric vehicles (NEVs), and walking, within the City. o Policy M-3.1: Develop an integrated, multimodal circulation system that accommodates transit, bicycles, pedestrians, and vehicles; provides opportunities to reduce air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions; and reinforces the role of the street as a public space that unites the City.
o Policy M -3.2: Improve safety conditions, efficiency, and comfort for bicyclists and pedestrians through design, maintenance, and law enforcement. Install wider sidewalks and curb extensions at pedestrian crossings (bulb outs) where appropriate.

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-14
o Policy M-3.3: Provide a pedestrian and bicycle network in existing and new neighborhoods that facilitates convenient and continuous pedestrian and bicycle travel free of major impediments and obstacles.
o Policy M-3.5: Ensure that streets in areas with high levels of pedestrian activity (such as employment centers, residential areas, mixed use areas, and schools) support safe pedestrian travel by providing detached sidewalks, bulb -outs, enhanced pedestrian crossings, pedestrian bridges, and medians.
o Policy M -3.9: Create a pleasant walking environment for roadway typologies where pedestrian travel is prioritized. This includes providing shade trees, landscaping, benches, pedestrian-scale lighting, way finding signage, transit shelters, and other approp riate amenities.

The General Plan includes goals and policies applicable to other areas, such as mobility, safety, noise, conservation, and environmental justice. The project’s consistency with applicable General Plan goals and policies is presented in
Table 3.10-7, at the end of this section.

San Marcos Municipal Code and Zoning Ordinance, Title 20 The provisions of Title 20 of the San Marcos Municipal Code are referred to as the Zoning Ordinance.

The Zoning Ordinance is based on the official Zoning Map of the City of San Marcos. The purpose of this Zoning Ordinance is to protect and promote the publ ic health, safety, comfort, convenience, and general welfare of the San Marcos community; to implement the policies of the General Plan; and to provide the physical, environmental, economic, and social advantages that result from the orderly planned use of land resources.

The project site has a zoning designation of MU -3. According to Section 20.225.060 of the City’s Zoning Ordinance, this zone is intended to “support a job -based mixed-use area combining a variety of commercial and office uses integrated as a cohesive devel opment. This business -oriented area shall be complementary to the MU-1 and MU-2 Zones; residential uses are not permitted in the MU-3 (SP) Zone. Typical uses include commercial retail, business services, administrative and office uses, institutional and government uses, business support and financial uses, restaurants, and health care facilities. Horizontal and vertical mixed use is permitted” (San Marcos 2021).

3.10.3 Thresholds of Significance
According to Appendix G of the State CEQA Guidelines, the proposed project would have a significant impact related to land use if it would:
• Threshold #1: Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purposes of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.

As identified above, impacts related to physical division of an established community are not discussed in this section. Section 5.0, Environmental Effects Found not to be Significant, provides additional information on this topic.

3.10.4 Project Impact Analysis
The project proposes 119 residential apartments on 2.51 gross acres for a proposed density of 47 dwelling units/acre. Six of the units would be affordable at the very low-income level. Very-low income

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-15
is defined by the U.S Department of Housing and Urban development as 50% of the Area Median Income or AMI)14. The proposed project is requesting approval of a General Plan Amendment (GPA22- 0003), Rezone (R20-0003), and a Site Development Plan (SDP22-0007), as further detailed below:
• General Plan Amendment (GPA22-0003) – A General Plan Amendment would be required to change the existing Mixed Use 3 (MU3) designation to Mixed Use 2 (MU2). • Rezone (R22-0003) - A rezone would be required to change the existing Mixed Use 3 (SP) (MU- 3-SP)) zoning to Mixed Use 2 (MU-2).
• Site Development Plan (SDP22-0007) - The Site Development Plan approval would be required to construct 119 multi-family residential units and 4,000 square feet (s.f.) of commercial and address the details of the architectural style, building elevation, fencing, landscaping, among other criteria, within the development.

The project applicant would utilize the State Density Bonus Program and 5% of the units would be affordable housing units, as defined under the State Density Bonus Law, California Government Code (Section 65915 – 65918) as enacted by California Assembly Bill No. 2345 (State Density Bonus). The Density Bonus Law allows for parking reductions and, in addition, the allowance of “incentives” or “concessions” from the local jurisdiction to assist with the construction and economic viability of the project.

Chapter 20.305 of the City’s Zoning Ordinance addresses the Density Bonus law and states that it is the intent of the City to encourage and facilitate development of affordable housing and to implement the goals, objectives, and policies of the City’s Housing Element.

The proposed project would rely mainly on the State Density Bonus law parking ratios for residential parking. However, the proposed project would use an incentive, as provided by the State Density Bonus law, in order to adjust the proposed residential parking from 147 spaces to 142 spaces and adjust the proposed commercial parking from 12 space to 5 spaces. The proposed project is also requesting waivers for development standards relating to minimum FAR and setbacks. Electric vehicle (EV) parking is incorporated in the project parking and includes 8 spaces with Level 2 EV chargers, 15 EV capable spaces and 36 EV ready spaces.

The proposed project would abandon/vacate a City slope easement per recorded document 2004- 0229021. This easement is located in the northwestern corner of the project site.

Threshold #1: Cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purposes of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.

Plans and policies considered in this analysis include the San Marcos General Plan, the City of San Marcos zoning ordinance and the MHCP.

San Marcos General Plan
As identified above, 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 minimum FAR of 1.0 and a maximum FAR of 1.50. If approved as currently proposed, the project would be consistent with the General Plan
as the proposed project includes a GPA. Specifically, the requested GPA would amend the project site’s

14 Area Median Income (AMI) is the midpoint of a region’s income distribution- half of the families in a region earn more than the median and half earn less than the median. This can also be looked at as the median household income.

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-16
designation in the Land Use and Community Design Element to Mixed Use 2 (MU2). The requested GPA would allow for development of the project up to 119 residential apartments, 4,000 s.f. of commercial use, common and private open space in an urbanized area of the City.

Table 3.10-7 at the end of this section summarizes the applicable San Marcos General Plan goals and policies relating to land use. As shown in Table 3.10 -7, the project is consistent with the applicable goals and policies.

Mobility Element Consistency – Level of Service Analysis The following analysis focuses on automobile delay/LOS, consistent with the City’s TIAG. The LOS analysis was conducted to identify roadway deficiencies in the project study area and to recommend project improvements to address such deficiencies. The LTA is incorporated and addressed in this section as it relates to consistency with the City’s Mobility Element policies . A VMT analysis, which is required under CEQA, is included as Appendix M of the EIR and summarized in Section 3.15, Transportation.

Analysis Methodology - Intersections
The AM intersection analysis evaluates LOS during the hour with the highest vehicular traffic between 7:00 AM and 9:00 AM. The PM intersection analysis evaluates LOS during the hour with the highest vehicular traffic between 4:00 PM and 6:00 PM. Tables 3.10-2 and 3.10-3 summarize the LOS criteria for signalized intersections and unsignalized stop-controlled intersections.

The analysis of signalized intersections utilized the operational analysis procedure as outlined in the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) 6th Edition signalized (Chapter 19) intersection analysis methodology. This method defines LOS in terms of delay, or more specifically, average stopped delay per vehicle. Delay is a measure of driver and/or passenger discomfort, frustration, fuel consumption and lost travel time. This technique uses 1,900 vehicles per hour per lane (VPHPL) as the maximum saturation volume of an intersection. This saturation volume is adjusted to account for lane width, on‐ street parking, pedestrians, traffic composition (i.e., percentage trucks) and shared lane movements (i.e., through and right‐turn movements originating from the same lane). The LOS criteria used for the analysis of signalized intersections are described in Table 3.10-2, identifying the thresholds of control delays and the associated LOS. The computerized analysis of intersection operations was performed utilizing the Synchro Version 11 traffic analysis software by Trafficware Ltd.

Unsignalized intersections were analyzed using the Highway Capacity 6th Edition side -street stop (Chapter 20) and all -way stop (Chapter 21) intersection analysis methodology. The computerized analysis of intersection operations was performed utilizing the Synchro Version 11 traffic analysis software by Trafficware Ltd.

LOS was determined as follows:
• All-way stop intersections: Reported for the entire intersection as an average value. • Side-street stop intersections: Reported for the worst-case movement.

The LOS criteria used for the analysis of unsignalized intersections are described in Table 3.10-3.

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-17
Analysis Methodology – Roadway Segments
Roadway segment LOS standards and thresholds provide the basis for analysis of arterial roadway segment performance. The analysis of roadway segment LOS is based on the functional classification of the roadway, the maximum capacity, roadway geometrics, and existing or forecast Average Daily Traffic (ADT) volumes. Table 3.10- 4 presents the roadway segment capacity standards found in the City’s TIAG. The actual capacity of a roadway facility varies according to its physical attributes.

Level of Service Standards
The City of San Marcos strives to maintain intersection and roadway segment operations based on LOS standards outlined in the General Plan Mobility Element. If the addition of the traffic generated from a proposed project results in any one of the followin g, improvements should be identified to increase performance to acceptable or pre-project conditions under each scenario:
• Triggers an intersection operating at acceptable LOS to operate at unacceptable LOS (LOS E or F) and increases the delay by more than 2.0 seconds. • Increases the delay for a study intersection that is already operating at unacceptable LOS (LOS E or F) by more than 2.0 seconds.
• Triggers a roadway segment operating at acceptable LOS (LOS A, B, C, D) to operate at unacceptable LOS and increases the volume/capacity (V/C) ratio by more than 0.02. • Increases the V/C ratio for a study roadway segment that is already operating at unacceptable LOS (LOS E or F) by more than 0.02.

Project Trip Generation
To determine the traffic generation of the proposed project, the April 2002 SANDAG Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates for the San Diego Region (SANDAG 2002) rates were applied to the proposed project. The “Multi -family Residential” (more than 20 DU/acre)” trip rate was used to estimate the project residential trip generation. The “Specialty Retail/Strip Commercial” trip rate was used to estimate the commercial trip generation.

Table 3.10-8 presents the trip generation rates and forecasted project -generated trips for weekday conditions. As shown in Table 3.10 -8, the project would generate approximately 874 average daily trips (ADTs), including 63 AM peak hour trips and 80 PM peak hour trips. The project trip distribution was manually developed based on the geographical location of the project, as well as the characteristics of the proposed and surrounding land uses. Additional considerations were taken for North Pacific Street and W. Mission Road, which allows for only right -in/right-out movements for the south leg.

Construction Trip Generation
Grading of the project site would consist of approximately 4,030 cubic yards (cy) of cut material and 12,270 cy of fill material requiring an import of approximately 8,240 cy of material. Assuming 20 work days for materials import and the use of a 15 cy truck, there would be approximately 28 truckloads per day. The grading phase of the project is not expected to generate trips above the trips associated with the 119-unit multi-family residential development and proposed commercial uses. Therefore, the grading phase would not result in any traffic related significant impacts or substantial effects above those associated with the project. No traffic related impacts are identified during construction.

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-18

Table 3.10-8. Project Trip Generation
Land Use Quantity
Daily Trip Ends
(ADT)
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
% of
ADT
In:Out
Split
Volume % of
ADT
In:Out
Split Volume
Rate ADT In Out Total In Out Total
Multi-Family
Residential
(more than 20
du/acre)
119 DU 6/DU 714 8% 20:80 12 46 58 9% 70:30 46 19 65
Specialty
Retail/Strip
Commercial
4,000
SF 40/KSF 160 3% 60:40 3 2 5 9% 50:50 8 7 15
Total 874 15 48 63 10% 70:30 54 26 80
Source: CRA 2023a.

Note: Trip generation rates were obtained from the (Not so) Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic Generation Rates for the San Diego Region, April 2002 by SANDAG
DU = Dwelling Unit, ADT = Average Daily Traffic
Local Transportation Analysis of Near-Term (Year 2025) Conditions The following section presents the analysis of study area intersections and street segments under Near-Term Year 2025 Base conditions and Near-Term Year 2025 Base + Project conditions.

Cumulative Project Traffic
Twelve projects were identified as cumulative projects for the Near Term Year 2025 Condition. These projects are detailed in Section 5.1 of the LTA (CRA 2023a). Combined, the cumulative projects total 12,194 ADT with 972 AM Peak Hour trips (279 in/693 out) and 1,134 PM Peak Hour trips (764 in/370 out).

Study area roadway and intersection geometrics under Near -Term Base conditions were assumed to be identical to the existing roadway geometrics. The Near -Term Base scenario traffic volumes were derived by adding the additional trips generated by the cumulat ive projects to the existing traffic volumes.

Near-Term Year 2025 Intersection Analysis
Table 3.10-9 summarizes the intersection operations through the study area for the Near -Term Year 2025 Base Condition and Base + Project conditions.

As shown in Table 3.10-9, in the Near-Term Year 2025 Base condition, all intersections are calculated to operate acceptably at LOS D or better during both the AM and PM peak hours. With the addition of project traffic (Base + Project condition) all intersections would continue to operate acceptably at LOS D. None of the study intersections would degrade to an unacceptable level with implementation of the proposed project and no improvements
would be required.

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-19
Table 3.10-9. Near-Term Year 2025 - Intersection Operations Without and With Project # Intersection Control
Type
Peak
Hour
Year 2025
Base
Conditions
Year 2025
Base + Project
Conditions Δ(3)
Consistent
with City LOS
Standards?(4) Avg.

Delay
(sec.)(1)
LOS(2)
Avg.

Delay
(sec.)(1)
LOS(2)
1 N. Rancho Santa
Fe / W. Mission
Road
Signal
AM 12.9 B 12.9 B 0.0 Yes
PM 14.2 B 14.6 B 0.4 Yes
2 N. Pacific Street
(west) / W.

Mission Road
Signal
AM 7.4 A 7.8 A 0.4 Yes
PM 8.0 A 8.1 A 0.1 Yes
3 N. Pacific Street
(east) / W.

Mission Road
Signal
AM 11.3 B 11.0 B -0.3 Yes
PM 8.7 A 8.8 A 0.1 Yes
4 N. Rancho Santa
Fe Road /
Capalina Road
Signal
AM 25.7 C 29.0 C 3.3 Yes
PM 42.3 D 49.5 D 7.2 Yes
5 N. Pacific Street /
Capalina Road SSSC(5)
AM 10.9 B 10.9 B 0.0 Yes
PM 12.0 B 12.1 B 0.1 Yes
6 N. Rancho Santa
Fe Road / SR-78
Westbound
Ramps
Signal
AM 45.3 D 45.2 D -0.1 Yes
PM 33.7 C 33.7 C 0.0 Yes
7 N. Rancho Santa
Fe Road / SR-78
Eastbound Ramps
Signal
AM 22.8 C 23.1 C 0.3 Yes
PM 21.7 C 22.1 C 0.4 Yes
8 N. Las Posas
Road / Descanso
Avenue
Signal
AM 22.6 C 22.6 C 0.0 Yes
PM 22.7 C 22.7 C 0.0 Yes
9 Project Driveway
#1 / Capalina
Road
SSSC(5)
AM DNE(6) DNE(6) 9.5 A 9.5 Yes
PM DNE(6) DNE(6) 9.9 A 9.9 Yes
10 Project Driveway
#2 / Capalina
Road
SSSC(5)
AM DNE(6) DNE(6) 9.4 A 9.4 Yes
PM DNE(6) DNE(6) 9.8 A 9.8 Yes
Source: CRA 2023a.

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-20
Near-Term (Year 2025) Segment Analysis
Table 3.10-10 summarizes the segment operations throughout the study area for the Near-Term Year 2025 Base and Near-Term Year 2025 Base + Project conditions. As shown in Table 3.10-10, all of the study area segments are calculated to operate acceptably at LOS C without the project with the exception of the following roadway segment:
• N. Rancho Santa Fe Road, between SR-78 Eastbound Ramps and Descanso Avenue (LOS E).

With the addition of project traffic, all of the study area segments would continue to operate at LOS C or better with the exception of N. Rancho Santa Fe Road between SR -78 Eastbound and Descanso Avenue, which
would continue to operate at LOS E. As shown in Table 3.10 -10, the trips associated with the proposed project would increase the volume/capacity ratio by 0.003, which does not surpass the 0.02 threshold for roadway segments operating at LOS E or F. Therefore, t his study roadway segment would not require improvements as a result of the proposed project.

Table 3.10-10. Near-Term Year 2025 Roadway Segment Operations Without and With Project Roadway Segment
Capacity
(LOS
E)(1)
Year 2025 Base
Condition
Year 2025
Base + Project
Condition Δ(4)
Consistent
with City
LOS
Standards?
(5)
Daily
Volume V/C(2) LOS(3) Daily
Volume V/C(2) LOS(3)
N.

Rancho
Santa Fe
Road
W. Mission
Road to
Capalina
40,000 13,900 0.348 A 14,159 0.354 A 0.006 Yes
Capalina
Road to
SR-78
Westbound
Ramps
40,000 19,420 0.486 B 19,850 0.496 B 0.010 Yes
SR-78 WB
Ramps to
SR-78 EB
Ramps
40,000 27,400 0.685 C 27,674 0.692 C 0.007 Yes
SR-78 EB
Ramps to
Descanso
Avenue
40,000 36,530 0.931 E 36,650 0.916 E 0.003 Yes
N. Pacific
Street
W. Mission
Road to
Capalina
Road
8,000 1,220 0.153 A 1,399 0.175 A 0.022 Yes
N. Pacific
Street
Capalina
Road to
Descanso
Avenue
15,000 2,840 0.189 A 2,848 0.190 A 0.001 Yes
W.

Mission
Road
N. Rancho
Santa Fe
Road to N.
40,000 17,460 0.437 B 17,639 0.441 B 0.004 Yes

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-21
Roadway Segment
Capacity
(LOS
E)(1)
Year 2025 Base
Condition
Year 2025
Base + Project
Condition Δ(4)
Consistent
with City
LOS
Standards?
(5)
Daily
Volume V/C(2) LOS(3) Daily
Volume V/C(2) LOS(3)
Pacific
Street
Capalina
Road
N. Rancho
Santa Fe
Road to N.

Pacific
Street
15,000 4,270 0.285 A 5,144 0.343 A 0.058 Yes
Descanso
Avenue
N. Pacific
Street to N.

Las Posas
Road
15,000 3,630 0.242 A 3,638 0.243 A 0.001 Yes
Source: CRA 2023a.

Notes: (1) Capacities based on City of San Marcos’s Roadway Classification Table (2) Volume to Capacity
(3) LOS = Level of Service
(4) Δ denotes a project-induced increase in the Volume to Capacity (V/C) ratio. (5) City of San Marcos strives to maintain intersection and roadway segment operations based on LOS standards (LOS D or better) outlined in the General Plan Mobility Element.

Local Transportation Analysis of Horizon Year 2050 Conditions Year 2050 Network Conditions
Study area roadway and intersection geometrics under Horizon Year 2050 Conditions were assumed to be identical to the Existing Conditions.

Horizon Year 2050 ADT forecasts were obtained from the SANDAG Series 14 ABM2+/2021 RP forecast year 2050 model (scenario ID#459). Any study roadway with Near-Term Year 2025 Base ADT found to be greater than forecasted Traffic Forecast Information Center (TFIC) ADT were adjusted using growth rates observed between existing and forecasted TFIC ADT for adjacent segments.

Intersection turning movement volumes were developed utilizing the roadway volumes analyzed for the roadway segment analysis. Growth was applied per approach based on existing and forecasted Horizon Year 2040 ADT, distributed based on existing travel patte rns, and balanced utilizing engineering judgement. Details on counts collected from TFIC and growth rates applied are provided in Appendix H of the LTA (Appendix N of this EIR).

Horizon Year 2050 Intersection Analysis
Table 3.10-11 summarizes the Year 2050 Without and With Project peak hour intersection analysis.

As shown in Table 3.10–11, without the project, all intersections are calculated to operate acceptably at LOS D or better during both the AM and PM peak hours.

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-22
Table 3.10-11. Horizon Year (2050) Intersection Operations Without and With Project # Intersection Control
Type
Peak
Hour
Year 2050
Conditions
Year 2050
With Project
Conditions Δ(3)
Consistent
with City LOS
Standards?(4) Avg.

Delay
(sec.)(1)
LOS(2)
Avg.

Delay
(sec.)(1)
LOS(2)
1 N. Rancho Santa Fe
/ W. Mission Road Signal AM 13.7 B 13.9 B 0.2 Yes
PM 15.5 B 16.0 B 0.5 Yes
2 N. Pacific Street
(west) / W. Mission
Road
Signal
AM 8.7 A 8.9 A 0.2 Yes
PM 11.0 B 11.1 B 0.1 Yes
3 N. Pacific Street
(east) / W. Mission
Road
Signal
AM 11.0 B 10.9 B -0.1 Yes
PM 11.9 B 12.1 B 0.2 Yes
4 N. Rancho Santa Fe
Road / Capalina
Road
Signal
AM 27.9 C 29.8 C 1.9 Yes
PM 39.7 D 47.7 D 8.0 Yes
5 N. Pacific Street /
Capalina Road SSSC(5) AM 11.7 B 11.9 B 0.2 Yes
PM 13.1 B 13.3 B 0.2 Yes
6 N. Rancho Santa Fe
/ SR-78 WB Ramps Signal AM 50.2 D 50.3 D 0.1 Yes
PM 35.5 D 35.6 D 0.1 Yes
7 N. Rancho Santa Fe
/ SR-78 EB Ramps Signal AM 27.4 C 28.6 C 1.2 Yes
PM 24.1 C 24.6 C 0.5 Yes
8 N. Las Posas Road
/ Descanso Avenue Signal AM 24.7 C 24.7 C 0.0 Yes
PM 27.8 C 27.8 C 0.0 Yes
9 Project Driveway #1
/ Capalina Road SSSC(5) AM DNE(6) DNE(6) 9.9 A 9.9 Yes
PM DNE(6) DNE(6) 10.3 B 10.3 Yes
10 Project Driveway #2
/ Capalina Road SSSC(5) AM DNE(6) DNE(6) 9.8 A 9.8 Yes
PM DNE(6) DNE(6) 10.1 B 10.1 Yes
Source: CRA 2023a.

Notes: (1) Average Delay expressed in seconds per vehicle (2) LOS = Level of Service
(3) Δ denotes the increase in delay due to project
(4) City of San Marcos strives to maintain intersection and roadway segment operations based on LOS standards (LOS D or better) outlined in the General Plan Mobility Element. (5) SSSC = Side Street Stop Controlled. For SSSC intersections, the delay shown is the worst delay experience by any of the movements.
(6) Intersection does not exist under Year 2050 Base condition Horizon Year 2050 Segment Operations
Table 3.10 -12 summarizes the segment operations throughout the study area for the Year 2050 Without and With Project daily street segment operations. As shown in Table 3.10-12, all of the study area segments are calculated to operate acceptably at LOS D without the proj ect with the exception of the following roadway segment:

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-23
• N. Rancho Santa Fe Road, between SR-78 Eastbound Ramps and Descanso Avenue (LOS E).

With the addition of project traffic all of the study area segments would continue to operate at LOS D or better with the exception of N. Rancho Santa Fe Road between SR -78 Eastbound and Descanso Avenue, which would continue to operate at LOS E. As shown in Table 3.10 -12, the trips associated with the proposed project would increase the volume/capacity ratio by 0.003, which does not surpass the 0.02 threshold for roadway segments operating at LOS E or F. Therefore, th is study roadway segment would not require improvements as a result of the proposed project.

Table 3.10-12. Horizon Year 2050 Roadway Segment Operations Without and With Project Roadway Segment
Capacity
(LOS
E)(1)
Year 2050 Conditions
Year 2050
With Project
Conditions Δ(4)
Consistent
with City
LOS
Standards?
(5)
Daily
Volume V/C(2) LOS(3) Daily
Volume V/C(2) LOS(3)
N.

Rancho
Santa Fe
Road
W. Mission
Road to
Capalina
40,000 16,800 0.420 B 17,509 0.426 B 0.006 Yes
Capalina
Road to
SR-78
Westbound
Ramps
40,000 22,400 0.560 C 22,830 0.571 C 0.011 Yes
SR-78 WB
Ramps to
SR-78 EB
Ramps
40,000 30,400 0.760 D 30,674 0.767 D 0.007 Yes
SR-78 EB
Ramps to
Descanso
Avenue
40,000 37,400 0.935 E 37,520 0.938 E 0.003 Yes
N. Pacific
Street
W. Mission
Road to
Capalina
Road
8,000 2,000 0.250 A 2,179 0.272 A 0.022 Yes
N. Pacific
Street
Capalina
Road to
Descanso
Avenue
15,000 5,100 0.340 B 5,108 0.341 B 0.001 Yes
W.

Mission
Road
N. Rancho
Santa Fe
Road to N.

Pacific
Street
40,000 24,400 0.610 C 24,579 0.614 C 0.004 Yes
Capalina
Road
N. Rancho
Santa Fe
Road to N.
15,000 4,300 0.287 A 5,174 0.345 B 0.058 Yes

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-24
Roadway Segment
Capacity
(LOS
E)(1)
Year 2050 Conditions
Year 2050
With Project
Conditions Δ(4)
Consistent
with City
LOS
Standards?
(5)
Daily
Volume V/C(2) LOS(3) Daily
Volume V/C(2) LOS(3)
Pacific
Street
Descanso
Avenue
N. Pacific
Street to N.

Las Posas
Road
15,000 3,700 0.247 A 3,708 0.247 A 0.001 Yes
Source: CRA 2023a.

Community Facility District (Congestion Management) Participation As a condition of project approval, 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).

Consistency with City of San Marcos Zoning Ordinance
The project has been designed to meet the development standards of the MU -2 zone, with the exception of the minimum FAR and the minimum setback requirements. California’s Density Bonus Law (Government Code Section 65915) provides for additional density as well as incentives and waivers for qualifying projects. The project applicant is requesting a waiver for the reduced FAR and the setback. The project FAR would be 1.24 compared to the 1.75 minimum FAR identified in the MU- 2 Development Standards (Table 20.225-2 of the Municipal Code). The project exceeds the minimum FAR (1.0) that was identified funder the MU-3 Development Standards. The building setback along W.

Mission Road would be 0 feet. This reduced setback is based upon the City’s request for additio nal right-of-way along W. Mission Road for future bike lane and sidewalk improvements. The building placement was shifted south, and the setback from W. Mission Road was reduced to zero feet. The exceptions are allowed with the requested waivers. The project meets all other aspects of the MU -2 Development Standards including the City's parking ratio through the allocation of an incentive, as provided under the State Density Bonus law.

Multiple Habitat Conservation Program
The project’s consistency with the MHCP is analyzed in Section 3.3, Biological Resources, of this EIR.

The analysis concludes that while the project is located within the MHCP, it is not located within a FPA as defined in the MHCP and Draft San Marcos Subarea Plan. Additionally, the project would not impact any sensitive habitat. The project, therefore, is consistent with the MHCP and Draft San Marcos Subarea Plan.

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-25
Easement Vacation
The proposed project would vacate a City slope easement per recorded document 2004-0229021.

This easement is located in the northwestern portion of the project site. Vacation of this easement would not cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purposes of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect.

3.10.5 Cumulative Impact Analysis
As described in Section 3.10 of the EIR, while the project seeks approval of a General Plan Amendment and Rezone of the project site, the proposed project would be consistent with the overarching goals and policies of the City’s General Plan (see Table3.10-7). In addition to the City’s General Plan, the proposed project would also be consistent with the City’s Municipal Code, San Diego Association of Governments 2050 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy, and applicable plans and polices. Furthermore, as analyzed throughout Chapter 3, implementation of the proposed project would not result in any significant unavoidable impacts that could further impact land use.

All cumulative projects would be subject to similar criteria as the proposed project, which would ensure compliance with existing applicable land use plans with jurisdiction over the project area. Any cumulative projects that propose amendments to the General Plan or Zon ing Ordinance would be required to show that proposed uses would not result in significant environmental impacts due to a conflict with applicable policies in a similar way as the proposed project. Since all current and future projects would be analyzed for compatibility and compliance with land use regulations prior to approval, cumulative impacts related to land use and planning are determined to be less than significant.

Regarding the LOS analysis for compliance with the City’s Mobility Element, the preceding analysis of the proposed project in Section 3.10.4 is based on methodologies that incorporate the cumulative effects of traffic from general growth and anticipated de velopment in the area. This reflects background traffic and traffic from area-wide growth already approved by the City of San Marcos plus the development of the proposed project. As discussed in Section 3.10.4, the project would l not result
in any required roadway or intersection improvements due to degraded LOS in the 2025 and 2050 time frames. Therefore, the project would not result in any inconsistencies with the goals and policies of the Mobility Element relating to LOS. Cumulative impacts would be less than significant.

3.10.6 Mitigation Measures
No land use impacts were identified; therefore, no mitigation measures are required.

3.10.7 Conclusion
The current General Plan land use and zoning designation is MU-3. With the proposed GPA and Rezone to MU-2, the proposed project would be consistent with the applicable goals and policies of the City’s General Plan. The project would also be consistent with the MHCP. Based upon the analysis presented in Sections 3.10.3 and 3.10.4, including Table 3.10-7, implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purposes of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. The analysis also included a detailed analysis to determine the proposed project’s consistency with the Mobility Element policies that address LOS. The proposed project would not result in any decreases in LOS to the studies roadwa ys or intersection in the 2025 and 2050 timeframe. Impacts would be less than significant.

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-26
Figure 3.10-1. Traffic Analysis Study Area

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-27
Table 3.10-13. Project Consistency with Applicable San Marcos General Plan Goals and Policies General Plan
Element Goal
or Policy
Goal/Policy Description Project’s Consistency with Goal/Policy Land Use and Community Design Element
Goal LU-1 Achieve a balanced distribution and
compatible mix of land uses to meet the
present and future needs of all residents and
the business community.

The project would construct 119 residential apartments and six of the units would be affordable at the very low income level (50% of the Area Median Income or AMI). These units would add to the housing stock within the city and the greater North County area of San Diego and would meet the demand for future housing in the city, as contemplated by the City’s General Plan. The proposed 4,000 s.f. of commercial use compliments the residential use and provides for a compatible mix of land uses. The project is consistent with this goal.

Goal LU-1,
Policy LU-1.1/
Goal EJ-1,
Policy EJ-1.1
Ensure that adjacent land uses complement
one another by considering compatibility of
activities, development patterns and
architectural character elements, and access
to various mobility choices.

The project area is developed with a mix of commercial, institutional, and residential uses. To the east of the project is the Crossroad Shopping retail center with various strip commercial establishments such as restaurants and salon services. To the south on the opposite side of Capalina Road is a church and the El Dorado mobile home community. To the west is an adjacent parcel (APN 219-115-35) which is zoned MU-3, containing various existing, abandoned, and demolished strip commercial establishments and parking areas. To the north of the project site is W. Mission Road, the SPRINTER rail line, and the Inland Rail Trail. North of that is an undeveloped area zoned MU-1 and then single family residential uses. The project’s architectural design includes varied rooflines and facades to break up the bulk and scale of the building. Proposed materials include stucco walls, composite shingle roof material, resawn wood fascia, trim detailing, and metal railing. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal LU-1
Policy LU-1.3/
Goal EJ-1,
Policy EJ-1.2
Diversify land uses by providing mixed use
land uses in strategic locations within the
City that place housing adjacent to
employment.

The project proposes a mixed-use development with residential and commercial uses. The project would add housing in an area that has commercial uses and is located within the vicinity of Palomar College, as well as other commercial land uses. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal LU-1,
Policy LU-1.4
Maintain the natural integrity of open space
preserves by ensuring development projects
are sensitively integrated along the edges of
preserved or protected areas.

The project site is a vacant, disturbed parcel, located in a developed portion of the city and is adjacent to development. There are no open space or protected areas adjacent to the project site. The project is consistent with this policy.

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-28
General Plan
Element Goal
or Policy
Goal/Policy Description Project’s Consistency with Goal/Policy Goal LU-2 Promote development standards and land
use patterns that encourage long-term
environmental sustainability.

The project has been designed to maximize the residential density on a parcel in a developed portion of the city and adjacent to W. Mission Road which is served by bus service. The project is also 0.6 mile from the SPRINTER rail station. Based upon the analysis in this EIR, the project would reduce all significant impacts to below a level of significance through the incorporation of mitigation measures.

The project is consistent with this goal.

Goal LU-2,
Policy LU-2.1/
Goal EJ-1,
Policy EJ-1.3
Promote compact development patterns that
reduce air pollution and automobile
dependence and facilitate walking, bicycling,
and transit use.

The project proposes a residential density of 47 units/acre. The project site is located within the SM-7 Mixed Use Transit Corridor as identified in the SANDAG Smart Growth Concept Map for North County. The project would install a sidewalk along the project frontage with Capalina Road and provide pedestrian connectivity to the sidewalk along W. Mission Road. The project site is adjacent to a North County Transit District (NCTD) bus stop and is 0.6 mile from the Palomar College SPRINTER rail station. The proposed project is consistent with this policy.

Goal LU-2,
Policy LU-2.2
Encourage new development to be sited to
respond to climatic conditions, such as solar
orientation, wind, and shading patterns.

The project would comply with the latest applicable Title 24 standards. The 2019 Title 24 standards required that all low-rise residential buildings shall have a photovoltaic system meeting the minimum qualification requirements such that annual electrical output is equal to or greater than the dwelling’s annual electrical usage. The 2022 Building Energy Efficiency Standards (Energy Code) improve upon the 2019 Energy Code for new construction of, and additions and alterations to, residential and nonresidential buildings. The 2022 Energy Code encourages efficient electric heat pumps, establishes electric-ready requirements for new homes, expands solar photovoltaic and battery storage standards, strengthens ventilation standards, and more.

Goal LU-2,
Policy LU 2.3
Require the incorporation of green building
practices, technologies, and strategies into
development projects per code standards.

The project incorporates green features. As a design feature, the project would install 8 EV charging stations, 15 EV capable chargers and 36 EV ready chargers.

The landscaping plan focuses on native, drought tolerant species and meets the City’s Water Efficiency Landscaping Ordinance and Municipal Code, Title 20. This minimizes the use of water for irrigation. The project has also been designed to meet current California Building Code requirements as related to green building practices. The project is consistent with this policy.

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-29
General Plan
Element Goal
or Policy
Goal/Policy Description Project’s Consistency with Goal/Policy Goal LU-2,
Policy LU-2.5
Promote landscaping (e.g., native, drought-
tolerant plants) that minimizes demands on
water supply.

The proposed landscape plan includes a mix of trees, shrubs, grasses and groundcover and the plant selection emphasizes low and moderate water use species. Proposed tree species include: Marina strawberry tree, Chinese flame tree, African sumac, Brisbane box, true green elm, crape myrtle, sweetshade, sweet bay, shrubby yew podocarpus, Carolina laurel, holly oak, tipu tree, and pink trumpet tree. The proposed project would also comply with the City’s Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance (WELO) and Municipal Code, Title 20. The landscape concept plan is included as Figure 2-4 and the complete landscape plan and planting palette is included in Appendix A.2.

Goal LU-2,
Policy LU-2.7/
Goal EJ-1,
Policy EJ-1.5
Promote the installation of trees to reduce
the urban heat island effect and green
infrastructure to reduce storm water runoff.

The proposed landscape plan includes a mix of trees, shrubs, grasses and groundcover and the plant selection emphasizes low and moderate water use species. Proposed tree species include: Marina strawberry tree, Chinese flame tree, African sumac, Brisbane box, true green elm, crape myrtle, sweetshade, sweet bay, shrubby yew podocarpus, Carolina laurel, holly oak, tipu tree, and pink trumpet tree. The proposed project would also comply with the City’s WELO and Municipal Code, Title 20. The landscape concept plan is included as Figure 2-4.

As discussed in greater detail in Section 3.9 (Hydrology/Water Quality) the project incorporates biofiltration features and source control and site design best management practices (BMPs) to reduce storm water runoff. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal LU-3 Develop land use patterns that are
compatible with and support a variety of
mobility opportunities and choices.

The project’s internal pedestrian circulation network would connect to the existing sidewalk along the project frontage on W. Mission Road. There is an NCTD bus stop on W. Mission Road in front of the project. The project is 0.6 mile to the SPINTER transit stop at Palomar College. The project is consistent with this goal.

Goal LU-3,
Policy LU-3.1
Require that new development and
redevelopment incorporate connections and
reduce barriers between neighborhoods,
transit corridors, and activity centers within
the City.

Goal LU-3,
Policy LU-3.4/
Provide non-motorized (pedestrian and
bicycle) access/circulation within, and to,
The project includes internal walkways that would connect to sidewalks on W.

Mission Road and Capalina Road. The project would construct a sidewalk on

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-30
General Plan
Element Goal
or Policy
Goal/Policy Description Project’s Consistency with Goal/Policy Goal EJ-5,
Policy EJ-5.1
mixed-use centers to reduce reliance on the
automobile.

Capalina Road along the project frontage which would improve the pedestrian connectivity in the greater project area. The project is consistent with the policy.

Goal LU-3,
Policy LU-3.5/
Goal EJ-5,
Policy EJ-5.2
Provide an interconnected open space
system that is accessible to the public,
including pedestrian and equestrian links,
bicycle paths, multi-use trails, recreation
areas, and drainage-ways.

The project incorporates 34,582 s.f. of common open space. The project incorporates pedestrian walkways which would connect to the City’s larger pedestrian and bicycle network. There are no public use trails in the project vicinity. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal LU-5 Promote community design that produces a
distinctive, high-quality built environment
with forms and character that create
memorable places and enrich community
life.

The project has been designed to incorporate architectural treatments, including varied rooflines to enhance the appearance of the project. This includes building articulation and setbacks and varied rooflines. Proposed materials include stucco walls, composite shingle roof material, resawn wood fascia, trim detailing, and metal railing. The conceptual landscape plan provides for a mix of trees, shrubs, and groundcover to further enhance the look and feel of the project. The project is consistent with this goal.

Goal LU-5,
Policy LU-5.4
Require building and site design that
respects the natural topography and iconic
ridgelines that serve as the visual backdrop
for San Marcos.

The project has been designed to respect the existing topography on the site, which is relatively flat. No primary or secondary ridgelines are located within or adjacent to the project site. The nearest primary ridgeline is within the North City Area #1 map and includes Owens Peak and “P” Mountain. This primary ridgeline is located approximately 1.35 miles northwest of the project site. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal LU-5,
Policy LU-5.7
Architecture shall be enhanced with high-end
building materials, varied roof lines, and
decorative details.

The project incorporates high-quality design. The project design incorporates architectural treatments and design to break up the bulk and scale of the buildings. This includes building articulation and setbacks and varied rooflines.

Proposed materials include stucco walls, composite shingle roof material, resawn wood fascia, trim detailing, and metal railing. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal LU-7 Direct and sustain growth and expansion in
areas of San Marcos that can support a
concentration of a variety of uses and are
particularly suitable for multimodal
transportation and infrastructure expansion
and improvements.

The project site is within the City of San Marcos, surrounded by existing development including commercial and residential uses. Existing services and utilities are present in proximity to the project. The project is in proximity to transit and provides sidewalks to encourage non-motorized transportation. The project is consistent with this goal.

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-31
General Plan
Element Goal
or Policy
Goal/Policy Description Project’s Consistency with Goal/Policy Goal LU-7,
Policy LU-7-2/
Goal EJ-5,
Policy EJ-5.3
Coordinate pedestrian, transit and
infrastructure upgrades with infill and
redevelopment opportunities.

The project is in proximity to transit and would construct a sidewalk along the project frontage with Capalina Road. The project will also provide access to the W. Mission Road sidewalk and NCTD bus stop along the project frontage with W.

Mission Road. The project is consistent with this goal.

Goal LU-8 Ensure that existing and future development
is adequately serviced by infrastructure and
public services.

As described further in Section 3.13 (Public Services), the project impacts related to public services were determined to be less than significant. The project’s demand for fire and police protection services would be offset with payment of appropriate development fees, including payment of Public Facility Fees (PFF) and annexation into and participation in applicable Community Facilities Districts (CFD). Impacts to parks would be offset through provision of on-site recreational facilities and payment of PFF. Additionally, as analyzed in Section 3.17 (Utilities and Service Systems) water and sewer services are available to serve the project and the project would either upgrade VWD facilities, pay applicable Water and Wastewater Capital Facility Fees to VWD per Ordinances Nos. 175 and 176 or a combination of upgrades and fees at an equitable level. The project is consistent with this goal.

Goal LU-8,
Policy LU-8.1
New development shall pay its fair share of
required improvements to public facilities
and services.

As described further in Section 3.13 (Public Services), the project’s demand for fire and police protection services would be offset with payment of appropriate CFD and PFF fees. The project is also required to pay appropriate statutory fees for schools, which would ensure impacts to schools are less than significant.

Impacts to parks would be offset through payment of the City's PFF (see Section

3.14, Recreation). Additionally, as analyzed in Section 3.17 (Utilities and Service Systems) water and sewer services are available to serve the project and the project would either upgrade VWD facilities, pay applicable Water and Wastewater Capital Facility Fees to VWD per Ordinances Nos. 175 and 176 or a combination of upgrades and fees at an equitable level. The project is consistent with this goal.

Goal LU-8,
Policy LU-8.2
Promote development timing that is guided
by the adequacy of existing and/or
expandable infrastructure, services, and
facilities.

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-32
General Plan
Element Goal
or Policy
Goal/Policy Description Project’s Consistency with Goal/Policy are available to serve the project and the project would either upgrade VWD facilities, pay applicable Water and Wastewater Capital Facility Fees to VWD per Ordinances Nos. 175 and 176 or a combination of upgrades and fees at an equitable level. The project is consistent with this goal.

Goal LU-10 Fire protection, emergency services, and law enforcement: Provide effective, high-quality,
and responsive services.

Goal LU-10,
Policy LU-10.1
Provide demand-based firefighting and
emergency medical services infrastructure,
equipment, and personnel to provide a high
level of fire, emergency medical, and law
enforcement service in San Marcos to meet
existing and future demands.

Goal LU-10,
Policy LU-10.2
Work closely with the County of San Diego
Sherriff’s Department to determine and meet
the community needs for adequate
personnel, equipment, and state-of-the-art
technology to effectively combat crime, and
meet existing and projected service
demands.

As described further in Section 3.13 (Public Services), the project impacts related to public services were determined to be less than significant. The project’s demand for police protection services would be offset with payment of appropriate development
fees, including payment of PFF and annexation into and
participation in applicable CFDs. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal LU-10,
Policy LU-10.3
Continue to conduct Public Outreach and
education regarding fire safety and crime
prevention within San Marcos.

The San Marcos Fire Department public education program provides comprehensive fire education via presentations, informational demonstrations, health fairs, and station tours, among others. The San Diego County Sheriff's Department provides safety presentations to youth groups and community groups through their Community Oriented Policing and Problem Solving deputies.

