Vista City Council
August 23, 2022

Includes arm only.Must specify CPW or CSW in fixture ordering logic.Downligh[ing applications only. \ AVM:51 lbs.(23.18 kgs.) \ \ \ \ \ \ Eaton \ /\ ems 1121 Highway 74 South
E�\� �N /, TD500002EN F�� N TD500002EN /1 Peachtree City,GA 30269 Specifications and TD513013EN T 'rF,'�a P 770-486-4800 dimensions subject to Powering Business Worldwide * www.designlights.org E"7 ``' 2015-12-21 13:42:28 Powering Business Worldwide www.eaton.com/lighting change without notice. 2015-12-21 13:42:28 Powering Business Worldwide January 31,20181:34 PM / oQ�OFEssllo
E22246 rr1
w m
f]' 31-2
Q'
trait
q�F OF C A1.\F0 4 ���
of 04
May 17 2022
08/23/2022 PH2 Page 20 o 165

. - . . . �� Oil skim
• �• ,� I ,i ♦ ■ r • r � ■ � � r r. � 1 � fit+., \ Ila
0%
MIS
1 :• 1 - FIR -"620; WOW .�`���-�� \ �• �'1�' . •
f 1
06 I IIIIIII I II 1 /,..;.., � y •. i f �►� �I. '� '► ,��i� • � �' �.� �, � i1����►�asi � 1 � ` 1 ► !,;!�.!_�`a', y � 'ice ;! I / �! �\ � '., 1 � �� � _ Will
�„ � ♦ � ,, � s� �I IP�r;�->� ��� �.��\ ��-_-=mob �� � � !������.,��� � � ,� ���� '�� , ��� ♦ �� 'ems �, � � _l � *� �, I �!,! � �\\��rii� � ♦ � ���, .�♦r �••.., • , .� � � �� �� � �►� � � � - ��� .,► � .0...�1� � yr �j -�l f- �/�� `��� � - , •-� .. �. 'WINE
�►
Ad
� ♦ ,I �, �� � of �o �� ���1 � �.� _ 1 .. �� IN
_
I
pi PPA
a MIS
�► � y ��� � • � ��� � � � � �. ��� III�� �� � � '-. �� � �� � ,..� ��_ ►. � .. �► - �►. � � ,� Ow OVER
_ -
\ \ ` . 7���• `��� � � �- ,� �, •� � � � 5yy��,,yy y! J it rdi' rJ. �.// `�� � i •\i `. �\. '���\ ,\ '� �.' �� `', �i t� .! i,. .fi/,.,f r � .: J� :., :�' r jJ / r . fir r WINES,
wT
Do
"MM Ill
TAW
Will
Ilk IMINIi
IIM OF
c
r
4 J
R.
— � — '♦ �• \. • ►���' � \ `- `� �/ � � ::, \., :._ _'/� :. _ /� Cyr I' ,/' :++�•:i:. //N"' l Q��Ir� ��� �''��. 1` ���� ,C� �{r .• � 1. r J r /fN 4?�o �_,' y .•;�':fr�' t x: '>{ �f»y ' S J ✓'> �Qn�• • annln• CIVIC en•In22rin• SUrVe In• � `v� � • I x r,r .0
AO
pok
F
. � � • % ����.[��o.�l�� III li �f �f "���� r ti,r r 7.J /
-���1 Qr tid?.;. �I�., _ "'fly ..rr,•,, •� /r
��. � � ` �, !.. � .,.•mod ... , .... •:
• ��� JJ rc
Will"
�
a
(��-11,� _�� ` '� `. � �� 1�=� �'�jr—► ' J��11j/`s' .v r J f,.Jrrcr/p'/ f l� �s� • ♦ ♦ • • .� - l / J+/;':..-L.F•''• it �ju': • •• `�• `� � '�we � .:�- I�siJ$�.' .�?�rm _-� - ,J/ , 'f F kJ.�a f y'�/ . r
• • 0 i • - • •

BILL OF MATERIALS LOADING DISCLAIMER: DESIGN CRITERIA STORMTRAP SYSTEM INFORMATION SITE SPECIFIC DESIGN CRITERIA ALLOWABLE MAX GRADE =311.00 STRUCTURAL DESIGN LOADING CRITERIA e StOTtiI"ap QTY. UNIT TYPE DESCRIPTION WEIGHT STORMTRAP IS NOT DESIGNED TO ACCEPT ANY ADDITIONAL LOADINGS FROM NEARBY STRUCTURES NEXT TO OR OVER THE TOP OF ALLOWABLE MIN GRADE = 309.50 for p LIVE LOADING: AASHTO HS-20 HIGHWAY LOADING WATER STORAGE PROV: 16,513.28 CUBIC FEET 1. STORMTRAP UNITS SHALL BE MANUFACTURED AND INSTALLED ACCORDING TO SHOP DRAWINGS APPROVED BY 0 I 3'-6" SINGLETRAP 0 STORMTRAP. IF ADDITIONAL LOADING CONSIDERATIONS ARE REQUIRED FOR STRUCTURAL DESIGN OF STORMTRAP, PLEASE CONTACT INSIDE HEIGHT ELEVATION =308.30 UNIT HEADROOM: 3'-6" SINGLETRAP THE INSTALLING CONTRACTOR AND ENGINEER OF RECORD. THE SHOP DRAWINGS SHALL INDICATE SIZE AND ll 1 A:DFFP✓/5MWWmM(FFMM 23 II 3'-6" SINGLETRAP 15844 STORMTRAP IMMEDIATELY. SYSTEM INVERT =304.80 eaanslm®AP pry// wPmlypuw]

LOCATION OF ROOF OPENINGS AND INLET/ OUTLET PIPE TYPES, SIZES, INVERT ELEVATIONS AND SIZE OF GROUND WATER TABLE: BELOW INVERT OF SYSTEM 0 III 3'-6" SINGLETRAP 0 NOTES:

SOIL BEARING PRESSURE: 3000PSF OPENINGS. 1 HRMEM�I�Y 21 IV 3'-6" SINGLETRAP 14146 TREE LOADING DISCLAIMER: 1. DIMENSIONING OF STORMTRAP SYSTEM SHOWN BELOW ALLOW FOR A 3/4" 1 287 �IL�Y SOIL DENSITY: 120 PCF 2. COVER RANGE: MIN.0.7O'MAX. 2.20' CONSULT STORMTRAP FOR ADDITIONAL COVER OPTIONS. P.815-941-4549 /F:331-318-6347 0 VII 3'-6" SINGLETRAP 0 THE STORMTRAP SYSTEM HAS NOT BEEN DESIGNED TO SUPPORT THE ADDITIONAL WEIGHT OF ANY TREES. FURTHERMORE, THE GAP BETWEEN EACH MODULE. P,815.-ml-4549 /F:331-318-&W EQUIVALENT UNSATURATED 3 SPIV 3'-6" SINGLETRAP VARIES ROOTS OF THE TREES MUST BE CONTAINED TO PREVENT FUTURE DAMAGE TO THE STORMTRAP SYSTEM. STORMTRAP ACCEPTS NO 2. ALL DIMENSIONS TO BE VERIFIED IN THE FIELD BY OTHERS.

LATERAL ACTIVE EARTH PRESSURE:35 PSF / FT. 3. ALL DIMENSIONS AND SOIL CONDITIONS, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO GROUNDWATER AND SOIL BEARING ENGINEER INFORMATION: 0 T2 PANEL 6" THICK PANEL 0 LIABILITY FOR DAMAGES CAUSED BY TREES OR OTHER VEGETATION PLACE AROUND OR ON TOP OF THE SYSTEM. ENGINEER INFORMATION:

EQUIVALENT SATURATED CAPACITY ARE REQUIRED TO BE VERIFIED IN THE FIELD BY OTHERS PRIOR TO STORMTRAP INSTALLATION. 3. SEE SHEET 3.0 FOR INSTALLATION SPECIFICATIONS. 5 T4 PANEL 6" THICK PANEL 1988
LATERAL ACTIVE EARTH PRESSURE:SO PSF/FT. (IF WATER TABLE PRESENT) 4. FOR STRUCTURAL CALCULATIONS THE GROUND WATER TABLE IS ASSUMED TO BE BELOW INVERT OF SYSTEM BHA ENGINEERS 0 T7 PANEL 6" THICK PANEL 0 SEDIMENT/SAND FILTER DISCLAIMER: 4. SP - INDICATES A MODULE WITH MODIFICATIONS. BHA ENGINEERS APPLICABLE CODES:ASTM C057 IF WATER TABLE IS DIFFERENT THAN ASSUMED, CONTACT STORMTRAP. 51 rj AVENIDA ENCINAS 9 JOINTWRAP 150' PER ROLL 51 15 AVENIDA ENCINAS ACI-318 FOR SYSTEMS CONTAINING SEDIMENT AND SAND FILTER MODULES; IF REQUIRED TO BE SEALED TO PREVENT SAND AND/OR 5. P - INDICATES A MODULE WITH A PANEL ATTACHMENT.

5. SYSTEM DESIGN MAY ALLOW FOR INCIDENTAL LEAKAGE AND WILL NOT BE SUBJECT TO LEAKAGE TESTING. 32 JOINTTAPE 14.5' PER ROLL BACKFILL TYPE:SEE SHEET 4.D FOR BACKFILL OPTIONS SUITE L PRE-TREATED WATER FROM MIGRATING INTO ADJOINING MODULES, IT IS THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE INSTALLING CONTRACTOR SUITE L CA 92008 TOTAL PIECES = 47 TO ENSURE THAT THOSE MODULES ARE SEALED. 6. CONTRACTORS RESPONSIBILITY TO ENSURE CONSISTENCY/ACCURACY TO CARLSBAD, TOTAL PANELS = 5 FINAL ENGINEER OF RECORD PLAN SET. CARLSBAD CA 92008 760.931.8700 HEAVIEST PICK WEIGHT = 15844 7. IF A WATERTIGHT SOLUTION IS REQUIRED FOR AN OUTLET CONTROL 1 760.931.8700 PROJECT INFORMATION: STRUCTUREAND BASE 'MODULES,,SEB10ETWEEN TOP LD JOINTS,

INCLUDING
BASE OF ADJOINING SSYMONS°P PROJECT INFORMATION:

WALLS, AND JOINTS BETWEEN MODULE AND ADJACENT END PANELS WILL

BE THE SOLE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE INSTALLING CONTRACTOR TO CAMINO LARGO PROVIDE AND INSTALL THE WATERTIGHT APPLICATION PER THE EOR'S CAMINO LARGO SPECIFICATION.

VISTA, CA VISTA, CA CURRENT ISSUE DATE: CURRENT ISSUE DATE:
3/29/2022 N 3/29/2022 ISSUED FOR: ISSUED FOR:

PRELIMINARY 1'-7" PRELIMINARY REV. DATE: ISSUED FOR: BWN REV, DATE: ISSUED FOR. DWN ALLOWABLE MAX GRADE =311,011
-_- - - - - - - ALLOWABLE MIN GRADE -309.50 N N N N N SEE SHEET 4.0 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - SPIV 8'-` " FOR BACKFILL - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 2.20' IVSPECIFICATIONS - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

0.70'_ _ - _ _ _ -_ _ _ - _ _ _ _ - _ _ _ II II II II II IV IV IV IVB' HWL =308.30 SPIV 38'-9" II II II II II II II II II 10 3/29/22 PRELIMINARY KW N 30' 3/29/22 PRELIMINARY KW 3'-6" SINGLETRAP SCALE: II II II II II II II II II SCALE:

NTS N NTS FSPIVT
III-I I SHEET TITLE: I= N N N N N N N N N SHEET TITLE:

I I-III-I I
-I I I-I I ! t �_ •• '.. •, SYSTEM INVERT = 304.80 SINGLETRAP i.. .; ,, ,. :' �: :,� 1.; ., •.• :` �: ` '!..' �;+;: •:•� ,; OUTLET CONTROL STRUCTURE, SEE NOTE 7 SINGLETRAP DESIGN`
I-III-III- SEE SHEET 2.1 CRITERIA - 151'-10j" SYSTEM LAYOUT

FOR DETAILS
1'-0" MIN. OVERHANG
REINFORCED CONCRETE FOUNDATION SHEET NUMBER: SHEET NUMBER:

FOR STORMTRAP SYSTEM - BY OTHERS.
(SEE SHEET 2.1 FOR DETAILS)
3'-6" SINGLETRAP 160 200 OPERATION AND MAINTENACE FOR MODULAR WETLAND SYSTEM (MWS) INSTALLATION NOTES I I 12" HDPE OUTLET.

EVERY INSTALLED MWS-LINEAR UNIT IS TO BE MAINTAINED BY THE SUPPLIER, OR A SUPPLIER APPROVED CONTRACTOR FOR AT �18 HOPE OUTLET. CONNECT 18 HOPE OUTLET. CONNECT

1. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE ALL LABOR, EQUIPMENT, MATERIALS AND INCIDENTALS CONNECT TO MODULAR TO UNDERGROUND VAULT. TO UNDERGROUND VAULT. I I LEAST THE FIRST YEAR. THE COST OF THIS SERVICE VARIES AMONG OUTSIDE SERVICE PROVIDERS. THE MWS-LINEAR IS A REQUIREDTO OFFLOAD AND INSTALL THE SYSTEM AND APPURTENANCES IN 12' I I 14' WETLAND SYSTEM MULTI-STAGE SELF-CONTAINED TREATMENT TRAIN FOR STORMWATER TREATMENT. EACH STAGE IS DESIGNED AND INTENDED ACCORDANCE WITH THIS DRAWING AND THE MANUFACTURERS SPECIFICATIONS, ppp-B I I B TO PROTECT SUBSEQUENT STAGES FROM CLOGGINGS. STAGES INCLUDE SCREENING, SEPARATION, CARTRIDGE MEDIA UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED IN MANUFACTURERS CONTRACT. \ \ FILTRATION, AND BIOFILTRATION. THE BIOFILTRATION STAGE CAN CONTAIN VARIOUS TYPES OF VEGETATION OR PLANTINGS.

ANNUAL INSPECTION IS REQUIRED TO EVALUATE PLANT HEALTH AND TRIM EXCESS VEGETATION. THE MAINTENANCE 2. UNIT MUST BE INSTALLED ON LEVEL BASE. MANUFACTURER RECOMMENDS A a°d d d d °
PROCEDURES ARE DESCRIBED BELOW. MINIMUM 6" LEVEL ROCK BASE UNLESS SPECIFIED BY THE PROJECT ENGINEER.

CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE TO VERIFY PROJECT ENGINEERS RECOMMENDED BASE 10 LO a L m in11 ° CLEAN CATCH BASIN FILTER-SCREENING IS PROVIDED BY A CATCH BASIN FILTER. THE FILTER WILL CONTAIN COARSE SEDIMENT, SPECIFICATIONS. cv N o L0 p cal d N o � TRASH,AND OTHER FLOATABLES. SEDIMENT CAPACITY IS REACHED AT 2 CUBIC FEET FOR THE CURB STYLE INLET AND 4 CUBIC o o I- d
FEET FOR THE DROP OR GRATED INLET CONFIGURATION (VARIES WITH SMALLER AND LARGER MODELS). THE FILTER REMOVES 3. ALL PIPES MUST BE FLUSH WITH INSIDE SURFACE OF CONCRETE. (PIPES CANNOT ° ° GROSS SOLIDS, INCLUDING LITTER,AND SEDIMENT GREATER THAN 200 MICRONS. THE CLEANING PROCEDURE IS EASILY DONE BY INTRUDE BEYOND FLUSH). INVERT OF OUTFLOW PIPE MUST BE FLUSH WITH DISCHARGE in d d ° d °° d d ° ° d IF 12" HOPE OUTLET. jn d ° d d ° ° d HAND OR WITH A SMALL INDUSTRIAL VACUUM DEVICE. THIS FILTER IS LOCATED DIRECTLY UNDER THE MANHOLE COVER OR CHAMBER FLOOR. ALL GAPS AROUND PIPES SHALL BE SEALED WATER TIGHT WITH A A A CONNECT TO MOD. A , d A TYPE B CURB INLET 2
CRATE FOR EASY ACCESS. NON-SHRINK GROUT PER MANUFACTURERS STANDARD CONNECTION DETAIL AND N N SHALL MEET OR EXCEED REGIONAL PIPE CONNECTION STANDARDS. LO W/ BYPASS WEIR FOR LO ° d

1. CLEAN PRE-TREATMENT CHAMBER - SEPARATION OCCURS IN THE PRE-TREATMENT CHAMBER'S SETTLING AREA LOCATED N d CAMINO LARGO N ° DIRECTLY UNDER THE CURB OR GRATED INLET. THIS CHAMBER HAS A CAPACITY OF APPROXIMATELY 21 CUBIC FEET FOR 4. CONTRACTOR TO SUPPLY AND INSTALL ALL EXTERNAL CONNECTING PIPES.

TRASH, DEBRIS, AND SEDIMENTS FOR MOST MODEL SIZES (VARIES WITH SMALLER AND LARGER MODELS). THE CHAMBER ° d

5. CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR INSTALLATION OF ALL RISERS, MANHOLES, AND CURB LINE CURB LINE TARGET TOTAL SUSPENDED SOLIDS AND PARTICULATE METALS AND NUTRIENTS. CLEANING THE SETTLING AREA CAN BE HATCHED. CONTRACTOR TO GROUT ALL MANHOLES AND HATCHES TO MATCH EDGE OF GUTTER 12" HDPE INLET. EDGE OF GUTTER PERFORMED WITH A STANDARD VACUUM TRUCK OR HAND HELD INDUSTRIAL SHOP VACUUM. THIS CHAMBER IS LOCATED FINISHED SURFACE UNLESS SPECIFIED OTHERWISE. B CURB FACE CONNECT TO MOD. B CURB FACE DIRECTLY UNDER THE MANHOLE OR GRATE ACCESS COVER FOR EASY ACCESS INTO THE CHAMBER. TYPE B CURB INLET 13' CURB OPENING

6. DRIP OR SPRAY IRRIGATION REQUIRED ON ALL UNITS WITH VEGETATION. 11' CURB OPENING

2. REPLACE PRE-FILTER CARTRIDGE MEDIA (BIOMEDIAGREENTN') - INITIAL FILTRATION IS PROVIDED BY A HORIZONTAL FLOW W/ BYPASS WEIR FOR PLAN VIEW CARTRIDGE FILTER UTILIZING BIOMEDIAGREEN MEDIA. MEDIA LIFE DEPENDS ON LOCAL SEDIMENT LOADING CONDITIONS GENERAL NOTES PLAN VIEW DRIVEWAY "H" AND CAN EASILY BE REPLACED AND DISPOSED OF WITHOUT ANY EQUIPMENT. THE BIOMEDIAGREEN MEDIA IS HELD 11' CURB OPENING 5' 13' CURB OPENING 5' WITHIN THE MEDIA CARTRIDGE PRE-FILTERS THAT ARE HOUSED IN THE PRE-TREATMENT CHAMBER. ENTRY INTO THE 1. MANUFACTURER TO PROVIDE ALL MATERIALS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. TOP OF 8" TOP OF 8" PRE-TREATMENT CHAMBER IS REQUIRED TO REPLACE THE BIOMEDIAGREEN MEDIA. THE LID OF THE MEDIA CARTRIDGE CURB CURB PRE-FILTER IS REMOVED BY LOOSENING TWO BOLTS. ONCE REMOVED MAINTENANCE PERSONNEL HAVE UNIMPEDED 2. ALL DIMENSIONS, ELEVATIONS, SPECIFICATIONS AND CAPACITIES ARE SUBJECT TO ACCESS TO EACH MEDIA CAGE HOUSING THE BIOMEDIAGREEN WHICH CAN BE QUICKLY REMOVED BY HAND OR WITH A CHANGE. FOR PROJECT SPECIFIC DRAWINGS DETAILING EXACT DIMENSIONS,WEIGHTS VACUUM TRUCK. ONCE OLD BIOMEDIAGREEN IS REMOVED NEW MATERIAL, PROVIDED IS PRE-WEIGHED BAGS, IS AND ACCESSORIES PLEASE CONTACT MANUFACTURER. m 0.5' DROPPED INTO THE MEDIA CAGE HOUSINGS. ONCE COMPLETED,THE CARTRIDGE LID IS REPLACED AND BOLTS TIGHTENED TYP.

ON THE LID OF THE MEDIA CARTRIDGE PRE-FILTER. 4' 4' TOP OF WEIR 0.5' TOP OF WEIR

3. REPLACE DRAIN DOWN FILTER MEDIA(BIOMEDIAGREENT") -AN OPTIONAL DRAIN DOWN FILTER, SIMILAR IN FUNCTION TO ° TYP. 2' 2' w 0.5' 2' 2' w THE MEDIA CARTRIDGE PRE-FILTER IS LOCATED IN THE DISCHARGE CHAMBER. THIS FILTER ALLOWS ANY STANDING d d ° ° ° d ° d ° TYP.

WATER FROM THE PRE-TREATMENT CHAMBER TO DRAIN FROM UNDER THE PERVIOUS PAVERS THROUGH THE SMALL d ° ° d ° ° Q ° ° d !�1^� ° d - ° ° ° ° d ° �!1^� d °d V ° �d ° ^° a °° d ° ° ° � °d V FILTRATION CARTRIDGE LOCATED IN THE DISCHARGE CHAMBER. THE DRAIN DOWN DEVICE ADDRESSES ANY VECTOR ° d ° ° a ° °° °14 N �/ ° ° \ ° d N a ° ° ° °° ° N LL-
ISSUES, BY ELIMINATING ALL STANDING WATER WITHIN THE MWS-LINEAR. REPLACEMENT OF MEDIA CAN BE PERFORMED ° d ° °° d ° ° ° d N L` ° d ° °° I d °N ° ° d°° ° d N J-i 0.5' BY HAND. ° ° ° °< TYP. ° y,

4. TRIM VEGETATION -THE MWS-LINEAR UTILIZES MULTIPLE PLANTS IN THE WETLAND CHAMBER TO ENHANCE POLLUTANT d REMOVAL. THE VEGETATION WILL NEED TO BE MAINTAINED (TRIMMED) AS NEEDED AND IS DONE AS PART OF REGULAR 305.45 IE 305.45 IE 305.45 IE 305.45 IE 305.45 IE 305.45 IE 305.45 IE SITE LANDSCAPING OR SYSTEM MAINTENANCE. MODULAR WETLAND SYSTEMS, INC. RECOMMENDS THAT THE PLANTINGS 18" OUTLET 12" OUTLET 18" OUTLET 12" OUTLET 12" INLET 18" OUTLET 12" OUTLET ARE NEVER GIVEN ANY FERTILIZER TO PROMOTE PLANT GROWTH OR HEALTH. SECTIONA A SECTIONS-B SECTIONA A SECTIONS-B

5. EVALUATE FLOW HYDRAULIC CONDUCTIVITY - THE SYSTEMS FLOW CHARACTERISTICS CAN BE ASSESSED FROM THE DISCHARGE CHAMBER. THIS INSPECTION FOR ADEQUATE FLOW CAPACITY SHOULD BE DONE DURING A RAIN EVENT. BY MODIFIED TYPE B CURB INLET WITH BYPASS WEIR INSPECTION AND VIEWING THE DISCHARGE CHAMBER, THE FLOW OUT OF THE SYSTEM CAN BE EASILY OBSERVED OR MODIFIED TYPE B CURB INLET WITH BYPASS WEIR MEASURE. IF FLOW OUT OF THE ORIFICE IS TOO LOW, IT COULD INDICATE MEDIA CARTRIDGE PRE-FILTER FOULING AND CAMINO LARGO MAINTENANCE MAY NEED TO BE PROVIDED TO THE BIOMEDIAGREEN AS DESCRIBED ABOVE. DRIVEWAY "H" NOT TO SCALE NOT To SCALE

6. WETLANDMEDIA MAINTENANCE - BIOFILTRATION IS PROVIDED BY AN ADVANCED HORIZONTAL FLOW VEGETATED NOTE:MODIFIED CURB INLETS WITH BYPASS WETLAND CHAMBER. THIS BIOFILTRATION CONTAINS A MIX OF SORPTIVE MEDIA, KNOWN AS WETLANDMEDIA, WHICH IS WEIR ARE HYDRAULICALLY CONNECTED DESIGNED TO SUPPORTS ABUNDANT PLANT AND BIOLOGICAL LIFE. THE LIFE OF THIS MEDIA CAN BE UP TO 20 YEARS TO THE MODULAR WETLAND SYSTEM. BMP EXHIBIT WHEN PROPERLY MAINTAINED. THE PERIPHERAL VOID AREA SURROUNDING THE PERIMETER OF THE WETLANDMEDIA CAN BE ACCESSED TO REMOVE ANY SURFACE CLOGGING. THE VERTICAL RISERS IN THE MIDDLE OF THE WETLANDMEDIA inc. CAMINO LARGO CAN ALSO BE ACCESSED AND WATER INJECTED TO BACKWASH THE WETLANDMEDIA. THESE FEATURES ALLOW FULL FLOW bhA,CAPACITY CANNOT BE RESTORED BY THESE STEPS,THE WETLANDMEDIA CAN BE REPLACED. band pDannhg, dyfl enghsedng, suryeyhg CITY OF VISTA, CALIFORNIA

7. WETLANDMEDIA REPLACEMENT - REMOVAL OF SPENT WETLANDMEDIA CAN BE DONE WITH A SHOVEL NOSE OF ANY 5115 AVENIDA ENCINAS VACUUM TRUCK. REPLACEMENT OF THE WETLANDMEDIA, ALTHOUGH NOT ANTICIPATED FOR 20 YEARS, IS DONE BY SUITE "L" ADDING NEW WETLANDMEDIA FROM A NUMBER OF VENDOR SUPPLIED SUPERSACS AND ADDED TO FILL THE WETLAND CARLSBAD, CA. 92008-4387 CHAMBER TO RECOMMENDED LEVELS. (760) 931-8700 SHEET 2 OF 3 K:\Ciyyop\V )�b� G\SWMP\BMP_TSM.dwg, 3/29/2022 4:36:05 PM PH2 Page 122 of 165

MAINTENANCE INDICATORS AND ACTIONS FOR

BIOFILTRATION BMPS
TYPICAL MAINTENANCE INDICATORS TYPICAL MAINTENANCE ACTIONS ACCUMULATION OF SEDIMENT(OVER 2 REMOVE AND PROPERLY DISPOSE OF INCHES DEEP OR COVERS VEGETATION), ACCUMULATED MATERIALS WITHOUT PROPOSED OR EXISTING SURFACE CURB INLET/BYPASS STRUCTURE VAULT SYSTEM LITTER, OR DEBRIS DAMAGE TO THE VEGETATION. CONFIRM

THAT SOIL IS NOT CLOGGING AND THAT THE
AREA DRAINS AFTER STORM EVENT. TILL OR FLOW BASED OPENING ; REPLACE SOIL AS NECESSARY. .

POOR VEGETATION ESTABLISHMENT ENSURE VEGETATION IS HEALTHY AND MODULAR WETLAND SYSTEM DENSE ENOUGH TO PROVIDE FILTERING AND °o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o° TO PROTECT SOILS FROM EROSION.

REPLENISH MULCH AS NECESSARY (IF LESS o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o° 100-YR HGL THAN 3INCHES DEEP), REMOVE FALLEN °o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o LEAVES AND DEBRIS, PRUNE LARGE SHRUBS o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o° OR TREES, AND MOW TURF AREAS. °o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o°0 100-YR HGL

WATER QUALITY
OVERGROWN VEGETATION-WOODY MOW OR TRIM AS APPROPRIATE, BUT NOT FLOW N VEGETATION NOT PART OF DESIGN IS LESS THAN THE DESIGN HEIGHT OF THE ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° :

PRESENT AND GRASS EXCESSIVELY TALL VEGETATION (TYPICALLY 4-6 INCHES FOR (GREATER THAN 10 INCHES) GRASS). CONFIRM THAT IRRIGATION IS 7o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o° ° ADEQUATE AND NOT EXCESSIVE AND THAT `y SPRAYS DO NOT DIRECTLY ENTER 7 ° ° ° ° °0°0°0°0° ° 000000
OVERFLOW GRATES. REPLACE DEAD PLANTS °o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o°o , AND REMOVE NOXIOUS AND INVASIVE ° ° ° ° ° ° ° ° 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
WEEDS.
o°o
EROSION DUE TO CONCENTRATED REPAIR/RE-SEED ERODED AREAS AND �� PIPE 18" OUTFLOW 12" OUTFLOW
IRRIGATION FLOW ADJUST THE IRRIGATION. ORIFICE BMP-1 ` 3
EROSION DUE TO CONCENTRATED REPAIR/RE-SEED ERODED AREAS AND MAKE DISCHARGE CHAMBER WETLAND CHAMBER PRE-TREATMENT CHAMBER 0.50' PIPE 0.50' STORMWATER RUNOFF FLOW APPROPRIATE CORRECTIVE MEASURES SUCH - FLOW CONTROL -WETLAND MEDIA -INCLUDES PRE-FILTER 12" OUTFLOW ORIFICE RISER SIZED UTILIZING PATENTED MEDIA CARTRIDGES PIPE AS ADDING EROSION CONTROL BLANKETS, TO DRAIN DOWN IN HORIZONTAL PERIMETER ADDING STONE AT ENTRY POINTS, OR LESS THAN 36 HOURS FLOW BIORETENTION RE-GRADING WHERE NECESSARY. REMOVE

OBSTRUCTIONS AND SEDIMENT
ACCUMULATIONS SO WATER DISPERSES.