Deputies also attend Neighborhood Watch meetings. In addition, the Crime Prevention Unit focuses on community outreach regarding crime prevention techniques, current trends, and prevention education. The project's annexation into and contribution to the applicable CFD would aid in the continued provision of these services. The project is consistent with this policy.

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-33
General Plan
Element Goal
or Policy
Goal/Policy Description Project’s Consistency with Goal/Policy Goal LU-11 Schools: Ensure all residents have access to high-quality education.

Students generated by the project would attend La Mirada Academy for grades K- 8 and San Marcos High School for grades 9-12. The project applicant would be required to pay all applicable development fees including payment of school mitigation fees, pursuant to California Education Code Section 17620 et seq. and Government Code Sections 65995(h) and 65996(b) as well as the City’s Municipal Code Section 17.52.050, The project is consistent with this goal.

Goal LU-11,
Policy LU-11.1
Collaborate with the local public school
district (SMUSD), private schools, and
institutions of higher learning to ensure a
range of traditional and distance-learning
educational opportunities are provided in
superior, accessible facilities that
complement the surrounding land uses.

The project would generate 60 students for SMUSD. The project developer would pay school mitigation fees to offset impacts to schools. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal LU-11,
Policy LU-11.2
Work with San Marcos Unified School District
and developers to ensure adequate school
facilities are funded as required by State law
and through developer mitigation
agreements between the school district and
the developer. The City shall require a “will
serve” letter substantiating that the
developer has paid fees to the satisfaction of
the school district prior to issuance of
building permits.

The project would generate 60 students for SMUSD. The project developer would pay school mitigation fees to offset impacts to schools. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal LU-12 Libraries: Provide library resources and
services that meet the needs of the
community.

Goal LU-12,
Policy LU-12.1
Provide adequate library facilities and
technological access that enhance San
Marcos’s quality of life and create a civic
environment with vast opportunities for self-
learning and academic enrichment.

While the proposed project does not include construction of any library facilities, this EIR has determined the project would not have a significant impact on library facilities (see Section 3.13, Public Services). Additional library resources are also available to the community through CSUSM and Palomar Community College. The project is consistent with this policy.

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-34
General Plan
Element Goal
or Policy
Goal/Policy Description Project’s Consistency with Goal/Policy Goal LU-12,
Policy LU-12.2
Accommodate technology needs of the
community and locate accessible technology
in the library.

While the proposed project does not include construction of any library facilities, project residents would have access to public computers through the existing library facilities. The project does not conflict with this policy.

Goal LU-13 Water Service and Supply: Manage and
conserve domestic water resources by
reducing water usage and waste on a per
capita basis, to ensure an adequate water
supply for existing and future residents.

The landscape plan for the project focuses on low-water use, native species. The Landscape Plan is presented in Figure 2-4. The proposed landscaping plan conforms to strict water conservation measures, including the City’s WELO.

Additionally, the project is required to pay Water Capital Facility Fees to VWD. The project is consistent with this goal.

Goal LU-13,
Policy LU-13.1
Work closely with local and regional water
providers to ensure high quality water
supplies are available for the community.

VWD treats water to meet stringent state and federal standards. Ensuring quality at the source is cheaper than treatment. As described in Section 3.9 (Hydrology/Water Quality), the project would not contribute significant polluted runoff due to the incorporation of bioretention and water quality BMPs.

Therefore, the project would not impact any local or regional water supplies. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal LU-13,
Policy LU-13.2
Actively promote water conservation
programs aimed at reducing demand.

VWD promotes conservation and has issued drought alerts under drought conditions. While not currently in effect, future residential users within this district would be required to comply with any drought alerts and required conservation measures that would reduce demand. The project also incorporates low-
water landscaping and would be required to comply with the City’s WELO. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal LU-13,
Policy LU-13.3
Encourage exploration and use of deep
underground wells to reduce reliance on
treatable water.

The project would irrigate proposed landscaping with potable water. Groundwater use is not proposed by the project. The project’s landscape plan focuses on low- water and drought-tolerant species and meets the requirements of the City’s WELO. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal LU-14 Wastewater: Ensure an adequate
wastewater system for existing and future
development.

Based on the analysis in Section 3.17 (Utilities and Service Systems), there is currently adequate wastewater treatment capacity to serve the project. The project proposes to connect to the existing 8-inch sewer main located in Capalina Road and would construct an 8-inch water main through the project site to create a looped water main connecting Capalina Road and W. Mission Road.

Additionally, as part of the project design, the applicant will construct additional sewer infrastructure, as detailed in the VWD Water/Sewer Study (2023). The project applicant may also pay VWD Wastewater Capital Facility Fees for portions of the improvements. The project is consistent with this goal.

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-35
General Plan
Element Goal
or Policy
Goal/Policy Description Project’s Consistency with Goal/Policy Goal LU-14,
Policy LU-14.1
Work closely with local service providers to
ensure an adequate wastewater system for
existing and future development is in place.

Goal LU-14,
Policy LU-14.2
Ensure development approval is directly tied
to commitments for the construction or
improvement of primary water, wastewater,
and circulation systems.

Based on the analysis in Section 3.17 (Utilities and Service Systems), there is currently adequate water and wastewater treatment capacity to serve the project.

Expansion of existing wastewater facilities would be necessary to accommodate buildout of the VWD services area per the 2018 Master Plan. The project would construct water and sewer improvements as detailed in Section 3.17.4 of the EIR. The project may also pay Water Capital Facility Fees to VWD and Wastewater Capital Facility Fees to VWD. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal LU-15 Flood control and storm water drainage
facilities: ensure adequate flood control and
storm water drainage is provided by the
community.

As identified in Section 3.9 (Hydrology/Water Quality), off-site runoff is projected to be less than pre-development conditions with implementation of the project.

No on-site or downstream flooding hazard has been identified. Therefore, implementation of the project would not impact flood control or storm water drainage facilities. The project is consistent with this goal.

Goal LU-15,
Policy LU-15.1
Implement activities, practices, procedures,
or facilities that avoid, prevent, or reduce
pollution of the San Marcos Storm Water
Conveyance System and receiving waters.

As identified in Section 3.9 (Hydrology/Water Quality), implementation of the project’s comprehensive water quality management plan, which incorporates biofiltration and BMPs, would ensure the project would treat runoff containing the pollutants of concern for locally impaired water bodies. Implementation of the project would reduce pollutants entering the San Marcos Storm Water Conveyance System and receiving waters. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal LU-15,
Policy LU-15.2
Improve inadequate or undersized
drainage/flood control facilities to solve both
small neighborhood and large regional
drainage and flood control problems.

As identified in Section 3.9 (Hydrology/Water Quality), off-site runoff is projected to be less than pre-development conditions with implementation of the project.

No on-site or downstream flooding hazard has been identified. No inadequate or undersized drainage/ flood control facilities were identified that serve the project

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-36
General Plan
Element Goal
or Policy
Goal/Policy Description Project’s Consistency with Goal/Policy area. Therefore, implementation of the project would not impact flood control or storm water drainage facilities. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal LU-15,
Policy LU-15.3
Avoid, to the extent possible, development in
floodplain and flood prone areas.

As identified in the Initial Study prepared for the proposed project (Appendix B.1), the project was determined to have no impact on 100-year flood hazards. The project does not propose development within a floodplain or flood prone area.

The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal LU-15,
Policy LU-15.4
Retain drainage courses in their natural
condition, to the extent possible. Consider
smaller-scale drainage improvements to
protect the environment and avoid disturbing
natural drainage courses; consider detention
areas and raised building pads.

The project is adequately designed such that it would not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area. The project detains and retains runoff through the site with combined water quality and hydromodification bioretention and BMPs. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal LU-16 Solid waste: reduce the amount of waste
material entering regional landfills with an
efficient and innovative waste management
program.

As discussed in Section 3.17 (Utilities and Service Systems), the City of San Marcos has a disposal rate target of 8.9 lbs/person/day. If the City meets this target, the City is considered in compliance with the 50% diversion requirement of AB 939. The most recent data (2021) from CalRecycle identifies the annual per capital disposal rate for the City of San Marcos is 5.6 lbs/person/day. Thus, the City is exceeding their current targets for diversion. In accordance with AB 34, the project would be required to achieve a 75 % waste diversion rate. All green waste would be diverted from landfills and recycled as mulch. The Sycamore Sanitary Landfill has sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs. The project is consistent with this goal.

Goal LU-16,
Policy LU-16.1
Work closely with local service providers to
ensure adequate solid waste disposal,
collection, and recycling services.

Non-recyclable waste, including general trash and green materials, would be collected and transported for disposal by EDCO, a licensed hauler. According to Section 3.17 (Utilities and Service Systems), the Sycamore Sanitary Landfill has sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs. In accordance with AB 341, the project would be required to achieve a 75% waste diversion rate. All green waste would be diverted from landfills and recycled as mulch. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal LU-16,
Policy LU-16.2
Increase recycling, composting, source
reduction, and education efforts throughout
the city to reduce the amount of solid waste
requiring disposal at landfills.

The City of San Marcos is in compliance with AB 939, which requires 50% waste diversion through recycling. The project is consistent with this policy.

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-37
General Plan
Element Goal
or Policy
Goal/Policy Description Project’s Consistency with Goal/Policy Goal LU-17 Utilities and Communications: Encourage
provision of power and communication
systems that provide reliable, effective, and
efficient services for San Marcos.

As discussed in Section 3.17 (Utilities and Service Systems) communications systems for telephones, computers, and cable television are serviced by utility providers such as AT&T, Cox, Spectrum (formerly Time Warner), and other independent cable companies. However, no specific systems upgrades are proposed with this project, and the location and extent of future facilities is not known at this time. The project would be served by SDG&E for electricity and gas service. The design for the dry utilities’ connection is still under preparation, however the project proposes to connect to existing infrastructure within Capalina Road or W. Mission Road. This work would take place within existing right-of-way and would not disturb any vegetation. The project would also relocate an SDG&E transformer located on Capalina Road. The project is consistent with this goal.

Policy LU-17.2 Require all new development and
redevelopment to provide the technology to
support multiple telecommunications
facilities and providers such as multi-media
products, wireless technologies, and satellite
communications.

As discussed in Section 3.17 (Utilities and Service Systems) communications systems for telephones, computers, and cable television are serviced by utility providers such as AT&T, Cox, Spectrum (formerly Time Warner), and other independent cable companies. However, no specific systems upgrades are proposed with this project, and the location and extent of future facilities is not known at this time. The design for the dry utilities’ connection is still under preparation, however the project proposes to connect to existing infrastructure within Capalina Road or W. Mission Road. This work would take place within existing right-of-way and would not disturb any vegetation. The project would also relocate an SDG&E transformer located on Capalina Road. The project is consistent with this policy.

Policy LU-17.3 The City shall prohibit above ground utility equipment within any of the pedestrian
pathway and street frontage areas. All above
ground utilities shall be placed either within;
“wet closets” within the buildings,
underground vaults, or behind buildings
where they are not visible. The developer
shall be responsible to contact the
applicable utility agencies in advance to
coordinate utilities prior to approval of the
final street improvement plans for both
As discussed in Section 3.17 (Utilities and Service Systems) communications systems for telephones, computers, and cable television are serviced by utility providers such as AT&T, Cox, Spectrum (formerly Time Warner), and other independent cable companies. However, no specific systems upgrades are proposed with this project, and the location and extent of future facilities is not known. The project would be served by SDG&E for electricity and gas service. The design for the dry utilities’ connection is still under preparation, however the project proposes to connect to existing infrastructure within Capalina Road or W.

Mission Road. This work would take place within existing right-of-way and would not disturb any vegetation. The project would also relocate an SDG&E

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-38
General Plan
Element Goal
or Policy
Goal/Policy Description Project’s Consistency with Goal/Policy public and private street frontages and prior
to submittal of building permits.
transformer located on Capalina Road. No above ground utility equipment is proposed. The project is consistent with this goal.

Mobility Element
Goal M-1 Provide a comprehensive multimodal
circulation system that serves the City land
uses and provides for the safe and effective
movement of people and goods.

The project would contribute to the overall pedestrian connectivity in the project vicinity through the construction of a sidewalk along the project frontage. The project would also provide a pedestrian access gate for future residents so they can access the sidewalks on W. Mission Road. The project is consistent with this goal.

Goal M-1,
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.

Implementation of the proposed project as a MU-2 development would decrease the trip generation for the project site compared to what could be developed under an MU-3 (non-residential mixed use) scenario. Based upon the traffic analyses prepared for the project by CRA (2023a and 2023b), the project does not result in any transportation impacts, nor does it result in any safety concerns.

The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal M-1,
Policy M-1.2
Require new development to finance and
construct internal adjacent roadway
circulation and City-wide improvements as
necessary to mitigate project impacts,
including roadway, transit, pedestrian, and
bicycle facilities.

The project has been designed to include an internal drive aisle. No private streets are proposed. The project does not result in any significant transportation related impacts and no improvements beyond what is already proposed as part of the project design are required. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal M-1,
Policy M-1.3/
Goal EJ-1,
Policy EJ-1.6
Require new developments to prepare and
implement Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) programs to minimize
vehicle trip generation and promote
alternative modes of travel within the City.
(See Policy M-1.3)
The project would be required to prepare a TDM plan consistent with the reports of Measure T-9 of the City’s Climate Action Plan Consistency Review Checklist.

The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal M-1,
Policy M-1.4
Utilize multi-modal LOS techniques to
evaluate transportation facilities. For
identified prioritized modes (based on facility
typology), provide the following minimum
LOS as shown in Table 3-4 of the Mobility
Element: LOS D or better for Vehicles as a
The location transportation analysis prepared for the project (Appendix N) relied on this LOS technique to determine project-related impacts to the circulation network. As summarized in Section 3.10.4 (Land Use and Planning) of this EIR, there would not be any degradation of LOS to below acceptable levels with implementation of the project. The project would be consistent with this policy.

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-39
General Plan
Element Goal
or Policy
Goal/Policy Description Project’s Consistency with Goal/Policy prioritized mode or the City shall allow for
flexible LOS where warranted (e.g., accepting
a lower LOS than identified above).

Goal M-1,
Policy M-1.6/
Goal EJ-2,
Policy EJ-2.10
Work to improve connectivity within the City
by closing gaps in the existing bicycle,
pedestrian, trail, transit, and roadway
network. Work with new development to
provide connectivity and redundancy in the
mobility network.

The project includes pedestrian pathways that would connect to the existing pedestrian and bicycle network. The project would also construct a sidewalk along the project frontage with Capalina Road which would improve pedestrian connectivity in the greater project area. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal M-1,
Policy M-1.7/
Goal EJ-2,
Policy EJ-2.11
Strive to ensure that streets within San
Marcos shall be complete streets where
feasible; thereby providing accessibility,
safety, connectivity, and comfort for all
modes and users of the system. Appropriate
new local streets and Main Streets will
prioritize pedestrian and bicycle users
through the corridor.

Complete streets balance the needs of all users, both motorized and non- motorized, in design and construction. The project includes pedestrian pathways that would connect to the existing pedestrian and bicycle network. The project would also construct a sidewalk along the project frontage with Capalina Road which would improve pedestrian connectivity in the greater project area. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal M-2 Protect neighborhoods by improving safety
for all modes of travel and calming traffic
where appropriate.

Travel modes within and surrounding the project area include vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle. The project includes pedestrian pathways that would connect to the existing pedestrian and bicycle network. The project would also construct a sidewalk along the project frontage with Capalina Road which would improve pedestrian connectivity in the greater project area. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal M-2,
Policy M-2.1
Work with new development to design
roadways that minimize traffic volumes
and/or speed, as appropriate within
residential neighborhoods; while maintaining
the City’s desire to provide connectivity on
the roadway network.

Goal M-3 Promote and encourage use of alternative
transportation modes, including transit,
bicycles, neighborhood electric vehicles
(NEVs), and walking, within the City.

The project would construct a sidewalk along the project frontage on Capalina Road which would enhance pedestrian connectivity in the project vicinity. There is a NCTD bus stop along the project frontage at W. Mission Road and the Palomar Station SPRINTER station is 0.6 miles from the project site. As a design feature,

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-40
General Plan
Element Goal
or Policy
Goal/Policy Description Project’s Consistency with Goal/Policy the project would install 8 EV chargers, 15 EV capable parking spaces and 36 EV ready parking spaces. Therefore, the project is consistent with this goal.

Goal M-3,
Policy M-3.1/
Goal EJ-1,
Policy EJ-1.8
Develop an integrated, multimodal
circulation system that accommodates
transit, bicycles, pedestrians, and vehicles;
provides opportunities to reduce air pollution
and greenhouse gas emissions; and
reinforces the role of the street as a public
space that unites the City.

The project would construct a sidewalk along the project frontage on Capalina Road which would enhance pedestrian connectivity in the project vicinity. The project would also provide residents access to W. Mission Road via a pedestrian gate. Compared to what could be developed under the MU-3 (non-residential mixed use) zoning on the project site, the proposed project would reduce the number of trips. This results in a corresponding reduction in air emissions and GHG emissions. The placement of high density residential along a transit corridor would provide for convenient nearby transit access to future residents of the project. Therefore, the project is consistent with this policy.

Goal M-3,
Policy M-3.2
Improve safety conditions, efficiency, and
comfort for bicyclists and pedestrians
through design, maintenance, and law
enforcement. Install wider sidewalks and
curb extensions at pedestrian crossings
(bulb outs) where appropriate.

The project would not impact any existing bicycle or pedestrian infrastructure.

The project would construct a sidewalk along the project frontage with Capalina Road which would enhance pedestrian connectivity in the project vicinity. The sidewalk would be designed to City standards. Therefore, the project is consistent with this policy.

Goal M-3,
Policy M-3.3
Provide a pedestrian and bicycle network in
existing and new neighborhoods that
facilitates convenient and continuous
pedestrian and bicycle travel free of major
impediments and obstacles.

Goal M-3,
Policy M-3.5/
Goal EJ-5,
Policy EJ-5.5
Ensure that streets in areas with high levels
of pedestrian activity (such as employment
centers, residential areas, mixed use areas,
and schools) support safe pedestrian travel
by providing detached sidewalks, bulb-outs,
enhanced pedestrian crossings, pedestrian
bridges, and medians.

Goal M-3,
Policy M-3.9/
Goal EJ-5,
Policy EJ-5.6
Create a pleasant walking environment for
roadway typologies where pedestrian travel
is prioritized. This includes providing shade
trees, landscaping, benches, pedestrian-
The project would also construct a sidewalk along the project frontage with Capalina Road which would improve pedestrian connectivity in the greater project area. The landscape concept plan includes street trees along Capalina Road and

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-41
General Plan
Element Goal
or Policy
Goal/Policy Description Project’s Consistency with Goal/Policy scale lighting, way finding signage, transit
shelters, and other appropriate amenities.
along the project frontage with W. Mission Road. The project is consistent with this policy. The project is consistent with this policy.

Conservation and Open Space Element
Goal COS-1 Identify, protect, and enhance significant
ecological and biological resources within
San Marcos and its adaptive Sphere of
Influence.

A biological technical report (Appendix D.1) and rare plant survey memorandum (Appendix D.2) were prepared for the project and summarized in Section 3.3. (Biological Resources). The project site is disturbed and does not support any sensitive habitat or sensitive species. The project has the potential to impact avian species protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act if tree removal, vegetation removal, or other construction activities occur during the nesting season. Implementation of mitigation measure MM-BIO-1 would reduce this potential impact to below a level of significance. The project is consistent with this goal.

Goal COS-1,
Policy COS-1.1
Support the protection of biological
resources through the establishment,
restoration, and conservation of high-quality
habitat areas.

A biological technical report (Appendix D.1) and rare plant survey memorandum (Appendix D.2) were prepared for the project and summarized in Section 3.3 (Biological Resources). The project site is disturbed and does not support any high quality habitat areas, nor does it support any sensitive habitat, or sensitive species. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal COS-1,
Policy COS-1.2
Ensure that new development, including
Capital Improvement Projects, maintain the
biotic habitat value of riparian areas, oak
woodlands, habitat linkages, and other
sensitive biological habitats.

No oak woodlands, jurisdictional wetlands, or habitat linkages occur on the project site. The project site is disturbed and does not support any sensitive habitat (Dudek 2023a). The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal COS-2 The City is committed to conserving,
protecting, and maintaining open space,
agricultural, and limited resources for future
generations. By working with property
owners, local organizations, and state and
federal agencies, the City can limit the
conversion of resource lands to urban uses.

The project site is an undeveloped parcel in a developed portion of the city and has been identified for development in the City’s General Plan. The project site has disturbed vegetation and does not support any sensitive habitat or any agricultural resources. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal COS-2,
Policy COS-2.1
Provide and protect open space areas
throughout the City for its recreational,
agricultural, safety, and environmental value.

A total of 34,582 s.f. of open space is proposed. This represents approximately 32% of the project site. This includes a mix of common open space and private

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-42
General Plan
Element Goal
or Policy
Goal/Policy Description Project’s Consistency with Goal/Policy open space. These areas would provide recreation for the future residents. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal COS-2,
Policy COS-2.2
Limit, to the extent feasible, the conversion
of open space to urban uses and place a
high priority on acquiring and preserving
open space lands for recreation, habitat
protection and enhancement, flood hazard
management, water and agricultural
resources protection, and overall community
benefit.

3.17 (Utilities and Service Systems) and it was concluded that there is adequate potable water service to serve the project. The project also incorporates low- water landscaping and would be required to comply with the City’s WELO. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal COS-2,
Policy COS-2.5
Continue to review future development
proposals to ensure that cultural resources
(including prehistoric, historic,
paleontological, and SB 18 Tribal resources)
are analyzed and conserved in compliance
with CEQA requirements.

The proposed project’s potential impacts to cultural resources are detailed in Section 3.4 (Cultural Resources) of the EIR. A cultural resources report was also prepared for the project and is included as Appendix E of the EIR. The City reached out to tribes consistent with the requirements of SB 18 and AB 52 and met with tribes that requested consultation. No historical resources were identified on the site. The project would not impact any known cultural resources on the project site; however, there is a potential to impact resources that are unknown at this time. Mitigation measures are incorporated into the EIR (MM-CR- 1 through MM-CR-4) to reduce impacts to cultural resources to below a level of significance. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal COS-2,
Policy COS-2.6
Preserve healthy mature trees where
feasible; where removal is necessary, trees
shall be replaced at a ratio of 1:1.

Four Mexican fan palms would be removed to prepare the site for development.

The proposed landscape plan includes 83 trees. The project would replace trees at an approximate 21:1 ratio, which greatly exceeds the requirements of a 1:1 replacement ratio. Proposed tree species include: Marina strawberry tree, Chinese flame tree, African sumac, Brisbane box, true green elm, crape myrtle, sweetshade, sweet bay, shrubby yew podocarpus, Carolina laurel. holly oak, tipu tree, and pink trumpet tree. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal COS-3 Protect natural topography to preserve and
enhance the natural beauty of San Marcos.

According to Section 3.1 (Aesthetics), the project has been designed to respect the existing topography on the site, which is relatively flat. Views of the surrounding hillsides would remain unobstructed from SR-78. The project site is not a protected scenic vista. The project also incorporates extensive design features that ensure that the visual character changes blend with the existing

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-43
General Plan
Element Goal
or Policy
Goal/Policy Description Project’s Consistency with Goal/Policy topography and surrounding development. The project is consistent with this goal.

Goal COS-3,
Policy COS-3.1
Preserve scenic resources, including
prominent landforms such as Double Peak,
Owens Peak, San Marcos Mountains,
Merriam Mountains, Cerro de Las Posas,
Franks Peak, and canyon areas through
conservation and management policies.

None of the prominent landforms as identified in the General Plan are on-site.

While implementation of the proposed project would result in changes in the viewshed, development would not alter or impede views of prominent landforms.

Views to prominent landforms would remain unobstructed. In addition, the project site is not a protected scenic vista. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal COS-3,
Policy COS-3.2
Encourage and maintain high-quality
architectural and landscaping designs that
enhance or complement the hillsides,
ridgelines, canyons, and view corridors that
comprise the visual character in San Marcos.

According to Section 3.1 (Aesthetics), the Specific Plan includes an overall architectural design theme to ensure a pleasant, orderly, and visually appealing development. The proposed architectural design includes elevation treatments, varied rooflines, and a mix of materials. The project has been designed to respect the existing topography on the site. Landscape materials would be used to enhance architectural elements and the provided street trees would enhance the pedestrian experience along the project frontages. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal COS-3,
Policy COS-3.3
Continue to work with new development and
redevelopment project applicants in
designing land use plans that respect the
topography, landforms, view corridors,
wildlife corridors, and open space that exists.

The project has been designed to respect the existing topography. The project site is relatively flat and located in a lower-elevation portion of the city. There are no view corridors in the project vicinity nor are there any wildlife corridors on the project site. The project site is not identified as a scenic vista. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal COS-3,
Policy COS-3.4
Evaluate potential impacts to visual and
aesthetic resources, including the potential
to create new light sources, while still
maintaining and being sensitive to rural
lighting standards.

Development of the proposed project would create new sources of light at a site that is currently undeveloped. Lighting would be guided by 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 to aid in the preservation of dark sky conditions. Lighting impacts were determined to be less than significant (Section 3.1 Aesthetics). The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal COS-4 Improve regional air quality and reduce GHG
emissions that contribute to climate change.

The project’s impact to air quality would be less than significant as described in Section 3.2 (Air Quality) of this EIR. The project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of any air quality plan or violate any air quality standard. Based upon the analysis in Section 3.7 (Greenhouse Gas), GHG emissions under the proposed project would be 49.5% less than if the project was built out under the current General Plan Designation of MU3. The project would also implement all of

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-44
General Plan
Element Goal
or Policy
Goal/Policy Description Project’s Consistency with Goal/Policy the applicable CAP Consistency Review Checklist (CAP Checklist) measures. The project is consistent with this goal.

Goal COS-4,
Policy COS-

4.1/ Goal EJ-
1, Policy EJ-

1.9 Continue to work with the U.S. EPA, CARB,
SANDAG, and the SDAPCD to meet State and
federal ambient air quality standards.

Implementation of the proposed project would not exceed any air quality standard during construction or operation. Impacts are less than significant. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal COS-4,
Policy COS-

4.3/ Goal EJ-
1, Policy EJ-

1.11 Participate in regional efforts to reduce GHG
emissions.

The project is not anticipated to impair implementation of AB 32. Development of the project would not affect regional efforts to reduce GHG emissions. The City’s updated 2020 CAP quantifies community emissions, identifies emission reduction targets, and specifies climate action measures to reduce GHG emissions. Based upon the analysis in Section 3.7 (Greenhouse Gas), GHG emissions under the proposed project would be 49.5% less than if the project was built out under the current General Plan Designation of MU3. The project would also implement all of the applicable CAP Checklist measures. The project is therefore consistent with the City’s CAP and the project would be consistent with the goals of AB 32. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal COS-4,
Policy COS-

4.4/ Goal EJ-
1, Policy EJ-

1.12 Quantify community wide and municipal GHG
emissions, set a reduction goal, identify, and
implement measures to reduce GHG
emissions as required by governing
legislation.

The City’s updated 2020 CAP quantifies community emissions, identifies emission reduction targets, and specifies climate action measures to reduce GHG emissions. Based upon the analysis in Section 3.7 (Greenhouse Gas), GHG emissions under the proposed project would be 49.5% less than if the project was built out under the current General Plan Designation of MU3. The project would also implement all of the applicable CAP Checklist measures. The project is therefore consistent with the City’s CAP and the project would be consistent with the goals of AB 32. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal COS-4,
Policy COS-

4.5/ Goal EJ-
1, Policy EJ-

1.13 Encourage energy conservation and the use
of alternative energy sources within the
community.

As discussed in Section 3.17 (Utilities and Service Systems), the proposed project includes various on-site features and measures to reduce the proposed project’s energy consumption. Further, the proposed project would be required to be consistent with appropriate mandatory project design features in the CAP Consistency Review Checklist that would reduce operational electricity consumption. The project would be built-in compliance with Title 24 requirements applicable at that time. Additionally, as a design feature, the project would install 8 spaces with EV chargers, 15 EV capable spaces and 36 EV ready spaces. The

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-45
General Plan
Element Goal
or Policy
Goal/Policy Description Project’s Consistency with Goal/Policy project has also been designed to meet current California Building Code requirements as related to green building practices. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal COS-4,
Policy COS-4.6
Goal EJ-1,
Policy EJ-1.14
Promote efficient use of energy and
conservation of available resources in the
design, construction, maintenance and
operation of public and private facilities,
infrastructure, and equipment.

Goal COS-4,
Policy COS-

4.8/ Goal EJ-
1, Policy EJ-

1.15 Encourage and support the generation,
transmission, and use of renewable energy.

Development on the project site would meet the requirements of California’s Building Energy Efficiency Standards, which focus on several key areas to improve the energy efficiency of newly constructed buildings. The project has also been designed to meet current California Building Code requirements as related to green building practices. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal COS-5 Reduce water consumption and ensure
reliable water supply through water
efficiency, conservation, capture, and reuse.

VWD promotes conservation and has issued drought alerts under drought conditions. Future residential users within this district would be required to comply with any issued alerts and required conservation measures that would reduce demand. The project proposes a landscape plan that emphasizes low water use species in adherence to the City of San Marcos Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance. The project is consistent with this goal.

Goal COS-6 Protect and restore appropriate surface
water and groundwater beneficial uses
through prioritizing the improvement of
locally impaired water bodies within the City
of San Marcos subwatersheds.

The project is located within a watershed with numerous impaired water bodies.

The BMP Design Manual requires that pollutants of concern for each impaired water body in the watershed be treated by engineered treatment controls to a medium pollutant removal
efficiency or better prior to leaving the project site. The project proposes treatment of storm water runoff via biofiltration facilities prior to discharge, which would result in a medium or high efficiency for removal of the pollutants of concern. Any groundwater infiltration would likely reach surface flows before reaching groundwater due to the approximate depth to groundwater.

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-46
General Plan
Element Goal
or Policy
Goal/Policy Description Project’s Consistency with Goal/Policy Therefore, according to Section 3.9 (Hydrology/Water Quality), the project would not have a potentially significant adverse impact on groundwater quality or result in significant impacts to impaired water bodies. The project is consistent with this goal.

Goal COS-6,
Policy COS-6.2
Promote watershed stewardship as the
community norm.

The project includes a comprehensive water quality management approach, which incorporates biofiltration and the use of BMPs, to ensure the project would not contribute any pollutants to area watersheds. Additionally, the project proponent would obtain a General Construction Activity Stormwater Permit, prepare a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan, and implement BMPs in compliance with the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. Erosion and sediment control and non-stormwater management measures implemented as required under these permits would contribute to watershed stewardship. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal COS-7 Achieve sustainable watershed protection for surface and ground water quality that
balances social, economical, and
environmental needs.

Erosion and sediment control and non-stormwater management measures implemented as required under these permits would contribute to watershed stewardship. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal COS-8 Focus watershed protection, surface and
groundwater quality management on sources
and practices that the City has the ability to
affect.

Implementation of the project’s comprehensive water quality management plan, which incorporates biofiltration and the use of BMPs, would ensure that the project would treat runoff containing the pollutants of concern for locally impaired water bodies. Additionally, the project proponent would obtain a General Construction Activity Stormwater Permit, prepare a SWPPP, and implement BMPs in compliance with the NPDES permit. Erosion and sediment control and non-stormwater management measures implemented as required under these permits would reduce construction effects on receiving water quality and protect stormwater runoff. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal COS-8,
Policy COS-8.4
Require new development and
redevelopment to protect the quality of water
bodies and natural drainage systems
Implementation of the project’s comprehensive water quality management plan, which incorporates biofiltration and the use of BMPs, would ensure that the project would treat runoff containing the pollutants of concern for locally

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-47
General Plan
Element Goal
or Policy
Goal/Policy Description Project’s Consistency with Goal/Policy through site design, source controls, storm
water treatment, runoff reduction measures,
BMPs, LID, hydromodification strategies
consistent with the Current San Diego
RWQCB Municipal Stormwater NPDES
Permit, and all future municipal stormwater
permits.
impaired water bodies. Additionally, the project proponent would obtain a General Construction Activity Stormwater Permit, prepare a SWPPP, and implement BMPs in compliance with the NPDES permit. Erosion and sediment control and non-stormwater management measures implemented as required under these permits would reduce construction effects on receiving water quality and protect stormwater runoff. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal COS-10 Establish and maintain an innovative,
sustainable solid waste collection, recycling,
and disposal delivery system for present and
future generations.

As discussed in Section 3.17 (Utilities and Service Systems), according to CalRecycle, the City of San Marcos has a disposal rate target of 8.9 lbs/person/day. If the City meets this target, the City is considered in compliance with the 50% diversion requirement of AB 939. The most recent data (2021) from CalRecycle identifies the annual per capita disposal rate as 5.6 pounds per person per day (CalRecycle 2021). Thus, the City is exceeding their target for diversion. In accordance with AB 34, the project would be required to achieve a 75% waste diversion rate. All green waste would be diverted from landfills and recycled as mulch. The Sycamore Sanitary Landfill has sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs. The project is consistent with this goal.

Goal COS-10,
Policy COS-

10.1 Promote the curbside recycling program to
divert residential refuse from the landfills.

The City of San Marcos is in compliance with AB 939, which requires 50% waste diversion through recycling. The project would participate in the City’s recycling efforts. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal COS-11 Continue to identify and evaluate cultural, historic, archaeological, paleontological, and
architectural resources for protection from
demolition and inappropriate actions.

A cultural resources report was prepared for the project site, summarized in Section 3.4 (Cultural Resources), and included as Appendix E of this EIR.

Mitigation measures are incorporated (MM-CR-1 through MM-CR-4) to reduce potential impacts to archaeological resources to below a level of significance.

There are no historical resources on the project site. The project would also implement mitigation measure MM-GEO-1 to minimize the potential for impacts to paleontological resources. The project is consistent with this goal.

Goal COS-11,
Policy COS-

11.1 Identify and protect historic and cultural
resources including individual properties,
districts, and sites (e.g., archaeological sites)
in compliance with CEQA.

A cultural resources report was prepared for the project site, summarized in Section 3.4 (Cultural Resources), and included as Appendix E of this EIR.

Mitigation measures are incorporated (MM-CR-1 through MM-CR-4) to reduce potential impacts to archaeological resources to below a level of significance.

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-48
General Plan
Element Goal
or Policy
Goal/Policy Description Project’s Consistency with Goal/Policy There are no historical resources on the project site. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal COS-11,
Policy COS-

11.2 Prohibit the demolition or removal of a
historic structure without evaluation of the
condition of the structure, the cost of
rehabilitation, and the feasibility of
alternatives to preservation in place
including but not limited to relocation, or
reconstruction offsite, and/or photo-
preservation.

There are no historical resources on the project site, therefore the project would not have the potential to impact such resources. The project is consistent with this policy.

Parks, Recreation and Community Health Element
Goal PR-1 Plan for, acquire, develop, and maintain a
system of local parks connected through an
integrated network of trails and high quality
recreational facilities.

Section 3.14 (Recreation) analyzed the project’s impact on recreational facilities.

The proposed project would result in an increase in the City of San Marcos population by approximately 369 residents. The proposed project would be required to pay the City’s PFF, which goes toward the acquisition and development of local and community park facilities throughout the City, in addition to what is provided on-site. The project includes 25,700 s.f. of common open space and 7,632 s.f. of private open space. With payment of the PFF and provision of on-site common open space and recreational amenities, impacts would be less than significant. The project is consistent with this goal.

Goal PR-1,
Policy PR-1.1/
Goal EJ-2,
Policy EJ-2.6/
Goal EJ-5,
Policy EJ-5.7
Develop and maintain a complete system of
public parks and recreational amenities that
provide opportunities for passive and active
recreation at a minimum standard of 5 acres
per 1,000 residents. Parks, trails, and
recreational facilities will enhance
community livability, public health, and
safety; should be equitably distributed
throughout the City; and be responsive to the
needs and interests of residents, employees,
and visitors.

Section 3.14 (Recreation) analyzed the project’s impact on recreational facilities.

Goal PR-1,
Policy PR-1.3/
Ensure that the development of parks, trails,
and recreation facilities and services keeps
Section 3.14 (Recreation) analyzed the project’s impact on recreation. The proposed project would result in an increase in the City of San Marcos population

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-49
General Plan
Element Goal
or Policy
Goal/Policy Description Project’s Consistency with Goal/Policy Goal EJ-
2,Policy EJ-2.7
pace with development and growth within
the City.
by approximately 369 residents. The proposed project would be required to pay the City’s PFF, which goes toward the acquisition and development of local and community park facilities throughout the city, in addition to what is provided on- site. The project includes 25,700 s.f. of common open space and 7,632 s.f. of private open space. With payment of the PFF and provision of on-site common open space and recreational amenities, impacts would be less than significant.

The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal PR-1,
Policy PR-1.4/
Goal EJ-5,
Policy EJ-5.8
Promote increased access to parks and open
spaces, pedestrian- and bike-oriented routes
to parks and open space, greening of public
rights-of-way, and a variety of active and
passive uses of parks and open space.

Section 3.14 (Recreation) analyzed the project’s impact on recreation. The proposed project would result in an increase in the City of San Marcos population by approximately 369 residents. The proposed project would be required to pay the City’s PFF, which goes toward the acquisition and development of local and community park facilities throughout the City, in addition to what is provided on- site. The project includes 25,700 s.f. of common open space and 7,632 s.f. of private open space. With payment of the PFF and provision of on-site common open space and recreational amenities, impacts would be less than significant.

The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal PR-1,
Policy PR-1.5/
Goal EJ-5,
Policy EJ-5.8
Require new development to be designed
and constructed in accordance with the
approved Parks Master Plan to meet or
exceed the City’s parkland standard of 5
acres per 1,000 residents.

Section 3.14 (Recreation) analyzed the project’s impact on recreation. The proposed project would result in an increase in the City of San Marcos population by approximately 369 residents. The proposed project would be required to pay the City’s PFF, which goes toward the acquisition and development of local and community park facilities throughout the City in addition to what is provided on- site. The project includes 25,700 s.f. of common open space and 7,632 s.f. of private open space. With payment of the PFF and provision of on-site common open space and recreational amenities, impacts would be less than significant.

The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal PR-1,
Policy PR-1.7
Promote park and facility design that
discourages vandalism, deters crime,
provides natural surveillance, and creates a
safe and comfortable environment.

Safety considerations of the proposed project are discussed in Section 3.13 (Public Services). As proposed, the proposed project, including development of park and open space areas, does not present any unique public safety challenges. The proposed project is consistent with this policy.

Goal PR-2,
Policy PR-2.2/
Goal EJ-5,
Policy EJ-5.10
Implement the trail network per the Master
Trails Plan to increase opportunities for
physical activity (e.g., walking, biking),
The City’s Master Trail Plan does not indicate any trails along the project frontage. The closest trail is the Inland Rail Trail. The proposed project would be required to pay the City’s PFF, which goes toward the acquisition and development of local and community park facilities throughout the city, in

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-50
General Plan
Element Goal
or Policy
Goal/Policy Description Project’s Consistency with Goal/Policy healthy lifestyles, and to reduce reliance on
cars.
addition to what is provided on-site. The project includes 25,700 s.f. of common open space and 7,632 s.f. of private open space. With payment of the PFF and provision of on-site common open space and recreational amenities, impacts would be less than significant. The project is consistent with this policy.

Safety Element
Goal S-1 Reduce risks to the community from
earthquakes by regulating new development
and redevelopment to prevent the creation
of new geologic and seismic hazards.

The project would implement all recommendations from the geotechnical investigation (Appendix G of the EIR). Additionally, development on the project site would be subject to the requirements of the latest California Building Code (CBC) for resistance to seismic shaking and would be constructed in accordance with other CBC criteria, current seismic design specifications of the Structural Engineers Association of California, other applicable regulations, and all applicable requirements of the State of California Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Cal/OSHA) to minimize risks from earthquakes. The project is consistent with this goal.

Goal S-1,
Policy S-1.1
Reduce the risk of impacts from geologic and
seismic hazards by applying current and
proper land use planning, development
engineering, building construction, and
retrofitting requirements.

The project would implement all recommendations from the geotechnical investigation (Appendix G of the EIR). Additionally, development on the project site would be subject to the requirements of the latest California Building Code for resistance to seismic shaking, and would be constructed in accordance with other CBC criteria, current seismic design specifications of the Structural Engineers Association of California, other applicable regulations, and all applicable requirements of Cal/OSHA to minimize risks from earthquakes. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal S-1,
Policy S-1.2
Investigate specific groundwater levels and
geologic conditions underlying all new
development or redevelopment proposals in
areas where potential fault rupture,
liquefaction, or other geologic hazards are
suspected.

There is no known faulting at the project site so the potential for surface fault rupture is low. The project site is not located in a State liquefaction susceptibility zone and is mapped in an area with generally zero to low liquefaction. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal S-2 Minimize the risk to people, property, and the environment due to flooding hazards.

The project site is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area nor within the City’s Flood Damage Prevention Overlay Zone. Additionally, off-site runoff is projected to be less than pre-development conditions with implementation of the project. No on-site or downstream flooding hazard has been identified. The project is consistent with this goal.

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-51
General Plan
Element Goal
or Policy
Goal/Policy Description Project’s Consistency with Goal/Policy Goal S-2,
Policy S-2
Require existing private development to take
responsibility for maintenance and repair of
structures to resist flood damage.

Goal S-3 Minimize injury, loss of life, and damage to
property results from structure or wildland
fire hazards.

Implementation of the proposed project would result in a developed area with roads, structures, and landscape vegetation. The project site is located in a Local Responsibility Area with a Non-Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (Non-VHFHSZ) designation per CALFIRE’s San Marcos Fire Hazards Severity Zones Map (2009) and is surrounded by areas identified as Non-VHFHSZ. Further, per Figure 6-4 of the City’s General Plan, the project site and surrounding areas are not identified as a Fire Hazard Severity Zone. No impact is identified for this issue area. The proposed project is consistent with this goal.

Goal S-3,
Policy S-3.1
Require development to be located,
designed, and constructed to provide
adequate defensibility and reduce the risk of
structural loss and life resulting from
wildland fires. Development will consider
hazards relative to terrain, topography,
accessibility, and proximity to vegetation.

One such provision for development to
minimize the risk of structural loss and life
shall be the inclusion of overhead fire
sprinklers.

The project site is located in a Local Responsibility Area with a Non-VHFHSZ designation per CALFIRE’s San Marcos Fire Hazards Severity Zones Map (2009) and is surrounded by areas identified as Non-VHFHSZ. Further, per Figure 6-4 of the City’s General Plan, the project site and surrounding areas are not identified as a Fire Hazard Severity Zone. No impact is identified for this issue area. The proposed project is consistent with this policy.