STANDING WATER (BMP NOT DRAINING). IF WHERE THERE IS AN UNDERDRAIN, SUCH AS MOSQUITO LARVAE ARE PRESENT AND IN PLANTER BOXES AND MANUFACTURED PERSISTENT, CONTACT THE SAN DIEGO BIOFILTERS, CHECK THE UNDERDRAIN PIPING DEEP ROUTED, DENSE, VECTOR CONTROL PROGRAM AT(858) TO MAKE SURE IT IS INTACT AND

DROUGHT TOLERANT
694-2888. MOSQUITO LARVICIDES SHOULD UNOBSTRUCTED. ABATE ANY POTENTIAL TYPE G-2 CATCH BASIN PLANTING SUITABLE FOR BE APPLIED ONLY WHEN ABSOLUTELY VECTORS BY FILLING HOLES IN THE GROUND PER D-8 WELL DRAINED SOIL NECESSARY AND THEN ONLY BY A LICENSED IN AND AROUND THE BIOFILTER FACILITY 10 5 INDIVIDUAL CONTRACTOR. AND BY INSURING THAT THERE ARE NO — = LEGEND AREAS WHERE WATER STANDS LONGER — — THAN 96 HOURS FOLLOWING A STORM. -_ I — ' OUTLET INLET OR OUTLET STRUCTURE CLEAR OBSTRUCTIONS. i An2 7 1 �,�,�e��j 10 FREEBOARD = 12.00" (CONJUNCTIVE USE FACILITY) FC
DAMAGE TO STRUCTURAL COMPONENTS REPAIR OR REPLACE AS APPLICABLE. _ HC — O2 BASIN HEIGHT HMAx = 30.00" SUCH AS WEIRS, INLET, OR OUTLET — — STRUCTURES � — — O3 6 PC 3" MULCH — — —�� — — — xyxyxyx PONDING DEPTH = 6.00" BEFORE THE WET SEASON AND AFTER RAIN WHERE CISTERNS ARE PART OF THE SYSTEM — — FROM SCREENS xXxxxxxxxxxx VAND OVERFLOW DRAINS I— / O' 18" AMENDED SOIL MIN. INFILTRATION RATE 5" HR — ' ' 4 RISER INVERT HTOP =E SEDIMENT AND DEBRIS 18.00" _ _4 PEA GRAVEL
AND DOWNSPOUTS: ENSURE PUMPS ARE I —� I O5 `EMERGENCY WEIR INVERT = 18.00" FUNCTIONING, WHERE APPLICABLE; CHECK — - - INTEGRITY OF MOSQUITO SCREENS; AND; O O U O O 7" GRAVEL LAYER FOR V2 STORAGE O �> CHECK THAT COVERS ARE PROPERLY SEALED 6 LOWER SLOT INVERT = 6.00 AND LOCKED. O O O O O� _ 1 - 5" HIGH X 34" LONG OPENING OUTFLOW —
70 *UPPER SLOT INVERT = 7.00"
h64TCH A64Nh�0ECE THREE (3) 12" RCP 6" PERFORATED PVC PIPE 1 - 4" HIGH X 10" LONG OPENING SITE SPECIFIC DATA I OUTLET PIPES _ I III i CONFORMING TO ASTM D PC POLLUTANT CONTROL WSEL = 6.00" PROJECT NUMBER 15086 WETLANLWEDIA BEO PATENTED PERIMETER CA 30 M L I I— - _ I I 3034 OR EQUIVALENT PROJECT NAME CAMINO LARGO KWD AREA VERREAL UNDERDRAIN U W1fMD 7 IMPERMEABLE 3" DEAD STORAGE " .i LINER* EXIST. GROUND RESTRICTER CAP TO LIMIT FLOW HC HYDROMODIFICATION CONTROL WSEL = 14.52

BELOW UNDERDRAIN
PROJECT LOCATION VISTA, CA ----- +- OUT OF V2 STORAGE AREA, LID ---- o
DRAIN DOWN HOLE, d = 4.00" FC FLOOD CONTROL WSEL = 18.00"

STRUCTURE ID
TREATMENT REQUIRED t
VOLUME BASED (CF) FLOW BASED (CFS) I I I i 1 BIOFILTRATION BASIN DETAIL, BMP 1 *ELEVATION MEASURED FROM BASIN SURFACE N/A 0.6 1 , NOT TO SCALE TREATMENT HGL AVAILABLE (FT) N/K �'
*30 MIL LINER NOTE: 30-MIL IMPERMEABLE LINER FOR BIORETENTION CONFORM TO THE FOLLOWING PEAK BYPASS REQUIRED (CFS) - IF APPLICABLE OFFLINE SPECIFICATIONS: SPECIFIC GRAVITY (ASTM D792): 1.2 (G/CC, MIN.); TENSILE (ASTM D882): 73 PIPE DATA cE MATERIAL DIAMETER ` h (LB/IN-WIDTH, MIN); ELONGATION AT BREAK (ASTM D882): 380 (%, MIN); MODULUS (ASTM D882):
30 (LB/IN-WIDTH, MIN.); AND TEAR STRENGTH (ASTM D1004): 8 (LB/IN, MIN); SEAM SHEAR INLET PIPE 1 305.45 PVC 12 ❑ STRENGTH (ASTM D882) 58.4 (LB/IN, MIN); SEAM PEEL STRENGTH (ASTM D882) 15 (LB/IN, IN).

INLET PIPE 2 N/A N/A N/A
E�
° e SEE COLORADO LINING INTERNATIONAL PVC 30 OUTLET PIPE 304.58 RCP 18" - HTTP: //WWW.COLORADOLINING.COM/PRODUCTS/PVC.PDF) OR APPROVED EQUAL.

PRETREATMENT BIORL IRA TION DISCHARGE �0 INLET PIPE >F14 40WD �O"
GE DRAIN OUTLET PIPE
RIM ELEVATION 314.50 314.50 314.50 SEE NOTES C DOWN LINE SEE NOTES 6" 8 ' 6" SURFACE LOAD PEDESTRIAN PEDESTRIAN PEDESTRIAN PLAN PLAN VIEW 9_O.

FRAME & COVER 3EA 030" 3EA 36" X 60" 2EA O3O" FRAMES AND COWRS SHIPPED LOOSE TO L EFT END VIEW WETLANDMEDIA VOLUME (CY) 11.41 BE GROUTED INTO PLACE BY CONTRACTOR. C/L A4 0VLE CA HATCH ORIFICE SIZE (DIA. INCHES) 02.58 EA 314.50 I NOTES: PRELIMINARY NOT FOR CONSTRUCTION. UPSTREAM BYPASS TO T-11199 OP OF RIM BE SET AT JOZ66. RISERS o MALE NATIONAL PIPE THREAD INSTALLATION NOTES ,- PVC ADAPTER CAST �1. CONTRACTOR TO PROVIDE ALL LABOR, EQUIPMENT, MATERIALS AND IN SIDE OF RISER WALL :::::, RISER WALL INCIDENTALS REQUIRED TO OFFLOAD AND INSTALL THE SYSTEM AND 70ULT APPURTENANCES IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS DRAWING AND THE VA

MANUFACTURERS' SPECIFICATIONS, UNLESS OTHERWISE STATED IN MANUFACTURER'S CONTRACT. ° ° GRA VEL STORAGE L A Q R

2. UNIT MUST BE INSTALLED ON LEVEL BASE. MANUFACTURER TREATMENT UNDERDRAIN ORIFICE RECOMMENDS A MINIMUM 6 A LEVEL ROCK BASE UNLESS SPECIFIED BY UPSTREAM BYPASS THREADED FEMALE NATIONAL THE PROJECT ENGINEER. CONTRACTOR IS RESPONSIBLE FOR VERIFYING - - - - - - - - - - - - FLOW a PIPE THREAD PVC CAP inc, — -i 6" FRENCH DRAIN, bhA,PROJECT ENGINEERS RECOMMENDED BASE SPECIFICATIONS. s WITH DRILLED ORIFICE PERFORATED PVC PIPE

4. CONTRACTOR TO SUPPLY AND INSTALL ALL EXTERNAL CONNECTING RSER Dand p0annhgo dyfl enghc wing, suryeyhg PIPES. ALL PIPES MUST BE FLUSH WITH INSIDE SURFACE OF i 5115 A VE N I D A E N C I N A S CONCRETE (PIPES CANNOT INTRUDE BEYOND FLUSH). INVERT OF ° °a° SUITE 1"° ° ° ° OUTFLOW PIPE MUST BE FLUSH WITH DISCHARGE CHAMBER FLOOR. _ ___ _ =III= =
ALL PIPES SHALL BE SEALED WATERTIGHT PER MANUFACTURERS � � � � ' � ` i CARLSBAD, CA. 92008-4387T (760E OUT A —I I I I I I I I I I I I�III—III STANDARD CONNECTION DETAIL. I — — ) 931-8700

5. CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR INSTALLATION OF ALL PIPES, RISERS, 6 BOTTOM OF BASIN MANHOLES, AND HATCHES. CONTRACTOR TO USE GROUT AND/OR 6w 24�-Off °60 RIGHT END VIEW - ° BRICKS TO MATCH COVERS WITH FINISHED SURFACE UNLESS SPECIFIED 255-O ° ° OTHERWISE.

6. CONTRACTOR RESPONSIBLE FOR CONTACTING BIO CLEAN FOR ELEVATION VIEW ° ACTIVATION OF UNIT MANUFACTURERS WARRANTY IS VOID WITHOUT TREATMENT FLOW (CFS) 0.611 PROPER ACTIVATION BY A BIO CLEAN REPRESENTATIVE.

OPERATING HEAD (FT) 3.0 6 BMP EXHIBIT PERFORATED PVC PIPE ° ° ° ° °
PRETREATMENT LOADING RATE (GPM/SF) 1.8 UNDERDRAIN ORIFICE ° CAMINO LARGO THREADED FEMALE NATIONAL °
GENERAL NOTES WETLAND MEDIA LOADING RATE (GPM/SF) 1.0 PIPE THREAD PVC CAP a ° CITY OF VISTA CALIFORNIA

1. MANUFACTURER TO PROVIDE ALL MATERIALS UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL: ► ►► WITH DRILLED ORIFICE ° a ° ° ° M o T�a�vb� MWS-L-8-24-5 -14 -V-UG °

2. ALL DIMENSIONS, ELEVATIONS, SPECIFICATIONS AND CAPACITIES ARE SUBJECT TO THE rNFOwwN cONTAINED IN THrs DocuMENT Is THE sort I I���' STORM WA TER BIOFI L TRA TION SYSTEM 1 CHANGE. FOR PROJECT SPECIFIC DRAWINGS DETAILING EXACT DIMENSIONS, WEIGHTS „w,,, ,,,M � a7,a� IF PROPERTY W FTH REO AND 1B USQ, lEP rHrs DxuMENT RESTRICT 0 R CAP DETAIL BMP 1 „� ,Gg%ml .147�, NOR ANY PART THEREOF, MAY W USED REPRODUCED OR MODIAED STANDARD DETAIL AND ACCESSORIES PLEASE CONTACT BIO CLEAN. z ��e � v r�rrMs av IN ANY MANNER WITH OUT THE WRITTEN CONSENT OF FORTERRA. A Fortma Cam pany NOT To SCALE SHEET 2 OF 3 K:\CidIo33,N1.At 1/G\SWMP\BMP_TSM.dwg, 3/29/20224:22:35 PM PH2 Page 123 of 165

t
Fes,
• +F
1k7 r
Fj 14-1 m
t }
i j
SANTA BARBARA
OF
AL
new r�r
IL
w ,
wf
y_'s J • 4 i
wlow_
}
F A R M H 0 U S E S P A N I S H R A N C H I PLAN
BassenianLagoni
Front Elevations

ARCHITECTURE - PLANNING - INTERIORS
Copyright 2021 Basseni�an I Lagoni Archileo#s C A M I NO L A G 0 12 . 16 . 2 1 ` , 0 Vista , California
d 6 Cal *iforniaWest .,, 0 2 4 81289
2 2 Legacy o� n e Livinv
08/ 22 3/ 0 PH2 Fge 124 of 165

I
51-011 401-011 51-011
0 01
�0
1 o�
OPT. OBSCURE GLASS
❑ I � I
I F1 I+___
i
DINING '
0 13 4 X 13 8 +--- Gi❑
101
a❑
❑ � � i , - El
(3
MASTER BEDROOM 2 1 u I � I I BATH 1 1 ° x 12
I I ❑ I KITCHEN ---
° I - t------t
O T.CAB./ OPT.
i HOME MANAGEMENT --- -- MASTER 18 LjI❑ ❑ Ct I GREAT BEDROOM I ROOM - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -�, I o 15 8 X 15 0 P
8 9 X 15 2 ` MINIMUM 160 CUBIC FEET OF OVER HEAD STORAGE LINEN
l / M
BA. 2
II ❑ I / I — — — // ❑ 1 6ARA E 1
I I D R I UP i i �iSTOR,�GO 1 202//x�204 ❑ I i i i i i i i i i // \� I -L-J
OPEN TO 1 °�IF" ENTRY BELOW 1 1 JI LAU.

BA. 3
OPT. UPPER CAB 1 BEDROOM 3 1 / LINEN 1 1 2 X 1 1 4 I / 1 II - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - PORCH STORA62
I L--- --� - - - BEDROOM 4
105 X 104 IX —
O
1 DO
O I _ I TYPICAL GARAGE SECTION OC) SCALE:3/16"= 1'.0" _ 1
• O
Ln
� I

PLAN I
5 0 . 0 0 29129 SQ. FT.