Goal S-3,
Policy S-3.2
Provide sufficient level of fire protection
service to reduce risk from urban and
wildland fire. Advocate and support regional
coordination among fire protection and
emergency service providers.

According to Section 3.13 (Public Services), the project would have a less than significant impact on fire protection services. Additional staff and resources would be provided via Community Facilities District No. 2001-01, into which the project would annex and pay required mitigation fees. The proposed project is consistent with this policy.

Goal S-3,
Policy S-3.3
Require development to provide additional
access roads when necessary to provide for
safe access of emergency equipment and
civilian evacuation concurrently.

Access to the project site would be via two unsignalized driveways on Capalina Road. Driveways and internal drive aisles have been designed to allow for access by emergency response equipment including fire trucks. The fire Marshal has reviewed the project plans. The proposed project is consistent with this policy.

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-52
General Plan
Element Goal
or Policy
Goal/Policy Description Project’s Consistency with Goal/Policy Goal S-3,
Policy S-3.4
Coordinate with fire protection and
emergency service providers to assess fire
hazards before and after wildfire events to
adjust fire prevention and suppression
needs, as necessary, commensurate with
both short- and long-term fire prevention
needs.

The Fire Marshal has reviewed the project plans. The project site is located in a Local Responsibility Area with a Non-VHFHSZ designation per CALFIRE’s San Marcos Fire Hazards Severity Zones Map (2009) and is surrounded by areas identified as Non-VHFHSZ. Further, per Figure 6-4 of the City’s General Plan, the project site and surrounding areas are not identified as a Fire Hazard Severity Zone. The proposed project is consistent with this policy.

Goal S-3,
Policy S-3.6
Protect communities from unreasonable risk
of wildfire within very high fire hazard
severity zones.
a. Assess site constraints when considering
land use designations near wildlands to
avoid or minimize wildfire hazards as part of
a community plan update or amendment.
b. Identify building and site design methods
or other methods to minimize damage if new
structures are located in very high fire hazard
severity zones on undeveloped land and
when rebuilding after fire.
c. Require ongoing brush management to
minimize the risk of structural damage or
loss due to wildfires.
d. Provide and maintain water supply
systems to supplies for structural fire
suppression.
e. Provide adequate fire protection.

Goal S-4 Protect life, structures, and the environment
from the harmful effects of hazardous
materials and waste.

During construction, there is a potential for accidental upset of fuels, lubricants, and other materials; however, there are existing federal and state standards in place for the handling, storage, and transport of these materials. During operation, the only hazardous materials anticipated for transport, use, or disposal would be routinely used household products. Household hazardous waste programs are in place, which address the use, handling, and disposal of these items. Additionally, the project site and surrounding properties are not considered hazardous materials sites. See Section 3.8 (Hazards and Hazardous

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-53
General Plan
Element Goal
or Policy
Goal/Policy Description Project’s Consistency with Goal/Policy Materials) for additional information. The proposed project is consistent with this goal.

Goal S-4,
Policy S-4.1
Promote and support the proper disposal,
handling, transport, delivery, treatment,
recovery, recycling, and storage of hazardous
materials in accordance with applicable
federal, State, and local regulations.

Goal S-4,
Policy S-4.2/
Goal EJ-1,
Policy EJ-1.21
Require areas of known or suspected
contamination to be assessed prior to reuse
or redevelopment. Plan for reuse of
contaminated areas in a manner that is
compatible with the nature of the
contamination and subsequent remediation
efforts.

A Phase I ESA was prepared for the project (Appendix J). The project site was not listed on any list of hazardous materials sites. Phase I concluded there is a low likelihood that recognized environmental conditions are present at the project site as a result of the current or historical land uses or from a known and reported off-site source. The project would not develop an area of known or suspected contamination. The proposed project is consistent with this policy.

Goal S-4,
Policy S-4.3/
Goal EJ-1,
Policy EJ-1.22
Require that land uses using hazardous
materials be located and designed to ensure
sensitive uses, such as schools, hospitals,
day care centers, and residential
neighborhoods, are protected.

The proposed project is not anticipated to generate, release, or use large amounts of hazardous materials. During operation, the only hazardous materials anticipated for transport, use, or disposal would be routinely used household products. Household hazardous waste programs are in place, which address the use, handling, and disposal of these items. The proposed project is not anticipated to impact any sensitive uses in the project vicinity. The proposed project is consistent with this policy.

Goal S-4,
Policy S-4.4/
Goal EJ-1,
Policy EJ-1.23
Avoid locating sensitive uses near
established hazardous materials users or
industrial areas where incompatibilities
would result, except in cases where
appropriate safeguards have been
developed and implemented.

A Phase I ESA was prepared for the proposed project site (Appendix J). The project site was not listed on any list of hazardous materials sites. The Phase I ESA concluded that there is a low likelihood that recognized environmental conditions are present at the project site as a result of the current or historical land uses or from a known and reported off-site source. The proposed project would not place sensitive uses near any known hazardous materials users or industrial areas. The proposed project is consistent with this policy.

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-54
General Plan
Element Goal
or Policy
Goal/Policy Description Project’s Consistency with Goal/Policy Goal S-5 Establish and maintain an effective
emergency response program to respond to
disasters and maintain continuity-of-life
support functions during an emergency.

The Safety Element of the General Plan states that W. Mission Road is one of the east/west streets that should remain open and passable during an emergency.

San Marcos is also included in the San Diego County Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan, which identifies risks posed by natural and human-caused disasters. The project provides for two driveways and the project has been reviewed by the Fire Marshal. According to Section 3.8 (Hazards and Hazardous Materials), the project would not impact any roadway or staging areas identified in any emergency planning documents. The project is consistent with this goal.

Goal S-5,
Policy S-5.3
Develop, implement, and maintain an
effective evacuation program for areas of
risk in the event of a disaster.

The San Marcos Emergency Operations Plan identifies several main thoroughfares as primary evacuation corridors in an emergency. The project provides two driveway access points on Capalina Road. According to Section 3.8 (Hazards and Hazardous Materials), the project would not impact any roadway or staging areas identified in any emergency planning documents. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal S-6 Provide neighborhood safety through
effective law enforcement.

Current staff levels are adequate to meet current law enforcement demand; however, development of the proposed project would increase this demand. To supplement police protection services, the project would contribute to CFD 98-01 Improvement Area #1. The project is consistent with this goal.

Goal S-6,
Policy S-6.1
Continue to maintain demand-based law
enforcement service levels to reduce the risk
of criminal activity.

Goal S-6,
Policy S-6.2
Continue public education efforts and
community outreach programs to promote
community involvement in crime and drug
prevention.

The San Diego County Sheriff's Department provides presentations to schools through their COPPS deputies. A school resource officer who handles all crimes relating to school students is also assigned to high schools within the City of San Marcos. The project's contribution to CFD 98-01 Improvement Area #1 would aid in the continued provision of these services. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal S-6,
Policy S-6.3/
Goal EJ-4,
Policy EJ-4.12
Use Crime Prevention through Environmental
Design (CPTED) principles in the design or
redevelopment of projects and buildings.

The San Diego County Sheriff's Department provides CPTED reviews through their crime prevention unit. The project's required contribution to a CFD would aid in the continued provision of this service. The Sheriff's Department has reviewed all project plans. The project is consistent with this policy.

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-55
General Plan
Element Goal
or Policy
Goal/Policy Description Project’s Consistency with Goal/Policy Goal S-7 Comply with the McClellan-Palomar Airport
Land Use Compatibility Plan.

The project site is located within Review Area 2 of the McClellan-Palomar airport influence area and may be subject to annoyances associated with noise, vibration, and overflights. Consistent with the ALUCP, recordation of overflight notification documents would be required as a condition of project approval.

Review Area 2 also limits heights of structures in areas of high terrain. The project site is not characterized as high terrain and proposed development would remain below surrounding prominent topographic features. The project is consistent with this goal.

Goal S-7,
Policy S-7.1
Record an overflight notification document in
association with the approval of any new
residential land use within the AIA overflight
notification area consistent with the ALUCP.

Noise Element
Goal N-1 Promote a pattern of land uses compatible
with current and future noise levels.

The noise study prepared for the project (Appendix O) modeled ambient and future noise levels at the project site and compared with exterior and interior noise thresholds contained in the City’s General Plan. The project would not result in any significant noise impacts. Additionally, the project is not of a type that would generate excessive noise to neighboring uses during daily operation.

Noise associated with increased traffic as a result of the project would not increase levels above the significance threshold of 3 dBA CNEL. Therefore, the project is consistent with this goal.

Goal N-1,
Policy N-1.1
Address the potential for excessive noise
levels when making land use planning
decisions in accordance with Table 7-3 Land
Use Compatibility Noise Standards.

The noise study prepared for the project (Appendix O) analyzed noise impacts to and generated from implementation of the proposed project. As summarized in Section 3.11 (Noise), construction and operational noise impacts would be less than significant. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal N-1,
Policy N-1.2
Ensure that acceptable noise levels are
maintained near noise-sensitive uses.

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-56
General Plan
Element Goal
or Policy
Goal/Policy Description Project’s Consistency with Goal/Policy than significant. The project would not impact any adjacent noise-sensitive land uses. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal N-1,
Policy N-1.3/
Goal EJ-4,
Policy EJ-4.11
Incorporate design features into residential
land use projects that can be used to shield
residents from excessive noise. Design
features may include, but are not limited to:
berms, walls, and sound attenuating
architectural design and construction
methods.

The project design includes rooftop parapets and shielding to minimize noise from HVAC equipment. The project design also includes balcony and patio shielding for units facing W. Mission Road to ensure private outdoor spaces do not have noise levels in excess of City standards. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal N-1,
Policy N-1.4
Require new development projects to provide
barriers to reduce noise levels, or provide
sufficient spatial buffers to separate
excessive noise generating land uses and
noise-sensitive land uses.

Goal N-1,
Policy N-1.5
Require an acoustical study for proposed
developments in areas where the existing
and projected noise level exceeds or would
exceed the Normally Acceptable levels
identified in Table 7-3.

A noise study was prepared for the project (Appendix O) and summarized in Section 3.11, (Noise), of the EIR. Construction and operational noise impacts were determined to be less than significant. The project would not exceed the Normally Acceptable levels in Table 7-3. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal N-2 Control transportation-related noise from
traffic, rail, and aviation sources near noise
sensitive land uses.

A noise study was prepared for the project (Appendix O) and summarized in Section 3.11, (Noise), of the EIR. Construction and operational noise impacts were determined to be less than significant. The analysis considered the influence of adjacent roadway noise and the SPRINTER rail line. The project is consistent with this goal. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal N-2,
Policy N-2.1
Encourage only noise-compatible land uses
along existing and future roadways,
highways, and freeways.

A noise study was prepared for the project (Appendix O) and summarized in Section 3.11, (Noise), of the EIR. For residential units with line-of-site to W.

Mission Road, private outdoor spaces would have enhanced balcony and patio shielding consisting of 5-foot barriers. The location where the enhanced shielding would be incorporated is shown on Figure 3.11-3.

Goal N-2,
Policy N-2.2
Promote coordinated site planning and traffic
control measures that reduce traffic noise on
noise-sensitive land uses.

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-57
General Plan
Element Goal
or Policy
Goal/Policy Description Project’s Consistency with Goal/Policy influence of adjacent roadway noise and the SPRINTER rail line. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal N-2,
Policy N-2.3
Advocate the use of alternative
transportation modes such as walking,
bicycling, mass transit, and non-combustible
engine vehicles to reduce traffic noise.

The project’s internal pedestrian circulation network would connect to the existing sidewalk on W. Mission Road and to the future sidewalk on Capalina Road. The project is adjacent to an NCTD bus stop on W. Mission Road and is less than 0.6 mile from the SPRINTER rail station. The project design incorporate bicycle racks per the requirements of the City’s CAP Checklist. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal N-3 Control non-transportation-related noise from
commercial, industrial, construction, and
other sources on noise sensitive land uses.

The nearest noise-sensitive land uses are the mobile homes located along Capalina Road. As analyzed in Section 3.11, (Noise), non-transportation-related noise impacts were determined to be less than significant. HVAC equipment would be shielded with parapets as part of the project design. The project is consistent with this goal.

Goal N-3,
Policy N-3.1
When adjacent to noise sensitive receptors,
require developers and contractors to
employ noise reduction techniques during
construction and maintenance operations.

The nearest noise-sensitive land uses are the mobile homes located along Capalina Road. As analyzed in Section 3.11, (Noise), all construction and operational impacts for the project would be less than significant. Construction activities would comply with the City’s Municipal Code requirement and all construction activities would occur between 7:00 AM and 4:30 PM, Monday through Friday. Therefore, the project is consistent with this goal.

Goal N-3,
Policy N-3.2
Limit the hours of construction and
maintenance operations located adjacent to
noise-sensitive land uses.

Construction activities would comply with the City’s Municipal Code requirement and all construction activities would occur between 7:00 AM and 4:30 PM, Monday through Friday. No construction activities will occur on weekends or holidays. No construction-related noise impacts were identified for the project.

The project is consistent with this policy.

Housing Element
Goal H-1 Provide a broad range of housing
opportunities with emphasis on providing
housing which meets the special needs of
the community.

The project would construct 119 residential apartments and six of the units would be affordable at the very low income level (50% of the AMI). The project proposes a mix of studio, one-bedroom, two-bedroom and three-bedroom units ranging from 600 s.f. to 1,030 s.f. The project is consistent with this goal.

Goal H-1,
Policy 1.1/
Designate land for a variety of residential
densities sufficient to meet the housing
needs for a variety of household sizes and
The project would construct 119 residential apartments and six of the units would be affordable at the very low income level (50% of the AMI). The project proposes a mix of studio, one-bedroom, two-bedroom and three-bedroom units

3.10 Land Use and Planning
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.10-58
General Plan
Element Goal
or Policy
Goal/Policy Description Project’s Consistency with Goal/Policy Goal EJ-4,
Policy EJ-4.5
income levels, with higher densities being
focused in the vicinity of transit stops and in
proximity to significant concentrations of
employment opportunities.
ranging from 600 s.f. to 1,030 s.f. The project site is adjacent to an NCTD bus stop and near the SPRINTER rail line along W. Mission Road, which is a highly traveled transportation corridor. The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal H-2 Protect, encourage, and provide housing
opportunities for persons of lower and
moderate incomes.

The project would construct 119 residential apartments and six of the units would be affordable at the very low income level (50% of the AMI). The project is consistent with this policy.

Goal H-4,
Policy 4.4
Balance the need to protect and preserve
the natural environment with the need to
provide additional housing and employment
opportunities.

The project balances the provision of housing with the preservation of open space. The project would develop 119 residential apartments and 4,000 s.f. of commercial use. All impacts would be mitigated to below a level of significance.

Additionally, Section 4.0, (Alternatives), of the EIR provides a range of alternative development scenarios, including a no development alternative, considered for the project site.

Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.11-1

3.11 Noise
Introduction
This section addresses the potential noise effects resulting from the construction of the project and analyzes the noise compatibility of the project site with surrounding land uses. The analysis is based on the following report, which is included as Appendix O of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR):15 • Noise Assessment, Capalina Apartments Residential Development GPA22 -0003, R22-0003, SDP22-0007 City of San Marcos, prepared by LDN Consulting, June 2023 (LDN 2023d) In the Initial Study prepared for the proposed project ( Appendix B.1), it was determined that there would be no potential for the project to have an adverse impact resulting from excessive noise levels from being located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or within two miles of a public airport.

Therefore, this issue is not discussed further in this section. Section 5.9, Environmental Effects Found Not to Be Significant – Noise of the EIR provides additional information on this topic.

Table 3.11-1 summarizes the project- and cumulative-level noise impacts, by threshold.

Table 3.11-1. Noise Summary of Impacts
Threshold of Significance Project Direct
Impact
Project
Cumulative
Impact
Impact After
Mitigation
#1 – Generation of a substantial
temporary or permanent increase in
ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the
project in excess of standards established
in the location general plan or noise
ordinance, or applicable standards of
other agencies.

Potentially
Significant
Less than
Significant
Mitigated to Less
Than Significant
#2 - Generation of excessive groundborne
vibration or groundborne noise levels.

Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Without Mitigation

3.11.1 Existing Conditions
This section provides background on noise analysis and a description of the existing noise environment on the project site and surrounding area and details the results of the ambient noise monitoring conducted by LDN Consulting on October 11, 2022 between 11:00 AM and 11:15 AM.

Background
Noise
Noise is generally defined as “unwanted sound” that interferes with normal activities. Excessive levels of noise can cause hearing loss, although the principal human response to environmental noise is

15 Full references for documents cited in this section are included in Chapter 7, References, of this EIR.

3.11 Noise
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.11-2
annoyance. Noise is measured on a logarithmic scale of sound pressure level known as decibel (dB).

A-weighted decibels (dBA) approximate the subjective response of the human ear to broad frequency noise sources by discriminating against very low and very h igh frequencies of the audible spectrum.

They are adjusted to reflect only frequencies audible to the human ear. Equivalent sound level (Leq) is the noise metric used to collect short-term noise level measurement samples. It represents a steady state sound level containing the same total energy as a time varying signal over a given sample period, with Lmax and Lmin as the maximum and minimum, respectively. Community receptors are more sensitive to unwanted noise intrusion during the evening and at night. State law requires that, for some planning purposes, an artificial dBA increment be added to quiet time noise levels in a 24 -hour A- weighted average noise descriptor called the Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL). In general, a change of 10 dBA is percei ved as twice as loud (i.e., 65 dBA sounds twice as loud as 55 dBA to a human ear), a 5 dBA change in community noise levels is clearly noticeable, and a 3 dBA change is the smallest increment that is perceivable by most people. Changes of 1 to 2 dBA are no t usually detectable by the human ear.

The decibel level of a sound decreases (or attenuates) exponentially as the distance from the source of that sound increases. For a single point source, such as a piece of mechanical equipment, the sound level normally decreases by about 6 dBA for each dou bling of distance from the source. Sound that originates from a linear, or “line” source, such as a heavily traveled traffic corridor, attenuates by approximately 3 dBA per doubling of distance, provided that the surrounding site conditions lack ground effects or obstacles that either scatter or reflect noise.

Surrounding site conditions, meteorological conditions, and the presence of manmade obstacles such as buildings and barriers may also reduce noise at the location of a receiver. For example, vegetation and loose soils may either absorb or scatter the sound from roadways, yielding sound attenuation rates in environments with these major ground effects that are as high as 4.5 dBA for each doubling of distance (compared to 3 dBA without major ground effects). In addition, barriers between a noise source and a receiver can substantially reduce noise levels at the receiver. A barrier that breaks the line of sight between a source and a receiver will typically result in at least 5 dBA of noise reduction.

Taller barriers will provide increased noise reduction.

Vibration
Vibration is an oscillatory motion through a solid medium in which the motion’s amplitude can be described in terms of displacement, velocity, or acceleration. Human response to vibration is best approximated by the vibration velocity level.

Heavy equipment operation, including stationary equipment that produces substantial oscillation or construction equipment that causes percussive action against the ground surface, may be perceived by building occupants as perceptible vibration known as “st ructureborne/groundborne” vibration.

Vibration in buildings is typically perceived as rattling of windows or items on shelves or the motion of building surfaces. The vibration of building surfaces can also be radiated as sound and heard as a low- frequency rumbling noise, known as groundborne noise. Although the perceived vibration from such equipment operation can be intrusive to building occupants, the vibration is seldom of sufficient magnitude to cause even minor cosmetic damage to buildings unless the receptors are in proximity to heavy equipment.

Vibration energy spreads out as it travels through the ground, causing the vibration amplitude to rapidly decrease with distance away from the source. Soil properties also affect the propagation of vibration.

3.11 Noise
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.11-3
Man-made vibration issues are, therefore, usually confined to short distances from the source (i.e., 50 feet or less).

Vibration amplitudes are usually described in terms of peak levels, as in peak particle velocity (PPV) in inches/second that correlates best with human perception. The particle velocity is the velocity of the soil particles resulting from a disturbance. Ag encies such as the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) use the PPV descriptor because it correlates well with damage or complaints.

Caltrans estimates that the threshold of perception is approximately 0.006 inches/second PPV and the level at which continuous vibration begins to annoy people is approximately 0.010 inches/second PPV (Caltrans 2020).

Existing Noise Environment
The project site is currently vacant and does not currently contain any sources of noise or vibration generation. The project site is located between W. Mission Road and Capalina Road. The project vicinity is developed with a mix of commercial, office and residential uses. Sources of noise in the surrounding area are primarily from traffic on W. Mission Road.

Existing ambient noise measurements were collected by LDN Consulting on October 11, 2022 along the northern boundary of the project site adjacent to W. Mission Road. Sound level meters mounted to tripods approximately five feet above the ground were used and measured sound for a period of 15 minutes. The monitoring location is shown in Figure 3.11-1.

The results of the noise level measurements are presented in Table 3.11-2. The measurements were taken on site to establish a baseline of the vehicle noise from W. Mission Road. The measurements were free of obstruction and had a direct line of sight to the roadways. As shown in Table 3.11 -2, the overall sound level was found to be 66.9 dBA Leq.

Table 3.11-2. Measured Ambient Noise Levels
Measurement
Identification Description Date/Time
Noise Levels (dBA Leq)
Leq Lmax Lmin L10 L50 L90
ML 1 W. Mission Road
October 11, 2022
11:00 AM to 11:15
AM

66.9 79.6 43.2 70.7 62.4 48.0
Source: LDN 2023d.

3.11.2 Regulatory Setting
The following section provides a general description of the applicable regulatory requirements pertaining to noise, including federal, state, and local guidelines.

Federal
Federal Bodies
Title 49 Chapter 65 of the United States Code of Federal Regulations provides for the regulation of noise to protect the public health, safety, and welfare. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA); Federal Rail Administration and Federal Transit Administration (FTA); and the Federal Aviation Administration, respectively, regulate roadway, rail, and aircraft.

3.11 Noise
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.11-4
Vibration and Groundborne Noise Impact Regulations
Publications of the FTA and Caltrans are two of the seminal works for the analysis of groundborne noise and vibration relating to transportation and construction-induced vibration. While the project is not subject to FTA or Caltrans regulations, these guidelines serve as a useful tool to evaluate vibration impacts. Caltrans guidelines recommend that a standard of 0.2 in/sec peak particle velocity (PPV) not be exceeded for the protection of normal residential buildings, and that 0.08 in/sec PPV not be exceeded for the protection of old or historically significant structures. With respect to human response within residential uses (i.e., annoyance, sleep disruption), FTA recommends a maximum acceptable vibration standard of 80 vibration velocity (VdB).

State
State noise standards regulate noise levels of motor vehicles, sound transmission through buildings, occupational noise control, and noise insulation. State regulatory guidelines governing noise levels generated by individual motor vehicles and guidelines governing occupational noise control are not applicable to planning efforts nor are these areas typically subject to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) analysis.

Office of Planning and Research General Plan Guidelines The State of California General Plan Guidelines, published by the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR), provides guidance for the acceptability of specific land use types within areas of specific noise exposure. The guidelines also present adjustment factors that may be used to arrive at noise acceptability standards that reflect the noise control goals of the community, the community’s sensitivity to noise, and the community’s assessment of the relative importance of noise pollution.

General Plan guidelines are advisory in nature. Local jurisdictions, including San Marcos, have the responsibility to set specific noise standards based on local conditions.

State of California Code of Regulations Title 24
In 1974, the California Commission on Housing and Community Development adopted noise insulation standards for hotels, motels, dormitories, and multi -family residential buildings (Title 24, Part 2, California Code of Regulations). Title 24 establishes stan dards for interior room noise (attributable to outside noise sources). The regulations also specify that acoustical studies must be prepared whenever a multi-family residential building or structure is proposed to be located near an existing or adopted fre eway route, expressway, parkway, major street, thoroughfare, rail line, rapid transit line, or industrial noise source, and where such noise source or sources create an exterior CNEL (or LDN) of 60 dBA or greater. Such acoustical analysis must demonstrate that the residence has been designed to limit intruding noise to an interior CNEL (or LDN) of at least 45 dBA [California’s Title 24 Noise Standards, Chap. 2-35].

Local
City of San Marcos General Plan
The following are applicable goals and policies from the City of San Marcos General Plan, Noise Element:
• Goal N-1: Promote a pattern of land uses compatible with current and future noise levels.

3.11 Noise
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.11-5
o Policy N -1.1: Address the potential for excessive noise levels when making land use planning decisions in accordance with Table 7-3 Land Use Compatibility Noise Standards. o Policy N-1.2: Ensure that acceptable noise levels are maintained near noise-sensitive uses. o Policy N-1.3: Incorporate design features into residential land use projects that can be used to shield residents from excessive noise. Design features may include, but are not limited to: berms, walls, and sound attenuating architectural design and constr uction methods.
o Policy N-1.4: Require new development projects to provide barriers to reduce noise levels, or provide sufficient spatial buffers to separate excessive noise generating land uses and noise-sensitive land uses.
o Policy N-1.5: Require an acoustical study for proposed developments in areas where the existing and projected noise level exceeds or would exceed the Normally Acceptable levels identified in Table 7-3.
• Goal N-2: Control transportation-related noise from traffic, rail, and aviation sources near noise sensitive land uses.
o Policy N -2.1: Encourage only noise -compatible land uses along existing and future roadways, highways, and freeways.
o Policy N-2.2: Promote coordinated site planning and traffic control measures that reduce traffic noise on noise-sensitive land uses.
o Policy N -2.3: Advocate the use of alternative transportation modes such as walking, bicycling, mass transit, and non-combustible engine vehicles to reduce traffic noise. • Goal N-3: Control non-transportation-related noise from commercial, industrial, construction, and other sources on noise sensitive land uses.
o Policy N -3.1: When adjacent to noise sensitive receptors, require developers and contractors to employ noise reduction techniques during construction and maintenance operations.
o Policy N-3.2: Limit the hours of construction and maintenance operations located adjacent to noise-sensitive land uses.

The following is an applicable goal and policy from the City of San Marcos General Plan, Safety Element:
• Goal S-7: Comply with the McClellan-Palomar Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. o Policy S-7.1: Record an overflight notification document in association with the approval of any new residential land use within the AIA overflight notification area consistent with the ALUCP.

The following is an applicable goal and policy from the City of San Marcos General Plan, Environmental Justice Element:
• Goal EJ-4: Foster healthy living conditions for people of all backgrounds and incomes

3.11 Noise
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.11-6
o Policy EJ-4.11: Incorporate design features into residential use projects that can be used to shield residents from excessive noise. Design features may include, but are not limited to: berms, walls and sound attenuating architectural design and construction methods.

The project’s consistency with applicable General Plan goals and policies is discussed in Section 3.10, Land Use and Planning. As detailed in Table 3.10-7 in Section 3.10, the project is consistent with the applicable goals and policies.

City of San Marcos Municipal Code
Chapter 10.24 (Noise)
Chapter 10.24 of the San Marcos Municipal Code prohibits loud, annoying, or unnecessary noises.

However, the Noise Ordinance does not specifically provide quantified property line noise level limits.

Section 10.24.020 provides definitions for and examples of prohibited noise sources. Included in the list of prohibited noise sources is demolition and building construction activities that occur Monday through Friday before 7:00 AM and after 6:00 PM or on Saturdays before 8:00 AM or after 5:00 PM.

The noise or dinance does not include a quantified noise level limit for construction noise. Section

10.24.030 describes the standards for how sound is assessed. Commonly, the City has utilized Section 36.409 the County of San Diego’s Noise Ordinance noise limit of 75 dBA Leq (8 -hour) for construction activities.

Section 17.32.180 (Grading Operation Restrictions)
City of San Marcos Municipal Code Section17.32.180 addresses the time limits that apply to grading, extraction, and blasting between 7:00 AM and 4:30 PM Monday through Friday. Grading, extraction, or related earth moving is not allowed in the City on the w eekends or holidays. The Municipal Code does not set noise limits on construction activities. Commonly, the City has utilized the County of San Diego’s Noise Ordinance noise limit of 75 dBA for construction activities.

The Noise Element of the County of San Diego General Plan establishes limitations on sound levels to be received by various land uses. New development may cause an existing noise sensitive land use (NSLU) to be affected by noise caused by the new development, or it may create or locate a NSLU in such a place that it is affected by noise. The Noise Element identifies airports and traffic on public roadways as the major sources of noise. The County Noise Element establishes the exterior noise level standards and provides interior standards and definitions. If the exterior noise level would exceed 75 dBA CNEL, new development would not be approved.

Chapter 20.300 (Zoning Ordinance)
The provisions of Title 20 of the San Marcos Municipal Code are referred to as the Zoning Ordinance.

Section 20.300, Performance Standards, within the Zoning Ordinance identifies noise regulations to prohibit unnecessary, excessive, and annoying noises. Table 20.300-4, included below as Table 3.11-
3 identifies allowable noise levels (dBA) by zone type. For multifamily residential and commercial uses, the allowable noise level, as measured at the property line is 65 dBA from 7:00 AM to 10:00 PM. and 55 dBA from 10:00 PM to 7:00 AM. Increases in allowable noise levels listed in Table 3.11-3 may be permitted in accordance with the standards outlined in Table 3.11-4.

1. Noise shall be measured with a sound-level meter that meets the standards of the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) (Section S1.4 -1979, Type 1 or Type 2). Noise levels shall be measured in decibels at the property line of the receptor property, and at least five (5) feet

3.11 Noise
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.11-7
above the ground and ten (10) feet from the nearest structure or wall. The unit of measure shall be designated as an A-weighted decibel (dBA) Leq standard. A calibration check shall be made of the instrument at the time any noise measurement is made.

2. No person shall create or allow the creation of exterior noise that causes the noise level to exceed the noise standards established by Table 20.300-4 (shown as Table 3.11-3). Increases in allowable noise levels listed in Table 20.300-4 (shown as Table 3.1 1-3) may be permitted in accordance with the standards outlined in Table 20.300- 5 (shown as Table 3.11-4).

3. No person shall create nor allow the creation of noise that causes the interior noise level when measured within a dwelling unit to exceed forty-five (45) dBA at any time, except as permitted by Table 20.300-6 (shown as Table 3.11-5).

4. Use of compressors or other equipment, including vents, ducts, and conduits, but excluding window or wall-mounted air conditioners, that are located outside of the exterior walls of any building, shall be enclosed within a permanent, noncombustible, view-obscuring enclosure to ensure that the equipment does not emit noise in excess of the ANSI standards.

Table 3.11-3. Exterior Noise Standards by Zone
Zone Allowable Noise Level (dBA Leq) Measured from the
Property Line
Single-Family Residential (A, R-1, R-2)1,2
7:00 AM and 10:00 PM (daytime) 60
10:00 PM and 7:00 AM (overnight) 50
Multifamily Residential (R-3) (1)(2)
7:00 AM and 10:00 PM (daytime) 65
10:00 PM and 7:00 AM (overnight) 55
Commercial (C, O-P, SR)(3)
7:00 AM and 10:00 PM (daytime) 65
10:00 PM and 7:00 AM (overnight) 55
Industrial
7:00 AM and 10:00 PM (daytime) 65
10:00 PM and 7:00 AM (overnight) 60
Source: City of San Marcos 2017 (Table 20.300-4)
Notes: (1) For single-family detached dwelling units, the "exterior noise level" is defined as the noise level measured at an outdoor living area which adjoins and is on the same lot as the dwelling, and which contains at least the following minimum net lot area: (i) for lots less than 4,000 square feet in area, the exterior area shall include 400 square feet, (ii) for lots between 4,000 square feet to 10 acres in area, the exterior area shall include 10 percent of the lot area; (iii) for lots over 10 acres in area, the exterior area shall include 1 acre. (2) For all other residential land uses, "exterior noise level" is defined as noise measured at exterior areas which are provided for private or group usable open space purposes. "Private Usable Open Space" is defined as usable open space intended for use of occupants of one dwelling unit, normally including yards, decks, and balconies.

When the noise limit for Private Usable Open Space cannot be met, then a Group Usable Open Space that meets the exterior noise level standard shall be provided. "Group Usabl e Open Space" is defined as usable open space intended for common use by occupants of a development, either privately owned and maintained or dedicated to a public agency, normally including swimming pools, recreation courts, patios, open landscaped areas, and

3.11 Noise
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.11-8
greenbelts with pedestrian walkways and equestrian and bicycle trails, but not including off -street parking and loading areas or driveways.
(3) For non-residential noise sensitive land uses, exterior noise level is defined as noise measured at the exterior area provided for public use.

Table 3.11-4. Permitted Increase in Noise Levels
Permitted Increase (dBA) Duration
(cumulative minutes per hour)
5 15
10 5
15 1
20 Less than 1 minute
Source: City of San Marcos 2017 (Table 20.300-5).

Table 3.11-5. Permitted Increase in Interior Noise Levels Permitted Increase (dBA) Duration
(cumulative minutes per hour)
5 1
10 Less than 1 minute
Source: City of San Marcos 2017 (Table 20.300-6).

3.11.3 Thresholds of Significance
According to Appendix G of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, noise impacts are considered potentially significant if they cause:
• Threshold #1: Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the location general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies. • Threshold #2: Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels.

The term “substantial increase” is not defined by any responsible agency. Under ambient conditions, people generally do not perceive that noise has clearly changed until there is a 3 dBA difference.

Therefore, a threshold of 3 dBA is commonly used to define “substantial increase,” as it is noticeable to humans under typical ambient conditions. For this analysis, a direct roadway noise impact would be considered significant if the project increases noise levels for a noise sensitive land use by 3 dBA CNEL and increases noise levels above an unacceptable noise level per the City’s General Plan in the area adjacent to the roadway segment.

As identified above, impacts related to being in the vicinity of a private airstrip or airport land use plan are not discussed in this section. Section 5.9, Environmental Effects Found Not to Be Significant – Noise, provides additional information on this topic.

3.11 Noise
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.11-9
San Marcos Noise Impact Thresholds
Construction Noise Standards
The City of San Marcos Municipal Code does not set noise limits on construction activities. Commonly, the City utilizes the County of San Diego’s Noise Ordinance Section 36.410 noise limit of 75 dBA at any existing sensitive receptor for construction activities. The Municipal Code Section 17.32.180 does address and limit grading and extraction activities between the hours of 7:00 AM and 4:30 PM, Monday through Friday, and no grading or earth moving activities are allowed on the weekends or holidays.

City of San Marcos Ground Vibration Standards
The City of San Marcos does not have adopted vibration criteria. The FTA provides criteria for acceptable levels of groundborne vibration for various types of buildings that are sensitive to vibration.

For purposes of identifying potential project -related vibration impacts resulting from the proposed project, the FTA criteria will be used. Table 3.11-6 shows the FTA groundborne vibration and noise impact criteria for human annoyance.

Table 3.11-6. Groundborne Vibration and Noise Impact Criteria (Human Annoyance)

Groundborne Vibration
Impact Levels
(VdB re 1 microinch/second)
Groundborne Noise Impact Levels
(dB re 20 micropascals)
Frequent
Events1
Occasiona
l Events2
Infrequent
Events3
Frequent
Events1
Occasiona
l Events2
Infrequent
Events3
Category 1: Buildings where low
ambient vibration is essential for
interior operations.
65 VdB4 65 VdB4 65 VdB4 N/A4 N/A4 N/A4
Category 2: Residences and
buildings where people normally
sleep.
72 VdB 75 VdB 80 VdB 35 dBA 38 dBA 43 dBA
Category 3: Institutional land uses
with primarily daytime use. 75 VdB 78 VdB 83 VdB 40 dBA 43 dBA 48 dBA Source: Federal Transit Administration , Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, September 2018.

1. “Frequent Events” are defined as more than 70 vibration events per day. Most rapid transit projects fall into this category.

2. “Occasional Events” are defined as between 30 and 70 vibration events of the same source per day. Most commuter trunk lines have this many operations.

3. “Infrequent Events” are defined as fewer than 30 vibration events of the same kind per day. This category includes most commuter rail branch lines.

4. This criterion limit is based on levels that are acceptable for most moderately sensitive equipment such as optical microscopes. Vibration-sensitive manufacturing or research would require detailed evaluation to define the acceptable vibration levels. Ensu ring lower vibration levels in a building often requires special design of the HVAC systems and stiffened floors.

5. Vibration-sensitive equipment is not sensitive to groundborne noise.

In addition to the vibration annoyance standards presented in Table 3.11 -6, the FTA also applies the following standards for construction vibration damage. As shown in Table 3.11-7, structural damage is possible for typical residential construction when the PPV exceeds 0.2 inch per second (in/sec). This criterion is the threshold at which there is a risk of damage to normal dwellings.

3.11 Noise
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.11-10
Table 3.11-7. Groundborne Vibration Impact Criteria (Structural Damage) Building Category PPV (in/sec) VdB
I. Reinforced-concrete, steel, or timber (no plaster) 0.5 102 II. Engineered concrete and masonry (no plaster) 0.3 98 III. Non-engineered timber and masonry buildings 0.2 94 IV. Buildings extremely susceptible to vibration damage 0.12 90 Source: Federal Transit Administration, Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment, September 2018.

Note: RMS = Root Mean Square (RMS) velocity calculated from vibration level (VdB) using the reference of one microinch/second.

Transportation Noise Standards
To control transportation -related noise sources such as arterial roads, freeways, airports, and railroads, the City of San Marcos has established guidelines for acceptable community noise levels in the Noise Element of the General Plan (Table 7-3 of the Ge neral Plan Noise Element). For noise sensitive rural and single-family residential uses, schools, libraries, parks, and recreational areas, the City Noise Element requires an exterior noise level of less than 60 dBA CNEL for outdoor usable areas, such as yard and patio areas. For multi-family developments, the standard is 65 dBA CNEL. A standard of 70 dBA CNEL is typically applied to commercial uses. The City has also established an interior noise limit of 45 dBA CNEL for all residential uses. Noise sensitive indoor spaces are subject to compliance with CCR Title 24 noise insulation standards demonstrating a 45 dBA CNEL interior noise level with all windows of the structure closed.

Operational Noise Standards
The City noise regulations that apply to the proposed project are found in Chapter 20.300 Site Planning and General Development Standards of the City Municipal Code. These regulations aim to prohibit unnecessary, excessive, and annoying noises from all sources, as certain noise levels are detrimental to the health and welfare of individuals. The standards of this section and of Chapter 10.24 Noise of the Municipal Code apply to all land uses unless otherwise specified. No person shall create or allow the creation of exterior noise that causes the noise level to exceed the noise standards established by Table 20.300-4 of the Municipal Code. See Table 3.11-3 earlier in this section.

The City Ordinance limits noise generation in commercial/and multi-family zones to 65 dB Leq (one- hour average) between the hours of 7 am and 10 pm and 55 dB Leq between the hours of 10:00 PM and 7:00 AM as measured at the project property line as shown above in Table 3 -3. Per the City of San Marcos General Plan Noise Element (GPNE), noise standards for commercial, multi -family, and mixed-use land uses are the same, and are higher than single -family residential areas because they reflect a more urban environment (GPNE, pg. 7-10). Higher t hresholds are permitted due to the integrated mix of residential and commercial activity and their usual location near major arterials (GPNE, pg. 7 -9). Properties directly surrounding the project site are all designated as commercial/mixed use under the City General Plan. The nearest residential use is the mobile home park located south across Capalina Road which is zoned multi -family. Therefore, the City Ordinance limits of 65 dBA hourly noise standard during the daytime hours between 7:00 AM and 10:00 PM. a 55 dBA standard during the nighttime hours between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. would apply at all property lines.

3.11 Noise
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.11-11

3.11.4 Project Impact Analysis
Construction and operation of the project have the potential to result in short term and long term increases in noise on the project site in the project vicinity. As part of the project design, residential units with direct line -of-site to W. Mission Road would have enhanced balcony and patio shielding consisting of 5 -foot barriers. The location where the enhanced shielding would be incorporated is shown on Figure 3.11-3. The shielding would be constructed of a non -gapping material consisting of masonry, ¼ inch thick glass, earthen berm, or any combination of these materials. Additionally, as part of the project design features, to ensure compliance with CCR Title 24, a final noise assessment is required prior to the issuance of the first building permit to identify the interior noise requirements based upon architectural and building plans. Interior noise levels of 45 dBA CNEL can be obtained with conventional building construction methods and providing a closed window condition requiring a means of mechanical ventilation (e.g., air conditioning) and upgraded windows for all sensitive rooms (e.g., bedrooms and living spaces).

Threshold #1: Generation of a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the location general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies.

Construction Noise
This section addresses the construction noise impacts associated with the project to determine if they would result in the exposure of persons to or generation of noise level in excess of applicable noise standards. Construction noise represents a short -term impact on the ambient noise levels, primarily from construction equipment. Grading activities typically represent one of the highest potential sources for noise impacts. The most effective method of controlling construction noise is through local control of construction hours and by limiting the hours of construction to normal weekday working hours. As stated above, the City of San Marcos Municipal Code does not set noise limits on construction activities. Commonly, the City utilizes the County of San Diego’s Noise Ordinance Section

36.410 noise limit of 75 dBA at any existing sensitive receptor for construction activities.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) has compiled data regarding the noise generating characteristics of specific types of construction equipment. Noise levels generated by heavy construction equipment can range from 60 dBA to in excess of 100 dBA when measured at 50 feet.

However, these noise levels diminish rapidly with distance from the construction site at a rate of approximately 6 dBA per doubling of distance. For example, a noise level of 75 dBA measured at 50 feet from the noise source to the receptor would be reduced to 69 dBA at 100 feet from the source to the receptor and reduced to 63 dBA at 200 feet from the source.

LDN used a point-source noise prediction model to calculate the expected construction noise impacts (LDN 2023d). The essential model input data for these performance equations include the source levels of each type of equipment, relative source to receiver horizontal and vertical separations, the amount of time the equipment is operating in a given day, also referred to as the duty -cycle and any transmission loss from topography or barriers.

The equipment needed for the most intensive grading activities would consist of a medium sized rubber tire tractor/backhoe, a large bulldozer, a medium sized front loader, a water truck, and a small to medium sized paver/blade. Based on the USEPA noise emi ssions, empirical data and the amount of equipment needed, worst case noise levels from the construction equipment for site preparation would occur during grading operations.

3.11 Noise
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.11-12
The potential noise sensitive uses are located adjacent or near the property lines. The affected land uses include the existing retail uses adjacent to the project to the east and west, and the existing residential uses across Capalina Road to the south ov er 100-feet from the proposed construction activities. W. Mission Road and the SPRINTER rail line are located to the north and are not considered sensitive uses. Existing ambient noise levels were determined to be 66.9 dBA Leq.

Grading
The grading activities would l consist of the preparation of internal roadways, parking, and the finished pads. No rock crushing or blasting are proposed as part of the grading activities. The equipment would be spread out over the project site from distances near the occupied propert y lines to distances of 200 feet or more away. Based upon the site plan, the majority of the grading operations, on average, would occur more than 100 feet from the property lines. This means that most of the time the average distance from all the equipment to the nearest property line is 100 feet.

As shown in Table 3.11-8, at an average distance of 100 feet from the construction activities to the nearest property line would result in a noise attenuation of 6.0 dBA without shielding. Given this, the noise levels would comply with the 75 dBA Leq (8-hour) standard at the property lines. Therefore, the construction noise impacts would be considered less than significant and no mitigation is required during construction of the proposed project. Additionally, all equipment should be properly fitted with mufflers and all staging and maintenance should be conducted as far away from the existing residence as possible.

Table 3.11-8. Construction Noise Levels
Equipment Type Quantity Used Source @ 50 Feet
(dBA)
Cumulative Noise Level
@ 50 Feet (dBA)
Tractor/Backhoe 1 72 72.0
Dozer D9 Cat 1 74 74.0
Loader/Grader 1 73 73.0
Water Truck 1 70 70.0
Paver/Blade 1 75 75.0
Cumulative Level 80.1
Distance to Sensitive Uses 100
Noise Reduction due to Distance -6.0
Property Line Noise Level 74.1
Source: LDN 2023d.

Grading Materials Import
Grading of the project site would require 8,240 cubic yards of import. Noise level changes greater than 3 dBA are often identified as audible and considered potentially significant, while changes less than 1 dBA would not be discernible to local residents. In the range of 1 to 3 dBA, resid ents who are very sensitive to noise may perceive a slight change. Community noise exposures are typically over a long time period rather than the immediate comparison made in a laboratory situation. Therefore, the level at which changes in community noise levels become discernible is likely greater than 1 dBA, and 3

3.11 Noise
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.11-13
dBA appears to be appropriate for most people. For the purposes for this analysis, direct and cumulative roadway noise impacts would be considered significant if the project increases noise levels for a noise sensitive land use by 3 dBA CNEL and if the pro ject increases noise levels above an unacceptable noise level per the City’s General Plan in the area adjacent to the roadway segment.

Typically, it requires a project to double (or add 100%) to the traffic volumes to result in a 3 dBA CNEL increase, which is considered a potential impact. Based on a current traffic volume of approximately 4,200 average daily traffic (ADT) or more on the roadways along the site and along the anticipated haul route, the additional trucks would add less than 0.5 dBA to the ov erall noise level. This is well below a 3 dBA increase that is considered a potential impact. Negligible noise impacts are anticipated at the residential uses that are located along the roadway due to the low volume of trucks. Impacts would be
less than significant.

Operational Noise
This section addresses the operational noise associated with the project to determine if it would result in the exposure of persons to or generation of noise level in excess of applicable noise standards.

Operational noise associated with the project would include traffic generated by the project that travels on area roadways as well as noise that is generated on the project site.

Future Onsite Roadway Noise
To determine the future noise environment and impact potential resulting from increased traffic associated with the proposed project, the FHWA model was utilized. The critical model input parameters, which determine the projected vehicular traffic noise levels, include vehicle travel speeds, the percentages of automobiles, medium trucks, and heavy trucks in the roadway volume, the site conditions, and the peak hour traffic volume. The peak hour traffic volumes range between six to 12 percent of the ADT and ten percent is generally acceptable for noise modeling.

Table 3.11-9 presents the roadway parameters used in the analysis including the peak traffic volumes, vehicle speeds, and the hourly traffic flow distribution (vehicle mix). The vehicle mix provides the hourly distribution percentages of automobile, medium trucks, and heavy trucks for input into the FHWA model. The Buildout conditions for W. Mission Road and Capalina Road include the future year 2050 traffic volume forecasts provided by the project traffic study (CRA 2023). In addition, the project site is located over 800 feet north of SR -78. According to the City of San Marcos General Plan Noise Element, background noise levels from the future traffic along SR-78 is 60 dBA CNEL at approximately 800 feet. The noise contours for this area would also include W. Mission Road and SPRINTER line noise.

Table 3.11-9. Future Traffic Parameters
Roadway Average Daily
Traffic (ADT)1
Peak Hour
Volumes1
Modeled
Speeds
(MPH)
Vehicle Mix %2
Auto Medium
Trucks
Heavy
Trucks
W. Mission Road 24,579 2,460 40 96 2 2
Capalina Road 5,174 517 35 96 2 2
Source: LDN 2023d.

Notes: Peak hour volumes are Year 2050 volumes identified in the Local Transportation Analysis prepared by CR Associates, 2023.

Typical City vehicle mix.

3.11 Noise
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.11-14
The required coordinate information necessary for the FHWA model input was taken from the conceptual site plans prepared by Summa Architecture (2023). The conceptual plans were used to identify the pad elevations, roadway elevations, and the relationship between the noise source(s) and the outdoor receptor areas. The modeled observer locations for the outdoor use areas are shown in Figure 3.11-2.

The modeling results for the future unmitigated exterior noise levels is shown in Table 3.11 -10, including any noise reduction from the distance between the source and receptor. Based upon these findings, noise levels at ground floor patios and upper floor balconies along W. Mission Road would exceed the City Noise Standard of 65 dBA CNEL if design features were not included.

Table 3.11-10. Future Unmitigated Exterior Noise Levels

Source: LDN 2023d.

As discussed earlier in this section, as part of the project design, residential units with direct line -of- site to W. Mission Road would have enhanced balcony and patio shielding consisting of 5-foot barriers.

3.11 Noise
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.11-15
The shielding would be constructed of a non -gapping material consisting of masonry, ¼ inch thick glass, earthen berm, or any combination of these materials. Table 3.11 -11 shows that with incorporation of these design features, the sound level at the building façade facing W. Mission Road would not exceed 65 dBA CNEL and the impact would be less than significant.

Table 3.11-11. Future Exterior Noise Levels with Balcony and Patio Design Features Receptor
Number(1) Receptor Location
Noise Level @
Receptor
(dBA CNEL)(2)
Reduction Due to
Shielding
(dBA CNEL)
Resultant Noise
Level
(dBA CNEL)
1 Building Facades along
W. Mission Road 72.1 -7.7 64.4
2 Building Facades along
Capalina Road 65.0 - 65.0
3 Park/Outdoor Areas 68.6 -5.0 63.6
Source: LDN 2023d.

Notes: See Figure 3.11-2
FHWA Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model, FHWA-RD-77-108 Additionally, as part of the project design features described in Table 2 -1, to ensure compliance with CCR Title 24, a final noise assessment is required prior to the issuance of the first building permit to identify the interior noise requirements based u pon architectural and building plans. Interior noise levels of 45 dBA CNEL can be obtained with conventional building construction methods and providing a closed window condition requiring a means of mechanical ventilation (e.g., air conditioning) and upgraded windows for all sensitive rooms (e.g., bedrooms and living spaces).

Project Related Offsite Transportation Noise
To determine if direct or cumulative off-site noise level increases associated with the development of the proposed project would create noise impacts, the traffic volumes for the existing conditions were compared with the traffic volume increase of existi ng plus the proposed project. According to the project traffic study, the project is estimated to only generate 874 daily trips with a peak hour volume of 80 trips (CRA 2023). The existing traffic volumes on W. Mission Road is 24,579 ADT and 5,147 ADT on Capalina Road. Typically, it requires a project to double (or add 100%) the traffic volumes to have a direct impact of 3 dBA CNEL or be a major contributor to the cumulative traffic volumes. The project would add less than a 10% increase to W. Mission Road and Capalina Road volumes. Therefore, no direct or cumulative impacts are anticipated. Impacts would be less than significant.

Operational Noise – HVAC Equipment
This section examines the potential operational noise source levels associated with the development and operation of the proposed project. Noise from a fixed or point source drops off at a rate of 6 dBA for each doubling of distance; for example, a noise l evel of 70 dBA at 5 feet would be 64 dBA at 10 feet and 58 dBA at 20 feet. A review of the proposed project indicates that noise sources such as the roof mounted mechanical heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) system are the primary source of stationary noise.

Properties directly surrounding the project site are designated as commercial/mixed use under the City General Plan. The nearest residential use is the mobile home park located south across Capalina Road, which is zoned R -MHP and has the same noise thresho ld as multi -family. Therefore, the City Ordinance limits of a 65 dBA hourly noise standard during the daytime hours between 7 a.m. and 10

3.11 Noise
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.11-16
p.m., a 55 dBA standard during the nighttime hours between 10 p.m. and 7 a.m. would apply at all property lines.

Roof-mounted HVAC would be installed at the proposed buildings. The project anticipates installing Carrier CA15NA (Series, 24 -A) or equivalent HVAC units with a reference noise level of 71 dBA at 3 - feet (Source: Carrier). The manufacturer’s specifications and noise levels are provided in Attachment B of Appendix O of this EIR. The HVAC units would cycle on and off throughout the day. Typically, HVAC units run for approximately 20 minutes each operating cycle to provide the necessary heating or cooling. It i s anticipated that the HVAC units would operate twice in any given hour or run for 40 minutes in any given hour. Noise levels drop 3 decibels each time the duration of the source is reduced in half.

Therefore, hourly HVAC noise level over a 40-minute period would be reduced approximately 2 decibels to 69 dBA based on operational time. To predict the property line noise level, a reference noise level of 69 dBA at 3-feet was used to represent the HVAC units.

The HVAC units are located a minimum of 160 feet from the residential property lines and would be shielded by the parapet walls that would break the line of sight to the HVAC units and would provide a minimum 5 dBA reduction. The typical locations of the proposed HVAC units are shown in Figure 3.11-

4. Up to 15 units would be clustered together closest to the nearest residential property line to the south. The remainder of the units are separated by at least 80 feet and this separation would result in a 20 d BA difference between other HVAC clusters and would not cumulatively increase the noise levels. Therefore, the worst-case combined noise from the HVAC would occur from 15 units.

Utilizing a 6 dBA decrease per doubling of distance, noise levels at the nearest residential property line as described above were calculated for the HVAC. The HVAC units are located a minimum of 160 feet from the nearest residential property lines. The noise level reductions due to distance and the building for the nearest property line is provided in
Table 3.11-12 below.

Table 3.11-12. Project HVAC Noise Levels (Southern Residential Property Line) Distance to
Nearest
Observer
Location
(Feet)
Hourly
Reference
Noise
Level
(dBA)
Noise
Source
Reference
Distance
(Feet)
Noise
Reduction
Due to
Distance
(dBA)
Reduction
Due to
Buildings
(dBA)
Noise
Level at
Property
Line
(dBA)
Quantity
Property Line
Cumulative
Noise Level
(dBA)(1)
160 69.0 3.0 -34.5 -5.0 29.5 15 41.2
Source: LDN 2023d.

Note: (1) Complies with the nighttime noise standard of 55 dBA.

Additionally, the noise levels at the nearest retail uses adjacent to the project to the west were analyzed using the same methodology described above. Up to 20 units would l be clustered closest to the western property line and would be separated by the remaining HVAC units by parapet walls and distance. Based on the distance to the property line to the west, noise associated with the operation of the HVAC units are expected to be 46.0 dBA or lower, which is below the 55 dBA nighttime threshold for commercial uses.

The noise levels from the proposed roof -mounted HVAC would be considered less than significant at the residential property line to the south and the commercial lines to the west and east with the proposed parapet walls and are in compliance with the City of San Marcos Municipal Code Section

10.24. 3.11 Noise
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.11-17
In summary, the proposed project would not result in a substantial temporary or permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project in excess of standards established in the location general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies.

Threshold #2: Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels.

This section analyzes the potential for the project to expose a person to or generation of excessive vibration or groundborne noise. Proposed residential uses would not be characterized as creating excessive vibration during project operation. The noise mo deling is based upon project construction details and schedule provided by the project applicant.

The nearest vibration-sensitive uses are the existing mobile homes to the south located 100 feet or more from the center of the proposed construction. Table 3.11-13 lists the average vibration levels that would be experienced at the nearest vibration sensitive land uses from the temporary construction activities.

Table 3.11-13. Vibration Levels from Construction Activities (Residential Receptors) Equipment
Approximate
Velocity Level at 25
Feet
(VdB)
Approximate
PPV Level
at 25 Feet
(in/sec)
Approximate
Velocity Level at
100 Feet
(VdB)
Approximate
PPV Level at 100
Feet
(in/sec)
Large bulldozer 87 0.089 68.9 0.0111
Backhoe Ram 87 0.089 68.9 0.0111
Jackhammer 79 0.035 60.9 0.0044
Loaded Trucks 86 0.076 67.9 0.0095
FTA Criteria 80 0.2
Significant Impact? No No
Source: LDN 2023d.
1 PPV at Distance D = PPVref x (25/D)1.5
The FTA has determined vibration levels that would cause annoyance to a substantial number of people and potential damage to building structures. The FTA criterion for vibration induced structural damage is 0.20 in/sec for the peak particle velocity (PPV). Project construction activities would result in PPV levels below the FTA’s criteria for vibration induced structural damage. Therefore, project construction activities would not result in vibration induced structural damage to residential buildings near t he construction areas. The FTA criterion for infrequent vibration induced annoyance is 80 Vibration Velocity (VdB) for residential uses. Construction activities would generate levels of vibration that would not exceed the FTA criteria for nuisance for nearby residential uses. Vibration impacts would be
less than significant.

3.11.5 Cumulative Impact Analysis
A “cumulative impact” refers to two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable or which compound or increase other environmental effects. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15130(b)(1)(A)(B), an adequate discussion of a p roject’s significant cumulative impact, in combination with other closely related projects, can be based on either: (1) a list of past, present, and probable future producing related impacts; or (2) a summary of projections contained in

3.11 Noise
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.11-18
an adopted local, regional, or statewide plan, or a related planning document that describes conditions contributing to the cumulative effect. For purposes of assessing the proposed project’s cumulative impact with respect to noise, the cumulative analysis is based upon a list approach to determine the proposed project’s contributing effect on potential cumulative noise impacts.

Cumulative construction noise could occur if there are other project under construction in the vicinity of the proposed project. Based upon the location of the project and the timing for development and location of the cumulative project included in Table 2-3, a cumulative noise impact is not anticipated and impacts would be less than significant.

As discussed above, future traffic noise levels were analyzed comparing existing traffic with existing plus proposed project traffic levels. This analysis accounts for reasonably foreseeable cumulative traffic levels in the vicinity of the project. As disc ussed previously, impacts would be less than
significant.

3.11.6 Mitigation Measures
Based upon the analysis presented in Sections 3.11.4 and 3.11.5, the project would not have any significant impacts and no mitigation measures are required.

3.11.7 Conclusion
Proposed grading and construction activities would not exceed the 75 dBA (8 -hour) threshold and impacts associated with construction and grading would be less than significant. Operational noise impacts at the project site would not exceed the City’s Gener al Plan Noise Element 65 dBA exterior noise threshold. As part of the project design, residential units with direct line -of-site to W. Mission Road would have enhanced balcony and patio shielding consisting of 5 -foot barriers. The location where the enhanced shielding would be incorporated is shown on Figure 3.11 -3. Construction activities would generate levels of vibration that would not exceed the FTA criteria for nuisance for nearby residential uses. Vibration impacts would be less than significant.

3.11 Noise
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.11-19
Figure 3.11-1. Ambient Monitoring Locations

Source: LDN 2023d.

3.11 Noise
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.11-20
Figure 3.11-2. Modeled Receptor Locations

Source: LDN 2023d.

3.11 Noise
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.11-21
Figure 3.11-3. Area of Enhanced Shielding on Patios and Balconies

Source: LDN 2023d.

3.11 Noise
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.11-22
Figure 3.11-4. Locations of Proposed HVAC Units

Source: LDN 2023d.

Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.12-1

3.12 Population and Housing
This section analyzes the potential for impacts related to population and housing resulting from development of the proposed project. This section considers population and housing characteristics in the area and discusses project consistency with regional growth projections.

In the Initial Study prepared for the proposed project (Appendix B.1), implementation of the proposed project was determined to have no impacts related to the displacement of housing or people. There is no existing housing on the project site and the site is vacant. The construction of the proposed project would not displa ce a substantial number of existing homes, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere, nor would it displace a substantial number of people. This issue is not discussed further in this section. Section 5.10, Environmental Effects Found Not to Be Significant – Population and Housing, of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) provides additional information on this topic.

Table 3.12-1 summarizes the project- and cumulative-impact analysis by threshold for the proposed project.

Table 3.12-1. Population/Housing Summary of Impacts
Threshold of Significance Project-Level Impact Cumulative-Level Impact
Impact After
Mitigation
• Threshold #1: Induce
substantial unplanned
population growth in an area,
either directly (for example by
proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for
example, through extension of
roads or other infrastructure).

Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant Without
Mitigation

3.12.1 Existing Conditions
This section provides background information regarding population and housing forecasts for the City of San Marcos based upon demographic information from the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG).

Population
As of January 1, 2022, the California Department of Finance (DOF) estimates the population of the City is 93,585 (DOF 2022). Based on growth projections provided by the Series 14: 2050 Regional Growth Forecast prepared by SANDAG, it is estimated that the City’s population growth will reach 104,365 persons by 2035, and 119,098 persons by 2050 (SANDAG 2022).

Housing
As of January 1, 2022, the City of San Marcos had 32,000 housing units. The housing stock is comprised of approximately 58.7 percent single -family detached and attached units, and approximately 31 percent multi -family units. Approximately 10.2 percent of t he housing stock as of

3.12 Populations and Housing
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.12-2
January 2022 consisted of mobile homes (DOF 2022). Based on the Series 14: 2050 Regional Growth Forecast, the city is expected to have 42,050 housing units by 2050 (SANDAG 2022).

3.12.2 Regulatory Setting
This section describes the local regulatory setting as it relates to population and housing for the proposed project.

State
California Planning and Zoning Law
The legal framework within which California counties and cities exercise local planning and land use functions is provided in the California Planning and Zoning Law (Sections 65000 through 66499.58 of the California Government Code). Under that law, each county and city must adopt a comprehensive, long-term general plan. The law gives counties and cities wide latitude in how a jurisdiction may create a general plan, but there are fundamental requirements that must be met. The requirements include seven mandatory elements described in the Government Code. Each element must contain text and descriptions setting forth objectives, principles, standards, policies, and plan proposals; diagrams and maps that incorporate data and analysis; and implementation measures.

Once the general plan of a county or city is adopted, it should be construed as a dynamic document, for which adaptability is a key component. Each jurisdiction frequently reviews its general plan for consistency and to ensure it addresses growth-related issues in a comprehensive manner. State law allows up to four general plan amendments per general plan element per year, so each jurisdiction can make changes as justified.

Senate Bill 375
Senate Bill 375 (codified in the Government Code and Public Resources Code), took effect in 2008 and provides a new planning process to coordinate land use planning, regional transportation plans, and funding priorities in order to help California meet the greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction goals established in Assembly Bill 32. Senate Bill 375 requires metropolitan planning organizations to incorporate a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) in their Regional Transportation Plans (RTPs) that will achieve GHG emissions reduction targets by reducing vehicle miles traveled from light -duty vehicles through the development of more compact, complete, and efficient communities.

Regional Housing Needs Allocation
A Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) is mandated by State Housing Law as part of the periodic process of updating local housing elements of the General Plan. The RHNA quantifies the need for housing within each jurisdiction during specified planning periods. Communities use the RHNA in land use planning, prioritizing local resource allocation, and deciding how to address identified existing and future housing needs resulting from population, employment, and household growth. The RHNA does not necessarily encourage or promote growth, but rather allows communities to anticipate growth, so that collectively the region and subregion can grow in ways that enhance quality of life, improve access to jobs, promotes transportation mobility, and address social equity and fair share housing needs.

3.12 Populations and Housing
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.12-3
Regional
San Diego Association of Governments
SANDAG is a public agency, composed of 18 cities and the County of San Diego, which builds strategic plans guiding the San Diego region in land use, growth, economics, and the environment. SANDAG also provides population and housing estimates for the region, which are based, in part, on local jurisdictional planning data and inform regional planning.

The SANDAG Regional Comprehensive Plan, adopted in 2004, provides a long -term planning framework for the San Diego region (SANDAG 2004). The Regional Comprehensive Plan identified smart growth and sustainable development as important strategies to direct the region’s future growth toward compact, mixed -use development in urbanized communities that already have existing and planned infrastructure, and then connecting those communities with a variety of transportation choices.

In 2011, SANDAG approved the 2050 Regional Transportation Plan and Sustainable Communities Strategy (RTP/SCS). This approval marked the first time SANDAG’s RTP included a sustainable communities strategy, consistent with the Sustainable Communities and Cli mate Protection Act of 2008, also known as Senate Bill 375. This RTP/SCS provided a blueprint to improve mobility, preserve open space, and create communities, all with transportation choices to reduce GHG emissions and meet specific targets set by the Cal ifornia Air Resources Board (CARB) as required by the 2008 Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act. In 2010, CARB established targets for each region in California governed by a metropolitan planning organization. SANDAG is the metropolitan planning organization for the San Diego region.

San Diego Forward: The 2021 Regional Plan
SANDAG is required by law to update its regional transportation plan every 4 years. In December 2021, SANDAG adopted the most recent update to its RTP/SCS. SANDAG’s 2021 RTP/SCS, known as San Diego Forward: The 2021 Regional Plan (Regional Plan), provides a long -term blueprint for the San Diego region that seeks to meet regulatory requirements, address traffic congestion, and create equal access to jobs, education, healthcare, and other community resources. The plan is the result of years of planning, data analysis, and community engagement to reimagine the San Diego region with a transformative transportation system, a sustainable pattern of growth and development, and innovative demand and management strategies. Because the Regional Plan combines the RTP, SCS and Regional Comprehensive Plan, it must comply with specific state and federal mandates that achieves GHG emission reduction targets set by the CARB; compliance with federal civil rights requirements (Title VI); and environmental justice considerations, air quality conformity, and a public participation process.

In September 2022, the SANDAG Board directed staff to prepare an amendment to the 2021 Regional Plan removing the regional road usage charge. In developing the amendment, SANDAG will refine the financial strategies used in the 2021 Regional Plan to achieve the region's GHG emissions target set by the CARB, without the road usage charge. SANDAG will also assess the region's continued ability to meet air quality standards. The draft amendment was released for public review and comment in June 2023.

3.12 Populations and Housing
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.12-4
land use planning of the City and other jurisdictions. For example, the City’s General Plan, and other local General Plans of cities, may change based on General Plan amendments initiated by the jurisdiction or landowner applicants. The General Plan amendm ents may result in increases in development densities by amending the regional category designations or zoning classifications.

Accordingly, SANDAG’s RTP/SCS latest forecasts of future development in the San Diego region, including location, must be coordi nated closely with each jurisdiction’s ongoing land use planning because that planning is not static, as recognized by the need for updates to SANDAG’s RTP/SCS every 4 years.

The project site is located within the SM -7 Mixed Use Transit Corridor as identified in SANDAG Smart Growth Concept Map for North County. The project applicant will utilize the State Density Bonus Program and 5% of the units will be affordable housing units, as defined under the State Density Bonus Law, California Government Code (Section 65915 – 65918) as enacted by California Assembly Bill No. 2345 (State Density Bonus). The Density Bonus Law allows for parking reductions and, in addition, the allowance of “incentives” or “concessions” from the local jurisdiction to assist with the construction and economic viability of the project.

Regional Growth Forecast
SANDAG estimates future population, housing, land use, and economic growth throughout San Diego County and its comprising cities, including the City of San Marcos. In August 2022, SANDAG accepted the Series 14: 2050 Regional Growth Forecast. This forecast serves as the foundation for San Diego Forward: The 2021 Regional Plan and other planning documents across the region. SANDAG growth projections for the region and for the City of San Marcos are outlined in Table 3.12-2 below.

Table 3.12-2. Forecasted Growth for the San Diego Region and the City of San Marcos Jurisdiction Year Change 2016-2050
2016 2025 2035 2050 Numeric Percent
Population
San Diego Region 3,309,510 3,470,838 3,620,329 3,746,054 436,544 13.2% City of San Marcos 94,258 101,707 104,365 119,098 24,840 26.4% Housing Units
San Diego Region 1,190,555 1,288,207 1,409,853 1,471,286 280,371 23.6 City of San Marcos 30,539 34,250 36,113 42,050 11,511 37.7% Employment
San Diego Region 1,629,948 1,788,970 1,935,565 2,094,017 464.069 28.5% City of San Marcos 41,096 45,786 51,523 63,031 21,935 53.4% Source: SANDAG 2022 Series 14: 2050 Regional Growth Forecast.

The City of San Marcos is expected to experience a higher growth rate for population, housing, and employment when compared to the entire region of San Diego. It should also be noted that the 2050 Regional Growth Forecast is not intended to be an exact formula utilized to determine growth in the region and comprising jurisdictions; rather it should be utilized as a starting point for regional planning.

3.12 Populations and Housing
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.12-5
Regional Housing Needs Allocation
Based on a methodology that weighs a number of factors (i.e., projected population growth, employment, commute patterns, and available sites), SANDAG determined quantifiable needs for housing units in the region according to various income categories. In its final RHNA figures, SANDAG allocated 3,116 housing units to the San Marcos area for the 2021– 2029 RHNA period. After credits for constructed units (546) and approved units (1,039) are taken into consideration, the City has a remaining 2021-2029 RHNA of 1,585, including 640 extremely/very low -income, 475 low -income, and 414 above moderate-income units (City of San Marcos 2021).

Local
City of San Marcos General Plan
The City’s Housing Element identifies three goals and associated policies that pertain to population and housing:
• Goal H-1: Provide a broad range of housing opportunities with emphasis on providing housing which meets the special needs of the community.
o Policy 1.1: Designate land for a variety of residential densities sufficient to meet the housing needs for a variety of household sizes and income levels, with higher densities being focused in the vicinity of transit stops and in proximity to significant concentrations of employment opportunities.
• Goal H -2: Protect, encourage, and provide housing opportunities for persons of lower and moderate incomes.
• Goal H-4: Reduce or remove governmental constraints to the development, improvement, and maintenance of housing where feasible and legally permissible. o Policy 4.4: Balance the need to protect and preserve the natural environment with the need to provide additional housing and employment opportunities.

The following goal and policy from the City of San Marcos General Plan, Environmental Justice Element pertain to population and housing:
• Goal EJ-4: Foster healthy living conditions for people of all backgrounds o Policy 1.1: Designate land for a variety of residential densities sufficient to meet the housing needs for a variety of household sizes and income levels, with higher densities being focused in the vicinity of transit stops and in proximity to significant concentrations of employment opportunities (See Housing Policy 1.1).

The proposed project’s consistency with applicable General Plan goals and policies is discussed in Table 3.10-7 in Section 3.10, Land Use and Planning, of this EIR. As detailed in Section 3.10.4, the project is consistent with the applicable goals and policies pertaining to population and housing.

The City adopted its 2021-29 Housing Element on July 13, 2021. According to the 2021- 29 Housing Element, the City had already constructed approximately 50 percent (approximately 1,585 units) of its RHNA allocation of 3,116 units with housing units construc ted, under construction, or approved.

Based on a residential sites inventory assessment, the City has the ability to adequately accommodate the remaining RHNA requirements within land that currently permits residential development

3.12 Populations and Housing
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.12-6
(comprised of proposed applications, vacant residential sites, and vacant land in Specific Plan Areas).

The project site is not identified within the City’s 2021-29 Housing Element inventory assessment as a site that could contribute to the RHNA allocation (City of San Marcos 2021).

3.12.3 Thresholds of Significance
Appendix G of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines provides thresholds for determining significant environmental impacts. A project may be deemed to have a significant impact to population and housing if it would:
• Threshold #1: Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure).

3.12.4 Project Impact Analysis
Threshold #1: Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of roads or other infrastructure).

Increases in population, housing, and employment are generally considered to be social or economic effects, as opposed to physical effects, which are the focus of CEQA analysis. There are circumstances where social and economic changes could indirectly cau se physical environmental impacts or result in changes to environmental resources, such as air quality, traffic, or noise levels. In other situations, lead agencies may evaluate social or economic change related to a physical change in determining whether the physical change is significant (CEQA Guidelines Section 15131).

The approximately 2.51-acre-project site is located entirely within the City of San Marcos. A General Plan Amendment is required to re-designate the project site from Mixed-Use 3 (MU3) to Mixed-Use 2 (MU2). A rezone is also required to re-designate the project site from Mixed Use 3 (SP) to Mixed Use 2 (MU2). The General Plan Amendment and Rezone would allow the project to build 119 multi -family residential units and 4,000 s.f. of commercial use on the site. Six of the units would be affordable at the very low-income level (50% of the Area Median Income or AMI) .

Construction of the proposed project would result in a temporary increase in construction employment.

Given the relatively common nature and scale of the construction associated with the proposed project, the demand for construction employment would likely be met within the existing and future labor market in the City and North County San Diego area. The size of the construction workforce would vary during the different stages of construction, but a substantial quantity of workers from outside the local area would not be expected to relocate permanently. Therefore, project construction would result in a less than significant impact related to population and employment growth.

The proposed project would directly induce growth through the development of 119 multi -family residential dwelling units. Based on the City’s population rate of 3.1 persons per dwelling unit, the proposed project would directly induce population growth to the area and would potentially add an estimated 369 people to the area. The proposed project would not, however, indirectly induce a growth in population as no extension of infrastructure is proposed beyond what is required to adequately serve the proposed project. The SANDAG population growth forecasts rely, in part, on individual jurisdiction’s planning documents, such as the City’s General Plan. Because the project proposes a General Plan Amendment and Rezone, the estimated population of 369 people would not have been accounted for in SANDAG’s projections. Therefore, the project’s induced population would exceed

3.12 Populations and Housing
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.12-7
these projections. However, determination of impacts related to population growth are based upon whether the induced growth would be considered substantial.

The future commercial uses are anticipate to have approximately four employees. It is expected that these employees would come from the local job market and would not require workers to relocate from outside the area. The proposed commercial use would not induce population growth.

As shown in Table 3.12-2 above, the City’s population is projected to grow from 94,258 people in 2016 to 104,365 people by 2035 (an increase of 10,107 people). The population increase of 369 people would account for 3.7% of SANDAG’s projected population growth.

There is no hardline number or percentage available to determine whether or not this estimated introduction of 369 people (3.7% of projected growth) could be considered a substantial increase in population. However, SANDAG’s 2050 Regional Growth Forecast is intended to be used as a starting point for regional planning as opposed to a prescribed growth pattern. Although the City determined that there are adequate sites available with appropriate designations/zoning to accommodate the remaining RHNA allocation for the current Housing Element planning period, the City has the discretion to adjust allocated housing units/sites as necessary to balance proposed plans for residential development with approved/constructed residential development (City of San Marcos 2021).

Therefore, while the proposed project would directly induce growth beyond current estimates and forecasts, it would not be considered substantially growth inducing, and impacts would be less than
significant.

3.12.5 Cumulative Impact Analysis
A “cumulative impact” refers to two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable or which compound or increase other environmental effects. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15130(b)(1)(A)(B), an adequate discussion of a p roject’s significant cumulative impact, in combination with other closely related projects, can be based on either: (1) a list of past, present, and probable future producing related impacts; or (2) a summary of projections contained in an adopted local, regional, or statewide plan, or a related planning document that describes conditions contributing to the cumulative effect.

The cumulative projects are listed in Table 2-3, and include single -family residential and multi-family (affordable and market rate). In addition, commercial, industrial, and institutional developments are proposed or approved. Collectively, the cumulative projects in Table 2 -3 include 2,373 residential units, approximately 307,000 s.f. of commercial/industrial/institutional use and 122 hotel rooms.

When the proposed proje ct is added into these totals it would be 2,492 residential units and approximately 311,000 s.f. of commercial/industrial/institutional use and 122 hotel rooms. These cumulative projects have the potential to either directly or indirectly induce population growth through development of new housing units and new employment opportunities. It is important to note that the introduction of new residential units and the associated population is not, in and of itself, a significant impact.

As discussed above, SANDAG determined quantifiable needs for housing units in the region according to various income categories. In its final RHNA figures, SANDAG allocated 3,116 housing units to the San Marcos area for the 2021– 2029 RHNA period. After credits for constructed and approved units the City has a remaining 2021-2029 RHNA of 1,585 units. The development of the proposed project and the cumulative projects would assist the City in meeting its RHNA goals, including goals for affordable housing. Additionally, for the longer term as shown in Table 3.12-2, SANDAG has forecasted

3.12 Populations and Housing
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.12-8
an increase of population (26.4% increase), housing (37.7% increase) and employment (53.4% increase) for the City from 2016 to 2050. The growth associated with the proposed project and the cumulative projects, combined, would be within the long -term forecasts from SANDAG. Therefore, cumulative impacts associated with population and housing would be less than significant.

3.12.6 Mitigation Measures
Based upon the analysis presented in Sections 3.12.4 and 3.12.5, impacts were determined to be less than significant. No mitigation measures are required.

3.12.7 Conclusion
Physical impacts related to population growth associated with the proposed project are addressed throughout the topic -specific chapters of this EIR. See Sections 3.1 through 3.17. When significant impacts were identified in the EIR, mitigation measures hav e been identified to reduce impacts to below a level of significance. All impacts would be mitigated to below a level of significance.

Construction of the proposed project would represent a temporary increase in construction employment. Given the relatively common nature and scale of the construction associated with the proposed project, the demand for construction employment would likely be met within the existing and future labor market in the City and North County San Diego area. The size of the construction workforce would vary during the different stages of construction, but a substantial quantity of workers from outside the local are a would not be expected to relocate permanently. Impacts would be less than significant.

As discussed above, the proposed project would introduce an estimated 369 people resulting from the development of 119 multi-family residential units. Based upon regional projections, comparisons to current land use designations, and comparison with the RHNA planning periods, the introduction of the estimated 369 people would not be considered substantial. The future commercial uses are anticipated to have approximately four employees. It is expected that these employees would come from the local job market and would not require workers to relocate from outside the area. The proposed commercial use would not induce population growth.

Impacts would be less than significant.

Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.13-1

3.13 Public Services
Introduction
This section analyzes the potential impact of the proposed project on public services including fire protection services, police protection services, schools, parks, and libraries. Please see Section 3.17, Utilities and Service Systems, for an analysis of water, wastewater, energy, telecommunications, stormwater, and solid waste services. The analysis also considers the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Appendix G and applicable State and Local regulations, including the City of San Marcos General Plan. The Gene ral Plan is available on the City’s web site. 16 Service provider letters are included in Appendix P of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR).

Table 3.13 -1 summarizes the project - and cumulative -level public services analysis impact, by threshold of significance.

Table 3.13-1 Public Services Summary of Impacts
Threshold of Significance Project-Level
Impact
Cumulative-Level
Impact Impact After Mitigation
Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for:

Fire protection services Less than Significant Less than Significant Less than Significant Without Mitigation
Police protection services Less than Significant Less than Significant Less than Significant Without Mitigation
Schools Less than Significant Less than Significant Less than Significant Without Mitigation
Parks Less than Significant Less than Significant Less than Significant Without Mitigation
Other public facilities Less than Significant Less than Significant Less than Significant Without Mitigation

3.13.1 Existing Conditions
This section details the existing service providers and resources related to fire protection, police protection, schools, parks, and libraries.

Fire Protection
The San Marcos Fire Department (SMFD) would provide fire protection and emergency medical services to the project. The SMFD has existing automatic mutual aid fire agreements in place with the Cities of Carlsbad, Vista, Escondido, Encinitas, and the Rancho Santa Fe Fire Protection District. The

16 http://www.san-marcos.net/work/economic-development/general-plan

3.13 Public Services
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.13-2
SMFD has an Insurance Service Office Rating 1, on a scale of one to ten with one being superior service.

The SMFD currently operates 4 fire stations, 4 paramedic assessment engine companies, 1 paramedic assessment truck company, 5 paramedic transport ambulances (24-hour units), 1 shift battalion chief, and 1 on -call duty chief. SMFD also cross -staffs three wi ldland fire engines and a State of California/Office of Emergency Services wildland fire engine (City of San Marcos 2023). The Department also cross-staffs three wildland fire engines and a State of California/Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) wildland fire engine.

The SMFD Station 1, located at 180 W. Mission Road, San Marcos, California 92069, is the closest station to the project site and would likely serve the project site should fire response or emergency services be needed (City of San Marcos 2023). SMFD Station 1 is located approximately 2 miles east of the project site. SMFD Station 1 houses an engine, truck, brush engine, ambulance, and battalion chief.

Police Protection
The San Diego County Sheriff’s San Marcos Station provides law enforcement services to the city and unincorporated communities of Harmony Grove, Elfin Forest, Lake San Marcos, Hidden Meadows, Ivy Del, Del Dios, Lake Hodges, and the San Pasqual Valley (SDCS D 2023). The San Marcos Station is located at 182 Santar Place, approximately two miles east of the project site.

The San Marcos Station serves more than 111,000 residents and staffs more than 100 deputies, volunteers, and professional staff members (SDCSD 2023). Additionally, Community Oriented Police and Problem Solving teams are assigned to investigate community quality-of-life issues (SDCSD 2023).

Lastly, the Sheriff’s San Marcos Station has the only ASTREA (Sheriff’s Aviation) helicopter landing pad in the County, which assists ground units and extends the range deputies can patrol (SDCSD 2023).

The County Sheriff’s Department does not set response time goals. The Sheriff’s Department does, however, prioritize different types of calls to better facilitate deputy dispatches. The Sheriff Department’s priority categories are as follows: priority level 1 (lifesaving response calls), priority level 2 (expeditious response calls within confines of vehicle codes), priority level 3 (calls responded to as soon as possible), and priority level 4 (calls responded to when clear, still being alerted to violatio ns that require immediate law enforcement action) (City of San Marcos 2012a).

Schools
The project site is located within the San Marcos Unified School District (SMUSD). SMUSD is 49 square miles in size and encompasses most of the City of San Marcos and portions of the cities of Vista, Escondido, and Carlsbad, as well as unincorporated areas of the County of San Diego between these cities. As of 2023, there were 10 elementary schools, 2 K–8 schools, 3 middle schools, 3 high schools, and 1 independent high school program that are a part of the SMUSD. In the 2021 -22 school year, SMUSD served 19,341 students. (SMUSD 2023a).

Based upon information from SMUSD (2023c), students generated by the project would attend La Mirada Academy for grades K -8 and San Marcos High School for grades 9 -12. Enrollment for the

3.13 Public Services
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.13-3
2022/23 year was 997 students at La Mirada Academy and 3,528 students at San Marcos High School (SMUSD 2023b).

Parks
The purpose of the City’s Parks, Recreation, and Community Health Element of the General Plan is to guide the City to provide recreational opportunities, which contribute to the health and well -being of the residents of San Marcos, and to provide goals and policies that outline the role recreational amenities play in achieving the City’s vision for the future (City of San Marcos 2012a). There are 24 community parks, 13 neighborhood parks and three recreation centers in the city. A more detailed discussion of park and recreation facilities is discussed in Section 3.14, Recreation.

The closest park to the project site is Innovation Park, located approximately 0.75 mile to the east of the project site. Innovation Park, located at 1151 Armorlite Drive and has a dog park, pickleball court, play equipment, permanent restrooms, and picnic tables (City of San Marcos 2021b).

Libraries
The city is served by the San Diego County Library, San Marcos Branch located at 2 Civic Center Drive, approximately 2.25 miles southeast of the project site. The San Marcos Branch is 15,394 square feet (s.f.) (City of San Marcos 2012b). The library is open seven days a week. The San Diego County Library system has 33 branches, and E -library, two bookmobiles, and five digital kiosks (San Diego County Library 2021b).

3.13.2 Regulatory Setting
Local
San Marcos General Plan
The following are applicable goals and policies from the City of San Marcos General, Land Use and Community Design Element related to public services:

Land Use and Community Design Element
• Goal LU -8: Ensure that existing and future development is adequately serviced by infrastructure and public services.
o Policy LU-8.1: New development shall pay its fair share of required improvements to public facilities and services.
o Policy LU -8.2: Promote development timing that is guided by the adequacy of existing and/or expandable infrastructure, services, and facilities. • Goal LU-10: Fire protection, emergency services, and law enforcement: Provide effective, high- quality, and responsive services.
o Policy LU -10.1: Provide demand -based firefighting and emergency medical services infrastructure, equipment, and personnel to provide a high level of fire, emergency medical, and law enforcement service in San Marcos to meet existing and future demands. o Policy LU -10.2: Work closely with the County of San Diego Sherriff’s Department to determine and meet the community needs for adequate personnel, equipment, and state-

3.13 Public Services
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.13-4
of-the-art technology to effectively combat crime, and meet existing and projected service demands.
o Policy LU-10.3: Continue to conduct public outreach and education regarding fire safety and crime prevention within San Marcos.
• Goal LU-11: Schools: Ensure all residents have access to high-quality education. o Policy LU-11.1: Collaborate with the local public school district (SMUSD), private schools, and institutions of higher learning to ensure a range of traditional and distance -learning educational opportunities are provided in superior, accessible facilities that complement the surrounding land uses.
o Policy LU-11.2: Work with San Marcos Unified School District and developers to ensure adequate school facilities are funded as required by State law and through developer mitigation agreements between the school district and the developer. The City shall require a “will serve” letter substantiating that the developer has paid fees to the satisfaction of the school district prior to issuance of building permits. • Goal LU -12: Libraries: Provide library resources and services that meet the needs of the community.
o Policy LU-12.1: Provide adequate library facilities and technological access that enhance San Marcos’s quality of life and create a civic environment with vast opportunities for self- learning and academic enrichment.
o Policy LU-12.2: Accommodate technological needs of the community and locate accessible technology in the library.

Safety Element
The following are applicable goals and policies from the City of San Marcos General Plan, Safety Element related to public services, including fire protection, police protection, parks, and libraries:
• Goal S -3: Minimize injury, loss of life, and damage to property resulting from structural or wildland fire hazards.
o Policy S-3.1: Require development to be located, designed, and constructed to provide adequate defensibility and reduce the risk of structural loss and life resulting from wildland fires. Development will consider hazards relative to terrain, topography, accessibility, and proximity to vegetation. One such provision for development to minimize the risk of structural loss and life shall be the inclusion of overhead fire sprinklers. o Policy S-3.2: Provide sufficient level of fire protection service to reduce risk from urban and wildland fire. Advocate and support regional coordination among fire protection and emergency service providers.
o Policy S-3.3: Require development to provide additional access roads when necessary, to provide for safe access of emergency equipment and civilian evacuation concurrently. o Policy S-3.4: Coordinate with fire protection and emergency service providers to assess fire hazards before and after wildfire events to adjust fire prevention and suppression needs, as necessary, commensurate with both short- and long-term fire prevention needs.