TARGET: 2,000 SQ. FT.
4 BEDROOMS / 3 BATHS
2 - CAR GARAGE

FLOOR AREA TABLE
I ST FLOOR 992 SQ. FT.
2ND FLOOR 1 , 137 SQ. FT.

TOTAL 2, 129 SQ. FT.
2 - CAR GARAGE 429 SQ. FT.

PORCH 44 SQ. FT.

PL A N I NOTE: SQUARE FOOTAGE MAY VARY DUE TO METHOD OF CALCULATION Bassenian I Lagoni
Reflects Santa Barbara Elevation

ARCHITECTURE - PLANNING - INTERIORS
Copyright 2022 Bassenian I Lagoni Architects C A M I N O L A R G O 12 . 1 6 . 2 1 ' 1 . 61 - . 11 Vista , California . ' „ Cal *iforniaWest 0 2 4 s 549 . 21 289
A Legacy of Fine Livid
o$i23i2o22
PH2 ge 125 of 165

TOP OF RIDGE TOP OF RIDGE 3 - • - _._: '
oil 00
oo o,% co -------- --- -----------------� - - - - C'4 @ENHANCED ELEVATION ♦ 4 __ - _ _ _ ----_ -- -- - -- _-_ ------------ ----m m------- -- +
ILI
I

FENCE LIME
m-m-
---------------- L- -- - -- -- - -- --- --I ---------------------- --i I
yr' .
{
FINJSH GRADE FINJSH GRADE REAR FRONT 114"= 1 ,=044
TOP Of RIDGE
I
LIM
— — - - I
CAD00
I I
I N I I 1 - - - - - - - - - I a ENHANCED ELEVATION # I I k I
I N I I I I i
FENCE LINE i M I I k I - - - - - I
N i iC> ' I I 00I I
I N 1 I Ad Ad
I M
I
F1 15w-I "DE 1 — — —— — I LEFT 1 1 TOP Of RIDGE ROOF PLAN A RAKE-
�
CH; 5: 12 U.N.O. �;e- -4,
ROOF MATERIAL. CONCRETUTTILE
I
' 00
OD 1
------- I.. .. - - - --I
ENHANCED ELEVATION +

FENCE LINE
00 I
I—

FINISH GRADE
FIGHT
Bassenian Lagoni
Santa Barbara Elevation
ARCHITECTURE • PLANNING • INTERIORS
Copyright 2021 Bassenian I Lagoni Archilects C A M I N 0 L A R G 0 12 . 16 . 2 1 1 1NNM. r +� Vista , California
. 0 2 4 8 Cal 'iforniaWest 59 . 19
osi23i2o22 ALegacyin �' PH2 ge 126 of 165

— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — I
51-011 401-011 51-011
0 01
:o
1 o�
OPT. OBSCURE GLASS
❑ I � I
i
° DINING �I ' °
❑ a❑
o ❑
- MASTER BEDROOM 2 L � BATH 110 x 12
❑ - _ _ I �` KITCHEN - - -
-J - - I - - I z
*MAN
CAB. �
HOME MANAGEMENT --- --
MASTER 18 Lf❑ ❑ I GREAT BEDROOM _ � I ROOM '� �' I o 5 8 X 15 0 182 X 15 2 I \\ MINIMUM 160 CUBIC FEET OF OVER HEAD STORAGE / I I LINEN 1-
BA. 2
/
❑ /
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - ❑ v ❑ ❑I 'il ,, l

I I I I I I I I I
6ARA,dE
UP 4
17 I
17 R I 17 R 1 I ISTORAGFI 1� I 1 20-2/x�20— I OPEN TO °P" ENTRY BELOW I JI LAU.
fi---- ---- I BA. 3 OPT. UPPER
CAB. I I BEDROOM 3 / \ LINEN 1 1 2 xi 1 8 I / \ II
II -- -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I I PORCH -r- L___ __I IIIr
--- BEDROOM 4
- - - - - ❑ I - _ 105 x 104
0 (ED.
1 00
O I _ I TYPICAL GARAGE SECTION O0 SCALE:3/16"= 1'-0" _ 1
• Q
Ln
NO
PLAN
5 0 . 0 0 ' 29129 SQ. FT.

TARGET: 2,000 SQ. FT.
4 BEDROOMS / 3 BATHS
2 - CAR GARAGE

FLOOR AREA TABLE
I ST FLOOR 992 SQ. FT.
2ND FLOOR 1 , 137 SQ. FT.

TOTAL 29129 SQ. FT.
2 - CAR GARAGE 429 SQ. FT.

PORCH 59 SQ. FT.

PL A N I NOTE: SQUARE FOOTAGE MAY VARY DUE TO METHOD OF CALCULATION Bassenian I Lagoni
Reflects Farmhouse Elevation

ARCHITECTURE - PLANNING - INTERIORS
Copyright 2022 Bassenian I Lagoni Architects C A M I N O L A R G O 12 . 1 6 . 2 1 ' -' Vista , CaliforniaCal *iforniaWest ' '` 0 2 4 s 549 . 21289
A Legacy of Fine Livincr
08/23/2022 e 127 of 165 PH2 9

TOP OF RIDGE TOP OF RIDGE ff
I
I I I I
I ---------J OD bo I I
ENHAh10ED ELEVATION
I I , r----
MOM W-
NE
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - j- - - - - - FEfICELt- - _ }� -
I I I I I I r I I I I I I
FINISH GRADE FINJSH GRADE REAR FRONT

TOP OF RIDGE
I
i I I I I I ibo
I
i I I I I I 812 I L-------J - — — — — — — — — — I -, + I I ENHANCED ELEVATION _ _J
I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

FENCE LIFE
I I I I I I IC> 1 I I I I I I r I 1 I I I # I L____:__J -------J OD I I I � � I I I I E I I L- — — — — — — — — — — — I
FINI H GRADEM I - - - - _ — LEFT
L — _ °6 °°

TOP OF RIDGE

ROOF PLAN
PITCH: 5-12 U-NjO-
c/
E. "
T - EA E. 1 " T ROOF MATERIAL: CONCRETE FLAT TILE JCD
I I I 7
OD o

ENHANCED ELEVATION
LI

FENCE LINE
- - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - - �
LJ OD

FINISH GRADE
RIGHT
ssenin L on PLAN
Farm h o u se Elevation
ARCHITECTURE • PLANNING • INTERIORS
opydght 2021 Basseniap I Lagoni Architects C A M I N 0 L A R G 0 12 . 16 . 2 1 •, ' Vista , California
44 Cal *iforniaWest , . ; 0 2 4 Is549 . 2 1289
o8i23i2o22 A f Fin LiviAge PH2 128 of 165

— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — I
51-011 401-011 51-011
0 01
:o
1 — I �
OPT. OBSCURE GLASS
n
i
DINING �I '
0 134 X 13 e +--- G❑
FO I ao
(D El
- MASTER BEDROOM 2
1 L I '
I I BATH 1 1 ° x 12

KITCHEN
OPT. CAB./ OPT.

HOME MANAGEMENT --- --
MASTER "Lf�' I GREAT nu ROOM
BEDROOM � I '� �' I o 5 8 X 15 0 182 X 15 2 I \\ MINIMUM 160 CUBIC FEET OF OVER HEAD STORAGE / � LINEN --1_ /❑❑ // M BA. o
❑ DI
1❑ /
/ I
II � I I ❑i vv / v6ARAdE
DN UP 2\ 17 R I 17 R I ISTORAGF 1 20-/X�20- OPEN To ' OF" EN RY ❑ / v II
BELOW i �i LAU.
+-F-+
fi----rt --- I BA. 3 / \ i
OPT. UPPER CAB 1 BEDROOM 3 / \ LINEN 1 1 2 X 1 1 8 / LJ a I I
I I PORCH -- -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 5TORAee
BEDROOM 4 EG
105 X 104
O
1 00
O I _ I TYPICAL GARAGE SECTION O0 SCALE:3/16"= 1'-0" _ 1
• Q
Ln
No
r PLAN
5 0 . 0 0 ' 29129 SQ. FT.

TARGET: 2,000 SQ. FT.
4 BEDROOMS / 3 BATHS
2 - CAR GARAGE

FLOOR AREA TABLE
I ST FLOOR 992 SQ. FT.
2ND FLOOR 1 , 137 SQ. FT.

TOTAL 29129 SQ. FT.
2 - CAR GARAGE 429 SQ. FT.

PORCH 44 SQ. FT.

PL A N I NOTE: SQUARE FOOTAGE MAY VARY DUE TO METHOD OF CALCULATION Bassenian I Lagoni
Reflects Sanish Ranch Elevation
ARCHITECTURE - PLANNING - INTERIORS p
Copyright 2022 Bassenian I Lagoni Architects C A M I N O L A R G O 12 . 1 6 . 2 1 ' -' Vista , CaliforniaCal *iforniaWest 0 2 4 s 549 . 21289
A Legacy of Fine Livid
o$i23i2o22
PH2 ge 129 of 165

TOP OF MIDGE TOP OF RIDGE --- ----� --- --- - --- -- - ---------- j N-
rn Ilikrn
--—— - D [mil - ----�

ENHANCED ELEVATION
-- --- - �.. -- r=-F.- -- - - - - - - - I-- -- -`
- - - - - - - - - - --- - - FENCE LIME- � � .� ;� —. PC _ 1 _ 1 00 co 1 -- ----- -- --- --- -- --_-�_ . Jy ,M
Fi H. GRADE FINISH GRADE REAR FRONT C 1/4"=1'-0"

TOP OF RIDGE
rn
� N
I I
00 N I
--- -- - - -- - -- - -- _ #' — — — — — — — — — N

EI HANCED ELEVATION
N
N
N
N
FENCE LINE - -
5_..
00 NN`
- I - - - - - -
FINISH GRADE I - - - - N 1� - - - - - - - - - - - - -
LEFT
TOP OFRIDGE 1F LI`''4II C PITH; 5.- 12 U.N.O.

RAKE. 6"
EAVE- 1 2PP
ROOF MATERIAL. fN RETE ' ' TILE
. .- - - - - -
" 1
{ENHANCED ELEVATION
: � L..�.. FENCE LINE
' - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

FINISH GIRD
RIGHT
Bassenian Lagoni P L .A N I
ARCHITECTURE • PLANNING • INTERIOR S pan1 s h Raneh El e v a tl o r1 Copyright 2021 Basseniari I Lagod Architects C A M I N 0 L A R G 0 12 . 16 . 21 41 Vista , California
441
It Cal *iforniaWes , . ; 0 2 4 ' 549 . 2 1289
08/23/2022 g °- n u PH2 Page 130 of 165

.i
f I
F
.��--.'�.�..__,� �. " _� � _�.�..-�� ....r..�� ���fir.• _ ��_ ��� � � �- - Lb TLI
emio
it
S A N T A B A R B A R A
-���---� � �� - ����--ram �� ���� ��� �-�--�r-ti,��---L•-�.-�-����.-�7 ..-����-�r-ti,-�-•�-�r�- iL
r
5 J Tr no
f
Ito
F A R M H 0 U S E S P A N I S H R A N C H Bassenian Lagoni PLAN 2
Front Elevations
AR CHITECTURE • PLANNING • INTERIORS
Copyright 2021 Bassentan I Lagoni Architects C A M I N 0 LA RG 0 12 . 16 . 2 1 Vista , California
0 2 4 s Cal 'iforniaWest 549 . 2 1289
08/23/2022 Legacy - Fine PH2 ge 131 of 165

DN
17R
I
I
N
BEDROOM 5
13$ X112 ,
OPT. OBSCURE GLASS
LINEN
itII
III IIIIo-TI T
lIII iIII
—
CAB. _ DININ V'
G
136 X102 1
- -
I
\\
1GREAT
MASTER
BATH zz L.F. ROOM 76 X 13
MASTER 8 III I r,
OPT. BED ROOM 5
0 3 0 BEDROOM 0 _ IN LIEU OF LOFT 162 X 14$ PT OPT.
9F 0 M
UPP-RC 0 ITC EN - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -,,LAU. BA. 2 Ln [E]
FO
00MINMYM 6 CUBIC FEET OF OVER HEAD T GE
UP
0 vR
0 I - -
7PANTIRY
I
R I S1I O"GE ARAGvEv
--LINEN _ ENTRY ,/ o? x 20 4 `
BEDROOM 2 0
/ \ I
� 10? x112 ERE
I BA 3 ,
LOFT / I
OPT. BEDROOM 5 I BEDROOM 3
145 X I l 0 I 6 0 I / \ 10- x11 — BEDROOM 4 Z- - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - - - - - -� 5ToleAee IIJ
O 106 X 100 — — — — — — — — — L——— --� I
Z
— —PORCH
II
II
_� TYPICAL GARAGE SECTION
o
M
SCALE:3/16"= 1'.0"
O
O O
. O
1n I I PLAN 2 29236 SQ. FT.

TARGET: 2, 150 SQ. FT.
50 . 00 4 BEDROOMS / 3 BATHS / LOFT / OPT. BEDROOM 5
2 - CAR GARAGE

FLOOR AREA TABLE
I ST FLOOR 19021 SQ. FT.
2ND FLOOR 19215 SQ. FT.

TOTAL 2,236 SQ. FT.
2 - CAR GARAGE 428 SQ. FT.
• PLAN 2 PORCH 69 SQ. FT.

Bassenian I Lagon e Reflects Santa Barbara Elevat on NOTE: SQUARE FOOTAGE MAY VARY DUE TO METHOD OF CALCULATION i

ARCHITECTURE - PLANNING - INTERIORS
Copyright 2022 Bassenian I Lagoni Architects C A M I N O L A R G O 12 . 1 6 . 2 1 ' Vista , California
1 „ Cal *iforniaWest 0 2 4 s 549 . 21 289
A Legacy of Fine Li vi d
08/23/2022
PH2 ge 132 of 165

TOP OF RIDGE TOP OF FRIDGE AL
AL AL
' uC> ' '
00 Idi Lad
C------------------- --------- - - - n. + @ENHANCED ELEVATION
-- ------------- ------------ ----
I -- --- -- -- — Y'

FENCE LIME
- - -- — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — FINISH GRADE FINISH GRADE REAR FRONT A 1/4"= 1 '-0"

TOP OF RIDGE
00 - - -- - - - - -- - - -- - -- - + - - - - - - - - - 3-5,12 I
( ENHANCED ELEVATION — — — — — — —— — — — I . I I

FENCE LINE
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - f I 00 7
I
I

FINISH GRADE
LEFT
TOP OF RIDGE L
I I
- - - - - - - - - - - -
I
I I

L - - - - - - - - - - - - J
ROOF PLAN A
PITCH: S:12 U.N.O.