3.13 Public Services
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.13-5
• Goal S-6: Provide neighborhood safety through effective law enforcement. o Policy S-6.1: Continue to maintain demand-based law enforcement service levels to reduce the risk of criminal activity.
o Policy S -6.2: Continue public education efforts and community outreach programs to promote community involvement in crime and drug prevention. o Policy S-6.3: Use Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles in the design or redevelopment of projects and buildings.

Parks, Recreation, and Community Health Element
The following are applicable goals and policies from the City of San Marcos General Plan, Parks, Recreation and Community Health Element related to parks:
• Goal PR-1: Plan for, acquire, develop, and maintain a system of local parks connected through an integrated network of trails and high-quality recreational facilities. o Policy PR-1.1: Develop and maintain a complete system of public parks and recreational amenities that provide opportunities for passive and active recreation at a minimum standard of 5 acres per 1,000 residents. Parks, trails, and recreational facilities w ill enhance community livability, public health, and safety; should be equitably distributed throughout the City; and be responsive to the needs and interests of residents, employees, and visitors.
o Policy PR-1.2: Update and maintain a Master Parks Plan and a Master Trails Plan that implement the City’s long-term vision for a complete system of parks, trails, and recreation facilities.
o Policy PR-1.3: Ensure that the development of parks, trails, and recreation facilities and services keeps pace with development and growth within the City. o Policy PR-1.4: Promote increased access to parks and open spaces, pedestrian- and bike- oriented routes to parks and open space, greening of public rights-of-way, and a variety of active and passive uses of parks and open space.
o Policy PR-1.5: Require new development to be designed and constructed in accordance with the approved Parks Master Plan to meet or exceed the City’s parkland standard of 5 acres per 1,000 residents.
o Policy PR-1.6: Require new infill development to provide plazas, mini parks, or other civic spaces as part of their parkland requirement.
o Policy PR-1.7: Promote park and facility design that discourages vandalism, deters crime, provides natural surveillance, and creates a safe and comfortable environment. o Policy PR -2.2: Implement the trail network per the Master Trails Plan to increase opportunities for physical activity (e.g., walking, biking), healthy lifestyles, and to reduce reliance on cars.

3.13 Public Services
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.13-6
Environmental Justice Element
The following are applicable goals and policies from the City of San Marcos General Plan, Environmental Justice Element related to parks:
• Goal EJ-2: Locate public facilities and services equitably throughout the community. o Policy EJ-2.7: Ensure that the development of parks, trails, and recreation facilities and services keeps pace with development and growth within the City (See Policy PR-1.3). o Policy EJ-4.12: Use Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles in the design or redevelopment of projects and buildings (See Policy S-6.3). o Policy EJ 2.6 and EJ -5.7: Develop and maintain a complete system of public parks and recreational amenities that provide opportunities for passive and active recreation at a minimum standard of 5 acres per 1,000 residents. Parks, trails, and recreational facilities will enhance community livability, public health, and safety; should be equitably distributed throughout the City; and be responsive to the needs and interests of residents, employees, and visitors (See Policy PR-1.1).
o Policy EJ-5.8: Promote increased access to parks and open spaces, pedestrian- and bike- oriented routes to parks and open space, greening of public rights-of-way, and a variety of active and passive uses of parks and open space (See Policy PR-1.4) o Policy EJ -5.10: Implement the trail network per the Master Trails Plan to increase opportunities for physical activity (e.g., walking, biking), healthy lifestyles, and to reduce reliance on cars (See Policy PR-2.2).

The project’s consistency with applicable General Plan goals and policies is discussed in Section 3.10, Land Use and Planning. As detailed in Table 3.10-7 in Section 3.10, Land Use and Planning, the project is consistent with all applicable goals and policies related to public services.

3.13.3 Thresholds of Significance
The significance criteria used to evaluate the project impacts to public services are based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a significant impact related to public services would occur if the project would:

Threshold #1: Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant e nvironmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services:
• Fire protection.
• Police protection.
• Schools.
• Parks.
• Other public facilities.

3.13 Public Services
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.13-7

3.13.4 Project Impact Analysis
Threshold #1: Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, or the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services:

Fire Protection
As discussed in Section 3.13.1, above, the SMFD provides fire protection services to the city and would serve the project site. The proposed project would increase the demand for SMFD resources as a result of the development of residential uses and the ass ociated population increase, as well as the proposed new commercial uses. Future residents and employees would increase the need for fire protection services through routine fire and emergency medical calls. As a condition of project approval, prior to the issuance of a grading permit, 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)

17. This would offset the project’s increase in demand for fire protection services.

Further, SMFD staff reviewed the project plans as part of the City’s project processing and provided comments relating to 1) requirements for updating emergency response maps, if needed; 2) installation of fire hydrants and fire lane/access prior to placem ent of combustible materials on the site; 3) the testing of new structures for emergency responder radio coverage in accordance with Section 510 of the California Fire Code; 4) Section 17/61/210 (Mid -Rise Buildings) will apply to the project; 5) width and height clearance requirements for fire apparatus; 6) installation of fire hydrants; 7) installation of Knox key boxes; 8) lighted directory map at each driveway entrance; and 9) elevators shall be the condition of CFC Section 607 (Elevator Operation, Maint enance, and Fire Service Keys) and CBC Chapter 30 (Elevators and Conveying Systems). All of these requirements have been incorporated into the project design and/or included as conditions of response project approval.

Therefore, the project would not resul t in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new fire protection facilities and impacts would be less than significant.

Police Protection
As discussed in Section 3.13.1, above, the San Diego County Sheriff’s Department provides law enforcement services to the city. More specifically, the project would be served by the San Marcos Station, located approximately 2 miles from the project site. The project would introduce approximately 369 residents on-site, resulting in an increased demand for existing police protection resources. The increased density of development on the project site would be expected to increase the frequency of emergency and non-emergency calls to the Sherriff’s Department. However, as discussed in Section

3.13.1, above, over 100 deputies, volunteers, and professional staff serve the residents of the city.

Law enforcement services include general patrol, criminal investigation, crime prevention, juvenile services, narcotics and gang investigations, communications and dispatch, and various management support services. Unlike fire services, which respond solely to emergencies, law enforcement services consist of patrolling large areas 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. Police units are continuously mobile, and service calls are responded to by the nearest available mobile unit. At the San Marcos Station, patrol deputies are assigned to a geographical “beat” area, allowing deputies to become familiar with

17 https://www.san-marcos.net/home/showpublisheddocument/24248/637163295768400000

3.13 Public Services
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.13-8
citizens and problems within their “beats”. As such, the location of the proposed project relative to the nearest station would not affect police protection. Further, to minimize the increased demand for police protection services, the project has been des igned to improve the safety for future residents and visiting guests. Safety features proposed for the project include walls and fencing and an onsite property manager. Lastly, lighting would be implemented throughout the site to provide safely illuminated walkways, parking areas, and common areas, as described in Section 2.2.2.3 (Chapter 2, Project Description). Additionally, the project would annex into an existing Community Facilities District (CFD 98-01, Improvement Area No. 1) for police protection.

Thus, while new development places increased demand on police protection services, it is not anticipated that the proposed project would result in the need for construction of new policies facilities or expansion of existing police facilities. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered police facilities.

Impacts resulting from the proposed project would be less than significant.

Schools
The project site is located within the service boundary of the SMUSD. Per SMUSD the following schools would serve the project:
• La Mirada Academy (grades K-8), 3697 La Mirada Drive, San Marcos • San Marcos High School (grades 9-12), 1615 W. San Marcos Boulevard, San Marcos Table 3.13-2 presents the number of students anticipated to be generated by the 119-unit residential project. As shown in Table 3.13-2, the project would generate 3 TK students, 23 K-8 students and 34 high school students for a total of 60 students.

Table 3.13-1. Student Generation
Grade Generation Rate(1) Number of Units
Proposed Students Generated
TK 0.02056 119 3
K-6 0.14393 119 18
7-8 0.04112 119 5
9-12 0.28567 119 34
Total Students 60
Source: SUMSD 2023b.

Note: (1) The district has rates for single family, multi family and apartments. The apartment rate was used for the project.

Based upon information from SMUSD, San Marcos High School is currently at capacity (SMUSD 2023b). SMUSD is currently looking into leasing land and expanding the parking capacity at San Marcos High School. There is also district-wide capacity issues. The addition of students generated by the project would contribute to the District-wide capacity issues. The project applicant shall pay school mitigation fees pursuant to California Education Code Section 17620 et seq. and Government Code Sections 65995(h) and 65996(b) in effect at the time of building permit issuance. Current Level II school fees are $4.79/s.f. for residential development and $0.78/s.f. for commercial development (SMUSD 2023c). Further, consistent with General Plan Policy LU -11.2, the applicant shall provide a

3.13 Public Services
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.13-9
letter from the school district to the City prior to the issuance of building permits confirming these fees have been paid.

Payment of these fees would assist in funding SMUSD’s long -range plans. Senate Bill (SB) 50 states that the fees imposed by school districts shall constitute the exclusive method of considering and mitigating impacts on school facilities caused by a develo pment project. Such payment shall provide “full and complete mitigation of the impacts of any legislative or adjudicative act...on the provision of adequate school facilities” (Government Code Section 65995(h)). As such, with contribution of required development fees, impacts to schools would be
less than significant.

Parks
Buildout of the proposed project is estimated to add an additional 369 residents to the City. Assuming five acres of park space per 1,000 residents, this equates to a demand of approximately 1.85 acres of park space generated by project residents.

The project applicant would be required to pay the City’s Public Facility Fees (PFF), which is required by all projects that increase the demand for park and recreation needs in the city. The PFF money would go towards the acquisition and development of local and community park facilities throughout the city, to offset the demand for public park space generated by the project, as described in Municipal Code Chapter 17.36 and 17.44. Payment of the PFF shall be made prior to City issuance of the first building permit for the proposed project. The PFF payment would ultimately contribute to development of new parks and recreational facilities and would offset the increase in demand of parks and recreational facilities generated by the proposed project, such that existing facilities would not be substantially deteriorated.

In addition, the project would provide 25,700 s.f. (0.59 acres) of common outdoor space and 7,632 s.f. of private open space. Project residents would have access to adequate on -site recreational facilities, which will help to offset increased use of existing parks and recreational facilities. As such, with payment of the required PFF in combination with provision of on -site common and private open space, impacts to parks would be
less than significant.

Other Public Facilities
The project would develop 119 residential units, generating approximately 369 residents at the project site. Although not all of these residents would be new residents to the city, the generation of residents at the project site would increase the demands on other public facilities, including library services and additional resources, in comparison to the project site’s current MU-3 designation which does not allow for a residential use. However, additional library services are available in the County through the Serra Cooperative Library System and California State University San Marcos (CSUSM). The Serra Cooperative Library System is a network of public, academic, and special libraries in the southern California counties of Imperial and San Diego. Serra he lps member libraries provide expanded resources and services at reduced costs. CSUSM also allows community members to obtain a Community Borrow Card by showing a valid photo identification (CSUSM 2023). Community members can also borrow materials at Palomar College with a valid photo identification and proof of current mailing address (Palomar College 2023). These additional library resources are in the San Marcos community and provide more than 200,000 s.f. of additional library space. Therefore, adequate library services are available to serve the proposed project, and a less than significant impact is identified for
this issue area.

3.13 Public Services
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.13-10

3.13.5 Cumulative Impact Analysis
A “cumulative impact” refers to two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable or which compound or increase other environmental effects. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15130(b)(1)(A)(B), an adequate discussion of a p roject’s significant cumulative impact, in combination with other closely related projects, can be based on either: (1) a list of past, present, and probable future producing related impacts; or (2) a summary of projections contained in an adopted local, regional, or statewide plan, or a related planning document that describes conditions contributing to the cumulative effect. For purposes of assessing the proposed project’s cumulative impact with respect to public services, the cumulative analysis is based upon a list approach to determine the proposed project’s contributing effect on potential cumulative impacts related to public services (see Table 2-3, Cumulative Projects).

Fire Protection Services
The geographic area for the cumulative analysis of fire protection and emergency services is those areas that are serviced by the SMFD. The cumulative projects that fall within this geographic area would add to the increase in demand for fire protection an d emergency services, and the potential need for additional fire protection resources. The SMFD provides service to the City of San Marcos and has existing automatic mutual aid fire agreements in place with the Cities of Carlsbad, Vista, Escondido, Encinit as, and the Rancho Santa Fe Fire Protection District. However, all cumulative projects would be required to participate in existing Community Facilities Districts as determined necessary. Future projects would be required to offset the increase in demand c aused by their respective projects. Development fee payments would go towards providing the additional staff and equipment that would be needed by SMFD in the future to provide fire protection services, including potential new fire stations. Similarly, to offset any potential cumulative impacts to fire protection services, the project would pay all required development impact fees. Thus, cumulative impacts to fire protection services would be
less than significant.

Police Protection Services
The geographic area for the cumulative analysis of police protection is those areas that are serviced by the San Diego County Sheriff’s Department. All cumulative projects listed in Table 2-3 would result in an increase in demand for police protection serv ices from the Sheriff’s Department, and the potential need for additional police protection resources. Nonetheless, all cumulative projects would be required to offset increased demand for police protection services through the payment of fees.

These fees would provide for additional staff and equipment to assist in the provision of law enforcement services. As such, with payment of fees, cumulative impacts to police protection services would be
less than significant.

Schools
Based upon information from SMUSD, San Marcos High School is currently at capacity (SMUSD 2023b). SMUSD is currently looking into leasing land and expanding the parking capacity at San Marcos High School. There are also district-wide capacity issues. The addition of students generated by the project along with cumulative development projects would contribute to the District -wide capacity issues.

As discussed in Section 3.13.4, the proposed project would be required to contribute development fees to SMUSD, pursuant to California Education Code Section 17620 et seq. and Government Code

3.13 Public Services
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.13-11
Sections 65995(h) and 65996(b) as well as the City’s Municipal Code Section 17.52.050. All the cumulative projects included in Table 2 -3 that include residential development would result in increased demand for school services, and would be required to pay school fees to offset the increase demand, similar to the proposed project. Additionally, non-residential projects are also required to pay school fees consistent with SMUSD’s developer fee schedule. As such, with contribution of required development fees by the proposed project and cumulative development projects, cumulative impacts to schools would be
less than significant.

Parks
The proposed project as well as the cumulative projects that are in the City of San Marcos (as identified in Table 2 -3) would add to the cumulative demand for park and recreation facilities in the city. All residential projects that increase the demand for park and recreation needs in the city are required to provide park space and/or pay park in lieu-fees. The environmental documentation prepared for each project would analyze impacts associated with the construction of any parks within each overall development footprint. As discussed in Section 3.13.4, the proposed project would be required to pay the City’s PFF, which is required for all projects that increase the demand for park and recreation needs in the city. The PFF would be used for developing neigh borhood and regional parks. It is expected that all cumulative projects that increase demand for parks and recreation needs would also be required to pay these fees. As such, cumulative impacts on recreational facilities in the city would be
less than significant.

Libraries
Cumulative projects within the service area of the San Marcos Branch Library would result in an increase in demand for library services. Aside from the San Marcos Branch, community members can obtain borrowing privileges at the CSUSM campus and the Palomar Community College. These additional library resources are in the San Marcos community and provide over 200,000 square feet of additional library space. Therefore, adequate library resources are available to serve cumulative development in San Marcos, and cumulative impacts to library services would be less than significant.

3.13.6 Mitigation Measures
No significant impacts to public services were identified; thus, no mitigation measures are required.

3.13.7 Conclusion
Development of the proposed project would result in an increase in demand for fire protection, emergency medical services, police protection, school services, and library facilities. However, the project applicant would be required to pay all applicable development fees including payment of school mitigation fees, development fees, and PFF. These feeds are utilized to provide improvements to public services in San Marcos, including fire and police protection, schools, parks, and libraries The payment all required development fees by the proposed project and cumulative development projects would offset any potential cumulative impacts to public services. The project applicant would also annex into CFD 2001-01 for fire and paramedic and CFD 98 -01, Improvement Area No. 1 for police protection, which would offset and minimize potential impacts. As such, with payment of fees towards schools, parks, fire, and police, impacts to public services would be less than significant.

3.13 Public Services
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.13-12

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.

Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.14-1

3.14 Recreation
Introduction
This section analyzes the potential impacts of the proposed project to existing recreational facilities.

The analysis also considers the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Appendix G and applicable State and Local regulations, including the City of San Marcos General Plan. The General Plan is available on the City’s web site.18
Table 3.14-1 summarizes the project- and cumulative-impact analysis by threshold for the proposed project.

Table 3.14-1. Recreation Summary of Impacts
Threshold of Significance Project-Level
Impact
Cumulative-Level
Impact
Impact After
Mitigation
.Threshold #1: The project increases
the use of existing neighborhood and
regional parks or other recreational
facilities such that substantial physical
deterioration of the facility would occur
or be accelerated.

Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant Without
Mitigation
.Threshold #2: The project includes
recreational facilities or requires the
construction or expansion of
recreational facilities which might have
an adverse physical effect on the
environment.

Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant Without
Mitigation

3.14.1 Existing Conditions
This section describes existing parks, recreation facilities, and trails in the city, on the project site and in the project vicinity. The City of San Marcos’s Parks Master Plan classifies parks into eight categories:

Regional Park; Community Park; Neighborhood Park; Mini (Urban) Park; Special Use Facility; Historical, Monument, and Memorial; Recreation Center; and Aquatic Center (City of San Marcos 2018). Details on each of these park categories are included below.

Regional Parks
Regional Parks are defined as parks that are a minimum of 50 acres, with 75 or more acres being optimal. The drive time to a Regional Park is approximately 1 hour or less, and offers a variety of terrain, scenic views, cultural amenities, and extensive nat ural areas with both passive and active opportunities (City of San Marcos 2018).

The closest regional parks to the project site are South Lake Park and Double Peak Park. South Lake Park is located at 975 Sunstone Drive, approximately three miles southeast of the project site. South Lake has a lake a trail connections. Double Peak Park is located at 900 Double Peak Drive,

18 http://www.san-marcos.net/work/economic-development/general-plan

3.14 Recreation
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.14-2
approximately three miles southeast of the project site. Double Peak has an amphitheater, kiosk, permanent restrooms, picnic shelter, picnic tables, play equipment, telescope, and trail connections.

Community Parks
Community Parks are defined as parks that are a minimum of 10 acres and up to 100 acres (City of San Marcos 2018). Community Parks serve two or more neighborhoods with a service area of 0.5 to 3 miles. There are five Community Parks in the City of San Marcos: Bradley Park, Woodland Park, Walnut Grove Park, Discovery/Lakeview Park, and Double Peak Park. Bradley Park, Walnut Grove Park, Discovery/Lakeview Park, and Double Peak Park would serve the project site because the project site is within the service area of these four parks (City of San Marcos 2018).

The closest community park to the project site is Bradley Park, located at 1587 Linda Vista Drive, approximately one mile south of the project. Bradley Park is developed with arena soccer field, ball fields, barbeque area, horseshoe court, multi -purpose fields, a picnic shelter, picnic tables and play equipment.

Neighborhood Parks
Neighborhood Parks are defined as parks that are generally 5 acres, although 7 to 10 acres is optimal.

Neighborhood Parks have a service area of 0.25 to 0.5 mile and should be accessible by arterial roads.

There are 14 Neighborhood Parks in San Marcos: Bue low Park, Connors Park, Hollandia Park, Innovation Park, Knob Hill Park, Jacks Pond Park, Cerros de Las Posas Park, Mission Sports Park, Montiel Park, Mulberry Park, Richmar Park, San Elijo Park, Simmons Family Park, and Sunset Park. (City of San Marcos 2018).

The closest neighborhood parks to the project site are Innovation Park and Mission Sports Park.

Innovation Park, located at 1151 Armorlite Drive, is approximately 0.75 mile southeast of the project site. It has a dog park, pickleball court, play equipment, permanent restrooms, and picnic tables (City of San Marcos 2023a). Mission Sports Park, located at 931 Bailey Court is approximately one mile east of the project site and has a lighted ballfield, permanent restrooms, picnic shelter, picnic tables and play equipment.

Mini (Urban) Parks
Mini (Urban) Parks are defined as parks that are 2,500 square feet (s.f.) to 1 acre in size, although a park area of less than five acres could be considered a Mini Park (City of San Marcos 2018). A Mini Park’s service area is 0.25 mile or less and is in a residential setting. There are 18 Mini (Urban) Parks in San Marcos: Alder Glen Park, Amigo Park, Bougher Park, Children’s Park, Civic Center Park, Creek View Park, Discovery Meadows, Foothill Park, The Laurels Park, Optimist Park, Pebblestone Park, Quail Valley Park, Questhaven Park, Regency Hills Park, Ridgeline Trailhead, Santa Fe Hills Park, Summer Hill Park, and Valley View Park.

The closest Mini Parks to the project site are Creek View Park and Valley View Park. Creek View Park located at 1299 Corte Encanto is approximately 0.5 mile northeast of the project site. Creek View Park has picnic tables and play equipment. Valley View Pa rk, located at 1399 Camino del Sol is approximately 0.5 mile north of the project. Valley View Park has play equipment, adapted play equipment, a turf play area and picnic tables.

3.14 Recreation
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.14-3
Special Use Facility
A Special Use Facility includes three categories of facilities (City of San Marcos 2018):
• Historic/Cultural/Social Sites – A unique local resource offering historical, educational, and cultural opportunities. Examples include historic downtown areas, performing arts parks, arboretums, display gardens, performing arts facilities, indoor theaters, churches, public buildings, and amphitheaters.

• Recreation Facilities – A specialized or single -purpose facility. Examples include community centers, senior centers, community theaters, hockey arenas, marinas, golf courses, and aquatic parks.

• Outdoor Recreation Facilities – Examples include tennis centers, softball complexes, sports stadiums, skateboard parks, and bark parks.

The size and service area of a Special Use Facility varies greatly.

Historical, Monuments, and Memorials
Historical, Monuments, and Memorials parks preserve monuments and memorials, provide programmed historical interpretation, attract tourists, and offer passive recreation opportunities (such as trails) (City of San Marcos 2018). The size and service area varies. There are no historical monuments or memorials in the vicinity of the project site.

Recreation Centers
Recreation Centers are intended to provide indoor leisure facilities and programs at a reasonable cost.

Recreation centers also serve as meeting facilities for local social gatherings and public events, and are designed to be a hub of recreation activity ( City of San Marcos 2018). The size and service area varies. The closest recreation center is located at 3 Civic Center Drive at San Marcos City Hall.

Aquatic Centers
Aquatic Centers are swimming facilities that provide active recreation for residents. The size of these facilities varies. The service area is a minimum population of 25,000, and the recommended level of service is one Aquatic Center site per 40,000 persons in San Marcos (City of San Marcos 2018). The closes aquatic center to the project site is the Las Posas Park Pool located at 1387 W. Borden Road.

The Las Posas Park Pool has a 25-yard recreational lap pool, splash pad and a picnic area.

Trails
The City of San Marcos currently owns and manages 63 miles of completed trails, with plans to expand the trail network to 72 miles. The goal of the trail system is two-fold: to serve as a recreational amenity, and to provide an alternative means of circulation for non-motorized travelers through an inter-linked citywide system of trails connecting residential neighborhoods to parks, schools, colleges, stores, restaurants, movie theaters, other important destinations within San Marcos, and the wider regional trails system (City of San Marcos 2018).

The Inland Rail Trail is the closest trail to the project site. The Inland Rail Trail runs alongside the SPRINTER light rail service connecting Escondido to Oceanside. The trail runs for over ten miles

3.14 Recreation
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.14-4
through the San Diego County communities of Escondido, San Marcos, and parts of Vista, with a 3- mile continuation through Vista added to the route in January 2021.

General Plan Park Standards
The San Marcos General Plan park acreage standard calls for five acres of parkland for every 1,000 residents. As of January 1, 2022, the California Department of Finance (DOF) estimates the population of the city is 93,585 (DOF 2022). Based on growth projections provided by the Series 14: 2050 Regional Growth Forecast prepared by the San Diego Associati on of Governments (SANDAG), it is estimated that the City’s population growth will reach 104,365 persons by 2035, and 119,098 persons by 2050 (SANDAG 2022). Using 2022 population figures, approximately 468 acres of parkland is required to meet the General Plan park standard. Using 2035 population estimates, approximately 522 acres of parkland would be required. Approximately 596 acres of parkland would be required using 2050 population estimates. There is currently over 290 acres of parkland in the city, for a park acreage ratio of approximately 3.1 acres of parkland for every 1,000 residents. Therefore, the City does not currently meet its General Plan park acreage standard.

3.14.2 Regulatory Setting
This section describes the state and local laws and regulations that are applicable to the proposed project.

State
Quimby Act
Since the passage of the 1975 Quimby Act (California Government Code Section 66477), cities and counties have been authorized to pass ordinances requiring that developers set aside land, donate conservation easements, or pay fees for park improvements. Revenues generated by the Quimby Act cannot be used for the operation and maintenance of park facilities. The goal of the Quimby Act was to require developers to help mitigate the impacts of property improvements. The act gives authority for passage of land dedication ordinances only to cities and counties.

The Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972
The Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972 enables cities, counties, and special districts to acquire land for parks, recreation, and open space. A local government may also use the assessments to pay for improvements and maintenance in these areas.

The Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act
The Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act (Government Code [GC] section 53311 et seq.) is a tax-based financing method available to cities, counties, and special districts. It authorizes local governments to establish community facilities districts within which they may levy special taxes and issue bonds to finance open space acquisition, maintenance, and other programs. Approval of the special tax and any related bond issue requires approval by two-thirds of the district electorate.

3.14 Recreation
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.14-5
Local
City’s Municipal Code Chapter 17.36 – Park and Recreational Development Construction Fee As described in Chapter 17.36 in the City’s Municipal Code, the continued increase in the development of dwelling units and population within the city has created the need for planning, acquisition, improvement, expansion and operation of public parks, playgrounds, and recreational facilities in the city, and thus the need for additional revenues with which to finance such facilities. This chapter of the Municipal Code requires that each builder of each dwelling unit to be constructed within the City of San Marcos shall, prior to the construction, pay a fee, as adopted by Resolution by the City Council.

City’s Municipal Code Chapter 17.44 – Development Services and Public Facilities, Exaction, Fees and/or Costs
The City recognizes that the continued development of property within the city's jurisdictional boundaries has resulted in an increased demand on existing public services, facilities, and infrastructure; the need for expansion of public services, facilities, and infrastructure; and/or the need for the installation of new public services, facilities, and infrastructure. It is the intent of the City that each applicant for a grading, construction, building and/or development permit or entitlement shall, prior to the issuance of such permit or entitlement, pay Public Facilities Fees. The funds generated by the payment of fees described Chapter 17.44 shall be deposited into separate accounts established for the purposes of maintaining, expanding, and installing public infrastructure. Such public infrastructure includes active or passive open space and parks.

City’s Municipal Code Section 20.225.120 – Outdoor Space Standards All new development in the MU -1 and MU-2 Zones is required to provide open space. Types of open space allowed include common outdoor open space, common indoor open space, and private open space subject to the standards of Tables 20.225-6 and 20.225-7 of the Zoning Ordinance.

San Marcos General Plan – Parks, Recreation, and Community Health Element The following are applicable goals and policies from the City of San Marcos General Plan, Parks, Recreation, and Community Health Element:
• Goal PR-1: Plan for, acquire, develop, and maintain a system of local parks connected through an integrated network of trails and high-quality recreational facilities. o Policy PR-1.1: Develop and maintain a complete system of public parks and recreational amenities that provide opportunities for passive and active recreation at a minimum standard of 5 acres per 1,000 residents. Parks, trails, and recreational facilities w ill enhance community livability, public health, and safety; should be equitably distributed throughout the City; and be responsive to the needs and interests of residents, employees, and visitors.
o Policy PR-1.2: Update and maintain a Master Parks Plan and a Master Trails Plan that implement the City’s long-term vision for a complete system of parks, trails, and recreation facilities.
o Policy PR-1.3: Ensure that the development of parks, trails, and recreation facilities and services keeps pace with development and growth within the City.

3.14 Recreation
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.14-6
o Policy PR-1.4: Promote increased access to parks and open spaces, pedestrian- and bike- oriented routes to parks and open space, greening of public rights-of-way, and a variety of active and passive uses of parks and open space.
o Policy PR-1.5: Require new development to be designed and constructed in accordance with the approved Parks Master Plan to meet or exceed the City’s parkland standard of 5 acres per 1,000 residents.
o Policy PR-1.6: Require new infill development to provide plazas, mini parks, or other civic spaces as part of their parkland requirement.
o Policy PR-1.7: Promote park and facility design that discourages vandalism, deters crime, provides natural surveillance, and creates a safe and comfortable environment.

The following are applicable goals and policies from the City of San Marcos General Plan Environmental Justice Element:
• Goal EJ-2: Locate public facilities and services equitably throughout the community. o Policy EJ-2.6: Develop and maintain a complete system of public parks and recreational amenities that provide opportunities for passive and active recreation at a minimum standard of 5 acres per 1,000 residents. Parks, trails, and recreational facilities w ill enhance community livability, public health, and safety; should be equitably distributed throughout the City; and be responsive to the needs and interests of residents, employees, and visitors (See Policy PR-1.1).
o Policy EJ-2.7: Ensure that the development of parks, trails, and recreation facilities and services keeps pace with development and growth within the City (See Policy PR-1.3). • Goal EJ-5: Encourage physical activity and improved physical fitness o Policy EJ-5.7: Develop and maintain a complete system of public parks and recreational amenities that provide opportunities for passive and active recreation at a minimum standard of 5 acres per 1,000 residents. Parks, trails, and recreational facilities w ill enhance community livability, public health, and safety; should be equitably distributed throughout the City; and be responsive to the needs and interests of residents, employees, and visitors (See Policy PR-1.1).
o Policy EJ -5.10: Implement the trail network per the Trails Master Plan to increase opportunities for physical activity (e.g., walking, biking), healthy lifestyles, and to reduce reliance on cars (See Policy PR-2.2).

Parks Master Plan
The City adopted its Parks Master Plan in 1990, which presents a vision of parks and recreation facilities for the City. Since that time, the city has changed significantly. The latest Parks Master Plan Update was adopted in June 2018. The goal of the Parks Master Plan Update is to identify potential improvement to the park system and, as funding becomes available, suggest additional amenities for new parks and improvements at existing park facilities (City of San Marcos 2018).

3.14 Recreation
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.14-7
Master Trails Plan
The City’s Master Trails Plan, adopted in 1991, details a trails implementation strategy and description of each proposed trail segment. The plan envisions a system of connectivity through trail corridors networked across the city. To meet this goal, the Master Trails Plan recommends creation of 72 miles of trails that will provide an alternative means of circulation and recreational opportunities to San Marcos residents and visitors. These trails will include 21 miles of urban trails, 36 miles of multiuse trails, and 15 miles of soft-surface trails that connect neighborhoods to parks, schools, and workplaces as well as to the trails systems of neighboring cities and the County of San Diego (City of San Marcos 2017). An update to the City’s Master Trail Plan is underway.

3.14.3 Thresholds of Significance
The significance criteria used to evaluate the project impacts to recreation are based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a significant impact related to recreation would occur if the project would:
• Threshold #1: Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated.
• Threshold #2: Include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment.

3.14.4 Project Impact Analysis
As discussed in Section 2.2.2.1 of this EIR, there are two main categories of open space proposed for the project – common open space and private open space.

The City of San Marcos Zoning Ordinance (Table 20.255 -6, Common Outdoor Open Space Required as a Percentage of Project Area) identifies common outdoor open space requirements for projects proposed in the MU-1 and MU-2 zones, such as the proposed project (upon approval of the requested General Plan Amendment and zone change). For projects that propose 10 or more residential units and have a lot size greater than 30,000 s.f., 20 percent of the project area must be common outdoor open space. Common outdoor open space for the project would be approximately 23% of the site. The outdoor common space would be 25,700 s.f. and includes 24,415 s.f. at grade (pool, spa, outdoor “living room”, open turf area with play equipment and passive open space areas) and a 1,285 s.f. rooftop deck. Figure 2-7 presents a rendering of the recreation area. Proposed common indoor space would be 1,250 s.f. and includes a fitness area and meeting room. All common open space would be for the use of future residents and would be maintained by the property management company. The project would exceed the requirements for common outdoor open space.

Private open space within the proposed project consists of private patio space and private balcony/deck space. The City of San Marcos Zoning Ordinance (Table 20.255-7, Indoor/Private Open Space Requirements) identifies private open space requirements for p rojects proposed in the MU -1 and MU-2 zones. For projects that propose more than 21 units, a minimum of 36 s.f. of private unit open space per unit is required. For the proposed project’s 119 units, this equates to a total of 4,284 s.f. of private open spa ce. The project provides private open space ranging from 50 s.f. to 80 s.f. depending on the unit size and plan level, for a total of 7,632 s.f. The project would exceed the requirements for private open space for each unit.

3.14 Recreation
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.14-8
Threshold #1: Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated?
Based on the population rate of 3.1 persons per housing unit in San Marcos, buildout of the proposed project is estimated to add an additional 369 residents to the city. This increase in residents would increase demand for neighborhood and regional parks and other recreational facilities. Assuming five acres of park space per 1,000 residents (the minimum standard goal of the City’s General Plan discussed in Section 3.14.2), the addition of residents on site equates to a demand of approximately

1.85 acres of public park space generated by project residents.

As discussed above, the project would provide 25,700 s.f. (0.59 acres) of common outdoor space including recreational amenities such as a pool, and play equipment. The project also provides for 7,632 s.f. of private open space and the proposed project woul d meet and exceed the common useable and private open space requirements per the City’s Municipal Code. The common and private open space and amenities included on the project site would provide residents with recreational opportunities and help to offset the additional demand on existing parks and recreational amenities generated by the proposed project.

Additionally, the project applicant would be required to pay the City’s Public Facility Fees (PFF), which is required by all projects that increase the demand for park and recreation needs in the City. The PFF money would go towards the acquisition and dev elopment of local and community park facilities throughout the city to offset the demand for public park space generated by the project, as described in Municipal Code Chapter 17.36 and 17.44. Payment of the PFF shall be made prior to City issuance of the first building permit for the proposed project. The PFF payment would ultimately contribute to development of new parks and recreational facilities and would offset the increase in demand of parks and recreational facilities generated by the proposed proje ct, such that existing facilities would not substantially deteriorate. With payment of the required PFF in combination with provision of on -site common and private open space, the project would not increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional par ks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facilities would occur or be accelerated. Impacts to existing neighborhood and regional parks would be
less than significant.

Threshold #2: Would the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Impacts associated with construction of the proposed project’s public and private open space are considered within the overall development footprint for the proposed project. Impacts from the development of proposed recreational facilities have been consid ered in the project impact analysis and mitigation measures for the proposed project, as a whole, are discussed in the various sections of this EIR.

As stated under Threshold #1, the project applicant would be required to pay the City’s PFF that would go towards the acquisition and development of local and community park facilities throughout the city.

As such, the project applicant may contribute to the construction or expansion of recreational facilities offsite that may have an adverse physical effect on the environment. Future expansion or development of new recreational facilities would be subject to CEQA environmental review as appropriate, which would identify and address any site -specific impacts. Therefore, impacts due to the construction or expansion of recreational facilities are considered
less than significant.

3.14 Recreation
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.14-9

3.14.5 Cumulative Impact Analysis
A “cumulative impact” refers to two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable or which compound or increase other environmental effects. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15130(b)(1)(A)(B), an adequate discussion of a p roject’s significant cumulative impact, in combination with other closely related projects, can be based on either: (1) a list of past, present, and probable future producing related impacts; or (2) a summary of projections contained in an adopted local, regional, or statewide plan, or a related planning document that describes conditions contributing to the cumulative effect. For purposes of assessing the proposed project’s cumulative impact with respect to recreation, the cumulative analysis is based upon a list approach to determine the proposed project’s contributing effect on potential cumulative impacts related to recreation. All of the cumulative projects within the city identified in Table 2 -3 are considered in this cumulative analysis.

The proposed project as well as the cumulative projects that are in the City of San Marcos would add to the cumulative demand for park and recreation facilities in the city. All cumulative projects that increase the demand for parks and recreation facilities in the city would be required to provide park space, common open space, private open space, and/or pay the City’s PFF. Similar to the proposed project, the provisioning of onsite open space and payment of PFF, as applicable, would ensure that cumulative development would not increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facilities would occur or be accelerated. Therefore, cumulative impacts to existing neighborhood and regional parks would be less than significant.

As with the proposed project, the potential environmental impacts of any recreational and open space amenities included as part of the cumulative development projects would be addressed along with the environmental analysis of each cumulative project as a whole. Furthermore, any substantial expansion or development of new recreational facilities funded by PFF would be subject to the appropriate CEQA environmental review prepared by the City, which would identify and address any site-specific impacts.

Therefore, cumulative impacts associated with the construction or expansion of recreational facilities would be
less than significant. In summary, implementation of City policies, such as the collection of PFF, along with compliance with CEQA requirements would ensure that cumulative impacts to recreational facilities would be properly addressed and mitigated. Therefore, cumulative impa cts to recreational facilities are considered less than significant.

3.14.6 Mitigation Measures
No significant impacts to recreation were identified; thus, no mitigation is required.

3.14.7 Conclusion
The proposed project would result in an increase in the City of San Marcos population by approximately 369 residents. The additional residents would require approximately 1.85 acres of new park space to fulfill the City’s General Plan requirement of five acres of park space per every 1,000 residents. The proposed project would be required to pay the City’s PFF, which would go towards the acquisition and development of local and community park facilities throughout the city. The project design also includes 25,700 s.f. (0.59 acres) of common outdoor space and 7,632 s.f. of private open space to provide residents with onsite recreational opportunities. With payment of the PFF and provision of on- site common open space and recreational amenities, impacts would be less than significant.

3.14 Recreation
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.14-10
Lastly, any impacts associated with the development of the proposed open space have been considered in the project impact analysis and mitigation for the proposed project as a whole and are discussed in the various sections of this EIR. Therefore, impacts resulting from construction of new park facilities would be less than significant.

3.15 Transportation
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.15-1

3.15 Transportation
This section provides a transportation impact analysis for the proposed project related to transit, roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities, vehicle miles traveled, design feature hazards and emergency access. The section is based on the following reports, which are included a s Appendices M and N of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR):
• Local Transportation Analysis, Capalina Development. Prepared by CR Associates, August 8, 2023 (CRA 2023a)
• Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis Technical Memorandum , Capalina Development.

Prepared by CR Associates, May 19, 2023 (CRA 2023b)
Section 3.10, Land Use and Planning, includes a description of existing traffic conditions, methodology, baseline conditions and trip generation for the local transportation analysis/level of service (LOS) analysis. Section 3.10 analyzes the project’s cons istency with the Mobility Element of the General Plan.

Table 3.15-1 summarizes the project- and cumulative-level traffic impact analysis, by threshold.

Table 3.15-1. Transportation Summary of Impacts
Thresholds of Significance Project-Level
Impact
Cumulative-Level
Impact
Impact After
Mitigation
#1: Conflict with a program plan, ordinance
or policy addressing the circulation system,
including transit, roadway, bicycle, and
pedestrian facilities
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Without
Mitigation
#2: Would the project conflict or be
inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section
15064.3, subdivision (b)?
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Without
Mitigation
#3 - Substantially increase hazards due to a
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or
dangerous intersections) or incompatible
uses (e.g., farm equipment).

Potentially
Significant
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Without
Mitigation
#4: Result in inadequate emergency access Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Without
Mitigation

3.15.1 Existing Conditions
The City strives to create a robust, city -wide system of roadways, bicycle and pedestrian paths and routes, as well as public transit options, which provide residents with alternative modes of travel as well as recreational opportunities.

Existing Roadways
Access to the project site from the regional transportation network would be provided via California State Route 78 (SR-78) freeway, N. Rancho Santa Fe Road, W. Mission Road, and Capalina Road.

3.15 Transportation
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.15-2
These facilities will either provide a direct connection to project site via project driveways, or will provide a critical link between the project site and the regional transportation network.

Existing Transit Service
The project site is located near several transit lines serviced by North County Transit District (NCTD).

There is an NCTD bus stop on W. Mission Road along the project frontage that serves east -bound buses. There is also a bus stop on W. Mission Road serving west-bound busses at N. Rancho Santa Fe Road. The following provides a description of the transit services in the project vicinity. • Bus Route 304 – This bus route is serviced along W. Mission Road in the eastbound/westbound direction within the project study area. This bus route connects the Palomar College Transit Center to the Encinitas Transit Station. Operations start at 4:53 AM and end at 8:23 PM between Monday and Friday, with 30-minute intervals. On Saturdays, operations start at 6:53 AM and end at 9:05 PM, with 60-minute intervals. This route does not operate on Sundays.
• Bus Route 305 – This bus route is serviced along W. Mission Road in the eastbound/westbound direction within the project study area. This bus route connects the Vista Transit Center to the Escondido Transit Center. On Monday through Friday, operations start at 4:37 AM and end at 11:30 PM, with 30-minute intervals. On Saturdays and Sundays, operations start at 5:34 AM and end at 11:31 PM, with 30-minute intervals. • Bus Route 604 – This route is serviced along W. Mission Road and North Rancho Santa Fe Road within the project study area. This bus route connects the Palomar Transit Center to the Encinitas Station. This route only operates during school arrival and dismissal periods Monday through Friday. This route does not operate on the weekend. • SPRINTER – This light rail line runs between Oceanside Transit Center and Escondido Transit Center (eastbound and westbound direction). The nearest stop to the project site is the Palomar College Transit Center and is located 0.6 mile to the east. Operatio ns start at 4:17 AM and end at 9:10 PM between Monday and Sunday, with 30-minute intervals.

Existing Bicycle Conditions
Under Existing conditions, Class II bicycle facilities exist along N. Rancho Santa Fe Road and W. Mission Road. Additionally, a Class I multi-use path exists along the south side of W. Mission Road east of N.

Pacific Street. This Class I multi-use path is identified as the Inland Rail Trail which is a proposed 21 - mile facility that will eventually connect both the Cities of Oceanside and Escondido while passing through San Marcos, Vista, and unincorporated areas of the San Diego County. The Inland Rail Trail is expected to be fully constructed some time in 2025.

Per the City of San Marcos General Plan, there are no planned bicycle facilities improvements along the project frontage.

Existing Pedestrian Connections
Pedestrian facilities are intermittently provided within the project study area. Paved sidewalks are provided along Capalina Road except for along the project frontage on the north side of Capalina Road.

Paved sidewalks are provided along W. Mission Road, including the project’s frontage.

3.15 Transportation
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.15-3

3.15.2 Regulatory Setting
The following provides a general description of the applicable regulatory requirements and guidelines for the project area.

State Regulations
California Department of Transportation
The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) is the primary state agency responsible for transportation issues. One of its duties is the construction and maintenance of the state highway system. Caltrans has established standards for roadway traffic flow and has developed procedures to determine if intersections require improvements. For projects that may physically affect facilities under its administration, Caltrans requires encroachment permits before any construction work may be undertaken. For projects that would not physically affect facilities but may influence traffic flow and levels of services at such facilities, Caltrans may recommend measures to mitigate the traffic impacts of such projects.

AB 1358 – California Complete Streets Act of 2008
The California Complete Streets Act of 2008 (Assembly Bill [AB] 1358) requires circulation elements as of January 1, 2011 to consider the transportation system from a multi-modal perspective, including public transit, walking, and biking, which have traditionally been marginalized in comparison to autos in contemporary American urban planning.

SB 743, CEQA Guidelines Update
In December 2018, the California Natural Resources Agency certified and adopted the CEQA Guidelines update package, which included the California Natural Resources Agency Guidelines for the Implementation of CEQA. As a result, the California Governor’s Off ice of Planning and Research (OPR) updated and released the Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA (Technical Advisory) in December 2018. According to the updated guidelines, lead agencies had until July 1, 2020 to comply with the updated CEQA revision. The City of San Marcos has adopted Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) thresholds as part of their Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (City of San Marcos 2020a).

While VMT is the preferred quantitative metric for assessing potentially significant transportation impacts under CEQA, it should be noted that SB 743 does not prevent a city or county from using metrics such as LOS as part of the application of local gene ral plan policies, municipal and zoning codes, conditions of approval, or any other planning requirements through a city’s planning approval process; cities can still ensure adequate operation of the transportation system in terms of transportation congestion measures related to vehicular delay and roadway capacity. As such, the City can continue to require congestion -related transportation analysis and mitigation projects through planning approval processes outside CEQA. Section 3.10, Land Use and Planning, includes results of the LOS analysis prepared for the project.

Local Plans and Policies
SANDAG San Diego Forward: The 2021 Regional Plan
The Regional Plan, adopted in 2021 by the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG), provides a long-term blueprint for the San Diego region that seeks to meet regulatory requirements, address

3.15 Transportation
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.15-4
traffic congestion, and create equal access to jobs, education, healthcare, and other community resources. The plan is the result of years of planning, data analysis, and community engagement to reimagine the San Diego region with a transformative transportation system, a sustainable pattern of growth and development, and innovative transportation demand and management strategies.

The Regional Plan updates growth forecasts and is based on the most recent planning assumptions considering currently adopted land use plans, including the City’s General Plan and other factors from the cities in the region and the County. SANDAG’s Regional Plan will change in response to the ongoing land use planning of the city and other jurisdictions. For example, the City’s General Plan, and other local General Plans of cities, may change based on General Plan amendments initiated by the jurisdiction or landowner applicants. The General Plan amendments may result in increases in development densities by amending the regional category designations or zoning classifications.

The Regional Plan also supports other regional transportation planning and programming efforts, including overseeing which projects are funded under the Regional Transportation Improvement Program and the TransNet program. SANDAG is applying data -driven strategies, innovative technologies, and stakeholder input to create a future system that is faster, fairer, and cleaner. Part of this data-driven approach includes the implementation of five key transportation strategies referred to as the 5 Big Moves. Thes e strategies provide the framework for the Regional Plan and consider policies and programs, changes in land use and infrastructure, the existing transportation highway and transit networks, and trends in technology to optimize use of the transportation sy stem. Together, these initiatives will create a fully integrated, world -class transportation system that offers efficient and equitable transportation choices, meets state climate targets, and supports local jurisdictions’ achievements of Climate Action Plan goals.

In September 2022, the SANDAG Board directed staff to prepare an amendment to the 2021 Regional Plan without the regional road usage charge. In developing the amendment, SANDAG will refine the financial strategies used in the 2021 Regional Plan to achieve the region's greenhouse gas emissions target set by CARB, without the road usage charge. SANDAG will also assess the region's continued ability to meet air quality standards. The draft amendment was released for public review and comment on June 13, 2023.

SANDAG Smart Growth Opportunity Area
The project site is located within the SM -7 Mixed Use Transit Corridor as identified in the SANDAG Smart Growth Concept Map for North County. The Smart Growth Concept Map identifies locations in the region that can support smart growth, transit, walking, a nd biking. The map serves as the foundation for prioritizing transportation investments and determining eligibility for local smart growth incentive funds.

3.15 Transportation
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.15-5
Congestion Management Program
The 2008 Congestion Management Program (CMP) for San Diego County was developed to meet the requirements of Section 65089 of the California Government Code. Since that time, the local agencies within San Diego County approved to opt out of the CMP requirem ents, as allowed within the Government Code. As such, there are no CMP -specific requirements associated with this project.

However, to ensure the region’s continued compliance with the federal congestion management process, SANDAG has prepared San Diego Fo rward: The 2021 Regional Plan in compliance with 23 Code of Federal Regulations 450.320. The Regional Plan incorporates performance monitoring and measurement of the regional transportation system, multimodal alternatives to single -occupancy vehicles, land use impact analysis, congestion management tools, and Integration with the Regional Transportation Improvement Program process.

City of San Marcos Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines The City of San Marcos approved Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines (TIAG) on November 16, 2020 (City of San Marcos 2020a). TIAG provide screening criteria for determining whether a land development project should conduct a VMT analysis. These thresholds are based on the project’s consistency with the General Plan, estima ted daily trips, project location, and other project characteristics. A VMT analysis applies to all land development projects except for those that meet at least one of the provided screening criteria.

City of San Marcos Bikeway Master Plan
The 2005 Bikeway Master Plan is an update to the City’s original master plan adopted in 2001. Goals of the master plan were to obtain State Bicycle Transportation Account (BTA) grant funds, improve bicycle facilities throughout the city for safer routes to school, create connections to adjacent cities and incorporate an environmental inventory analysis. One of the goals of the master plan was to connect the city’s trails to bicycle facilities to complete a safe and enjoyable trail and bikeway system.

San Marcos General Plan
The Land Use and Community Design Element of the General Plan identifies specific policies related to congestion management. Those that are applicable to the proposed project are identified below. • Goal LU -1: Achieve a balanced distribution and compatible mix of land uses to meet the present and future needs of all residents and the business community. o Policy LU-1:1: Ensure that adjacent land uses complement one another by considering compatibility of activities, development patterns and architectural character elements, and access to various mobility choices.
• Goal LU-3: Develop land use patterns that are compatible with and support a variety of mobility opportunities and choices.
o Policy LU-3.4: Provide non-motorized (pedestrian and bicycle) access/circulation within, and to mixed-use centers to reduce reliance on the automobile. o Policy LU -3.5: Provide an interconnected open space system that is accessible to the public, including pedestrian and equestrian links, bicycle paths, multi-use trails, recreation areas, and drainage-ways.

3.15 Transportation
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.15-6
o Policy LU -3.7: Require new development to prepare traffic demand management programs.
o Policy LU -3.8: Require new development and discretionary actions to annex into a Congestion Management Community Facilities District.

The Mobility Element of the General Plan identifies specific goals and policies related to an efficient circulation system, traffic calming and safety, and alternative modes of travel. Those that are applicable to the transportation analysis for the proposed project are identified below. Policy M-1.4, which addresses LOS, is analyzed in Section 3.10, Land Use and Planning. • Goal M-1: Provide a comprehensive multimodal circulation system that serves the City land uses and provides for the safe and effective movement of people and goods. o 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. o Policy M -1.2: Require new development to finance and construct internal adjacent roadway circulation and City-wide improvements as necessary to mitigate project impacts, including roadway, transit, pedestrian, and bicycle facilities. o Policy M -1.3: Require new developments to prepare and implement Transportation Demand Management (TDM) programs to minimize vehicle trip generation and promote alternative modes of travel within the city.
o Policy M-1.4: Utilize multi-modal LOS techniques to evaluate transportation facilities. For identified prioritized modes (based on facility typology), provide the following minimum LOS as shown in Table 3-4 of the Mobility Element:
 LOS D or better for Vehicles as a prioritized mode
⸋ Generally, provides facilities that have minimum vehicle congestion during peak periods. Most motorists are delayed less than 55 seconds at a signal (or less than one signalized cycle).
 The City shall allow for flexible LOS where warranted (e.g., accepting a lower LOS than identified above).
o Policy M-1.6: Work to improve connectivity within the City by closing gaps in the existing bicycle, pedestrian, trail, transit, and roadway network. Work with new development to provide connectivity and redundancy in the mobility network. o Policy M-1.7: Strive to ensure that streets within San Marcos shall be complete streets where feasible; thereby providing accessibility, safety, connectivity, and comfort for all modes and users of the system. Appropriate new local streets and Main Streets will prioritize pedestrian and bicycle users through the corridor. • Goal M-2: Protect neighborhoods by improving safety for all modes of travel and calming traffic where appropriate.
o Policy M-2.1: Work with new development to design roadways that minimize traffic volumes and/or speed, as appropriate, within residential neighborhoods, while maintaining the City’s desire to provide connectivity on the roadway network.

3.15 Transportation
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.15-7
o Policy M-2.3: Consider roundabouts, as appropriate, as an intersection control device with demonstrated air quality, traffic efficiency, and safety benefits. • Goal M-3: Promote and encourage use of alternative transportation modes, including transit, bicycles, neighborhood electric vehicles (NEVs), and walking, within the City. o Policy M-3.1: Develop an integrated, multimodal circulation system that accommodates transit, bicycles, pedestrians, and vehicles; provides opportunities to reduce air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions; and reinforces the role of the street as a public space that unites the City.
o Policy M -3.2: Improve safety conditions, efficiency, and comfort for bicyclists and pedestrians through design, maintenance, and law enforcement. Install wider sidewalks and curb extensions at pedestrian crossings (bulb outs) where appropriate. o Policy M-3.3: Provide a pedestrian and bicycle network in existing and new neighborhoods that facilitates convenient and continuous pedestrian and bicycle travel free of major impediments and obstacles.
o Policy M-3.5: Ensure that streets in areas with high levels of pedestrian activity (such as employment centers, residential areas, mixed use areas, and schools) support safe pedestrian travel by providing detached sidewalks, bulb -outs, enhanced pedestrian crossings, pedestrian bridges, and medians.
o Policy M -3.9: Create a pleasant walking environment for roadway typologies where pedestrian travel is prioritized. This includes providing shade trees, landscaping, benches, pedestrian-scale lighting, way finding signage, transit shelters, and other approp riate amenities.

The Environmental Justice Element of the General Plan identifies specific goals and policies related to access to and facilitation of walking, bicycling, and transit use. Those that are applicable to the proposed project are identified below.
• Goal EJ -1: Reduce greenhouse gas emissions, enhance air quality, and reduce impacts associated with climate change.
o Policy EJ -1:1: Ensure that adjacent land uses complement one another by considering compatibility of activities, development patterns and architectural character elements, and access to various mobility choices (See Policy LU-1.1). o Policy EJ -1.3: Promote compact development patterns that reduce air pollution and automobile dependence and facilitate walking, bicycling, and transit use (See Policy LU -

2.1).
o Policy EJ -1.6: Require new developments to prepare and implement Transportation Demand Management (TDM) programs to minimize vehicle trip generation and promote alternative modes of travel within the city (See Policy M-1.3). o Policy EJ-1.8: Develop an integrated multimodal circulation system that accommodates transit, bicycles, pedestrians, and vehicles; provides opportunities to reduce air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions; and reinforces the role of the street as a public space that unites the City (See Policy M-3.1).
• Goal EJ-2: Locate public facilities and services equitably throughout the community.

3.15 Transportation
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.15-8
o Policy: EJ-2.10: Work to improve connectivity within the City by closing gaps in the existing bicycle, pedestrian, trail, transit, and roadway network. Work with new development to provide connectivity and redundancy in the mobility network (See Policy M-1.6). o Policy: EJ-2.11: Strive to ensure that streets within San Marcos shall be complete streets where feasible; thereby providing accessibility, safety, connectivity, and comfort for all modes and users of the system. Appropriate new local streets and Main Stre ets will prioritize pedestrian and bicycle users through the corridor (See Policy M-1.7). • Goal EJ-5: Encourage physical activity and improved physical fitness. o Policy: EJ-5.1: Provide non-motorized (pedestrian and bicycle) access/ circulation within, and to, mixed-use centers to reduce reliance on the automobile (See Policy LU-3.4). o Policy EJ - 5.2: Provide an interconnected open space system that is accessible to the public, including pedestrian and equestrian links, bicycle paths, multi-use trails, recreation areas, and drainage-ways (See Policy LU-3.5).
o Policy EJ-5.5: Ensure that streets in areas with high levels of pedestrian activity (such as employment centers, residential areas, mixed use areas, and schools) support safe pedestrian travel by providing detached sidewalks, bulb -outs, enhanced pedestrian crossings, pedestrian bridges, and medians (See Policy M-3.5). o Policy EJ -5.6: Create a pleasant walking environment for roadway typologies where pedestrian travel is prioritized. This includes providing shade trees, landscaping, benches, pedestrian-scale lighting, way finding signage, transit shelters, and other appro priate amenities (See Policy M-3.9).

The proposed project’s consistency with applicable General Plan goals and policies is discussed in Section 3.10, Land Use and Planning. As presented in Table 3.10 -7 in Section 3.10, the project is consistent with the applicable transportation-related goals and policies.

3.15.3 Thresholds of Significance
Appendix G of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines provides thresholds for determining significant environmental impacts. A project may be deemed to have a significant impact on transportation if it would:
• Threshold #1: Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities; or • Threshold #2: Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b); or • Threshold #3: Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment); or • Threshold #4: Result in inadequate emergency access.

3.15 Transportation
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.15-9

3.15.4 Project Impact Analysis
Threshold #1: Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities.

Access to the proposed project from the regional transportation network would be provided via California State Route 78 (SR -78) freeway, N. Rancho Santa Fe Road, W. Mission Road, N. Pacific Street, and Capalina Road. These facilities would either provide a direct connection to the proposed project, via the project driveway, or would provide a critical link between the proposed project and the regional transportation network.

The project would not result in any conflicts related to plans or policies addressing transit, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. The project is located within one half mile of NCTD transit lines, including bus routes and 0.6 mile from closest SPRINTER station. Construction of the project may results in a temporary disruption of the bicycle lane and sidewalk along the project frontage with W. Mission Road.

This specifically relates to the installation of the water line to serve the project. The contractor would install signage in advance of the work to notify cyclists and pedestrians. No impact to the transit stop is anticipated.

Sidewalks are proposed along the project frontage along Capalina Road. Sidewalks are also proposed surrounding the main building and recreational area providing direct access to the dwelling units, fitness center, leasing office, and retail land use component of the proposed project. Lastly, sidewalks are proposed along the south and west side of the buildings on the north side of the property connecting directly to existing sidewalk facilities along W. Mission Road. Curb ramps at the project driveways woul d be reconstructed, if needed, with detectable surface warning tactiles (yellow truncated domes) as well as meeting all ADA requirements.

With implementation of the proposed sidewalk improvements, the overall pedestrian environment would be enhanced for both walkability and safety and would not result in any impacts to pedestrian facilities (CRA 2023a). No other offsite pedestrian improvements were recommended in the traffic study.

Additionally, based upon the analysis presented in Section 3.10.4, the project would not result in an inconsistency with the Mobility Element of the City’s General Plan. The Local Transportation Analysis determined that the project would result in 874 total average daily trips (ADT). All study intersections and street segments are calculated to operate acceptably at LOS D or better with the addition of project and cumulative project traffic under Near Term 2025 and Horizon Year 2050 conditions with the exception of the segment of N. Rancho Santa Fe Road between SR -78 Eastbound Ramps and Descanso Avenue. This segment is forecasted to operate at LOS E with and without the proposed project in the Near Term 2025 and Horizon Year 2050 condition. The trips associa ted with the proposed project would not be enough to increase the volume/capacity ratio by 0.02, which is the threshold for roadways operating at LOS E or F (CRA 2023a).

Therefore, no impact related to a conflict with a program plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities is identified for the project.

Threshold #2: Conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.3(b).

The City’s Transportation Impact Analysis (TIA) Guidelines (San Marcos 2020a) provide several screening approaches to identify when a project should be expected to cause a less-than-significant

3.15 Transportation
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.15-10
impact related to VMT. The City of San Marcos TIA Guidelines suggest that a detailed transportation VMT analysis applies to all land development projects, except those that meet at least one of the screening criteria. Relevant screening criteria for the proposed project is described below:
• Presumption of Less Than Significant Impact for Affordable Residential Development – Residential projects with 100% deed restricted affordable housing can be presumed to have a less-than-significant transportation impact and would not require a detailed VMT analysis. If a project contains less than 100% affordable housing, the portion that is affordable should be screened out of requiring a detailed VMT analysis. Projects can only be screened out if they are located in parts of the city that have been ident ified by SANDAG and the City as Smart Growth Opportunity Areas. For mixed-use projects, this screening criteria should be applied to the residential component separately to determine if that portion of the project screens out of a detailed VMT analysis.
• Local-Serving Retail - Retail projects that have 50,000 square feet gross floor area or less can be presumed to have a less than-significant transportation impact and would not require a detailed VMT analysis. For a mixed-use project, this screening criteria should be applied to the retail/commercial component separately to determine if that portion of the project screens out of a detailed VMT analysis.
• Map-Based Screening for Residential and Office Projects – Residential and employment projects that are proposed in areas that generate VMT below adopted City thresholds can be presumed to have a less -than-significant transportation impact and would not require a detailed VMT analysis. This determination must b e made using SANDAG’s online residential and employment VMT maps for existing year or model baseline year VMT (whichever is available at the time analysis is being conducted), which show census tracts in the city where the VMT is below the regional average. The following types of projects could be screened out using this approach:
o Residential and office projects proposed in census tracts with residential VMT per capita below the City’s threshold of 85% of the SANDAG regional average. A significant impact would occur if the project generates VMT per resident or worker greater than 85 % of the regional average.
o In order to utilize this screening approach, the project must incorporate similar land use characteristics to other projects in the census tract. For mixed-use projects, this screening criteria should be applied to the residential and employment components separately to determine if any portions of the project screen out of a detailed VMT analysis.

VMT Analysis Based upon the criteria provided above, the proposed project would be screened out from conducting a detailed VMT Analysis because of the following reasons (CRA 2023b):
• Presumption of Less Than Significant Impact for Affordable Residential Development – The proposed project includes an affordable housing component, and the six affordable housing units proposed are presumed to have less than significant VMT impacts; • Local-Serving Retail - The commercial retail portion of the proposed project totals 4,000 s.f. and considered local -serving retail. Local -serving retail is presumed to have less than significant VMT impacts; and
• Map-Based Screening for Residential Projects – The project site is located within a census tract with a 12.5 VMT/capita based on SANDAG’s online residential and employment VMT

3.15 Transportation
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.15-11
maps, as shown in Figure 3.15 -1. The 113 -market rate residential units proposed by the project are located in a low VMT area (66.2% below the regional average) and are presumed to have a less than significant VMT impact (CRA 2023b).

Therefore, the proposed project is considered to be screened out of a detailed VMT analysis and may be presumed to cause a less-than-significant VMT impact.

Threshold #3: Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment) Site Access & Internal Circulation
The project would be located approximately 450 feet east of the N. Rancho Santa Fe Road and Capalina Road intersection in the City of San Marcos. The project site is currently vacant and is bordered by W. Mission Road on the north, Capalina Road to the south, abandoned/vacant development to the west, and commercial retail land uses to the east. The proposed project would restripe the centerline in Capalina Road to provide a two-way left turn lane. Project site access would be provided via two new project driveways, one at each end of the project site, along Capalina Road.

A brief description of each of the two driveways is provided below:
• Project Driveway #1 is located at the western end of the project site along Capalina Road and would function with full access. This driveway serves as one of two entry points and provides access points to the project site from the west. This driveway is projected to operate at LOS B or better under all study scenarios.
• Project Driveway #2 is located at the eastern end of the project site along Capalina Road and would function with full access. This driveway serves as one of two entry points and provides access points to the project site from the east. This driveway is projected to operate at LOS B or better under all study scenarios.

The internal circulation network does not include any hazardous design features and the project does not propose any incompatible uses. The project’s internal roadways are designed to provide safe movement of bicycle, pedestrian, and vehicle traffic through the project site. Internal roadways on the project site allow for two-way flow of vehicle traffic. One dead -end aisle is proposed at the northwest corner of the project site, which is designed to meet San Marcos Fire District and City driveway standards. Additionally, the following are included as project design features (CRA 2023b):
• Construct driveways in accordance with City and Fire District Standards. • Install stop sign (R1-1) at both project driveways.
• Appropriate signage to warn drivers of pedestrian foot traffic.

Vehicle Queuing
A 95th percentile queue analysis was conducted to determine the extent of queueing at the project driveways as well as movements at intersections where the project contributes 20 or more daily vehicle trips. The queue analysis was conducted under Near -Term Year 2025 Base with Project conditions and Horizon Year 2050 with Project conditions. Table 3.15 -2 displays the 95th percentile queue analysis results for project driveway intersections under both analysis scenarios. Intersection queueing reports are provided in Appendix K of the Local Transportation Analysis (Appendix N of the EIR).

3.15 Transportation
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.15-12
As shown in Table 3.15-2, the 95th percentile queues for turning movements are projected to fit within the available storage with the exception of the westbound left-turn movement on N. Rancho Santa Fe and Capalina Road. At most, 125 feet of 95th percentil e queue would exceed storage length under Horizon Year 2050 with Project Conditions. As detailed in the project description, as part of the project design the applicant would restripe and extend the westbound left turn pocket on Capalina Road at N.

Rancho Santa Fe Road by approximately 125 feet. This would provide for adequate storage for the westbound left -turn movement at the intersection and provide safe left -turn movements at this intersection..

Table 3.15-2. Vehicle Queue Summary
Intersection Control
Type
Turning
Movement
Peak
Hour
Available
Storage
(feet)
Near-Term Year 2025
with Project Conditions
Horizon Year 2050 with
Project Conditions
95th
Percentile
Queue (ft)1
Excess
Queue (ft)
95th
Percentile
Queue (ft)1
Excess
Queue (ft)
N. Rancho
Santa Fe & W.

Mission Rd
Signal
NBL
AM
180
100 0 125 0
PM 150 0 175 0
EBR
AM
160
75 0 100 0
PM 75 0 125 0
WBL
AM
310
225 0 250 0
PM 250 0 275 0
N. Rancho
Santa Fe &
Capalina Rd
Signal
SBL
AM
195
50 0 75 0
PM 75 0 125 0
WBL
AM
100
200 100 225 125
PM 175 75 125 25
Project Drwy #1
& Capalina Rd SSSC SBLR
AM
230
25 0 25 0
PM 25 0 25 0
Project Drwy #2
& Capalina Rd SSSC SBLR
AM
140
25 0 25 0
PM 25 0 25 0
Source: CRA 2023a.

Notes: (1) Queues are rounded to the nearest 25 feet to represent one vehicle length SSSC = Side-Street Stop Controlled
NBL= Northbound Left
EBR= Eastbound Right
WBL= Westbound Left
SBL= Southbound Left
SBLR = Southbound Left and Right
Sight Distance Analysis
An intersection sight distance analysis was conducted for both proposed project driveways along Capalina Road. The City of San Marcos Intersection Sight Distance Guidelines, December 2, 2020, were utilized to evaluate intersection sight distances at the pr oject driveways (City of San Marcos 2020b). The following two types of sight distances were evaluated:

3.15 Transportation
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.15-13
• Stopping Sight Distance - The distance traveled in the time it takes a driver to recognize an object ahead, decide to stop, and then stop their vehicle. • Corner Sight Distance - The distance a driver stopped on the minor road can see approaching vehicles on the major road before their line of sight is blocked by an obstruction near the intersection.

Table 3.15 -3 displays the measured sight distance, the design speed, as well as the minimum intersection sight distance requirements. As shown, both proposed project driveways would meet the intersection sight distance requirements.

Table 3.15-3. Measured Sight Distances
Driveway Type
Direction of
Oncoming
Traffic
Design Speed
(MPH)
Minimum ISD
(ft)
Measured
ISD (ft) Pass or Fail
Project
Driveway #1
& Capalina
Road
Stopping Southbound 40 300 478 Pass
Corner (Left) Westbound 40 440 780 Pass
Corner (Right) Eastbound 40 380 478 Pass
Project
Driveway #2
& Capalina
Road
Stopping Southbound 40 300 728 Pass
Corner (Left) Westbound 40 440 530 Pass
Corner (Right) Eastbound 40 380 728 Pass
Source: CRA 2023a.

In summary, the project does not include any hazardous design features or any incompatible uses, provides adequate sight distance, and has been designed to provide safe movement throughout and around the project site. As part of the project design, the app licant would restripe and extend the westbound left turn pocket on Capalina Road at N. Rancho Santa Fe Road by approximately 125 feet.

This would provide for adequate storage for the westbound left -turn movement at the intersection.

Impacts will be less than significant.

Threshold #4: Result in inadequate emergency access.

The project has been designed to incorporate two project driveways. The project would not include any hazardous design features or any incompatible uses, provides adequate sight distance, and has been designed to provide safe movement throughout and around the project site. The project design has also been reviewed by the Fire Marshal and no issues related to inadequate emergency access were identified. Impacts would be
less than significant.

3.15.5 Cumulative Impact Analysis
A “cumulative impact” refers to two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable or which compound or increase other environmental effects. Pursuant to CEQA

3.15 Transportation
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.15-14
Guidelines Section 15130(b)(1)(A)(B), an adequate discussion of a project’s significant cumulative impact, in combination with other closely related projects, can be based on either: (1) a list of past, present, and probable future producing related impacts; or (2) a summary of projections contained in an adopted local, regional, or statewide plan, or a related planning document that describes conditions contributing to the cumulative effect. For purposes of assessing the proposed project’s cumulative impact with respect to transportation, the cumulative analysis is based upon a list approach to determine the proposed project’s contributing effect on potential cumulative impacts related to hazards. All of the cumulative projects identified in Table 2 -3 are considered in this cumulative analysis.

Cumulative Policy Impact
The related projects and other cumulative development in San Marcos would be subject to the same circulation-related programs, plans, ordinances, and policies as the proposed project. Cumulative projects would be required to demonstrate consistency with th e SANDAG 2021 Regional Plan, San Marcos General Plan, San Marcos Bikeway Master Plan, and San Marcos TIA Guidelines, which guide development of transportation systems and circulation in the city. The cumulative projects primarily propose medium- to high-density residential and mixed-use development in areas with good transit connectivity and active transportation options, reducing dependence on automobiles and encouraging more active travel modes. As a result, cumulative impacts related to a conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities would be
less than significant.

Cumulative VMT Analysis
According to the City’s TIA Guidelines (San Marcos 2020a) if a land use project (or a component of a mixed-use project) is screened out of requiring a detailed existing VMT analysis or if it falls below the existing VMT thresholds outlined in Table 2 of the Transportation Impact Analysis Guidelines, it would also result in a less than significant cumulative impact. Therefore, the proposed project’s cumulative VMT impact would be
less than significant.

Hazards Due to Design and Emergency Access
Site design hazards and emergency access are analyzed and addressed on a project-by-project basis.

Each of the projects in Table 2 -3 would be reviewed to ensure that the site design does not include any traffic related hazards and that there is adequate em ergency access or required mitigation measures to reduce impacts. Therefore, impacts related to hazardous design and emergency access would be
less than significant.

3.15.6 Mitigation Measures
Based upon the analysis presented in Sections 3.15.4 and 3.15.5, impacts were determined to be less than significant. No mitigation measures are required.

3.15.7 Conclusion
Based upon the analysis presented in Section 3.15.4, the project would not have an impact related to a conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities.

3.15 Transportation
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.15-15
Project impacts related to hazards due to a design feature, incompatible use or inadequate emergency access were determined to be less than significant. The applicant would restripe and extend the westbound left turn pocket on Capalina Road at N. Rancho Santa Fe Road by approximately 125 feet.

This would provide for adequate storage for the westbound left-turn movement at the intersection. The project would also restripe the centerline in Capalina Road to provide a two -way left turn lane. For all other intersections analyzed, there is adequate storage for turning movements. The project would also have a less than significant impact related to VMT based on the City’s screening criteria.

3.15 Transportation
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.15-16
Figure 3.15-1 Project Location within SANDAG SB 743 VMT Map

Source: CRA 2023b.

Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.16-1

3.16 Tribal Cultural Resources
Introduction
This section analyzes the potential impacts of the proposed project on tribal cultural resources. As defined by Public Resources Code Section 21074, a tribal cultural resource is a site, feature, place, and or cultural landscape that is geographically defi ned in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Native American tribe, and that is 1) either on or eligible for the California Register of Historic Resources (CRHR) or a local historic register, or 2) determined by the City, at its discretion to treat the resources as a tribal cultural resource (Public Resources Code Section 5024.1). Cultural resources are further analyzed in Section 3.4, Cultural Resources, of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR).

The analysis in this section is based upon the following report prepared by Dudek (2023c) as well as specific outreach and consultation with appropriate Tribes:
• Archaeological Resources Inventory Report for the Capalina Apartments Project , City of San Marcos, California (Dudek 2023c)
The analysis also considers the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines Appendix G and applicable State and Local regulations, including the City of San Marcos General Plan. The cultural resources study is included as
Appendix E of the EIR and the General Plan is available on the City’s web site. 19 Table 3.16 -1 summarizes the tribal cultural resources project - and cumulative - level impacts, by threshold.

Table 3.16-1. Tribal Cultural Resources Summary of Impacts Threshold of Significance Project-Level
Impact
Cumulative-Level
Impact
Impact After
Mitigation
#1 – Cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of a tribal cultural resource,
defined in Public Resources Code Section
21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural
landscape that is geographically defined in
terms of the size and scope of the landscape,
sacred place, or object with cultural value to a
California Native American tribe, and that is
listed or eligible for listing in the California
Register of Historical Resources, or in a local
register of historical resources as defined in
Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k).

Potentially
Significant No Impact Mitigated to Less
Than Significant
#2 – Cause a substantial adverse change in
the significance of a tribal cultural resource,
defined in Public Resources Code Section
21074 as either a site, feature, place, cultural
landscape that is geographically defined in
terms of the size and scope of the landscape,
sacred place, or object with cultural value to a
Potentially
Significant No Impact Mitigated to Less
Than Significant

19 http://www.san-marcos.net/work/economic-development/general-plan

3.16 Tribal Cultural Resources
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.16-2
Threshold of Significance Project-Level
Impact
Cumulative-Level
Impact
Impact After
Mitigation
California Native American tribe, and that is a
resource determined by the lead agency, in its
discretion and supported by substantial
evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria
set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources
Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria
set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources
Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall
consider the significance of the resource to a
California Native American tribe.

3.16.1 Existing Conditions
This section provides information on the archeological context of the project site. It also provides information on the outreach and consultation efforts with local Tribes, as required by existing regulations.

Natural Setting
The project site is currently undeveloped, vacant land. Per the Phase I Environmental Site Assessment prepared for the project, the project site appeared to be vacant pastureland from prior to 1939 until approximately 1974, when the northwestern perimeter of the property appeared to be vacant, rough- graded land. By 1980, the project site appeared to be vacant, rough-graded land with what appeared to be an area graded for uses as a vehicle parking area on the southeastern portion of the property.

By 1996, th e property appeared to be vacant, weed -abated land. By 2005, a vehicle parking area appeared to be to be located on the southeastern perimeter of the subject property. By 2012, the vehicle parking area was removed and the property appeared to be vacant, we ed-abated land (The Phase 1 Group 2022). Currently, the entire site is occupied with disturbed habitat with a few ornamental trees (Dudek 2023a).

Prehistoric Context
Evidence for continuous human occupation in the San Diego County region spans the last 12,000 years. Various attempts to parse out variability in archaeological assemblages over this broad time frame have led to the development of several cultural chronologies; some of these are based on geologic time, most are based on temporal trends in archaeological assemblages, and others are interpretive reconstructions. Each of these reconstructions describes essentially similar trends in assemblage composition in more or less detail. This research employs a common set of generalized terms used to describe chronological trends in assemblage composition from an archaeological perspective: Paleoindian (pre-5500 BC), Archaic (8000 BC.–AD 500), Late Prehistoric (AD 500–1750), and Ethnohistoric (post -AD 1750). Native American Aboriginal lifeways did not cease at European contact. “Protohistoric” refers to the chronological trend of continued Native American Aboriginal lifeways at the cusp of the recorded historic period in the Americas. The tribal cultural context spans all of the archaeologically- based chronologies further described below. The following information on these periods is from the archaeological resources inventory report prepared for the project by Dudek (2023c) and is included as Appendix E.

3.16 Tribal Cultural Resources
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.16-3
Paleoindian Period (pre-5500BC)
Evidence for Paleoindian occupation in coastal Southern California is tenuous, especially considering that the oldest dated archaeological assemblages look nothing like the Paleoindian artifacts from the Great Basin. One of the earliest dated archaeological assemblages in coastal Southern California (excluding the Channel Islands) derives from P-37-004669 (CA-SDI-4669), in La Jolla. A human burial from P-37-004669 was radiocarbon dated to 9,590–9,920 years before present (approximately 95% probability) (Hector 2007). The burial is part of a larger site complex that contained more than 29 human burials associated with an assemblage that fits the Archaic profile (i.e., large amounts of groundstone, battered cobbles, and expedient flake tools). In contrast, typ ical Paleoindian assemblages include large stemmed projectile points, high proportions of formal lithic tools, bifacial lithic reduction strategies, and relatively small proportions of groundstone tools. Prime examples of this pattern are sites that were studied by Emma Lou Davis (1978) on China Lake Naval Air Weapons Station near Ridgecrest, California. These sites contained fluted and unfluted stemmed points and large numbers of formal flake tools (e.g., shaped scrapers, blades). Other typical Paleoindian sites include the Komodo site (CA -MNO-679)—a multicomponent fluted point site, and CA -MNO-680—a single component Great Basin stemmed point site (Basgall et al. 2002). At CA-MNO-679 and CA-MNO- 680, groundstone tools were rare while finely made projectile points were common.

Turning back to coastal Southern California, the fact that some of the earliest dated assemblages are dominated by processing tools runs counter to traditional notions of mobile hunter –gatherers traversing the landscape for highly valued prey. Evidence for the latter—that is, typical Paleoindian assemblages—may have been located along the coastal margin at one time, prior to glacial desiccation and a rapid rise in sea level during the early Holocene (pre-7500 BP) that submerged as much as 1.8 kilometers of the San Diego coastline. If this were true, however, it would also be expected that such sites would be located on older landforms near the current coastline. Some sites, such as P -37- 000210 (CA -SDI-210) along Agua Hedionda Lagoon, contained stemmed points similar in form to Silver Lake and Lake Mojave projectile points (pre -8000 BP) that are commonly found at sites in California’s high desert (Basgall and Hall 1990). P-37-000210 yielded one corrected radiocarbon date of 8520–9520 BP (Warren et al. 2004). H owever, sites of this nature are extremely rare and cannot be separated from large numbers of milling tools that intermingle with old projectile point forms.

Warren et al. (2004) claimed that a biface manufacturing tradition present at the Harris site complex P-37-000149 (CA-SDI-149) is representative of typical Paleoindian occupation in the San Diego County region that possibly dates between 10,365 and 8200 BC (Warren et al. 2004, p. 26). Termed San Dieguito (Rogers 1945), assemblages at the Harris site are qualitatively distinct from most others in the San Diego County region because the site has large numbers of finely made bifaces (including projectile points), formal flake tools, a biface reduction trajectory, and relatively small amounts of processing tools (Warren 1964, 1968). Despite the unique assemblage composition, the definition of San Dieguito as a separate cultural tradition is hotly debated. Gallegos (1987) suggested that the San Dieguito pattern is simply an inland manifestation of a broader economic pattern. Gallegos’ interpretation of San Dieguito has been widely accepted in recent years, in part because of the difficulty in distinguishing San Di eguito components from other assemblage constituents. In other words, it is easier to ignore San Dieguito as a distinct socioeconomic pattern than it is to draw it out of mixed assemblages.

The large number of finished bifaces (i.e., projectile points and non-projectile blades), along with large numbers of formal flake tools at the Harris site complex, is very different than nearly all other assemblages throughout the San Diego County region, regardless of age. Warren et al. (2004) made this point, tabulating basic assemblage constituents for key early Holocene sites. Producing finely

3.16 Tribal Cultural Resources
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.16-4
made bifaces and formal flake tools implies that relatively large amounts of time were spent for tool manufacture. Such a strategy contrasts with the expedient flake -based tools and cobble -core reduction strategy that typifies non-San Dieguito Archaic sites. It can be inferred from the uniquely high degree of San Dieguito assemblage formality that the Harris site complex represents a distinct economic strategy from non-San Dieguito assemblages.

If San Dieguito truly represents a distinct socioeconomic strategy from the non -San Dieguito Archaic processing regime, its rarity implies that it was not only short-lived, but that it was not as economically successful as the Archaic strategy. Such a conclusion would fit with other trends in southern California deserts, wherein hunting -related tools are replaced by processing tools during the early Holocene (Basgall and Hall 1993).

Archaic Period (8000 BC – AD 500)
The more than 2500-year overlap between the presumed age of Paleoindian occupations and the Archaic period highlights the difficulty in defining a cultural chronology in the San Diego County region.

If San Dieguito is the only recognized Paleoindian component in the San Diego County region, then the dominance of hunting tools implies that it derives from Great Basin adaptive strategies and is not necessarily a local adaptation. Warren et al. (2004) admitted as much, citing strong desert connections with San Dieguito. Thus, the Archaic pattern is the earliest local socioeconomic adaptation in the San Diego County region (Hale 2001, 2009).

The Archaic pattern is relatively easy to define with assemblages that consist primarily of processing tools: millingstones, handstones, battered cobbles, heavy crude scrapers, incipient flake-based tools, and cobble-core reduction. These assemblages occur in all environments across the San Diego County region, with little variability in tool composition. Low assemblage variability over time and space among Archaic sites has been equated with cultural conservatism (Byrd and Reddy 2002; Warren 1968; Warren et al. 2004). Despite enormous amounts of archaeological work at Archaic sites, little change in assemblage composition occurs until the bow and arrow is adopted at around AD 500, as well as ceramics at approximately the same time (Griset 1996; Hale 2009). Even then, assemblage formality remains low. After the bow is adopted, small arrow points appear in large quantities and already low amounts of formal flake tools are replaced by increasing amounts of expedient flake tools. Similarly, shaped millingstones and handstones decrease in proportion relative to expedient, unshaped groundstone tools (Hale 2009). Thus, the terminus of the Archaic period is equally as hard to define as its beginning because basic assemblage constituents and patterns of manufacturing investment remain stable, complimented only by the addition of the bow and ceramics.

Late Prehistoric Period (AD 500-1769)
The period of time following the Archaic and prior to Ethnohistoric times (AD 1750) is commonly referred to as the Late Prehistoric (M. Rogers 1945; Wallace 1955; Warren et al. 2004). However, several other subdivisions continue to be used to describe various shifts in assemblage composition, including the addition of ceramics and cremation practices. In northern San Diego County, the post - AD 1450 period is called the San Luis Rey Complex (True 1978). Rogers (1929) also subdivided the last 1,000 years into the Yuman II and III cultures, based on the distribution of ceramics. Despite these regional complexes, each is defined by the addition of arrow points and ceramics, and the widespread use of bedrock mortars. Vagaries in the appearance of the bow and arrow and ceramics make the temporal resolution of the San Luis Rey complex difficult. For this reason, the term Late Prehistoric is well-suited to describe the last 1,500 years of prehistory in the San Diego region.

3.16 Tribal Cultural Resources
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.16-5
Temporal trends in socioeconomic adaptations during the Late Prehistoric period are poorly understood. This is partly because the fundamental Late Prehistoric assemblage is very similar to the Archaic pattern, but includes arrow points and large quantities of fine debitage from producing arrow points, ceramics, and cremations. The appearance of mortars and pestles is difficult to place in time because most mortars are on bedrock surfaces; bowl mortars are actually rare in the San Diego County region. Some a rgue that the Ethnohistoric intensive acorn economy extends as far back as AD 500 (Bean and Shipek 1978). However, there is no substantial evidence that reliance on acorns, and the accompanying use of mortars and pestles, occurred prior to AD 1400. True (1980) argued that acorn processing and ceramic use in the northern San Diego region did not occur until the San Luis Rey pattern emerged after approximately AD 1450.

Ethnohistoric (post-AD 1769)
Early descriptions of the lifeways of Southern California ethnohistoric groups were provided by explorers, missionaries, administrators, and other travelers, who gave particular attention to the coastal populations (Boscana 1846; Fages 1937; Geiger and Mei ghan 1976; Harrington 1934; Laylander 2000). Subsequent ethnographers in the early twentieth century were able to give much more objective, detailed, and penetrating accounts. Most of the ethnographers attempted to distinguish between observations of the customs of surviving Native Americans and orally transmitted or inferred information concerning the lifeways of native groups prior to European intrusion into the region. The second of these subjects provides a terminal baseline for discussing the cultures of the region’s prehistory. Despite the relatively rich ethnographic record, attempts to distinguish between the archaeological residues that were produced by the linguistically unrelated but culturally similar Luiseño and Ipai/Kumeyaay have been largely unsuccessful (Pigniolo 2004; True 1966).

The first systematic ethnographic work in California was done in 1871 and 1872 by Stephen Powers (Heizer 1978); in 1877, Powers collected and printed his ethnographic observations in Tribes of California (Powers 1877). Prior to the work of Powers, there we re limited records and accounts that might be broadly considered as ethnohistorical data, such as Boscana (1846). At the beginning of the twentieth century, Alfred L. Kroeber and others began four decades of systematic documentation of tribal ethnographies. Kroeber’s (1925) monumental work on the Indians of California continues to be an authoritative source of information. It is important to note that even though there were many informants for these early ethnographies who were able to provide information f rom personal experiences about native life before the Europeans, a significantly large proportion of these informants were born after 1850 (Heizer and Nissen 1973); therefore, the documentation of pre-contact, Aboriginal culture was being increasingly supplied by individuals born in California after considerable contact with Europeans. As Robert F. Heizer (1978) stated, this is an important issue to note when examining these ethnographies, since considerable culture change had undoubtedly occurred by 1850 among the Native American survivors of California. Nonetheless, the enormous value of the ethnographies done under Kroeber’s guidance is obvious. The major sources for this review include Lowell John Bean and Florence C. Shipek (1978), Kroeber (1925), Phili p S. Sparkman (1908), and Raymond White (1963).