RAKE: 0"
-------3 EVE. 121, ROOF MATERIAL: N RETE " " TILE
OD �
- - - -� +
a,ENHANCED ELEVATION
LaiFENCE LINE
FIf�l15w-I DE
RIGHT
Bassenian Lagoni
Santa Barbara Elevation
ARCHITECTURE • PLANNING • INTERIORS
Copyright 2021 Bassenian I Lagem Architects C A M I N 0 L A R G 0 12 . 16 . 2 1 931 f r W04• -vj,, .,fir} ♦ � Vista , California
lel +1 94S 553 9100 1 0 2 4 a CaliforniaWest 08/23/2022 A f n � e 133 of 165 PH2 9

I
I
5'-011 37'-0" 8,-0" O
N
OPT. OBSCURE GLASS
- I I
I
II I I I I
LINEN I 0 oPT.I DINING
I CAB.

I I 136 X 102 GREAT MASTER Ii
zz L.F.

I III —II
t
ROOM
BATH 76 X138
MASTER 0 0

BEDROOM
I62 X 14$ o
OPT. ��
I UPPI�SJNURc -------

KITCHEN
LAU. BA. 2
III
E,
fi==rt=rt p I I o =-00- PANY�-------- I - ' 00 I M
— — — — MINIMUM 6�CUBIC FEET OF OVER HEAD4TRAGI
I I
II I I UP , II I 17R u II � i
DN /
17 R I STORAGE x� ARAGE
El o LINEN _ ENTRY o? x 20 4 ' I BEDROOM 2
102 X 11 ° _ I BA. 3 ;
II
LOFT / I I I - - - OPT. BEDROOM 5 I BEDROOM 3
145 X 1 1 0
I 106 XIIO
BEDROOM 4 STORAft 106 X 100 - - - - - - - - - L——— --� II
==3,
I z
PORCH
- - - - - - - - - - j� 77- 707
I II I
I
o TYPICAL GARAGE SECTION
o SCALE:3/16"= 1'.0"
O
O O
• O
1n I I PLAN 2 2,236 SQ. FT.

TARGET: 2, 150 SQ. FT.
50 . 00 4 BEDROOMS / 3 BATHS / LOFT / OPT. BEDROOM 5
2 - CAR GARAGE

FLOOR AREA TABLE
I ST FLOOR 19021 SQ. FT.
2ND FLOOR 19215 SQ. FT.

TOTAL 2,236 SQ. FT.
2 - CAR GARAGE 428 SQ. FT.

PORCH 69 SQ. FT.

Bassenian I Lagoni PLAN 2
Reflects Farmhouse Elevation NOTE: SQUARE FOOTAGE MAY VARY DUE TO METHOD OF CALCULATION

ARCHITECTURE - PLANNING - INTERIORS
Copyright 2022 Bassenian I Lagoni Architects C A M I N O L A R G O 12 . 1 6 . 2 1 ' Vista , California
Cal *iforniaWest
0 2 4 s 549 . 21289
A Legacy of Fine Livid
o$i23i2o22
PH2 ge 134 of 165

TOP OF RIDGE TOP OF RIDGE ���� � T. ,____��T�� Tom, - + - . . .__.__ -•,J� ,_- ..,--.,� . ,____ �,____ ,.., , I I I I
- . .t4
-- ------J I Ico I - - ------------------------------� +
@ENHANCED ELEVATION
J I k I
l .

I i FENCE LINE
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — rt — — — — — — — — — — — k I
y
I
j k I 1 _ 1 ON I I k I 400 L------------------------------J k I J.
k I
FINISH GRADS FIh11�H ItADE FEAR FONT 1 1 H=1'-0"

TOP OF RIDGE
. - -- - -- -
�
00 I I I k ! ■ I ! ■
I 1 I
f I 1 I I I I M I I Iai
k I I I 1
k I 1I I I k I
I I 1I ! I ! I
L----J L----J L-------J L-------J + - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - I
ENHANCED ELEVATION — — —— — — — — — — — I I I
I I

FENCE LIME
- - - - - - — 1 L - - - - - - - - - - - - _ - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - � I
I
I I I I00co
I I
I I
I

FINISH GRADS
I I
LEFT I Ir - - - - -
I
I - - - - - - - - = — J
I I
TOP OF RIDGE I
T L - - - - - - - - - - - - J ---*.tom-. _ --- .,--•-• ---- -T ----« 4 ROOF PLAN
PITCH: 5- 12 U-f .O. V
- — f AK -. Err ------i ROOF MATERIAL- CONCRETE FLAT TILE � I
I i
I I �
I I M
I
CD
I I �
+
p ENHANCED ELEVATION
I I I k
I i I I
I I I I
I I I FENCE LINE
I I I I
I I
I I I I
I

FINISH RADII
RIGHT
Bassenian PLAN 2
Farlmh o us e EIevatl o n
ARCHITECTURE • PLANNING • INTERIORS
Copyright 2021 Basseman I Lagenl ArchRects C A M I N 0 L A G 0 12 . 16 . 2 1 Vista , California
44 Cal 'iforniaWest osi23i2o22 4 -J ` Fin � PH2 ge 135 of 165

I
I
5'-011 37'-0" 8,-0" O
N
OPT. OBSCURE GLASS
- I I
I
II I I I I
LINEN I 0 oPT.I DINING
I CAB.

I I 136 X 102 GREAT MASTER Ii
zz L.F.

I III —II
t
ROOM
BATH 76 X138
MASTER 0 0

BEDROOM
I62 X 14$ o
OPT. ��
I UPP �B.I�SJNURC -------

KITCHEN
LAU. BA. 2
III
E,
fi==rt=rt p I I o =-00- PANY�-------- I - ' 00 I M
— — — — MINIMUM 6�CUBIC FEET OF OVER HEAD4TRAGI
I I
II I I UP , II I 17R u II � i
DN /
17 R I STORAGE x� ARAGE
El o LINEN _ ENTRY o? x 20 4 ' I BEDROOM 2
102 X 112 _ I BA. 3 ;
II
LOFT / I I
r - - - - - - - - - - -
OPT. BEDROOM 5 I BEDROOM 3 I 14— XII — I '. 106 X110
==31,
BEDROOM 4 5TORAft 106 X 100 — — — — — — — — — L——— --� I I
z
— — — — — — — — - - - - - - -I� - II
II
_ I TYPICAL GARAGE SECTION
CIO M SCALE:3/16"= 1'.0"
O
O O
• O
1n I I PLAN 2 2,236 SQ. FT.

TARGET: 2, 150 SQ. FT.
50 . 00 4 BEDROOMS / 3 BATHS / LOFT / OPT. BEDROOM 5
2 - CAR GARAGE

FLOOR AREA TABLE
I ST FLOOR 19021 SQ. FT.
2ND FLOOR 19215 SQ. FT.

TOTAL 2,236 SQ. FT.
2 - CAR GARAGE 428 SQ. FT.

PORCH 58 SQ. FT.

Bassenian I Lagoni PLAN 2
Reflects Spanish Ranch Elevation NOTE: SQUARE FOOTAGE MAY VARY DUE TO METHOD OF CALCULATION ARCHITECTURE • PLANNING • INTERIORS
Copyright 2022 Bassenian I Lagoni Architects C A M I N O L A R G O 12 . 1 6 . 2 1 ' Vista , California
Cal *iforniaWest
0 2 4 s 549 . 21289
A Legacy of Fine Livid
o$i23i2o22
PH2 ge 136 of 165

TOP O; RIDUG TOP OF RIDGE --------------------------------
L
]mom ' ' -- -----J 00 — ;. . OD — 1 � 1 ENHANCED ELEVATION 4 ;�� 4 - - - - � :�.� `�_• i 'J _ ,±tip_, -- -- �, ------------------------------ ----------------
_-_-
s —.

FENCE LONE _ - - -- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - " - - - - — - - - - - — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — __ YAW ._.
1 w
_ 1 00
3llilk.. I,t7i 1
---------------------
FI TINISH GRADE REAR FRONT C 114"=1'-0"

TOP OF RIDGE
�.�.�—.�-�.�--�.�.�_�,••��v�•�•�.�•�.�•�•.�.�.�•�•�—.�..�.�.r-....��.�-�.�.�.�-�-�-�-�.�.���.�.� .v .—�.�. vim. r- -- -- r----- -------� r-------�
t
_ r
_ t
——
Y - @ENHANCED ELEVATION — — — — — _ _. —— ....._ — — I

FENCE LINE
— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — viol
:: 00

FINISH GRADE
I
LEFT
4-12
I

TOP OF RIDGE
ROOF PLAN C
�.�--�-��--��tv�-�,r--yam��rw�-�r� v t.'-+�.-�-��ti-'�._�.'�+- -_�„"ti+�•-�r���'�'� �+�-'�'���''�'�"ti'�• PITCH: 5:12 U-N,O. - — --' - - - - RAKE: 6" r------- EAVE. 12" ROOF MATERIAL: CONCRETUTTILE
L- I._
_ 1
00 ON
ENHANCED ELEVATION +1
I
6 FENCE LIVE
— -- - - - — — — — — — — — — — — ON
-_
00 e S �i-

FINISH GRADE
RIGHT
Bassenian Lagoni PLAN 2
ARCHITECTURE • PLANNING • INTERIORS p
� I� i Ranch � Iatir�
Copyright 2021 Basseman I Lagom Architects C A M I N 0 L A R G 0 12 . 16 . 2 1 0 2 4 a Cal 'iforniaWest 4 Legacy ` Fin Live'
osi23i2o22
PH2 ge 137 of 165

i
ddbb W
i
IL
� y
J
. _ w m ". +l��frW�t�. 'j�'�' - y{S► ,.�' �- �tA4� L � +; � ����a.���-�. •I�}M1' �4.-�'r' ��� i i
I�
.I
I
1 I
i
t ; iL 4 v
I sf -.e LL f '_4lp .s
jd-
iL
lb.
r k _ pm 1111 -14'
�k 1 1 11
T rr. p ry �� b •T i i
IIIIIII�
i
■
31 O"O"M 100
r r
NoWO beach,CA USA 9M
lel.+1 949 553 9100
fax+1949 553 05" 6 • • •

I
51-011 401-011 51-011
0 01
0 1
�n
I
I
I
I
OPT. OBSCURE GLASS - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- -ITI - - - - - - DIN
ININ +___ a0 17 R

IIII III
I
0I
QIIII
O1 x3
El
BA. 4 O
- - -

OPEN TO
28 L.F. BELOWMASTER KITCHEN MASTER BATH GREAT t------tBEDROOM ROOM -- NTR 170 x 160 0 LINEN 89 x 159O ----------------- -I
m-
I \ -
IO -+I IPT Lu O 01'
- - - - - - - - -/- I 1

BED O-
M 5
106 x10
FX
jo
MINIMUM 160 CUBIC FEET OF OVER HEAD STORAGE IU0rt BA. 2 M --4 °
I i I i P Q =#
u I
II 1 1 1 1 I -- 17 / I /
rZoo/z/ z /-Z /-Z -L- LJ
DN I I I STORAGE GARAGE 17R 204 x20` I OPT. BEDROOM 5 w/ BATH 4

IN LIEU OF LOFT
BA. 3
ENTRY
// \\
OPEN TO / \ BELOW I O
I / \
I
BEDROOM 2
LOFT / 10° x124 FEDz/- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - \-\-JI OPT. BEDROOM 5 BEDROOM 3
W/ BA 4 100 x 105 I 1 0 I
130 x154
BEDROOM 4 / 1 5TORnee 1 OPT. OFFICE PORCH L J II
108 x 100 I I
I I I z 1 oo
O I _ I TYPICAL GARAGE SECTION OC) SCALE:3/16"= 1'.0" _ 1
Ln
• O
� I
PLAN 3
5 0 . 0 0 2,374 SQ. FT.

TARGET: 2,350 SQ. FT.
4 BEDROOMS / 3 BATHS / LOFT /
OPT. BEDROOM 5 W/ BA. 4
2 - CAR GARAGE

FLOOR AREA TABLE
I ST FLOOR 19064 SQ. FT.
2ND FLOOR 1 ,310 SQ. FT.

TOTAL 2,374 SQ. FT.
2 - CAR GARAGE 429 SQ. FT.

PORCH 48 SQ. FT.

Bassenian I Lagoni PLAN 3
Reflects Santa Barbara Elevat on NOTE: SQUARE FOOTAGE MAY VARY DUE TO METHOD OF CALCULATION i

ARCHITECTURE - PLANNING - INTERIORS
Copyright 2022 Bassenian I Lagoni Architects C A M I N O L A R G O 12 . 1 6 . 2 1 ' Vista , California
1 „ I O r n I e 0 2 4 s 549 . 21 289
A Legacy of Fine Livid
o$i23i2o22
PH2 ge 139 of 165

TOP OF RIDGE TOP OF RIDGE xi
. . . . . . _ AL Jm 00 t <D 00 a�
co rq
co
----- -- — — —
---- -- -- - — -- -- — -- -- ---------- + "? I +

ENHANCED ELEVATION
r- ----- -- --- ----- ----- ----- -- - -------------- -- - -- -- ----- - -- -- vp
t

FENCE LINE
00 CS 0 i.

FINISH GRADE V��{y FI DE REAR FRONT A 1/4 k p=1`_0"

TOP OF RIDGE
JCL a
r- - - - - - - - - - - - - -
I I
I 4,12
00 — J—
CO
---- -� L-- -- -� � - - -- - -- - - � - - -- --- + I
ENHANCED ELEVATION 111k UN
I
I
I
I
I

FENCE LINE
I
CK
00 I
I
I

FINISH GRADE
LEFT
I I I

TOP OF RIDGE

IF PLAIN
AL AL PITCH; 5,12 U.N.O.

RAKE per,
EA Y E: 1 L"
ROOF MATERIAL. CONCRETUTTILE
' 00
00 @ENHANCED ELEVATION

FENCE LIME
zra.* M
00 FINISH G ADE
RIGHT
Bassenian I Lagoni
Santa Barbara Elevation
ARCHITECTURE • PLANNING • INTERIORS
Copynght 2021 Bassenian I Lagonp Archttects C A M I N 0 L A G 0 12 . 16 . 2 1 it M.