San Marcos is situated within the ethnohistoric territory of the Native American Luiseño cultural group, according to Kroeber’s study (1925; see also Rivers 1993). The Luiseño language belongs to the Cupan group of the Takic language branch of the Uto-Aztecan language family. Luiseño is a term given to Native Americans under the administration of Mission San Luis Rey, and later applied specifically to the Payomkawichum ethnic nation who were present in the region where the mission was founded.

Meaning the “western people,” the name Payomkawichum can also be applied to the closely related coastal Luiseño who lived north of the mission.

3.16 Tribal Cultural Resources
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.16-6
Luiseño territory was situated in the north half of San Diego County and the western edge of Riverside County. Their lands encompassed the southern Santa Margarita Mountains and the Palomar Mountains, and their foothills to the Pacific Ocean. The territory extended eastward into the San Jacinto Valley and the western foothills of the San Jacinto Mountains. Their neighbors to the were the Juaneño (Acjachemen) who spoke a Luiseño dialect, the Cahuilla and Cupeño to the east who spoke other Takic Cupan languages, and the Ipai (Kumeyaay) to the south who spoke a California-Delta Yuman language.

The Luiseño resided in permanent villages and associated seasonal camps. Village population ranged from 50 –400 with social structure based on lineages and clans. A single lineage was generally represented in smaller villages, while multiple lineages and a dominant clan presided in larger villages.

Each clan/village owned a resource territory and was politically independent, yet maintained ties to others through economic, religious, and social networks in the immediate region. There were contact period villages in the vicinity of this segment, near the towns of Vista, San Marcos, and Escondido, but researchers have been unable to place rancheria names from the mission registers with these locations.

Luiseño geographical names are very numerous; small tracts with distinguishing features may be named, or there may be a name for a small portion of a tract, or names for a large tract of country (Sparkman 1908). Some geographical names may be descriptive a nd some names are of old village sites noted to be located near modern localities and settlements; for example, Palimai is associated with the slough at mouth of Agua Hedionda Creek (Sparkman 1908). The Project area is located south Agua Hedionda Creek and north of San Marcos Creek. Kroeber has noted place names; north of Agua Hedionda Creek is Palamai, south and of San Marcos Creek is Hakuti, and east of San Marcos Creek is Shikape (Kroeber 1925).

Like other Indigenous California groups, the primary food staple was the acorn (Bean and Shipek 1978), supplemented by other plant resources, fish, shellfish, waterfowl, and marine and terrestrial mammals. Villages were situated near reliable sources of water, needed for the daily leaching of milled acorn flour. Other plant foods included pine nuts and grass seeds, manzanita, sunflower, sage, chia, lemonade berry, wild rose, holly-leaf cherry, prickly pear, and lamb’s quarter. Large and small prey included deer, antelope, rabbit, jackrabbit, wood rat, mice, and ground squirrel, as well as quail, ducks, and other birds. Fish, such as trout, were caught in rivers and creeks.

The first direct European contact with the Luiseño occurred in July 1769 with the Spanish expedition led by Gaspar de Portolá. During the next six years, eight missions and forts were founded north and south of Luiseño territory. In 1776, Mission San Juan Capistrano was founded less than 10 miles north, and the populations of five northern Luiseño villages had been halved within 15 years. In 1798, Mission San Luis Rey was established within Luiseño territory, and the proselytizing among the Payomkawichum began in earnest.

Several Luiseño leaders signed the statewide 1852 treaty, locally known as the Treaty of Temecula (an interior Luiseño village), but the U.S. Congress never ratified it. By 1875, however, reservations for the Luiseño were established in the Palomar Mountai ns and nearby valleys, including Pala, Pauma, Rincon, Pechanga, and La Jolla.

Records Search
A detailed records search including previous cultural resources report, previously recorded cultural resources and archival research was conducted for the project. Please see Section 3.4, Cultural Resources, for a summary.

3.16 Tribal Cultural Resources
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.16-7
Tribal Correspondence and Coordination
On September 16, 2022, Dudek requested a search of the Sacred Lands File (SLF) by the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for the project area. The SLF consists of a database of known Native American resources. The NAHC replied on November 9, 2022 i ndicating that the SLF search came back negative. The NAHC provided a list of Native American tribes and individuals/organizations with traditional geographic association that might have knowledge of cultural resources in this area.

Outreach letters were mailed November 14, 2022, to all Native American representatives included on the NAHC contact list. These letters attempted to solicit additional information relating to Native American resources that may be impacted by the project. N ative American representatives were requested to define a general area where known resources intersect the project area. Two responses have been received to date.

The Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians responded on December 12, 2022, stating that the project area is located within their Traditional Use Area and Specific Area of Historic interest and the potential exists that the project may impact Traditional Cultural R esources (TCRs) or Traditional Cultural Properties (TCPs). They recommend archaeological and tribal monitoring for any ground disturbing activities.

The Pechanga Band of Indians responded on December 23, 2022, stating that the project is located near a TCP and three Ancestral Placename Villages with 18 previously recorded sites within one mile of the project. The Pechanga Band of Indians pointed out th at Agua Hedionda Creek is located near the project boundary, which is concerning as they buried their Ancestors near long -term waters, and native soils likely remain intact beneath the plow-zone, meaning here is a high potential to encounter sensitive subsurface resources during ground -disturbing activities associated with the project. They are recommending monitoring by a San Diego County qualified archaeologist and a professional Pechanga Tribal Monitor during earthmoving activities.

The City sent out notices to Tribes consistent with the requirements of Senate Bill (SB) 18 and Assembly Bill (AB) 52. SB 18 letters were sent on December 7, 2022 and AB 52 letters were sent on February 23, 2023.

The Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians requested consultation on January 19, 2023. The City consulted with the Rincon Band and a close -out consultation letter was received on June 12, 2023 stating concurrence with the City’s standard mitigation measures.

The San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians requested consultation on March 6, 2023. The City consulting with the San Luis Rey Band and a close -out letter was received on September 22, 2023 stating concurrence with the City’ standard mitigation measures.

The Pechanga Band of Indians requested consultation on March 15, 2023. The City provided additional project information to the Tribe and is waiting for comments and/or the close -out consultation letter.

Archaeological (Prehistoric) Resources
As detailed in Section 3.4, Cultural Resources, of the EIR, Dudek archaeologist Makayla Murillo conducted an intensive level pedestrian survey of the proposed project area on October 12, 2022.

Saving Sacred Sites Native American monitor Jessica Alexander participated in the pedestrian survey.

All survey work was conducted employing standard archaeological procedures and techniques consistent with the Secretary of the Interior Standards. Five -meter interval survey transects were

3.16 Tribal Cultural Resources
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.16-8
conducted in an east-west direction for the project area. Within the transects, the ground surface was examined for prehistoric artifacts (e.g., flaked stone tools, tool -making debris, stone milling tools, ceramics, fire-affected rock), soil discoloration that might indicate the presence of a cultural midden, soil depressions, features indicative of the current or former presence of structures or buildings (e.g., standing exterior walls, post holes, foundations), and historic artifacts (e.g., metal, glass, ceramics, building materials). Ground disturbances such as burrows, cut banks, and drainages were also visually inspected for exposed subsurface materials.

The project area is relatively flat and undeveloped with a small east facing slope along the western boundary. Some disturbances were observed, such as stockpiled imported rock on the northwesternmost portion of the project area. Ground visibility was fair (25-50%) in areas where the ground surface was obscured by vegetation. Approximately 75% of the project area was obscured by dead grass and a few dispersed palm trees. Modern debris (e.g., refuse, plastic fragments, irrigation pipes, glass fragments) is s trewn throughout the project area. The pedestrian survey did not identify any cultural resources within the project area.

3.16.2 Regulatory Setting
The following section provides a general description of the applicable regulatory requirements pertaining to tribal cultural resources. The analysis of tribal cultural resources is a State requirement under CEQA, as required by AB 52, described below. The City also has goals and policies in the General Plan Conservation and Open Space Element related to cultural resources, as described below.

State
Senate Bill 18
SB 18, approved in 2004, amends the California Civil Code and the California Government Code, requiring cities and counties to contact and consult with California Native American tribes prior to adopting or amending any general plan or specific plan, or designating land as open space in order to preserve or mitigate impacts to specified Native American places, features and objects that are located within the city’s or county’s jurisdiction. SB 18 also requires cities and counties to hold in strict confidence any information about the specific identity, location, character, or use of these resources.

In 2005, the Office of Planning and Research published Tribal Consultation Guidelines to guide cities and counties on the process of engaging in consultation in accordance with SB 18. The Native American Heritage Commission maintains a list of California Native American Tribes with whom cities and counties must consult pursuant to SB 18.

Assembly Bill 52
AB 52 was approved in 2014 and adds new requirements regarding consultation with California Native American Tribes and consideration of tribal cultural resources. The law went into effect on July 1, 2015, and after that date, if requested by a California N ative American Tribe, lead agencies must consult prior to the release of a Negative Declaration, Mitigated Negative Declaration or Draft EIR.

3.16 Tribal Cultural Resources
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.16-9
Local
San Marcos General Plan Conservation and Open Space Element The Conservation and Open Space Element of the City’s General Plan contains several policies pertaining to the protection of archaeological and historic resources. The following goals and policies apply to the project:
o Policy COS-2.5: Continue to review future development proposals to ensure that cultural resources (including prehistoric, historic, paleontological, and SB 18 Tribal resources) are analyzed and conserved in compliance with CEQA requirements. • Goal COS -11: Continue to identify and evaluate cultural, historic, archaeological, paleontological, and architectural resources for protection from demolition and inappropriate actions.
o Policy COS-11.1: Identify and protect historic and cultural resources including individual properties, districts, and sites (e.g., archaeological sites) in compliance with CEQA. o Policy COS -11.2: Prohibit the demolition or removal of a historic structure without evaluation of the condition of the structure, the cost of rehabilitation, and the feasibility of alternatives to preservation in place including but not limited to relocati on, or reconstruction offsite, and/or photo-preservation.
o Policy COS-11.3: Identify opportunities for adaptive reuse of historic sites and buildings to preserve and maintain their viability.

The project’s consistency with applicable General Plan goals and policies is discussed in Section 3.10, Land Use and Planning. As detailed in Table 3.10 -7, the project is consistent with the applicable General Plan goals and policies pertaining to cultural resources.

San Marcos Archaeological and Historical Resources Consultant Guidelines The City of San Marcos published guidelines for archaeological and historical resources consultants in January 2023. The guidelines are generally meant to aid third party consultants who prepare archaeological or architectural history inventories, surveys, evaluations, and other technical documents. These guidelines include information pertaining to the minimum qualifications, records searches, tribal outreach, pedestrian surveys, reporting, research design, findings, discussion and evaluations, management conclusions, references, and appendices of inventories, surveys, evaluations, and other technical documents (City San Marcos 2023). Dudek prepared the archaeological resources inventory report in accordance with these guidelines.

3.16.3 Thresholds of Significance
The determination of significance for tribal cultural resources is based on CEQA Guidelines Appendix G. Impacts to tribal cultural resources would be significant if the proposed project would:
• Threshold #1: Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource that is listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Publi c Resources Code Section 5020.1(k); or

3.16 Tribal Cultural Resources
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.16-10
• Threshold #2: Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource that is a resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

3.16.4 Project Impact Analysis
Project grading activities will result in ground disturbance in those areas of the project site proposed for development. Ground disturbing activities can result in impacts to tribal cultural resources if they are present on the project site. Mitigation me asures have been identified in Section 3.4, Cultural Resources, to reduce the potential to impacts to unknown cultural resources to below a level of significance (MM CR-1 through MM-CR-4). The following analysis discusses the potential for the project to have on tribal cultural resources.

Threshold #1: Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource that is listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section 5020.1(k).

Based upon the cultural resources study prepared for the project (Dudek 2023c) and consultation with local tribes, the project site does not contain any known tribal cultural resources that are listed or eligible for listing in the CRHR or in a local regis ter of historical resources. However, as described in Section 3.4, Cultural Resources, and as identified above, impacts to unknown subsurface archaeological resources may occur on the project site. Therefore, the project has the potential to disturb unidentified archeological resources during project grading (Impact CR -1). MM-CR-1through 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 unidentifi ed cultural resources, 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 through MM -CR-3 would ensure proper handling and treatment of s uch 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 mitigation measures MM -CR-1 through MM-CR-4 provides additional protections for significant resources and describes the process for proper treatment and handling to ensure impacts are minimized. Implementation of this mitigation would reduce potential project-level impacts to tribal cultural resources to below a level of significance.

Threshold #2: Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource that is a resource determined by the lead agency, in its discretion and supported by substantial evidence, to be significant pursuant to criteria set forth i n subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. In applying the criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1, the lead agency shall consider the significance of the resource to a California Native American tribe.

The City has not identified any cultural resources to be present on the project site pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5024.1. Based upon the cultural resources study prepared for the project (Dudek 2023c) and consultation with local tribes, the project site does not contain any known tribal cultural resource that are significant pursuant to criteria set forth in subdivision (c) of Public Resources Code Section 5024.1
. However, as described in Section 3.4, Cultural Resources, and as identified above, impacts to unknown subsurface archaeological resources may occur on the project site.

Therefore, the project has the potential to disturb unidentified archeological resources during project

3.16 Tribal Cultural Resources
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.16-11
grading (Impact CR-1). 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, 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 through MM-CR-3 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 mitigation measures MM -CR-1 through MM -CR-4 provides addition al protections for significant resources and describes the process for proper treatment and handling to ensure impacts are minimized. Implementation of this mitigation would reduce potential project-level impacts to tribal cultural resources to below a level of significance.

3.16.5 Cumulative Impact Analysis
A “cumulative impact” refers to two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable or which compound or increase other environmental effects. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15130(b)(1)(A)(B), an adequate discussion of a p roject’s significant cumulative impact, in combination with other closely related projects, can be based on either: (1) a list of past, present, and probable future producing related impacts; or (2) a summary of projections contained in an adopted local, regional, or statewide plan, or a related planning document that describes conditions contributing to the cumulative effect. For purposes of assessing the proposed project’s cumulative impact with respect to tribal cultural resources, the cumulative analysis is based upon a list approach to determine the proposed project’s contributing effect on potential cumulative impacts on tribal cultural resources.

While no resources were identified on the project site during the cultural resources reconnaissance, it was determined that there could be a potential for unidentified resources to be encountered subsurface during project grading. Other cumulative projects would be required to assess the potential for impact to archaeological resources and provide mitigation measures or avoidance measures to reduce significant impacts to cultural resources consistent with the requirements of CEQA and the City.

Additionally, the lead agency is required to consult with tribes pursuant to the requirements of SB 18 and/or AB 52. The City requires standard conditions of approval related to construction monitoring by an archeologist to ensure there are no inadvertent impacts to ar cheological resources. Cumulative impacts would be
less than significant.

3.16.6 Mitigation Measures
Mitigation measures MM -CR-1 through MM -CR-4 in Section 3.4, Cultural Resources, would reduce potential tribal cultural resources impacts to below a level of significance.

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. 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

3.16 Tribal Cultural Resources
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.16-12
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 dist urbing 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’s Planning Divisi on 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 moni toring 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 e vidence 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 disturb ing 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, wi ll 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) ar e 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

3.16 Tribal Cultural Resources
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.16-13
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 any 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 th e 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 San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians, Rincon Band of Luiseño Indians, Pechanga Band of 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.

MM-CR-3 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 co nstruction 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 deter mine, 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 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

3.16 Tribal Cultural Resources
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.16-14
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 ov erlie 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.

3.16 Tribal Cultural Resources
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.16-15
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 archae ological 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 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)).

3.16.7 Conclusion
Based upon the cultural resources study prepared for the project (Dudek 2023c) and consultation with local tribes pursuant to SB 18 and AB 52, the project site does not contain any known tribal cultural resource that are listed or eligible for listing in t he CRHR or in a local register of historical resources.

However, as described in Section 3.16.4, impacts to unknown subsurface archaeological resources may occur on the project site. Therefore, the proposed project has the potential to disturb unidentified archeological resources during project grading. Mitigation is required to reduce potential impacts to unknown subsurface resources. 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, 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 through MM-CR-3 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 Mitigation measures MM-CR-1 through MM-CR--3 and MM- CR-4 provides additional protections for significant resources and describes the process for proper treatment and handling to ensure impacts are minimized. Implementation of this mitigation would reduce potential project-level impacts to tribal cultural resources to below a level of significance.

3.16 Tribal Cultural Resources
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.16-16

THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.

Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.17-1

3.17 Utilities and Service Systems
Introduction
This section identifies the existing service providers for utilities and service systems, including water, wastewater, stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, and telecommunications facilities and analyzes the ability of these providers to serve the proposed project based upon current utility infrastructure. A detailed energy consumption analysis is included in Section 3.5, Energy, of this EIR.

The analysis in this section relies on the following documents, which are included as Appendices Q.1 and Q.2 of the EIR20:
• Capalina Apartments Water and Sewer Study , Final Technical Memorandum, prepared by Vallecitos Water District, November 7. October 23, 2023. • Water and Wastewater Capital Facility Fees for Capalina Apartments (APN 219-115-33). Letter to City of San Marcos, dated October 31, 2022.

The Draft Water and Sewer Study, prepared by the Vallecitos Water District (VWD) considered water demand and sewage generation increases due to the proposed General Plan Amendment and development from the proposed project. The Draft Water and Sewer Study also analyzed the ability of VWD’s infrastructure to serve the proposed project and made recommendations for the capital improvements for demand generated by the proposed project.

Table 3.17-1 summarizes the utilities and service system analysis, by threshold.

Table 3.17-1. Utilities and Service Systems Summary of Impacts Threshold of Significance Project-Level
Impact
Cumulative-Level
Impact
Impact After
Mitigation
#1 - Require or result in the relocation
of reconstruction of new or expanded
water, wastewater treatment or
stormwater drainage, electric power,
natural gas, or telecommunications
facilities, the construction or relocation
of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant Without
Mitigation
#2 - Have sufficient water supplies
available to serve the project and
reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry, and
multiple dry years?
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant Without
Mitigation
#3 - Result in a determination by the
wastewater treatment provider which
serves or may serve the project that it
has adequate capacity to serve the
project’s projected demand in addition
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant Without
Mitigation

20 Full references for documents cited in this section are included in Chapter 7, References, of this EIR.

3.17 Utilities and Service Systems
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.17-2
Threshold of Significance Project-Level
Impact
Cumulative-Level
Impact
Impact After
Mitigation
to the provider’s existing
commitments?
#4 – Generate solid waste in excess of
State or local standards, or in excess of
the capacity of local infrastructure, or
otherwise impair the attainment of solid
waste reduction goals?
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant Without
Mitigation
#5 – Comply with federal, state, and
local management and reduction
statues and regulations related to solid
waste?
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant
Less than
Significant Without
Mitigation

3.17.1 Existing Conditions
The following provides background information about the water, wastewater, solid waste, and other utility service providers that will serve the proposed project.

Water Service Area
The project lies within VWD for both water and wastewater services. VWD provides water, wastewater, and reclamation services to a population of more than 108,000 within its 45-square -mile boundary including: San Marcos, the community of Lake San Marcos, parts of Carlsbad, Escondido and Vista and other unincorporated areas in north San Diego County. VWD also wholesales recycled water to the City of Carlsbad and the Olivenhain Municipal Water District.

The project site lies completely within VWD’s 855 Pressure Zone. The project site is currently undeveloped. Potable water is delivered to the project area by an existing 8-inch water main in Capalina Road.

Water Supply
VWD is a member of the San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA), thus eligible to purchase water transported into San Diego County via the massive aqueducts of SDCWA and its wholesaler, Metropolitan Water District (MWD) of Southern California. To understand water supply availability for the proposed project, it is important to begin with MWD and follow the water supply through these agencies.

MWD was formed in 1928 to develop, store and distribute supplemental water to southern California for domestic and municipal purposes. MWD consists of 26-member agencies and has a service area covering six counties, 5,200 square miles, and 19 million peopl e. MWD obtains water from local sources as well as the Colorado River (via the Colorado River Aqueduct) and the Sacramento -San Joaquin Delta (via the State Water Project). MWD’s Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP) documents the availability of these supplies to meet future demands. With a projected annual water demand of 5,374,000 acre-feet per year for 20 45, the MWD UWMP concludes that, with implementation of required conservation measures, MWD has supply capabilities sufficient to meet expected demands through 2045 under normal, single dry, and multiple dry water years (MWD 2021).

3.17 Utilities and Service Systems
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.17-3
The MWD water demands through normal, single dry year, and multiple dry years are shown below in Table 3.17-2.

Table 3.17-2. Metropolitan Water District Total Water Demands in Acre Feet Per Year Year 2025 2030 2035 2040 2045
Average Year 4,925,000 5,032,000 5,156,000 5,261,000 5,374,000 Single Dry Year 4,929,000 5,037,000 5,156,000 5,265,000 5,374,000 Multiple Dry Years 4,877,000 5,064,000 5,182,000 5,299,000 5,410,000 Source: MWD 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (MWD 2021).

SDCWA is the largest member agency of MWD and supplies 75 to 95 percent of the water needs in San Diego County. The population within the SDCWA’s service area was approximately 3.3 million people in 2020 and is projected to increase to roughly 3.8 million people by 2045. The County of San Diego is expected to develop an additional 130,000 acres between 2020 and 2050, with the majority (125,000 acres) of development dedicated to residential land uses. These regional growth projections are based on the San Diego Assoc iation of Governments Series 14 Regional Growth Forecast, developed for its 2019 Federal Regional Transportation Plan adopted by San Diego Association of Governments’ Board of Directors on October 25, 2019. In fiscal year 2020, total water demand in the SDCWA’s service area was 463,128 acre-feet, of which 92% was for municipal and industrial use and 8% was for agricultural water use. By 2045, the SDCWA’s annual water demands are projected to reach 630,771 acre- feet. This projection accounts for planned futu re water conservation savings (SDCWA 2021).

SDCWA is historically the largest purchaser of MWD water; however, as SDCWA and its member agencies have increased their locally controlled water resources and investments in water use efficiency, SDCWA purchases have declined. In fiscal year 2020, SDCWA purchased 62,852 acre-feet, or about 6% of all the water MWD sold. SDCWA’s UWMP assessed water reliability from 2025 through 2045 and determined that there are sufficient supplies to meet projected demands under Single Dry- Year and Multiple Dry-Year conditions (SDCWA 2021).

According to the VWD Master Plan Report, VWD imports about 75% of its water supply from SDCWA.

The rest of VWD’s water supply is provided by the recently completed Carlsbad seawater desalination plant as well as up to 2,200 acre -feet per year of supply from the Olivenhain MWD. Currently, VWD delivers water through 356 miles of pipeline and operates 10 pump stations and 19 potable water storage reservoirs ranging in size from 350,000 gallons to 40 million gallons (MG). VWD’s total operational storage capacity is 121.6 MG. During Fiscal Year 2013- 2014, VWD provided an average of 14.8 million gallons per day (MGD) to approximately 21,900 meters serving residential, commercial, light industrial, institutional, construction, landscape irrigation and agricultural uses (VWD 2018).

Wastewater Service Area
VWD provides wastewater and reclamation services to a 23 -square mile area serving approximately 93,000 people as well as commercial, light industrial, institutional, construction, landscape irrigation, and agricultural customers. Their service area includes the City of San Marcos, parts of the cities of Carlsbad, Escondido, and Vista, and unincorporated areas within the County of San Diego. In addition, VWD wholesales recycled water to the City of Carlsbad and the Olivenhain MWD. Within its service area, there are some rural areas that still use septic systems for sewage disposal, thus VWD’s current 23-square mile sewer service area is much smaller in size than its water service area, although VWD’s

3.17 Utilities and Service Systems
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.17-4
sphere of influence is equal in size for both. VWD has over 20,000 sewer service connections with 4 lift stations and approximately 250 miles of pipeline (VWD 2018).

VWD would provide the proposed project’s wastewater service. The project site is completely within VWD sewer shed 21C (VWD 2023). The project site is currently undeveloped. Sewer service is provided to the project area by an existing 8-inch sewer mainline in Capalina Road.

Wastewater Flows
The VWD 2018 Master Plan includes a wastewater system analysis assessing existing and projected wastewater flows, existing and projected capacity and needed capital improvements.

Table 3.17-3 presents the existing and projected future average wastewater flows for VWD’s service area at 5-year increments from the base year of 2014 to 2035 and ultimate buildout conditions. These interim flow projections were estimated based upon SANDAG’s growth fo recasts for the region that were available at the time of the Master Plan’s preparation (VWD 2018). As shown in Table 3.17-3, VWD’s 2014 average daily wastewater flow was 7.5 MGD. The average annual flow projection for the ultimate condition is 14.4 MGD. This total represents the maximum potential flow based on allowable land uses and existing flows. While the ultimate flow is potentially higher, continued conservation and water use efficiency would delay reaching ultimate conditions (VWD 2018).

Wastewater Infrastructure and Capacity
VWD’s sewer service area is divided between two principal drainage basins which are named based on the treatment facility which serves it. The treatment facilities used by VWD are the Meadowlark Water Reclamation Facility (MRF) and the Encina Water Pollution Control Facility (EWPCF). The existing wastewater collection system includes treatment facilities, major conveyance facilities, gravity mains, trunk sewers, lift stations, siphons, and force mains. VWD is able to recycle up to 74% of the wastewater generated in the service area.

Solids Treatment Capacity
The EWPCF is a regional treatment facility located in the City of Carlsbad with a treatment capacity of up to 40.51 MGD. VWD currently owns 10.47 MGD of solids treatment capacity at EWPCF. MRF does not have solids treatment capacity and therefore all solids are treated at the EWPCF. As shown in Table

3.17-3, VWD’s 2014 average daily wastewater flow was 7.5 MGD. The ultimate average wastewater flow identified in the 2018 VWD Master Plan is 14.4 MGD, resulting in a projected solids treatment capacity deficiency of 3.93 MGD (VWD 2023).

Table 3.17-3. Projected Wastewater Flows within VWD Service Area Year Average Annual Flows
(MGD)
Peak Dry Weather Flows
(MGD) (1)
Peak Wet Weather
Flows (MGD) (1)
Existing 2014 7.5 11.7 17.5
2020 8.7 13.2 20.0
2025 9.5 14.2 21.6
2030 9.6 14.4 21.9
2035 9.6 14.4 22.0

3.17 Utilities and Service Systems
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.17-5
Year Average Annual Flows
(MGD)
Peak Dry Weather Flows
(MGD) (1)
Peak Wet Weather
Flows (MGD) (1)
Ultimate 14.4 20.2 31.7
Ultimate w/ NTA (2) 15.2 21.2 33.4
Source: VWD 2018 Master Plan, page 7-19.

Notes: (1) Peak flows were estimated by applying District Peaking Curves as presented in Chapter 6 of the 2018 Master Plan.
(2) NTA is the Northern Tributary Area, a separate drainage basin located in the northern part of VWD’s service area that drains away from the wastewater collection system. NTA flows were estimated and would need further evaluation if this area is to be connected into VWD/s sewer system.

Liquids Treatment Facility
VWD currently has a total of 12.67 MGD liquids treatment capacity between EWPCF and MRF. VWD owns 7.67 MGD of liquids treatment capacity at the EWPCF. MRF has a liquid treatment capacity of

5.0 MGD, with a peak wet weather capacity of 8.0 MGD. The ultimate average wastewater flow identified in the 2018 Master Plan is 14.4 MGD, resulting in a projected liquids trea tment capacity deficiency of 1.73 MGD (VWD 2023.)
Ocean Disposal Capacity
EWPCF’s ocean outfall consists of approximately 1,000 feet on land and extends approximately 7,900 feet into the Pacific Ocean. The EWPCF employs peak flow management procedures and has constructed facilities to manage peak flows, including storage tanks and pump stations. Per the 2018 Master Plan, the plant has provisions to incrementally increase capacity by adding two more 8 MG basins in the future, for a maximum storage capacity of 24 MG. The member agencies’ ability to manage inflow and infiltration into the sewer system is a major factor in deferring additional peak flow facilities or future outfall upgrades at the EWPCF (VWD 2018).

VWD currently owns 10.47 MGD of ocean disposal capacity at the EWPCF. The ultimate average wastewater flow identified in the 2018 Master Plan is 14.4 MGD, resulting in a projected liquids treatment capacity deficiency of 3.93 MGD (VWD 2023).

Land Outfall Capacity
A majority of VWD’s wastewater is conveyed to the EWPCF using VWD’s maintained Land Outfall. The Land Outfall is approximately 8 miles long and conveys flow by gravity as well as pressure through siphon sections. VWD maintains the entire pipeline from Lift Station No. 1 to the EWPCF. From Lift Station No. 1 to El Camino Real, VWD is the sole user of this pipeline. Total capacity of the land outfall is 20.85 and the land outfall capacity controlled by VWD is 12.10 MGD (VWD 2023).

As stated above, the MRF has a capacity of 5.0 MGD with a peak wet weather capacity of 8.0 MGD.

Combined with the 12.10 MGD capacity of the land outfall controlled by VWD, VWD has a combined peak wet weather wastewater collection capacity of 20.10 MGD (12. 10 MGD + 8.0 MGD). According to the VWD’s 2018 Master Plan, average daily wastewater flow through the land outfall was approximately 7.5 MGD in 2014. This corresponds to a peak wet weather flow of 17.5 MGD, which falls within VWD’s combined peak wet weathe r collection capacity. However, the 2018 Master Plan estimated that, under approved land uses, VWD has an ultimate build-out average flow of 14.4 MGD.

This corresponds to a peak wet weather flow of 31.7 MGD, which exceeds VWD’s combined peak wet weather collection capacity. To accommodate additional wastewater flows from planned development,

3.17 Utilities and Service Systems
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.17-6
the 2018 Master Plan recommended conveyance of peak flows to the EWPCF through a parallel land outfall (VWD 2023).

VWD Planned System-wide Wastewater Facility Improvements VWD’s 2018 Master Plan analyzed the existing wastewater system to determine size of pipeline replacements and extensions utilizing a hydraulic model developed by collecting the system’s physical data, estimating existing wastewater flows, and calibrating t he model using actual meter data. The 2018 Master Plan does not include developments that were not approved prior to June 30, 2014. As development projects are proposed, the project proponents will be required to prepare a study that will, at a minimum, de fine the location and size of the sewer facilities required to serve the development, including the necessary regional collection, transfer, and treatment infrastructure (VWD 2018).

VWD’s 2018 Master Plan has identified sewer pipe segments CA-4 through CA-14 for upsizing from 8- inch to 10-inch to 12-inch and 15-inch as Capital Improvement Project (CIP) #SP-23, a phase 5 project.

Phase 5 projects are planned for construction after the year 2036 and are completely funded by development without contribution from VWD’s capacity fund (VWD 2023).

Based upon the Draft Water and Sewer Study, the following sewer infrastructure improvements may be required to be implemented by the project applicant to address those deficiencies unless subsequent modeling indicates they are not required:
• CIP SP-23: Pacific Street & Descanso Avenue Pipeline Replacement o Approximately 1,860 feet of existing 8-inch and 10 -inch sewer main within Pacific Street and Descanso Avenue must be replaced with 12-inch main (CA-4 through CA-8). o Approximately 1,094 feet of existing 8 -inch and 10 -inch sewer main within Descanso Avenue and Las Posas Road must be replaced with 15-inch main (CA-9 through CA-14).

Solid Waste
Solid waste disposal in the City is provided by a private franchise hauler, EDCO Waste and Recycling (EDCO), a private waste collection and recycling company which handles all residential, commercial, and industrial collections within the city. Waste collected by EDCO is hauled to the Escondido Transfer Station where it is then transported to the Sycamore Sanitary Landfill in Santee. Recyclable materials are processed at the Escondido Resource Recovery Transfer Station. The project site would be serviced by EDCO. The Escondido Transfer Station has a permitted daily tonnage of 3,223 tons per day (CalRecycle 2019a). Solid waste is consolidated here and then trucked to a landfill for disposal.

The County of San Diego prepared a Five -Year Review Report of its Integrated Waste Management Plan (June 2022) to plan for the next 15 years of countywide landfill disposal capacity and to determine the adequacy of the region’s planning documents based on updated demographic trends and regulations. The report used an average of the past 15 years in-county disposal data (2005-2020) to project disposal for the next 15 years (2022-2037). Though in-county disposal may both increase and decrease over the next 15 years, a conservative projection is that disposal will remain near the average. The 15-year disposal average is 3,206,009 in-county tons annually (County of San Diego 2022).

The report included a second disposal projection scenario, which anticipates organic materials being diverted from the landfills at a greater rate to align with the statewide organics legislation and goals

3.17 Utilities and Service Systems
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.17-7
(AB 32, AB 1826, AB 1594, and SB 1383). When the 75% organics diversion rate was applied to the County’s baseline disposal, organics waste disposal projections were reduced to 288,541 tons for the year 2025. These reductions were deducted from the overall disposal projection to provide a disposal scenario if organics regulations result in increased diversion. Considering the additional organics diversion scenario, the projected disposal by 2037 would be 2,282,678 tons annually, nearly a million tons (923,330 tons) less than the average disposal projection of 3,206,009 tons (County of San Diego 2022).

The second component of determining disposal capacity is the permitted daily capacities allowed by the Local Enforcement Agencies including any projected maximum disposal limits. The maximum annual allowable permitted capacity for all San Diego County land fills was 6,967,600 tons in 2021 and will be 4,134,600 tons in 2032. Landfill operators project that Otay Landfill will close in 2030 and Miramar Landfill will close in 2031. Sycamore Landfill is anticipated to receive additional waste flows at that time. The County’s report projections assumed that Sycamore Landfill will apply for three expansions to their daily permitted capacity. Sycamore Landfill has completed CEQA for these landfill expansions; however, there has been no application to the Local Enforc ement Agency to revise the Solid Waste Facility Permit. For the purposes of projection, the County assumed that the first expansion at Sycamore Landfill is estimated to occur in 2025 and daily permitted capacity is projected to increase permitted capacity from its current 5,000 tons per day to 7,000 tons per day. The second expansion is estimated to occur in 2027 and permitted capacity is projected to increase to 9,000 tons per day followed by a third expansion estimated to occur in 2030 to increase permitt ed capacity to 11,000 tons per day. The County’s report indicated that there would be adequate landfill capacity to serve the County for the next 15 years. Specifically at Sycamore Landfill, the report estimated that there was 105,064,991 cubic yards (or 8 6,153,293 tons) remaining based on aerial survey/calculations occurring in February 2021. Estimated closure date is listed as 2042, though the permit is anticipated to be revised and extended to 2054 (County of San Diego 2022).

Electricity and Natural Gas
SDG&E provides energy service to an estimated 3.3 million consumers through 1.3 million electric meters and approximately 800,000 natural gas meters in San Diego County and southern Orange County (City of San Marcos 2012a). Electrical facilities throughout the city include a combination of aboveground and belowground electrical distribution lines and utilities structures. The city’s fiber-optic network is facilitated by a 72-strand fiber-optic line that runs in various streets throughout the city. All major arterials in the city have implemented fiber optics. The design for the dry utilities’ connection is still under preparation, however the project proposes to connect to existing electricity and natural gas infrastructure within Capalina Road or W. Mission Road. This work would take place within existing right-or-way and would not disturb any vegetation. The project would also relocate an SDG&E transformer located on Capalina Road.

Telecommunications
Telecommunications services to the project site may be provided by various distributors. Existing AT&T, Cox and other independent cable companies telecommunication lines are available in the project vicinity.

3.17.2 Regulatory Setting
Existing federal, state, and local regulations related to water, wastewater, and solid waste that are applicable to the proposed project are summarized below.

3.17 Utilities and Service Systems
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.17-8
Federal
Clean Water Act
The federal Clean Water Act (CWA) establishes regulatory requirements for potable water supplies including raw and treated water quality criteria. The City of San Marcos is required to monitor water quality and conform to regulatory requirements of the CWA.

Resource Recovery and Conservation Act
The Resource Recovery and Conservation Act Subtitle D focuses on state and local governments as the primary planning, regulating, and implementing entities for the management of non- hazardous solid waste, such as household solid waste and nonhazardous indu strial solid waste. Subtitle D provides regulations for the generation, transportation, and treatment, storage, or disposal of hazardous wastes.

State
California Green Building Standards Code (CCR, Title 24, Part 11 – CALGreen) In 2008, the California Building Standards Commission adopted the nation’s first green building standards. The California Green Building Standards Code (Part 11 of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations) is commonly referred to as CALGreen and esta blishes minimum mandatory standards and voluntary standards pertaining to the planning and design of sustainable site development, energy efficiency (in excess of the California Energy Code requirements), water conservation, material conservation, and inte rior air quality. The CALGreen standards took effect in January 2011 and instituted mandatory minimum environmental performance standards for all ground -up, new construction of commercial, low-rise residential and state-owned buildings and schools and hospitals.

The CALGreen 2022 building standards code became effective on January 1, 2023. The mandatory standards require the following measures that relate to utilities and service systems (24 CCR Part 11):
• Mandatory reduction in indoor water usage through compliance with specified flow rates for plumbing fixtures and fittings and faucets and fountains. • Mandatory reduction in outdoor water usage through compliance with a local water efficient landscaping ordinance or the California Department of Water Resources’ Model Water Efficient Landscape Ordinance.
• 65% of construction and demolition waste must be diverted from landfills. • Mandatory inspections of energy systems to ensure optimal working efficiency. • Inclusion of electric vehicle charging stations or designated spaces capable of supporting future charging stations.

The CALGreen standards also include voluntary efficiency measures that are provided at two separate tiers and implemented at the discretion of local agencies and applicants. CALGreen’s Tier 1 standards call for a 15% improvement in energy requirements, str icter water conservation, 65% diversion of construction and demolition waste, 10% recycled content in building materials, 20% permeable paving, 20% cement reduction, and cool/solar -reflective roofs. CALGreen’s more rigorous Tier 2 standards call for a 30% improvement in energy requirements, stricter water conservation, 75% diversion of construction and demolition waste, 15% recycled content in building materials, 30% permeable paving, 25% cement reduction, and cool/solar-reflective roofs.

3.17 Utilities and Service Systems
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.17-9
Urban Water Management Plans
Urban water purveyors are required to prepare and update a UWMP every 5 years. The UWMPs address water supply, treatment, reclamation, and water conservation, and contain a water shortage contingency plan. Local UWMPs and those of other water districts are supplemental to the regional plans prepared by MWD. The Water Conservation Bill of 2009 (SBX7 -7) requires each urban retail water supplier to develop an urban water use target and an interim urban water use target. Notably, SBX7-7 authorizes urban retail water suppliers to determine and report progress toward achieving these targets on an individual agency basis or pursuant to a regional alliance as provided in California Water Code (CWC) Section 10608.28(a). In accordance with this regulation, the MWD pre pared and their Board of Directors adopted its 2020 UWMP in 2021. MWD’s UWMP includes estimated future water demands until 2045, using updated population projections and a conservative assumption that, in the absence of mandatory water conservation measures, per-capita consumption could rebound to its 2020 target value (MWD 2021). Demands provided in MWD’s UWMP have been coordinated with SDWCA, VWD’s wholesale supplier.

Assembly Bill 939 and 341
In 1989, Assembly Bill (AB) 939, known as the Integrated Waste Management Act (California Public Resources Code, Section 40000 et seq.), was passed because of the increase in waste stream and the decrease in landfill capacity. The statute established the California Integrated Waste Management Board, which oversees a disposal reporting system. AB 939 mandated a reduction of waste being disposed where jurisdictions were required to meet diversion goals of all solid waste through source reduction, recycling, and composting activities of 25% by 1995 and 50% by the year 2000.

AB 341 (2011) amended the California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 to include a provision declaring that it is the policy goal of the state that not less than 75% of solid waste generated be source-reduced, recycled, or composted by the year 2020, and annually thereafter. In addition, AB 341 required the California Department of Resources Recycling and Recovery (CalRecycle) to develop strategies to achieve the state’s policy goal. CalRecycle has conducted multiple workshops and published documents that identify priority strategies that CalRecycle believes would assist the state in reaching the 75% goal by 2020.

Senate Bill 1374
Signed in 2002, the Construction and Demolition Waste Materials Diversion Requirements (SB 1374) were codified in Public Resources Code Section 42919. SB 1374 requires that jurisdictions include in their annual AB 939 report a summary of the progress made in diverting construction and demolition waste. The legislation also required that CalRecycle adopt a model ordinance for diverting 50 to 75 percent of all construction and demolition waste from landfills. The model ordinance was adopted by CalRecycle on March 16, 2004.

Assembly Bill 1826
AB 1826 requires jurisdictions to implement an organic waste recycling program for businesses, including outreach, education, and monitoring of affected businesses. Additionally, each jurisdiction is to identify a multitude of information, including barrie rs to siting organic waste recycling facilities, as well as closed or abandoned sites that might be available for new organic waste recycling facilities.

AB 1826 defines “organic waste” as food waste, green waste, landscape and pruning waste, nonhazardous wood waste, and food -soiled paper waste that is mixed in with food waste. It also defines a “business” as a commercial or public entity, including, but not limited to, a firm, partnership,

3.17 Utilities and Service Systems
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.17-10
proprietorship, joint stock company, corporation, or association that is organized as a for -profit or nonprofit entity, or a multi-family residential dwelling consisting of five or more units. As of January 1, 2017, businesses that generate 4 cubic yards o r more of organic waste per week are subject to this requirement. Commencing January 1, 2019, businesses that generate 4 cubic yards or more of commercial solid waste per week also are required to arrange for organic waste recycling services. In September 2020, CalRecycle reduced this threshold to 2 cubic yards of solid waste (i.e., total of trash, recycling, and organics) per week generated by covered businesses (CalRecycle 2023).

Senate Bill 1383
SB 1383 establishes statewide organic waste diversion rate goal of 75 percent by 2025. Beginning in 2022, SB 1383 required every jurisdiction to provide organic waste collection services to all residents and businesses, including food, green material, landscaping waste, organic textiles, lumber, paper products, manure, biosolids, digestate, and sludges. Jurisdictions are also required to educate residents and businesses about the collection requirements.

Local
San Diego County Integrated Waste Management Plan
Pursuant to the Integrated Waste Management Plan, the Countywide Integrated Waste Management Plan for San Diego County describes the goals, policies, and objectives of the county for coordinating efforts to divert, market, and dispose of solid waste during the planning period through the year 2017 (County of San Diego 2005). A Five -Year Review Report was prepared in June 2022 to plan for 15 years of countywide landfill disposal capacity and to determine the adequacy of the region’s planning documents based on updated demographic trends and regulations. The report identified reduced landfill disposal rates compared to the high in 2005. The plan presumes waste disposal tonnages will not reach the 2005 level again due to increased State and local recycling programs. Another reason for reduced landfill dispo sal rates is increased conservation and recycling activities, expansion of compost and construction and demolition facilities, and implementation of mandatory recycling ordinances by jurisdictions. Average disposal quantities and landfill capacities are discussed above in Section 3.17.1 (County of San Diego 2022).