Vista , California
Cal *iforniaWest
49 . 212 9
A Legacy of-Fine LiviKge osi23i2o22
PH2 140 of 165

51-011 401-011 51-011
0 01
0 1
�n
I
I
I
I
OPT. OBSCURE GLASS
ININ +--- CJ,O
O I
.10
8 x 13 a QO
II
El
MASTER 28 L.F. I I KITCHEN MASTER BATH I GREAT II
BEDROOM I ROOM t------t I O NTR
17� x 16� O � LINEN 189 x 159 I I ------
Lsl
OPT I I I I O O
- - fi lu
I I �I � � BA. 2 \ MINIMUM 160 CUBIC FEET OF OVER HEAD STORAGE / I ch 4- - - -- -�
U OI /
1 1 1 1 17
DN I I I STORAGE GARAGE 17R
I I I I I I I 204 X20\ I I BA. 3
ENTRY
// \\
OPEN TO L / \ BELOW I Lo
I / \
BEDROOM 2
I A / \ I
LOFT / 10° x124 I- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - OPT. BEDROOM 5 BEDROOM 3
W/ BA 4 lo° x 105
I
13� x154
BEDROOM 4 / - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - STORA62
OPT. FFICE I L--- --J II
108 x1o°
O
O
1 DO
O I _ I TYPICAL GARAGE SECTION OC) SCALE:3/16"= 1'.0" _ 1
• O
Ln
PLAN 3
50 . 00 2,374 SQ. FT.

TARGET: 2,350 SQ. FT.
4 BEDROOMS / 3 BATHS / LOFT /
OPT. BEDROOM 5 W/ BA. 4
2 - CAR GARAGE

FLOOR AREA TABLE
I ST FLOOR 19064 SQ. FT.
2ND FLOOR 1 ,310 SQ. FT.

TOTAL 2,374 SQ. FT.
2 - CAR GARAGE 429 SQ. FT.
• PLAN 3 PORCH 35 SQ. FT.

Bassenian I Lagon e Reflects Farmhouse Elevation NOTE: SQUARE FOOTAGE MAY VARY DUE TO METHOD OF CALCULATION

ARCHITECTURE - PLANNING - INTERIORS
Copyright 2022 Bassenian I Lagoni Architects C A M I N O L A R G O 12 . 1 6 . 2 1 ' Vista , California
1 „ Cal *iforniaWest 0 2 4 s 549 . 21289
A Legacy of Fine Livid
o$i23i2o22
PH2 ge 141 of 165

TOP OF RIDGE TOP OF RIDGE u ii � • u II
Il II II II

I II II II I I
II II a II II II i
-
Ik
_-1r--JI__1�_
------ _--_--------------__
1 law k I I I I I
— ,,
' I I ON L----J L---------� i i 00 I 00 y
E _%L-------- --------------------J t 1 f
Ia ENHANCED ELEVATION
r
r---- I i.

I 1 II � •. - - I { I J
I I ]
'-
•
I I I I FENCE LINE
f # LL.

F t
ON
I I I J
I I I j
00 = y 00 ' L-------------------------------41
� ti ` I I � I • '.Y •w 1 ..

FINISH GRADE FINISH GRADE REAR FRONT 1/4 IP=1 1-011

TOP OF MIDGE
4,12
I I I I I I I
I I I I I I I I — — — - -- -
- - - - - — — — —— — — -
- — —
4 F T
I 1
00 L_----__J L__--__ -- I C-4 I I � I
( ENHANCED ELEVATION
I
I I
I
I I I I I I 1 I I I I I I - rENCE LINE
I I I I I I I I ON L J
F I I
---- ----� ----- -- I I � I
I cp� I
I I
;_ISH DE I I C — — — — — - - - - - �
LEFT I - - - - 4:12

TOP OF RIDGE

ROOF PLAN

II II

II II II II II
PITCH: 5' 12 U"I1. .

II II II II II II it
II a II II II II 11 RAKE- 6p' - -- II �i II II a II Ik n II iM ii II SAVE: 1 2"

II II II II II II II
11 Ik II II II II 11 II n II II a II- - V - II II IIIIII IIIIIIII IIIIII IIII IIII ICII II I I

I II
II
CONCRETE FLAT TILEII II ROOF MATERIAL.

II II II II
II II II II
II II I II
II
LL
11 II II II II II II II II II 11 II II �L-- -- -- --u-- -- -- -- _JL_JL_JL— -- -- -- --u-- -- -- --1�— I I I k
co
00 I I I I
I I I kr
I I �
I
L _ •J
@ENHANCED ELEVATION

FENCE LINE
iS.

FINISH GkADE
RIGHT
Bassenian I Lagoni
Farm o use Eievati on

ARCHITECTURE - PLANNING - INTERIORS
Copyright 2021 Basserlran I Lagenl Architects C A M I N 0 L A G 0 12 . 16 . 2 1 ¢ � ,•� j :: �' i Vista , California • Cal I o r I e
F0 2 4 ' 549 . 2 1289
1 Legacy - Fine . nq
osi23i2o22
PH2 ge 142 of 165

51-011 401-011 51-011
0 01
0 1
�n
I
I
I
I
OPT. OBSCURE GLASS - - - - ININ +--- CJ,O
O I
1 8 x 13 a QO
II
El
II I
MASTER 28 L.F. I I KITCHEN MASTER BATH I GREAT II
BEDROOM I ROOM t------t I I
O NTR
17� x 16� O LINEN 189 x 159 I +— —+ -- —
------
OPT I I I I O O
+— —+ Im O fi IU rt I \ MINIMUM 160 CUBIC FEET OF OVER HEAD STORAGE / I I BA; . 2
01 I / // rn FX (:Do mVv'g
II o I i i U OI r / 17 12 � i
I I I I I I \ r I I \r I
DN I I I I STORAGE GA�RA�G E 17R
I I I I I I I 204 X20\ I I r/ \\
II BA. 3
ENTRY
// \\
OPEN TO / \ BELOW I . r \ BEDROOM 2 // \\ Ir \ I
E0
LOFT / 10° x124 z— — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — — —\N OPT. BEDROOM 5 BEDROOM 3
W/ BA 4 100 x 105 I 1 0 I
130 x154 77 BEDR OM 4 / PORCH I 5T L J I OPT. OFFICE —
108 x 100 I
II I x
CD
O
1 00
O I _ I TYPICAL GARAGE SECTION OC) SCALE:3/16"= 1'.0" _ 1
• O
Ln
PLAN 3
5 0 . 0 0 29374 SQ. FT.

TARGET: 2,350 SQ. FT.
4 BEDROOMS / 3 BATHS / LOFT /
OPT. BEDROOM 5 W/ BA. 4
2 - CAR GARAGE

FLOOR AREA TABLE
I ST FLOOR 19064 SQ. FT.
2ND FLOOR 1 ,310 SQ. FT.

TOTAL 2,374 SQ. FT.
2 - CAR GARAGE 429 SQ. FT.

PORCH 45 SQ. FT.

Bassenian I Lagoni PLAN 3
Reflects Spanish Ranch Elevation NOTE: SQUARE FOOTAGE MAY VARY DUE TO METHOD OF CALCULATION ARCHITECTURE • PLANNING • INTERIORS
Copyright 2022 Bassenian I Lagoni Architects C A M I N O L A R G O 12 . 1 6 . 2 1 ' Vista , California
1 „ Cal *iforniaWest 0 2 4 s 549 . 21289
A Legacy of Fine Livid
o$i23i2o22
PH2 ge 143 of 165

TOP OF RIDGE TOP OF RIDGE - -z _ �- � � � -�.-'�--w}-�.--,�L.�-v .� �---� _ .���.-v v-=�. �..- .mot:-��_ -�ti--��� .���. �.-v-=�. �. �-_�- .v��tom- y r`� � -�'�-�� _ ������ � � � _ ���� -�^'�•--.-�-�����ti�-_.

I
( 1 y
- _ C00
k
y
+ t 4 - + ENHANCED ELEVATI0N
-
-��� — � _ — � � — � ��_•��� ��. " -fir_� n � - -_ ti.�—� F ir. F
F---------------------------- ------------------------ ------- FENCE LINEtam.
� -- � .•
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- - - - - - r _ - t t
1 1 p 00 � F Y
FINISH GRADS 4FINISHGRADZ REAR FRONT C

TOP OF RIDGE
E.
----- C _- - - J -- --- - - - - --- OD
---_- - - -- - - L-@ENHANCED
+- - -- --- -ELEVATION I I I I
I I
I I
I I

FENCE LINE
- I
OD
I
- --� - ' ' - - ------ I I I I
I I
I I
I
FINISH GRADE I
- - - - - - - - - - -
LEFT I --- I I I
I �J
L — _ — „ -i

TOP OF RIDGE
_ ROOF PLAID C P1T H: 5:1 U.N.O. ;e o•
RAKE: I "
ROOF MATERIAL: N RETE ' ' TILE
_ _ 1
1 1
+
@ENHANCED ELEVATION

FENCE LIME
OD
FINISH FkADE
RIGHT
Bassenian Lagoni
ARCHITECTURE • PLANNING • INTERIORS p
Copyright 2021 Bassentan I Lagem Architects C A M I N 0 L A R G 0 12 . 16 . 2 1 • 0 4. 'I.'•` Vista , California
2660
NoWO 5mh.CA USA
lel +1 94S 553 9100 1 0 2 4 a Cal 'iforniaWest A Legacy of Fine -Livid
osi23i2o22
PH2 ge 144 of 165

PLANNING COMMISSION

STAFF REPORT

PUBLIC HEARING
July 19, 2022
P21-0300
REQUEST: A request for a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Site Development Plan and Tentative Subdivision Map for 46 single- family dwelling units in the proposed Medium Density Residential land use designation (10 du/ac) and located at 2123 N. Santa Fe Avenue.

APPLICANT: California West Communities
RECOMMENDATIONS: 1. Adopt Resolution 2022- , recommending City Council approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration
and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
for 46 single-family dwelling units located at 2123 N.

Santa Fe Avenue

2. Adopt Resolution 2022- , recommending City
Council approval of a General Plan Amendment,
Zone Change, Site Development Plan and Tentative
Subdivision Map for 46 single-family dwelling units
located at 2123 N. Santa Fe Avenue
LOCATION: The project site is located at 2123 N. Santa Fe Avenue, at the northeast corner of N. Santa Fe Avenue and Camino Largo, between Taylor Street to the south and Osborne Street to the north (APN: 159- 240-07) (see Exhibit 3)
LAND AREA: 9.3 acres
KEY ISSUES: Does the project meet the Development Code requirements for the R-1-13 (Residential) zone and small lot development?
Is the proposed project consistent with the General Plan? BACKGROUND:

On October 17, 2017, the Planning Commission recommended City Council approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and that the City Council make an application to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) for the Annexation/Reorganization of Assessor's Parcel Number 159-240-07 (2123 N. Santa Fe Avenue) as well as approval of a Tentative Subdivision Map and Zoning Change (pre-zoning to A-1) for an 8-lot single family residential subdivision located at the northeast corner of North Santa Fe Avenue and Camino Largo, between Taylor Street to the south and Osborne Street to the north (Vote: 6-0-1, Cramer absent).

P21-0300SR 1
EXHIBIT 5
08/23/2022 PH2 Page 145 of 165

On December 12, 2017, the City Council approved the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, Tentative Subdivision Map and Zoning Change (pre-zoning to A-1) for the 8-lot single-family residential subdivision and approved moving forward with an application to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) for the Annexation/Reorganization of Assessor's Parcel Number 159-240-07.

Subsequent to LAFCO's approval of the annexation of subject project site, the property owners attempted to move the project forward but they were not successful in doing so.

After several years of project dormancy and inactivity, California West Communities have decided to propose a different residential product at this location that becomes the subject of this request for consideration by the Planning Commission. Basically, proposing a total of 46 single-family dwelling units and associated site improvements where 8 single-family residential homes were once proposed back in 2017.

I. SITE AND PROJECT DESCRIPTION
A. Site Description
The project site supports a non-operational commercial palm tree nursery.

The nursery operations consisted of selling palm trees that were grown aboveground and maintained in box stock containers. Remnants of the former nursery remain onsite including hoop frames of the former greenhouses, palm trees in box planters, and piles of green waste. There is a structure that is associated with the former nursery operations located in the south-central portion of the site and trucks and machinery scattered throughout the site. Physical improvements on the site consist of internal dirt access drives, chain link fencing and gates, and wooden electrical transmission poles and overhead wires.

Topographically, there is an east-west trending ridge situated in the north central portion of the project site. Elevations on the project site range from 361 feet amsl at the top of the ridge to 295 amsl in the southwestern corner of the property adjacent to Camino Largo.

The project site is located immediately south of the City's northwest boundary. Land uses surrounding the project site include Osborne Street, rural residential and nurseries to the north, North Coast Church to the north/northwest, rural residential and the single-family homes in the Sandalwood neighborhood to the south, Rancho Guajome Adobe Museum and Rancho Guajome Regional Park (in the City of Oceanside) to the west (see Figure 2 in Attachment A). The closest school to the site is Guajome Park Academy located at 2000 North Santa Fe Avenue, approximately 0.25 mile southwest of the project site. The closest City fire station to the site is Vista Fire Department (VFD) Station No. 3 located at 1070 Old Taylor Road, approximately one mile to the east. The closest police station to the site is the San Diego County Sheriff's Department (SDCSD) located at 30 Main Street Unit G130, approximately two miles southeast of the project site. The nearest public airports to the project site are McClellan Palomar P21-0300SR 2
08/23/2022 PH2 Page 146 of 165

Airport and Oceanside Municipal Airport, each located approximately five miles south and west of the project site, respectively.

B. Project Description
The proposed project consists of a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Site Development Plan and Tentative Subdivision Map to develop 46 single-family dwelling units, drainage improvements, wet and dry utilities, private streets, common and private open space (including one large common open lawn area), and all associated infrastructure on a 9.3- acre parcel. The 46 proposed units would result in a density of 4.95 dwelling units per acre. Conceptual architectural plans for the homes are proposed and included as part of this request. The project site is currently designated by the General Plan as RR Rural Residential (1 du/ac) and the project would require a General Plan Amendment from RR to Medium Density (MD) residential land use (maximum of 10 dwelling units per acre) and a zone change from A-1 to R-1-B (small lot subdivision), 3,600 square foot lots (minimum size) to accommodate the 46 units on the subject site.

The project includes the conversion of the former nursery to residential land uses. To do so, the project would demolish 10,600 square feet (sf) of existing structures that include a greenhouse and a shed. The 46 homes (4-bedroom plans with optional 5t" bedroom) would range from 2,129 sf to 2,374 sf and extend to a height of no greater than 35 feet. Architecturally, the project would provide three residential styles: Santa Barbara; Farmhouse; and Spanish Ranch, each constructed with stucco facades that are enhanced with wood and brick accents. Flat planes would be disrupted with portions of the residences recessed further from the street front, covered front porches, and pitched roofs. Internally, the development would have commonality by using a neutral color palette while expressing individuality through a variation of architectural features such as shutters, arches, and porch and entryway size and placement. Retaining walls are planned for each lot with maximum heights of approximately five feet.

The project is designed to adhere to the General Plan land use and community design goal of sharing common development patterns among neighborhoods. As such, to complement the existing surrounding residential areas, the project is designed in a manner to reflect the styles of agrarian farmhouse and Spanish ranch architecture.

The 46 single-family homes would provide garage parking for two vehicles with two guest parking spaces on the driveway. An additional 46 open guest parking spaces are distributed throughout the site. In all, a total of 230 parking spaces would be provided onsite.

The project would provide 14,923 sf of common open space along the eastern perimeter of the project site. In addition, the project provides landscaped areas (including slopes) that would support a variety of groundcover and shrubs with mature trees within the eastern and northern P21-0300SR 3
08/23/2022 PH2 Page 147 of 165

perimeter of the project site as well as within buffers between individual rear yards.

Access would be provided by four private cul-de-sac streets that extend from Camino Largo. Resident parking would be provided via two-car garages and individual driveways with additional parking being provided along both sides of each cul-de-sac private street. Camino Largo would be improved from an unclassified gravel road to a two-way paved street with a curb and gutter system and sidewalks. The pavement along the southern half of Camino Largo would be improved to a minimum width of 28 feet. In addition, the four private cul-de-sac streets would be 40 feet wide curb to curb to accommodate on-street parking on both sides of the streets, which would meet the proposed parking requirements set forth in the small lot subdivision/residential development ordinance adopted by the City Council on May 10, 2022. The project would also include the addition of a stop sign at the intersection of Camino Largo and N. Santa Fe Avenue. In addition, to improve line of sight when turning south onto N. Santa Fe Avenue from Camino Largo, two existing trees would be removed at the southeast corner of Camino Largo and N. Santa Fe Avenue.

To accommodate storm water flows and maintain water quality, a 16,219-sf biofiltration basin would be constructed, in the southwest corner of the project site and an underground storage vault/modular wetland system (MWS) would be constructed along the eastern perimeter of the site.

Additional storm drain facilities including a curb and gutter system would be part of the project design. Other new and/or upgraded onsite infrastructure would connect locally to existing water, sewer and storm drain infrastructure that are within an existing easement that parallels Camino Largo.

An electrical transmission line and pole that currently traverse the site would be removed and electrical utilities would be undergrounded. A quitclaim of the current San Diego Gas and Electric (SDG&E) utility easement noted on the Tentative Subdivision Map would occur with a new easement created for the underground infrastructure.

The project would be constructed in one phase. Project construction activities would consist of demolition; site preparation; grading; installation of underground utilities, and internal streets paving; building construction; and architectural coatings. Subject to the City's approvals, demolition is slated to commence in November 2022, with grading and trenching for underground infrastructure to begin in late winter/early spring 2023. Site paving and construction of the homes follow, with project completion anticipated in fall of 2023. In all, the project would include 40,950 cubic yards (cy) of export.

Proposed drainage improvements would include curbs and gutters, curb inlets, swales, catch basins, concrete brow ditches, and storm drain P21-0300SR 4
08/23/2022 PH2 Page 148 of 165

pipes. The improvements would convey on-site storm water runoff through one biofiltration basin (BMP-A) and one underground vault (BMP-2, detention for the 100-year storm event).

Biofiltration basins and storm drain system would accommodate existing drainage through the site with total discharge not exceeding pre- development conditions. The storm drain system would be capable of handling a 100-year storm event as mentioned above and would include post-construction water quality Best Management Practices (BMPs) in accordance with local, regional, and State stormwater regulations.

The proposed project involves the construction of 46 single-family residences, which would increase the impervious surface area at the site.

The project runoff would be treated by the proposed biofiltration basin and the underground stormwater vault/MWS. Runoff from the westerly half of the project would enter a biofiltration basin at the southwest corner of the site. A proposed storm drain would convey the treated runoff out of the biofiltration basin and to a culvert along North Santa Fe Avenue and eventually the unnamed drainage that parallels Camino Largo. A proposed storm drain would convey the treated runoff from an underground stormwater vault/ MWS situated in the eastern portion of the site and discharge towards the unnamed natural drainage course that parallels the south side of Camino Largo. Thus, similar to existing conditions, runoff from the project site would ultimately enter the unnamed drainage. A Hydromodification Screening was prepared for the project to quantify the project's erosion susceptibility rating (low, medium, or high).

The analysis involved a channel screening analysis that established the limits of the study area and included a field survey in addition to archival research. The conclusion of the Hydromodification Screening is that the project has an overall low susceptibility to erosion both onsite and offsite within the unnamed channel and the limits of the study area. Therefore, analysis concluded that the project would not result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site. Impacts would be less than significant.

Dry utilities that include electric, gas, and telecommunication infrastructure would be extended to the site from existing infrastructure, and the current overhead electrical lines that traverse the site would be undergrounded across the site and reconnected to the existing infrastructure off site.

C. Required Approvals
The project is a proposed General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Site Development Plan and Tentative Subdivision Map. The Planning Commission will make a recommendation to City Council, and ultimately the City Council is authorized to approve the project.

Following approval of a Tentative Subdivision Map, the developer has a period of three years (with additional extensions of two or more years P21-0300SR 5
08/23/2022 PH2 Page 149 of 165

granted by the State under various Assembly and Senate Bills if applicable at that time) to process a Final Map, otherwise the Tentative Subdivision Map expires. The Final Map can be approved by the City Council when a licensed engineer submits a map which substantially complies with the Tentative Subdivision Map and satisfies the applicable conditions, including the completion of street and other public improvements or the provision of bonds guaranteeing the construction of those improvements, typically within one year. Upon recordation of the Final Map, a legal lot is created and homes may be constructed. Consistent with State law and City policy, associated discretionary permits approved in conjunction with a subdivision map are also valid for the term and life of the map.

D. Zoning/Existing Land Use
Subject property (Existing): A-1 (Residential) Zone/non-operational commercial palm tree nursery
Subject property (Proposed): R-1-B (Residential) Small Lot Residential Development
Surrounding property:

North: Limited Agricultural Use (A- 70) (County of SD) and Commercial (C-1) (City of Vista) / Single-family residential, agricultural fields, and ranches
East: A-1 (Residential) Zone/single-family residential units South: A-1 (Residential) Zone/single-family residential unit West: E-1 (Residential) Zone/Antique Gas and Steam Engine Museum
E. General Plan Land Use Designation
Subject property (Existing): Rural Residential (RR) 1 du/ac Subject property (Proposed): Medium Density Residential (MD), maximum of 10 dwelling units per acre
Surrounding property:

North: Semi-Rural Residential (SR-1) (County of SD) and Neighborhood Commercial (CN) (City of Vista)
East: Rural Residential (RR), maximum of one dwelling unit per acre
South: Low Density (LD), maximum of two dwelling units per acre West: Open Space (OP)
F. Environmental Review
A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) was prepared for the proposed project, which is included as Exhibit "A" to Exhibit 1. The mitigation requirements are summarized in Appendix J of the MND. The public review period started on May 11, 2022 and ended on May 30, 2022. Five comment letters were received during that period, and written responses were prepared (contained in Appendix I of the MND).

P21-0300SR 6
08/23/2022 PH2 Page 150 of 165

II. ANALYSIS
A. Zoning and General Plan Conformance
The project site is currently designated by the General Plan as Rural Residential (RR) at 1 du/ac. The project is proposing a designation of Medium Density (MD) residential land use (maximum of 10 dwelling units per acre) that would allow a maximum of 93 units on the subject site.

Therefore, the proposed 46 single-family homes under this project would be consistent with the proposed General Plan designation for the site of Medium Density Residential. The proposed density of approximately 4.95 dwelling units per acre is below the maximum of 10 dwelling units per acre permitted by the proposed General Plan designation. The site would be re- zoned R-1-B, single-family zone as a small lot subdivision in accordance with Chapter 18.33 of the Development Code.

Small Lot Development
Small lot development regulations were adopted by the City Council on May 10, 2022 subsequent to receiving Planning Commission's recommendation of approval for these new regulations. Small lot subdivisions are intended to provide an alternative to the traditional single- family subdivisions, thereby increasing options for fee simple homeownership opportunities.

Development standards in the small lot subdivision ordinance concerning minimum lot area, lot width, parking, open space, landscaping, storage, building height and setbacks are being applied in this case. Conceptual architectural plans for the homes are proposed and included as part of this request. Building permits will be required for subsequent development of the single-family units on the site, which will be limited by the building height and setback standards as shown on the conceptual site development plans - typical lot detail. The minimum lot size requirement of 3,600 square feet is being met. The maximum allowable building height is 35 feet or two stories, whichever is less. The proposed height for the units is a maximum of 29 feet. The minimum lot width of 45 feet applies and proposed lots are approximately 50 feet wide meeting this standard. Four parking spaces per lot is required where all lots are proposing two car garages and two spaces on the driveway. On-street parking is being provided on both sides of the private streets for a total of 46 on-street parking spaces for this project.

All areas not occupied by structures, driveways, parking areas and pedestrian walkways shall have landscaping in the form of street trees, landscaped parkways, and slope erosion control planting, therefore the project meets this requirement. The overall landscaping of the project would consist of a variety of native and non-native evergreen and deciduous trees and shrubs that would provide shade, ornamental accents, slope stabilization, and integration of the development into the existing surrounding landscape. Non-native vines would be used for freestanding and any plantable walls where applicable; non-native and P21-0300SR 7
08/23/2022 PH2 Page 151 of 165

native shrubs would be used on slopes; turf or grass would be limited to the open space areas; and primarily native plants would be used for the biofiltration basins. Plant selection is based on the Water Efficient Landscaping ordinance in the City's Development Code, Chapter 18.56.

All of the proposed plant species would require low or moderate water use and would be fairly drought tolerant, with the exception of the turf areas which would require high water use.

Common usable open space requirements would also be satisfied through the provision of one open space/park area totaling 14,923 square feet. A total of 9,200 square feet of common usable open space is required for this project, therefore this requirement is being met on the site. Further, 9,200 square feet of private usable open space would be divided among the 46 units, meeting the minimum required 200 square feet of private usable open space per unit with a minimum 10-foot dimension.

Minimum setbacks are required as follows: 20 feet front yard from driveway line to face of garage and 10 feet front yard from driveway line to the remainder of the residential unit; 5 feet side yard with no encroachments allowed; and 10 feet rear yards with no encroachments allowed. The project, as proposed, is meeting all setback requirements.

Each home will include a minimum 160 cubic feet enclosable overhead storage cabinet in the garage. Proposed units would be constructed per the requirements of the California Building Code (CBC) that is in effect at the time building plans are submitted for permit approvals (including CALGreen requirements), and would include Heating, Ventilating and Air Conditioning (HVAC) units mounted on the ground.

As proposed, the project is consistent with applicable development standards for a small lot development in the R-1-B zone.

B. Biological Resources
Vegetation on the project site is limited to ornamental vegetation, including Eucalyptus, Mexican fan palm, Canary Island date palm, and Peruvian pepper tree as well as non-native species and non-native grass, which is mowed on an annual basis. During the due diligence for the project site and the vegetation surveying conducted in January 2022, no sensitive plant or any animal species were observed.

The project site contains trees and shrubs that could support nesting sites for bird species protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA).

Impacts to nesting birds could occur if vegetation clearing were to take place during the avian breeding season (generally February 1 to August 31). Mitigation Measure BR-1 reduces potential impacts to nesting birds to less than significant as described in the Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND).

P21-0300SR 8
08/23/2022 PH2 Page 152 of 165

C. Land Use Compatibility
The subject property is surrounded by residential uses to the north, east, and south. Therefore, the proposed single-family residential project is compatible with adjacent land uses.

D. Public Service Availability
All public services and utilities are at the site boundaries and can be extended to serve the project and all utility providers have indicated that they are able to provide services to the 46 proposed residential units.

E. Traffic Impacts
The project proposes 46 single-family dwelling units which will generate a total of 460 trips per day as identified in the Local Transportation Study report prepared by LLG, November 30, 2021. Because the project will generate less than 500 trips per day, the project is concluded to have no significant transportation impacts (VMT or Vehicle Miles Traveled) for purposes of CEQA and no VMT related improvements are required and VMT analysis is not needed. Senate Bill 743 (SB 743) resulted in a shift in the measure of effectiveness for determining transportation impacts from Level of Service (LOS) and vehicular delay to VMT. As of July 1, 2020, VMT analyses are required for use in all CEQA documents.

Transit service in Vista is provided by the North County Transit District (NCTD). Within the project area, NCTD operates two bus routes: Route 303 is a high frequency route that travels between the Oceanside Transit Center and the Vista Transit Center and travels along North Santa Fe Avenue in the project area; Route 318 also travels between the Oceanside Transit Center and the Vista Transit Center and travels along Bobier Drive, within one mile of the project site. Route 303 has a bus stop approximately

0.10 mile south of the project site. The project would not affect these existing bus operations or facilities.

F. Noise
Construction noise is governed by the City's Noise Element (2012).

Pursuant to the City's noise abatement criteria, construction activities are limited to Monday through Saturday between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. The maximum permissible noise level for construction activities is 75 dBA measured over eight hours of continuous construction (or Leq- 8h). This noise level is measured at or within the property lines of any property that is developed and used either in part or whole for residential purposes. Thus, for the purposes of analysis, construction operations at the project site would be deemed in compliance if the 75 dBA Leq-8h noise contour does not touch the closest residential property line.