Countywide policies for reducing waste and implementing the programs identified in the individual jurisdiction Source Reduction and Recycling Elements and Household Hazardous Waste Elements , which are intended to reduce costs, streamline administration of programs, and encourage a coordinated and planned approach to integrated waste management.

To avoid duplication of effort, all jurisdictions in the county participate in the San Diego County Integrated Waste Management Local Task Force. The Local Task Force coordinates mandated planning, oversees implementation of new or countywide integrated wa ste management programs, and carries out an active legislative program. Regulatory reform, changes to state diversion requirements, and reduction of the costs of compliance are considered by the Local Task Force, as well as other solid waste issues of regional or countywide concern.

City of San Marcos Municipal Code
Title 8, Health and Sanitation
San Marcos Municipal Code Title 8 contains regulations and provisions on sewers and sewage disposal plants, sewer connections, septic tanks, waste matter, garbage and refuse collection, and other

3.17 Utilities and Service Systems
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.17-11
matters concerning sanitation. Chapter 14.15 contains regulations concerning storm water management and discharge control. Chapter 14.24 contains regulations concerning underground utility facilities. Title 19 regulates subdivision requirements, including the installation of utility facilities and connections and payment or fees for such installations.

Title 20, Chapter 20.330 Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance (WELO) The provisions of Title 20 of the San Marcos Municipal Code are referred to as the Zoning Ordinance.

Title 20, Section 20.330, details the City’s Water Efficient Landscape (WELO). In accordance with State law, Chapter 20.330 establishes specific standards for landscape and irrigation design and installation to ensure beneficial, efficient, and responsible use of water resources within the city.

City of San Marcos General Plan
The General Plan Conservation and Open Space Element includes two goals and one policy that are applicable to the proposed project (related to water supply and solid waste):
• Goal COS -5: Reduce water consumption and ensure reliable water supply through water efficiency, conservation, capture, and reuse.
• Goal COS -10: Establish and maintain an innovative, sustainable solid waste collection, recycling, and disposal delivery system for present and future generations. o Policy COS-10.1: Promote the curbside recycling program to divert residential refuse from the landfills.

The General Plan Land Use and Community Design Element identifies the following goals and policies regarding utilities and services systems that are applicable to the proposed project:
• Goal LU -8: Ensure that existing and future development is adequately serviced by infrastructure and public services.
o Policy LU-8.1: New development shall pay its fair share of required improvements to public facilities and services.
o Policy LU -8.2: Promote development timing that is guided by the adequacy of existing and/or expandable infrastructure, services, and facilities. • Goal LU-13: Water Service and Supply: Manage and conserve domestic water resources by reducing water usage and waste on a per capita basis, to ensure an adequate water supply for existing and future residents.
o Policy LU-13.1: Work closely with local and regional water providers to ensure high quality water supplies are available for the community.
o Policy LU-13.2: Actively promote water conservation programs aimed at reducing demand. o Policy LU -13.3: Encourage exploration and use of deep underground wells to reduce reliance on treatable water.
• Goal LU -14: Wastewater: Ensure an adequate wastewater system for existing and future development.

3.17 Utilities and Service Systems
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.17-12
o Policy LU-14.1: Work closely with local service providers to ensure an adequate wastewater system for existing and future development is in place. o Policy LU -14.2: Ensure development approval is directly tied to commitments for the construction or improvement of primary water, wastewater, and circulation systems. • Goal LU-16: Solid waste: reduce the amount of waste material entering regional landfills with an efficient and innovative waste management program.
o Policy LU-16.1: Work closely with local service providers to ensure adequate solid waste disposal, collection, and recycling services.
o Policy LU-16.2: Increase recycling, composting, source reduction, and education efforts throughout the city to reduce the amount of solid waste requiring disposal at landfills. • Goal LU-17: Utilities and Communications: Encourage provision of power and communication systems that provide reliable, effective, and efficient service for San Marcos. o Policy LU-17.2: Require all new development and redevelopment to provide the technology to support multiple telecommunications facilities and providers such as multi -media products, wireless technologies, and satellite communications. o Policy LU-17.3: The City shall prohibit above ground utility equipment within any of the pedestrian pathway and street frontage areas. All above ground utilities shall be placed either within; “wet closets” within the buildings, underground vaults, or behi nd buildings where they are not visible. The developer shall be responsible to contact the applicable utility agencies in advance to coordinate utilities prior to approval of the final street improvement plans for both public and private street frontages a nd prior to submittal of building permits.
o Policy LU-17.4: Require utility location to be shown on all site development plans at the time of development/ project application.

3.17.3 Thresholds of Significance
The determination of significance for utilities and service systems is based on Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. Utilities and services system impacts would be significant if the proposed project meets any of the following thresholds.
• Threshold #1: Require or result in the relocation of reconstruction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause si gnificant environmental effects?
• Threshold #2 - Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years? • Threshold #3 - Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?

3.17 Utilities and Service Systems
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.17-13
• Threshold #4 – Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals?
• Threshold #5 – Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statues and regulations related to solid waste?

3.17.4 Project Impact Analysis
The project proposes to connect to the existing 8-inch water main and 8-inch sewer main in Capalina Road. The project would also construct an 8-inch water main (530 linear feet) through the project site to create a looped water main connecting Capalina Road and W. Mission Road to meet fire flow requirements. The project would dedicate an easement to VWD through the project’s drive aisle.

Two scenarios are considered for the off -site sewer improvements needed to serve the project, Scenario 1 and Scenario 2. The following offsite improvements would be required, depending on the scenario that is implemented, and would be required to be in place prior to project occupancy. These improvements would occur within already paved roadways.

Scenario 1
• Upsize approximately 1,860 feet of existing 8-inch and 10 -inch sewer main within Pacific Street and Descanso Avenue with a 12-inch main (CA-4 through CA-8); and • Upsize approximately 1,094 feet of existing 10-inch sewer main within Descanco Avenue and Las Posas Road with a 15-inch main (CA-9 through CA-14).

Scenario 2 relies on pending VWD -Board approved improvements associated with the South Pacific Industrial project which would construct of a sewer main extension in Pacific Street between Seminole Street and Grand Avenue (pipes ALT-2 and ALT-3).

Under Scenario 2, the proposed project would
• Construct a pipe (ALT-1) to connect the existing sewer main in Seminole Street to the new main in South Pacific Street (ALT-2 and ALT-3); and
• Sever the connection to the existing sewer main in the northern portion of Pacific Street.

Given the current deficiencies in sewer segments CA-4 through CA-14, the proposed project may also need to implement the following improvements under Scenario 2 :, unless VWD determines they are no longer needed based upon future modeling and coordination with the project applicant. • Upsize approximately 1,860 feet of existing 8-inch and 10 -inch sewer main within Pacific Street and Descanso Avenue with a 12-inch main (CA-4 through CA-8); and • Upsize approximately 1,094 feet of existing 10-inch sewer main within Descanco Avenue and Las Posas Road with a 15-inch main (CA-9 through CA-14).

3.17 Utilities and Service Systems
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.17-14
The results of the Water and Sewer Study Final Technical Memorandum are not the accepted conditions for the development and final conditions would be part of the construction agreement process or issued separately by VWD (pg. 23, VWD 2023).

The EIR assumes these improvements may still be required under Scenario 2 to provide the most conservative analysis
Additionally, the project applicant shall pay the applicable Water and Wastewater Capital Facility Fees in affect at the time service is committed in accordance with VWD rules and regulations. Proof of payment shall be provided to the City’s Planning Manager.

The design for the dry utility connection is still under preparation, however the project proposes to connect to existing infrastructure within Capalina Road or W. Mission Road. This work would take place within existing right-or-way and would not disturb any vegetation. The project would also relocate an SDG&E transformer located on Capalina Road.

Threshold #1: Require or result in the relocation of reconstruction of new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or stormwater drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunications facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects? Water
The project site lies within VWD’s water service area and would be served by VWD for potable water and water for fire protection. VWD has confirmed their ability to serve the project and has prepared a Technical Memorandum which includes a Water System Analysis. The memorandum analyzes water demand, water distribution, water storage capacity and water pump station capacity (VWD 2023, Appendix Q.1).

Water Demand
The City of San Marcos’ approved land use designation for the project site is MU-3, Mixed (Commercial & Office – no residential). VWD’s 2018 Master Plan based its ultimate water demand planning on this land use. The project is proposing 119 multi -family residential units with 4,000 square feet (s.f.) of commercial use. Table 3.17-4 provides the average water demand generated both under the density planned for the VWD 2018 Master Plan and for the proposed project. As shown, the proposed project would increase the projected average water demand from the 2018 Master Plan land use by 18,885 gallons per day (GPD) (VWD 2023).

Table 3.17-4 Estimated Water Demands for Proposed Project Land Use Type Area
(Acres) Residential Units Duty Factor (gpd/ac) Water Demand (gpd) 2018 Master Plan Land Use Demand
Commercial/Office 2.51 0 1,500 3,765
Total 2.51 3,765
Proposed Project Demand
Residential
(40-50 du/ac) 2.51 119 9,000 22,590

3.17 Utilities and Service Systems
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.17-15
Land Use Type Area
(Acres) Residential Units Duty Factor (gpd/ac) Water Demand (gpd) Commercial/Mixed
Use 0.04 1,500 60
Total 2.51 22,650
Water Demand
Increase 18,885
Source: VWD 2023.

Notes: GPD= Gallons per Day
MGD= Million Gallons per Day
MG= Million Gallons
Water Distribution System Analysis
VWD prepared a water distribution system analysis to identify potential system impacts that may be created by the proposed water demand, and to recommend any improvements required to provide service to the project. Modeling focused on the infrastructure in the direct vicinity of the project site.

Per the 2018 Master Plan, maximum day demands for the proposed project a re 300% those of average day demands, and peak hour demands are 620% those of average day demands (VWD 2023).

Pipeline design criteria states that to avoid excessive velocity and headloss within the distribution system, the maximum allowable velocity is 7 feet per second. The model found that the project would not create any distribution system deficiencies under an average day demand scenario but would create system deficiencies under maximum day plus fire flow demand conditions in the existing 8-inch water main in Capalina Road. As discussed above, the project design includes construction of an 8 - inch water main (530 linear feet ) through the project site to create a looped water main connecting Capalina Road and W. Mission Road to meet fire flow requirements. upsizing approximately 876 feet of the existing 8 -inch water main in Capalina Road (CA-1) with a 10 -inch main to meet fire flow requirements. As shown in Table 3.17-5, an upsized pipe diameter of ten inches would reduce the velocity to 6.72 feet per second. Improvements would occur within an existing paved road so no additional environmental impacts would occ ur. Less than significant impacts are identified for the water distribution system.

Table 3.17-5 Potable Water Pipeline Results under Maximum Day Demand plus Fire Flow Conditions Pipe ID
Number Length (ft) Existing Pipe
Diameter (in)
Velocity
under
Average Day
Demand
(ft/s) (1)
Velocity
under
Maximum
Day + Fire
Flow (ft/s) (1)
Upsized Pipe
Diameter (in)
Velocity
under
Maximum
Day + Fire
Flow w/
Upsized Pipe
(ft/s) (1)
C-1 876 8 0.08 10.50 10 6.72
Source: VWD 2023.

Notes: (1) Maximum allowable velocity: 7 feet per second.

FT= feet
IN= inches
FT/S= feet per second

3.17 Utilities and Service Systems
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.17-16
Water Storage Analysis
The 2018 Master Plan outlines VWD’s potable water storage reservoirs for each pressure zone. The project is located entirely within the VWD 855 pressure zone. Water storage for this zone is located within the 920 zone and 1028 Twin Oaks pressure zones. Table 3.17-6 shows the required storage in the 855, 920, and 1028 Twin Oaks pressure zones for existing and ultimate build -out conditions relative to the existing storage provided within each zone. As shown in Table 3.17-6, there is sufficient existing storage available to meet existing demand. The project would increase the projected average water demand by approximately 18,885 GPD. The amount of additional reservoir storage required is 500% of the project’s average day demand, which is 94,425 gallons GPD (18 ,885 gallons X 500%).

VWD’s analysis found that water storage capacity is currently available to serve the project’s increased storage requirements. The project would contribute to an existing deficiency identified for ultimate storage requirements. However, per VWD, Master Plan projects would address and accommodate the ultimate build-out storage deficiency and Water Capital Facility Fees paid by this project would be used for the increase in storage necessitated by the project’s demand (VWD 2023).

Less than significant
impacts are identified for water storage capacity.

Table 3.17-6 Existing Reservoir Storage Capacity and Requirements Pressure Zone
Existing
Average Day
Demand
(MGD)
Existing
Storage
Requirement
(MG)
Ultimate
Average Day
Demand
(MGD)
Ultimate
Storage
Requirement
(MG)
Existing
Storage
Available (MG)
855 3.74

50.05 6.79
101.25
0 920 5.61 10.40 18
1028 Twin Oaks 0.66 3.06 73
Totals 10.01 50.05 20.25 101.25 91
Source: VWD 2023.

Notes: MGD= Million Gallons per Day
MG= Million Gallons
Water Pump Station Analysis
Since the proposed project is located in a pressure zone that is not served by pumping, there would be no impacts to existing or proposed pump stations (VWD 2023).

Summary
While the project would increase water demand by 18,885 GPD above what the 2018 Water Master Plan identified, VWD’s analysis determined that with payment of the required Water Capital Facility Fees, the project would have less than significant impacts related to water distribution, water storage, or water pumping (VWD 2023). The project proposes to connect to the existing 8 -inch water main located in Capalina Road and would construct 530 feet of an 8 -inch water main through the project site to create a loop ed water main connecting Capalina Road and W. Mission Road to meet fire flow requirements. The project would dedicate an easement to VWD through the project’s drive aisle.. This improvement would occur within an existing paved road and would not result in any additional significant environmental impacts. Impacts to water services would be less than significant.

3.17 Utilities and Service Systems
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.17-17
Wastewater
The proposed project lies completely within VWD sewer shed 21C. The analysis of wastewater infrastructure is based upon the Draft Water and Sewer Study, prepared by VWD (VWD 2023). The Draft Water and Sewer Study is included in Appendix Q.1 of this EIR.

As described above, the proposed project would include development of 119 apartments and 4,000 s.f. of commercial use. The current General Plan designation for the project site is MU -3 Mixed Use which allows for commercial and retail uses. VWD’s 2018 Master Plan based its ultimate wastewater generation planning on this approved land use and assumed the project site would generate approximately 3,012 GPD of wastewater. The project is proposing a General Plan Amendment to change the site to MU-2 with proposed residential development (40-50 du/acre) and commercial use.

The Draft Water and Sewer Study estimated that the proposed project would generate approximately 20,379 GPD of wastewater. This is an increase in the projected average wastewater generation of 17,367 GPD (VWD 2023).

Wastewater Collection System Analysis Model Results
VWD modeled several wastewater scenarios to identify system impacts that may be created by the proposed sewer generation, and to recommend any improvements required to provide service to the project. Modeling focused not only on the sewer collection infras tructure in the direct vicinity of the project site, but also on all downstream infrastructure from the development to Lift Station No. 1 on San Marcos Boulevard that would be receiving project flows. Two scenarios were modeled.

Scenario 1
Scenario 1 modeled the proposed project connecting to the existing VWD sewer system. The modeling results showed that there are deficiencies in pipe segments CA -4 through CA-14, located in Pacific Street, Descanso Road and Las Posas Road, under the currently approved density under peak wet weather flows during the ultimate buildout condition. The wastewater flows from the proposed project would further increase those deficiencies.

Scenario 2
Scenario 2 would re -route existing sewer flows from Seminole Street south to Grand Avenue, rather than north to pipes CA-7 through CA-14, located in Descanco Avenue and Las Posas Road, which were determined to have deficient capacity in Scenario 1. The Sou th Pacific Industrial project has been approved by the VWD Board for construction of a sewer main extension in Pacific Street between Seminole Street and Grand Avenue (pipes ALT -2 and ALT-3). Under Scenario 2, the proposed project would construct a pipe (ALT-1) to connect the existing sewer main in Seminole Street to the new main in South Pacific Street (ALT -2 and ALT-3) and sever the connection to the existing sewer main in the northern portion of Pacific Street. The diverted flows, as well as the flows fr om the recently approved Cherokee multi -use project, the South Pacific Industrial project, and the WoodSpring Suites hotel project would be routed through the pipes ALT-1 through ALT-7 to join the flows in Las Posas Road at pipe CA-18. Under this scenario, there would still be deficiencies in segments CA -4 through CA-14 under the currently approved density under peak wet weather flows during ultimate build -out conditions and the wastewater flow from the proposed project would increase those deficiencies.

However, the deficiencies in the pipelines located in Descanso Avenue and Las Posas Road (CA -7 through CA-14) would be reduced and no new deficiencies would occur in Pacific Street, Grand Avenue or Las Posas Road. The project applicant would proceed with Scenario 2.

3.17 Utilities and Service Systems
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.17-18
The VWD 2018 Master Plan identified pipe segments CA-4 through CA-14 as CIP SP-23 (Pacific Street & Descanso Avenue Replacement Project). This Capital Improvement Project (CIP) will upsize the existing 8-inch and 10-inch pipes to 12 -inch and 15-inch pipes. This is a Phase 5 project in the CIP and is planned for construction after the year 2036. As discussed above, if required, the project includes upsizing approximately 1,860 feet of existing 8-inch and 10 -inch sewer main within Pacific Street and Descanso Avenue with a 12-inch main (CA -4 through CA- 8); and upsizing approximately 1,094 feet of existing 10- inch sewer main within Descanso Avenue and Las Posas Road with a 15 - inch main (CA -9 through CA-14) (VWD 2023). Improvements to these sewer lines would addr ess deficiencies and would occur within existing paved roads, so no additional environmental impacts would occur. Less than significant impacts are identified for the wastewater collection system.

Wastewater Lift Station Analysis
Since the project is not located in a sewer shed that is served by a lift station, no lift station upgrades would be required, and no impacts would occur (VWD 2023).

Parallel Land Outfall Analysis.

Per the Draft Water and Sewer Study, prepared for the project, VWD has a combined peak wet weather wastewater collection capacity of 20.85 MGD. VWD’s 2014 average daily wastewater flow through the land outfall was 7.5 MGD. This corresponds to a peak wet weather flow of 17.5 MGD, which falls within VWD’s combined peak wet weather collection capacity.

The 2018 Master Plan estimated that, under approved land uses, VWD has an ultimate build- out average dry weather flow of 14.4 MGD. This corresponds to a peak wet weather flow of 31.7 MGD, which exceeds VWD’s combined peak wet weather collection capacity. T o accommodate additional wastewater flows from planned development, the 2018 Water Plan recommended conveyance of peak flows to the EWPCF through a parallel land outfall (VWD 2023).

The project proposes to generate 17,367 GPD of additional average wastewater flow that was not accounted for in the Land Outfall’s capacity studied in the 2018 Master Plan. However, per the Draft Water and Sewer Study, prepared for the proposed project, VWD finds that outfall capacity is currently available to serve the project’s proposed wastewater generation. Wastewater Capital Facility Fees paid by the project would be used toward design and construction of a parallel land outfall to be sized to accommodate ultimate build -out wastewater flows (VWD 2023). Less than significant impacts are identified for the parallel land outfall.

Wastewater Treatment Facility Analysis
Because VWD utilizes both MRF and EWPCF for wastewater treatment, wastewater generated by the proposed project would be treated at either facility. MRF has liquids treatment capacity of up to 5 MGD with a peak wet weather capacity of 8 MGD. MRF does not ha ve solids treatment capacity, and therefore all solids are treated at the EWPCF. The EWPCF is a regional facility with treatment capacity of up to 40.51 MGD (VWD 2023).

Solids Treatment Capacity
VWD currently owns 10.47 MGD of solids treatment capacity at EWPCF. VWD’s 2014 average daily wastewater flow was 7.5 MGD. Therefore, VWD concluded that adequate solids treatment capacity exists at this time to serve the project. However, the ultimate average wastewater flow identified in the 2018 Master Plan is 14.4 MGD, resulting in a projected solids treatment capacity deficiency of 3.93

3.17 Utilities and Service Systems
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.17-19
MGD. Wastewater flows from the proposed project would contribute to that deficiency. Wastewater Capital Facility Fees paid by the project would be used towards the deficiency to accommodate the solid treatment capacity wastewater flows (VWD 2023). Therefore, less than significant impacts would occur.

Liquid Treatment Capacity
VWD currently owns 7.67 MGD of liquids treatment capacity at the EWPCF in addition to the liquids treatment capacity of 5.0 MGD at MRF, for a total of 12.67 MGD of liquids treatment capacity. VWD’s 2014 average daily wastewater flow was 7.5 MGD. Therefore, VWD concludes that adequate solids treatment capacity exists at this time to serve the project. However, the ultimate average wastewater flow identified in the 2018 Master Plan is 14.4 MGD, resulting in a projected liquids treatment capacity deficiency of 1.73 MGD. Wastewater flows from the proposed project would contribute to that deficiency. Wastewater Capital Facility Fees paid by the project would be used towards the deficiency to accommodate the ultimate average wastewater flow (VWD 2023). Therefore, less than significant impacts would occur.

Ocean Disposal Capacity
VWD currently owns 10.47 MGD of ocean disposal capacity at the EWPCF. VWD’s 2014 average daily wastewater flow was 7.5 MGD. Therefore, VWD concludes that adequate ocean disposal capacity exists at this time to serve the project. The ultimate average wastewater flow identified in the 2018 Master Plan is 14.4 MGD resulting in an ocean disposal deficiency of 3.93 MGD. Wastewater flows from the proposed project would contribute to that deficiency. Wastewater Capital Facility Fees paid by the project would be used towards the deficiency to accommodate the ocean disposal wastewater flow (VWD 2023). Therefore, less than significant impacts would occur.

Wastewater Summary
While the project would increase wastewater flows by 17,367 GPD above what the 2018 Water Master Plan identified, VWD has determined that adequate wastewater treatment and disposal capacity exists for the proposed project at this time. As discussed in the Draft Water and Sewer Study (Appendix Q.1), the project applicant would be required to pay all applicable Wastewater Capital Facility fees in effect at the time service is committed in accordance with District rules and regulations.

The project proposes to connect to the existing 8-inch sewer main located in Capalina Road and would construct an 8 -inch water main through the project site to create a looped water main connecting Capalina Road and W. Mission Road. Additionally, as part of the project design, the applicant would implement Scenario 2 for wastewater service, as detailed in the VWD Capalina Apartments Water and Sewer Study (2023). These improvements would occur within the project site or within existing paved roads and would not result in additional environmental impacts. Under these conditions, the project would not exceed current capacities of the wastewater treatment system and would not significantly impact existing wastewater treatment systems. Therefore, impacts to sewer services would be less
than significant.

Stormwater Drainage
As discussed in Section 3.9.4 , Hydrology and Water Quality, the proposed project would result in an increase of impervious areas on the site. If not carefully planned for, increased runoff from impervious surface can cause alterations to drainage courses. However, the proposed project has been designed to carefully handle runoff and to meet regulatory requirements to ensure that post-development runoff

3.17 Utilities and Service Systems
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.17-20
quantities and rates are similar to or less than the pre -development condition. Although the project would include new storm water infrastructure (two biofiltration basins) to support project facilities, the proposed infrastructure has been accounted for and analyzed throughout this EIR. The project would not contribute a substantial amount of new stormwater runoff relative to existing conditions, and impacts are determined to be less than significant. Please refer to Section 3.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, for additional discussion related to drainage.

Electric Power/ Natural Gas
The project would be served by SDG&E for electricity and gas service. The project would be required to implement, as applicable, the City’s Climate Action Plan Consistency Checklist measures that would reduce operational electricity consumption. The project would be requir ed to include various on -site features and measures to reduce the project’s energy consumption, which includes electric vehicle charging stations and electric vehicle ready spaces, electric or solar water heaters, solar panels, a transportation demand management plan, reduced landscaping water use, and trees. The project would also be built under the most current Title 24 standards which are designed to reduce energy.

The design for the dry utilities’ connection is still under preparation; however, the project proposes to connect to existing electricity and gas infrastructure within Capalina Road or W. Mission Road. This work would take place within existing right -or-way and would not disturb any vegetation. The project would also relocate an SDG&E transformer located on Capalina Road. Aside from these improvements, the project would not require the relocation of reconstruction of new or expanded power, or natural gas facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects. Impacts would be less than significant.

Telecommunications
Communications systems for telephones, computers, and cable television are serviced by utility providers such as AT&T, Cox, Spectrum (formerly Time Warner), and other independent cable companies. Existing telecommunications infrastructure in the vicinity of the project site would be available to serve the proposed project. N o specific systems upgrades are proposed or would be required to serve the proposed project. Thus, the project would not result in physical impacts associated with the construction of telecommunications systems. Impacts would be less than
significant.

Threshold #2: Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry, and multiple dry years? As discussed in response to Threshold # 1, the project would be served by VWD. Per the Water and Sewer Memorandum (Appendix Q.1), the project is anticipated to generate an additional 18,885 GPD over the ultimate demand projected in the 2018 Master Plan. This equates to approximately 21.15 acre-feet per year.

As discussed above, MWD’s UWMP shows water supplies would be available to meet current and future demands of the region. With a projected annual water demand of 5,374,000 acre-feet per year in 2045, the MWD UWMP demonstrates that, with implementation of required conservation measures, MWD has supply capabilities sufficient to meet expected demands through 2045 under normal, single dry, and multiple dry water years (MWD 2021). Additionally, SDCWA’s UWMP assessed water reliability from 2025 through 2045 and determined that there are sufficient supplies to meet projected demands under Single Dry-Year and Multiple Dry-Year conditions (SDCWA 2021). The additional 21.15

3.17 Utilities and Service Systems
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.17-21
acre-feet per year generated by the project would present a less than significant increase in water demand relative to the annual water demand projected by the MWD’s UWMP.

Further, the project site would be developed in compliance with CALGreen, which implements water efficiency standards for appliances and fixtures. Compliance with CALGreen would further reduce project water usage in combination with VWD and MWD’s ongoing w ater conservation practices.

Compliance with these regulations and conservation measures would ensure sufficient water supplies are available to service the project. Impacts to water services would be less than significant.

Threshold #3: Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project’s projected demand in addition to the provider’s existing commitments?
As discussed under Threshold #1, above, the project site is within VWD’s service area, which would provide service to the project. The project is expected to increase wastewater flows by 17,367 GPD over what was assumed in the 2018 Master Plan. This would lead to an increase of 17,367 GPD in solids handling, liquids handling and ocean disposal capacity requirements at the EWPCF and in the parallel land outfall’s capacity requirement. VWD has determined that adequate wastewater treatment and disposal capacity exists for the proposed project at this time. As discussed in the Draft Water and Sewer Study (Appendix Q.1), the project applicant would be required to pay all applicable Wastewater Capital Facility fees in effect at the time service is committed in accordance with District rules and regulations. Under these conditions, VWD has determined that adequate wastewater treatment and disposal capacity exists for the proposed project at this time (VWD 2023). Because the project would not exceed current capacities of the wastewater treatment system and would contribute Wastewater Capital Facility fees that would be used towards improvements, impacts would be less than significant.

Threshold #4: Generate solid waste in excess of State or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals? Construction of the proposed project would result in the generation of solid waste such as scrap lumber, concrete, residual wastes, packing materials, and plastics. The City works with EDCO to promote its construction and demolition material waste removal and recycling program. A minimum of 75% of non -hazardous construction and demolition waste would be recycled pursuant to the requirements of CalGreen and AB 939, and construction would not impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals. Construction impacts would be less than significant.

Operation of the proposed project would result in increased generation of solid waste. The anticipated solid waste generation from the proposed project was estimated using CalRecycle’s Estimated Solid Waste Generation Rates (CalRecycle 2019b). It is estimated that the residential portion of the project (119 units) would generate approximately 1,455 pounds of solid waste per day (12.23 pounds per household). The 4,000 s.f. of commercial portion of the project is estimated to generate 184 pounds per day (0.046 pounds per s.f.), for a total of 1,639 pounds or 0.74 tons per day. This does not consider any waste diversion through recycling. According to CalRecycle, the city has a disposal rate target of

8.9 pounds per person per day. If the City meets this target, the city is considered in compliance with the 50% diversion requirement of AB 939. The most recent data (2021) from CalRecycle identifies the annual per capita disposal rate as 5.6 pounds per person per day (CalRecycle 2021). Thus, the city is exceeding their target for diversion.

Solid waste generated by the proposed project would be collected and transported to the Sycamore Sanitary Landfill by EDCO. According to CalRecycle, the facility currently has a daily permitted capacity

3.17 Utilities and Service Systems
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.17-22
of 5,000 tons per day for solid waste but is projected to increase to 7,000 tons per day in 2025 and 9,000 tons per day in 2027. Sycamore landfill’s estimated closure date is listed as 2042, though the permit is anticipated to be revised and extended to 2054 (County of San Diego 2022). Solid waste generated by the proposed project would contribute a minimal amount of solid waste to Sycamore Sanitary Landfill’s daily permitted capacity. As such, the proposed project’s solid waste generation can be accommodated at the landfill. The project would not generate solid waste in excess of state or local standards, or in excess of the capacity of local infrastructure, or otherwise impair the attainment of solid waste reduction goals. Impacts would be less than significant.

Threshold #5: Comply with federal, state, and local management and reduction statues and regulations related to solid waste?
The proposed project would comply with all federal, state, and local statues and regulations regarding solid waste. The project would include trash enclosures with clearly marked, source-sorted receptacles for disposing of solid waste, recyclables, and organic waste to facilitate compliance with the requirements of AB 341, AB 939, AB 1826, SB 1383, and CALGreen Code. Additionally, all solid waste facilities, including landfills, require solid waste facility permits to operate. In San Diego County, Public Resources Code (Sections 44001- 44018) and California Code of Regulations Title 27, Division 2, Subdivision 1, Chapter 4 (Section 21440 et seq.) authorizes the County Department of Environmental Health, Local Enforcement Agency to issue solid waste facility permits. Sycamore Sanitary Landfill is a permitted facility and EDCO is a licensed hauler. As such, the project would comply with existing regulations related to solid waste disposal and would not violate federal, state, or local management and reduction statutes and regulations related to solid waste. Impacts would be less than significant.

3.17.5 Cumulative Impact Analysis
A “cumulative impact” refers to two or more individual effects which, when considered together, are considerable or which compound or increase other environmental effects. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15130(b)(1)(A)(B), an adequate discussion of a p roject’s significant cumulative impact, in combination with other closely related projects, can be based on either: (1) a list of past, present, and probable future projects producing related impacts; or (2) a summary of projections contained in an adopted local, regional, or statewide plan, or a related planning document that describes conditions contributing to the cumulative effect. For purposes of assessing the proposed project’s cumulative impact with respect to utilities and services systems, the cumu lative analysis is based upon a combined list and plan project approach.

Water
Some of the cumulative projects included in Table 2-3 are within VWD’s service area for potable water service and would contribute to the cumulative demand for water supply and water infrastructure.

However, MWD anticipates the demand of future development through their master planning process.

According to MWD’s UWMP, no water shortages are anticipated within MWD’s service area in single or multiple dry years through 2045. Not all cumulative projects included in Table 2-3 fall into the VWD’s service area; those that do not would be served by neighboring districts.

As described in Section 3.17.4, above, the proposed project would result in less than significant impacts to water supply services. As discussed in Section 3.17.1, MWD has determined that with supplies provided by SDCWA and compliance with the Water Conser vation Bill of 2009, no water shortages would occur in a normal year through 2045 (MWD 2021). Other cumulative projects that are consistent with the land use assumptions made in MWD’s UWMP would have already been

3.17 Utilities and Service Systems
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.17-23
accounted for in demand projections. Projects that are inconsistent with the land use assumptions made in MWD’s UWMP would also be subject to CEQA and required to include water supply assessments to demonstrate adequate supply for development. Further, rel ated projects would be required to show that adequate infrastructure exists to serve the related projects and mitigate any potential impacts to water infrastructure caused by the project. All projects would be required to pay applicable Capital Facility Fees to VWD or the applicable water service provider, which are required to go towards infrastructure improvements. Thus, cumulative impacts to water services would be less
than significant.

Wastewater
Cumulative projects that are within the VWD service area for wastewater services would contribute to the cumulative demand for wastewater services. VWD anticipates the demand of future development through their master planning process. Cumulative projects that are consistent with the land use assumptions made in VWD’s Master Plan would have already had their demand accounted for.

As discussed in Section 3.17.4, above, VWD has sufficient capacity at this time to account for the proposed project’s estimated increase in wastewater generation. However, VWD identified existing system deficiencies in pipe segments CA -4 through CA-14, as well as in capacity for solids handling, liquids handling, ocean disposal and parallel land outfall’s capacity for ultimate build-out wastewater flows. The cumulative projects that result in an increase in density or development over what was accounted for in VWD’s Master Plan would further exacerbate these deficiencies. Per VWD, payment of Wastewater Capital Facility fees would go toward projects identified in their 2018 Master Plan including upsizing applicable pipelines and design and construction of a parallel land outfall (VWD 2023). The project applicant for the proposed project and for cumulative projects would be required to pay all applicable Wastewater Capital Facility fees in effect at the time service is committed in accordance with District rules and regulations, which would be utilized to fund the identified projects in the 2018 Master Plan. Thus, with payment of all applicable Wastewater Capital Facility fees to VWD, cumulative impacts to wastewater treatment facilities would be less than significant.

Electrical Power and Natural Gas
Potential cumulative impacts related to energy and natural gas infrastructure would result if the project, in combination with past, present, and future projects, would require or result in the relocation of reconstruction of new or expanded electric power or natural gas facilities, the construction or relocation of which could cause significant environmental effects.

As described in Section 3.17.4, above, the proposed project would have a less than significant impact related to energy and natural gas. Each of the cumulative projects identified in Table 2 -3 would be within the service area of SDG&E. Each of the cumulative projects would be required to analyze their potential for impacts related to the provision of electricity and natural gas services, including the need for new or expanded utility infrastructure, and would be required to mitigated potential impacts from expanded infrastructure to below a level of significance. Cumulative projects are also required to comply with the state’s energy efficiency standards and local regulation s. Additionally, SDG&E regularly undertakes upgrades and expansions, as needed, throughout their service area to continue provided reliable electricity and natural service. SDG&E conducts their own CEQA review on these projects. In conclusion, cumulative impacts related to the provision of electrical power and natural gas would be
less than significant.

3.17 Utilities and Service Systems
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 3.17-24
Solid Waste
Future development projects would generate solid waste to be disposed of at the Sycamore Sanitary Landfill. According to CalRecycle, the facility has a daily permitted capacity of 5,000 tons/day for solid waste (expected to increase to 7,000 tons per day in 2025, and 9,000 tons per day in 2027). As of February 2021, remaining capacity was 105,064,991 cubic yards or approximately 86 million tons with an anticipated closure date of 2042, li kely to be revised and extended to 2054 (County of San Diego 2022). Further, there are five other landfills in the County. This includes Borrego Landfill, with a remaining capacity of 88,750 cy and a closure date of 2046; Miramar Landfill, with a remaining capacity of 11,080,871 cy and a closure date of 2031); Otay Landfill, with a remaining capacity of 11,122,997 cy and closure date of 2030, and two US Marine Corps landfills – Las Pulgas and San Onofre, with remaining capacities of 5,657,717 and 1,057,605 cy and 2060 and 2031 closure dates respectively (County of San Diego 2022).

The proposed project and cumulative projects include 2, 373 residential units, approximately 307,000 s.f. of commercial and 122 hotel rooms. When the CalRecycle’s Estimated Solid Waste Generation Rates (CalRecycle 2019b) are applied to the proposed project and the cumulative project, the total solid waste anticipated to be generated is 43,388 pounds per day (lbs/day) or 21.69 tons/day. This is prior to any diversion from mandatory recycling and green waste/organics progra m. Assuming a 75% diversion rate, a s required by AB 341, the net solid waste generation would be approximately

5.42 tons/day. The Sycamore Sanitary Landfill has a daily permitted capacity has a daily permitted capacity of 5,000 tons/day, which is expected to increase to 7,000 tons/day in 2025 and 9,000 tons/day in 2027. The cumulative project’s would result in incremental contribution to the landfill capacity; however the impact would be AB 341.

3.17.6 Mitigation Measures
Impacts would be less than significant, so no mitigation measures are required.

3.17.7 Conclusion
Development of the proposed project would result in an incremental increase in the need for water, wastewater, stormwater, energy, and solid waste services. However, as outlined in the project impact analysis above, it is determined that water, wastewater, stormwater, energy, and solid waste services would be adequate and
project- and cumulative-level impacts would be less than significant.

4.0 Alternatives
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 4-1

4.0 Alternatives

4.1 Introduction to Alternatives
Section 15126.6 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines states that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) shall “describe a range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the location of the 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 range of alternatives evaluated in an EIR is governed by the “rule of reason” that requires an EIR to set forth only those alternatives necessary to permit a reasoned choice. An EIR need not consider an alternative whose effects cannot be reasonably ascertained and whose implementation is remote and speculative (Section 15126.6(a) of the CEQA Guidelines).

In developing the alternatives to be addressed in the EIR, the potential alternatives were evaluated in terms of their ability to meet the basic objectives of the project, while reducing or avoiding the environmental impacts of the project identified in Section 3.0, Environmental Analysis, of the EIR.

In determining what alternatives should be considered in an EIR, it is important to acknowledge the objectives of the project, the project’s significant effects, and unique project considerations. These factors are important to the development of alternati ves that meet the criteria specified in Section 15126.6(a). Although, as noted above, EIRs must contain a discussion of “potentially feasible” alternatives, the ultimate determination as to whether an alternative is feasible or infeasible is made by the lead agency’s decision‐making body, the San Marcos City Council (see Public Resources Code Section 21081[a] [3]).

4.2 Project Objectives
The following project objectives describe the purpose of the proposed project and provide a basis for identification of a range of reasonable alternatives evaluated in the EIR:
• Provide a multi-family housing opportunity through a range of unit types, sizes, and number of different bedroom counts, including studios, one-, two-, and, three-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.
• Integrate high -density housing opportunities and commercial uses close to major transit corridors, education facilities, and job centers to optimize land use with transit use and active modes of transportation, reduce reliance on automobiles, and potentially reduce energy usage and air pollutant and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions.
• To the extent possible given the site constraints, maximize the opportunity to provide high - density housing for the City of San Marcos in the 45-50 dwelling unit per acre density range. • Support the housing needs of the City of San Marcos and the region by developing high-quality, workforce housing that balances density with price -points and long-term maintenance costs, such that new apartments remain financially attainable. • Incorporate deed restricted affordable housing into a portion of the proposed project.

4.0 Alternatives
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 4-2

4.3 Project Alternatives Considered in This EIR

4.3.1 Description of Alternative
The following alternatives are under consideration for this project:
• No Project/No Development Alternative (Section 4.3.3) • No Project/ Existing Plan Alternative (Section 4.3.4) • Reduced Intensity Alternative (Section 4.3.5)
Alternatives considered and removed from further consideration are summarized in Section 4.4.

4.3.2 Summary of Impacts
• Project- and cumulative-level impacts associated with implementation of the proposed project are evaluated in Sections 3.1, Aesthetics, through 3.17, Utilities and Service Systems, of the EIR. As identified in Table 1 -1, in Chapter 1, Executive Summary, co nstruction and/or operation of the proposed project would have the potential to cause the following significant but mitigable environmental impacts:
• Impact BIO-1: Potential to impact avian species protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act if tree removal, vegetation removal, or other construction activities occur during the nesting season.
• Impact CR-1: Due to grading and ground disturbing activities, the project has the potential to impact unidentified archeological resources on the project site. • Impact CR -2: There is a potential for project construction activities to disturb previously unidentified human remains on the project site.
• Impact GEO-1: Project grading may result in disturbance of previously unknown paleontological resources.

All project impacts would be mitigated to below a level of significance.

4.3.3 No Project/No Development Alternative
Under the No Project/No Development Alternative, the proposed 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. T he project site is currently undeveloped and supports disturbed habitat.

4.3.3.1 Comparison of the Effects of the No Project/No Development Alternative to the Proposed Project
Aesthetics
Under this alternative the project site would remain in its current condition and the visual character of the site would not change. The site is generally flat, with elevations ranging from 580-600 feet above mean sea level. The project site is currently undeveloped, vacant land and the entire site is characterized as disturbed habitat (Dudek 2023a). There are a few ornamental trees on the project

4.0 Alternatives
Capalina Apartments Draft EIR October 2023
City of San Marcos Page 4-3
site. This alternative would not add additional sources of lighting to the project site and vicinity.

Compared to the proposed project, this alternative would reduce impacts. No aesthetics impacts would occur under the No Project/No Development Alternative.

Air Quality
Under the No Project/No Development Alternative, air emissions associated with project construction including emissions associated with grading, site preparation, site finishing and building finishing would not occur. Implementation of this alternative would not introduce any uses that could generate operational air emissions. This alternative would not result in any construction or operational air pollutant emissions. However, as discussed in Section 3.2.4, impacts to air quality for the proposed project would be less than significant and no mitigation would be required. Compared to the proposed project, this alternative would reduce air pollutant emissions. No air quality impacts would occur under the No Project/No Development Alternative.

Biological Resources
The No Project/No Development Alternative would not require any ground -disturbing activities. This alternative would avoid potential impacts to nesting birds (Impact BIO-1) since no trees or vegetation would be removed. The proposed project includes a mitigation measure to reduce the potential impact to nesting birds to below a level of significance. Since impacts to biological resources would be avoided under the No Project/No Develo pment Alternative, mitigation measure MM -BIO-1 would not be implemented or required. Compared to the proposed project, this alternative would eliminate the potential biological resources impacts. No biological resources impacts would occur under the No Project/No Development Alternative.

Cultural Resources
The No Project/No Development Alternative would not require any ground -disturbing activities.

Therefore, there would be no potential to impact unknown archaeological resources potentially located within the project site (Impact CR -1). Further, there would be no potential to disturb previously unidentified human remains that may be present on the project site (Impact CR-2). As such, mitigation measures MM -CR-1 through MM -CR-4 would not be implemented or required. Compared to the proposed project, the No Proj ect/No Development Alternative would result in no impacts to cultural resources and impacts would be reduced compared to the proposed project.

San Marcos City CouncilMarch 26, 2024

San Marcos City Council
March 26, 2024