Ambient noise levels were conducted at the project site approximately 600 feet east of N. Santa Fe Avenue. During this short-term measurement, noise levels of 47.1 dBA were taken. Furthermore, noise levels 100 feet P21-0300SR 9
08/23/2022 PH2 Page 153 of 165

from N. Santa Fe Avenue would be approximately 62.7 dBA CNEL.1 By both measures, construction noise levels would likely exceed the existing ambient noise environment by 10 dBA. The following mitigation measure would incorporate a construction noise management plan including the use of temporary sound barriers to reduce noise levels at neighboring NSLUs.

A Construction Management Plan that describes the measures included on the construction plans to ensure compliance with the noise limit shall be prepared by the project applicant and submitted to the City of Vista Planning Division for approval prior to issuance of the grading permit.

Specific measures further outlined in the MND are to be included in order to reduce construction noise. Temporary sound barriers or sound blankets may be installed between construction operations and adjacent noise- sensitive receptors. Material stockpiles and mobile equipment staging, parking, and maintenance areas to be located as far as practicable from noise sensitive receptors.

G. Public Policy Consideration

1. General Plan/Development Code/Design Guidelines Conformance:

The proposed project is consistent with the Development Code, Design Guidelines, and proposed General Plan designation for the site of Medium Density Residential. The proposed density of approximately 4.95 dwelling units per acre is below the maximum of 10 dwelling units per acre permitted by the General Plan.

III. REQUIRED FINDINGS:

The draft findings for approval of the General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Site Development Plan and Tentative Subdivision Map are included in the attached Resolution (Exhibit 2).

IV. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATION:

The project, as proposed, meets the requirements of the City's Development Code for a small lot subdivision in the R-1-B zone as it would be consistent with the proposed General Plan designation of Medium Density Residential (10 du/ac) for the site. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, and approval of the General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Site Development Plan and Tentative Subdivision Map.

Respectfully submitted,
t:&
Patsy Chow
Deputy Director of Community Development / City Planner 1 CNEL metric includes evening and nighttime noise levels.Construction would not occur during those hours.

P21-0300SR 10
08/23/2022 PH2 Page 154 of 165

EXHIBITS:

1. Resolution 2022- , recommending City Council approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration with Exhibit "A"

2. Resolution 2022- , recommending City Council approval of a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Site Development Plan and Tentative Subdivision Map with Exhibits "A" and "B"

3. Location Map

4. Project Plans —full size (limited distribution) P21-0300SR 11
08/23/2022 PH2 Page 155 of 165

COMMISSIONERS
Chair Rick Rosaler, Vice Chair Charles Grimm,
John Aguilera, Garry Garretson, Beth Hastings,
Don Looney, John Savage
STUDENT COMMISSIONERS MINUTES
Kassani Rio Herrera, Peter Childs

PLANNING COMMISSION

REGULAR MEETING
July 19, 2022
The July 19, 2022, Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission was called to order by Chair Rosaler at 6:00 pm.

COMMISSION MEMBERS PRESENT:

Chair Rick Rosaler, Vice Chair Charles Grimm, Garry Garretson, Don Looney, Beth Hastings, John Savage,
Student Commissioners: Peter Childs, Kassani Rio Herrera COMMISSION MEMBERS ABSENT:

John Aguilera
STAFF PRESENT:

City Planner & Deputy Director of Community Development Patsy Chow Principal Planner Michael Ressler
Associate Planner Raffi Mangassarian
Deputy City Attorney Amanda Guy

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
Chair Rosaler led the Pledge of Allegiance
AGENDA CHANGES:

Deputy Director Patsy Chow stated that there are no changes to the agenda.

APPROVAL OF MINUTES:

Commissioner Garretson moved to approve the minutes of July 5, 2022. Seconded by Cmnr. Savage.

MOTION TO APPROVE CARRIED: Vote 6-0 (Aguilera absent)
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS:

None.
08/23/2022 200 Civic Center Drive Vista,CA 92084'2 760-726-1340 cityotvista.com Page 156 of 165

Planning Commission - Minutes
July 19, 2022

PUBLIC HEARING ITEMS:

PH1. P21-0130 — Melrose Way Subdivision — Zoran Djordjevich, Pacific International Investments, Inc.

The project applicant, Zoran Djordjevich, is requesting approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration, General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Tentative Subdivision Map and Density Bonus for a 15-Lot single family residential subdivision at 1205 Melrose Way (APNs 166-184-10-00, 166-184-09-00 and 166-183-17-00).

Associate Planner Raffi Mangassarian presented the staff report.

Erin McKinley provided applicant's presentation.

Planning Commission comments:
• Desired transition / land uses
• Density
• Waivers / concessions circumstances
• Affordable Housing unit(s) - Deed restrictions — 55 years Chair Rosaler opened the public hearing.

SPEAKERS:
• Erin McKinley (applicant) — in favor
• Chris Robbins — in opposition
• Amanda Olivas — in favor
• Christine Manier— in opposition
• Carla McMillan — in favor
• Ben Williams — in favor
• Lorren Etienne — no position stated on speaker card • Maria Martin- in favor
Chair Rosaler closed the public hearing.

Planning Commission comments:
• No architecture or floor plans presented
• Compatibility issues
• ADU questions
• Is this the appropriate place for infill?
• General Plan / Zone Change legislative — recommendation going to City Council • Proposal not in the best interest of the community — not in support of project 08/23/2022 PH2 Page 157 of 165

Planning Commission - Minutes
July 19, 2022

1. RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A

MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING

AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, ZONE

CHANGE, AND TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP INCLUDING A DENSITY BONUS FOR A 15-LOT SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT 1205 MELROSE WAY (APNS 166-184-10-00, 166-184-09-00, AND 166-183-17-00)

NO ACTION TAKEN
MOTION BY CMNR. LOONEY TO ADOPT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION, SECONDED BY CMNR. GARRETSON

2. ADOPT RESOLUTION 2022-14, RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL

DENIAL OF A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, ZONE CHANGE, AND

TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP INCLUDING A DENSITY BONUS FOR A 15-LOT SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION LOCATED AT 1205 MELROSE WAY (APNS 166-184-10-00, 166-184-09-00, AND 166- 183-17-00)
MOTION CARRIED: Vote 6-0 (Aguilera absent)
Five-minute break
PH2. P21-0300 — Camino Largo - California West Communities A request for approval of a Mitigated Negative Declaration, General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Site Development Plan and Tentative Subdivision Map for 46 single-family dwelling units located at 2123 N. Santa Fe Avenue (APN: 159-240-07-00).

City Planner & Deputy Director of Community Development Patsy Chow presented staff report.

Arlene Tendrick provided applicant's presentation.

Planning Commission comments:
• Parking requirements
• City Council prelim discussion item (previously done) — no formal vote • Junior ADU possibility
• Slope maintenance — HOA exhibit
• Sales price
• Fencing — 6-foot-tall fence
• Recorded easement
• Sidewalk improvements / intersection improvements at Osborne Chair Rosaler opened the public hearing.
08/23/2022 PH2 Page 158 of 165

Planning Commission - Minutes
July 19, 2022

SPEAKERS:
• Arlene Tendick (applicant) — in favor
• Gabriel Jacobs — in opposition
• Chris Jacobs — in opposition
• Michael Jacobs — no position stated on the speaker card • Phil Church — neutral
• Gary Gilman — in opposition
• Mary Cottle — in opposition
• Teri Ardito — in opposition
• Joseph Gregory — in opposition
• Ryan Jacobs — in opposition
• John Simone — in opposition
• Leigh Dick — in opposition
• Ursula Sack — in opposition
• Tyler Martin — in favor
Chair Rosaler closed the public hearing.

Twenty-five-minute break
Rod Bradley with BHA— roadway explanation provided — Camino Largo private street Kara Palm with Helix Environmental — off-site blue line stream, cannot confirm status since not previously studied, not part of the project
Planning Commission comments:
• Entitlements run with the land
• Road detail on Camino Largo
• Camino Largo only in-and-out access
• Future widening of N. Santa Fe Avenue
• Stream boundary
• Concerned about unit size / price of homes
• More amenities — recreation — pool — dog run —tot lot • Density of proposed project not compatible with adjacent properties

1. RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF A MITIGATED

NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND
REPORTING PROGRAM FOR 46 SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNITS
LOCATED AT 2123 N. SANTA FE AVENUE

NO ACTION TAKEN
MOTION BY CMNR. GRIMM TO ADOPT THE FOLLOWING RESOLUTION, SECONDED BY CMNR. GARRETSON

2. ADOPT RESOLUTION 2022-13, RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL

DENIAL OF A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, ZONE CHANGE, SITE
08/23/2022 PH2 Page 159 of 165

Planning Commission - Minutes
July 19, 2022

DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR 46
SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNITS LOCATED AT 2123 N. SANTA FE AVENUE
MOTION CARRIED: Vote 6-0 (Aguilera absent)

REPORTS/COMMENTS FROM COMMISSION MEMBERS
• None
City Planner & Deputy Director of Community Development Patsy Chow • No meeting in August (tentative)
• September 6, 2022, housing related topics
• Discussion regarding annexation and zoning in general ADJOURNMENT:

Chair Rosaler adjourned the meeting at 10:02PM.

SECRETARY
08/23/2022 PH2 Page 160 of 165

PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2022-13

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CHARTERED

CITY OF VISTA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL DENIAL OF

A GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, ZONE CHANGE, SITE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR 46 SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES LOCATED AT 2123 N. SANTA FE AVENUE
APPLICANT: CALIFORNIA WEST COMMUNITIES
PLANNING CASE NO. P21-0300
The Planning Commission of the City of Vista does resolve as follows:

1. Findings. The Planning Commission hereby finds and declares the following:

A. Pursuant to Section 18.48.020 of the Vista Development Code, the applicant, California West Communities, has submitted an application for a project located at 2123 N. Santa Fe Avenue, as follows:

A General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Site Development Plan and Tentative Subdivision Map to construct 46 single-family dwelling units on a 9.3-acre site located at 2123 N. Santa Fe Avenue. The project proposes to construct 46 homes, open space amenities, guest parking, and associated site improvements.

B. On July 19, 2022, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request for a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Site Development Plan and Tentative Subdivision Map on a property generally described as follows:

A 9.3-acre parcel located at the northeast corner of N. Santa Fe Avenue and Camino Largo, addressed as 2123 N. Santa Fe Avenue, and also known as Assessor's Parcel Number 159-240-07-00.

C. On July 19, 2022, the Planning Commission did not take action regarding the Mitigated Negative Declaration and proposed Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for this project;
D. Pursuant to Title 17 of the Vista Development Code, the Planning Commission did consider the recommendations of the City Planner, City Engineer, the Vista Irrigation District, and the San Diego Gas and Electric Company, or their authorized representatives, with respect to appropriate fire flow, fire hydrants, public improvements and connections to be installed, and such other agencies as may have been deemed necessary by the Community Development Director, pertaining to the project;
E. Following the recommendation of the Planning Commission, the General P18-0117 res EXHIBIT 6
08/23/2022 PH2 Page 161 of 165

RESOLUTION 2022-13

PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CHARTERED CITY OF VISTA
PAGE 2
Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Site Development Plan and Tentative Subdivision Map, including the Conditions of Approval attached as Exhibit A, will be presented to the City Council for a final decision;
F. At the public hearing staff reports both written and oral were received in evidence, and all persons desiring to speak on the project were heard. At the conclusion of said hearing, after consideration of all evidence presented, the Planning Commission made certain findings and reached a decision on the project as hereinafter set forth.

2. Action.

A. The above recitations are true and correct.

B. The Planning Commission does not make the following findings with regard to the request for a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change for 46 single- family homes as proposed by the applicant:

1. The General Plan, Land Use and Community Identity (LUCI) Element, Goal 2 promotes the preservation and enhancement of neighborhoods that share common development patterns, topography, major streets, and zoning patterns.

The proposed General Plan Amendment for 46 single-family homes on a 9.3-acre site would not be compatible or consistent with existing surrounding single-family residential development and their large lot sizes. The proposed amendment would also not help preserve existing neighborhoods that surround the project site.

2. The proposed Zone Change from A-1 (Agricultural) for single-family residential use and other related uses to R-1-13 (Residential) small lot development would allow for residential development at much higher density compared to existing one dwelling unit per acre zoning for the subject property and nearby properties abutting the site. At the same time, the proposed zone change would diminish the amount of rural zoned land that is currently available in the city.

C. The Planning Commission does not recommend approval of the request for a Site Development Permit to develop 46 single-family homes, including associated site improvements, as that approval is predicated upon consistency with all applicable elements of the General Plan and Development Code regulations. Consistency with the General Plan proposed designation for the project site of Medium Density (MD) residential cannot be found absent approval of the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change.

D. The Planning Commission does not recommend approval of the request for a Tentative Subdivision Map as that approval is predicated upon consistency with all general and specific plans. Consistency with the General Plan proposed designation for the project site of Medium Density (MD) residential cannot be found absent approval of the General Plan Amendment and Zone Change.

P21-0300 res
08/23/2022 PH2 Page 162 of 165

RESOLUTION 2022-13

PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CHARTERED CITY OF VISTA
PAGE 3
E. In view of the necessary findings, and considering the applicable law, the decision of the Planning Commission is to recommend City Council denial of a General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Site Development Plan, and Tentative Subdivision Map to develop 46 single-family homes and associated site improvements on 9.3 acres of land located at 2123 N. Santa Fe Avenue (APN 159-240-07-00).

3. Recommendation. DENIED at a regular meeting held on the 19t" day of July, 2022, by the Vista Planning Commission by the following vote:

AYES: 6 COMMISSIONERS: Rosaler, Savage, Grimm, Hastings, Garretson, Looney
NOES: COMMISSIONERS:

ABSENT:1 COMMISSIONERS: Aguilera
ABSTAIN: COMMISSIONERS:

RICHARD ROSALER, CHAIRMAN
APPROVED AS TO FORM: ATTEST:

Walter Chung, Acting City Attorney Secretary
By: By:

Exhibits:

A. Project Plans
P21-0300 res
08/23/2022 PH2 Page 163 of 165

s f
j`� ► : Y
'
'�li<�r"�� � j �r''��`y"�r✓ F�,�' a,�,�y.�'.��` fi+dyy,,-�t. �y �,��j�+` r 1 R� 'Aedz_y
[J-e n 7 o n_W,y
l
V 44
V °�!'••r w'.1 ii�
z.
14P it
f §
It
NO
/
3A v
x
♦�• 1 a.�� ,� f ' 4 s. At
x �
G 9� S y�{I��1�
0 7N
�n
,Ai�
w_w
1< � ss• ah �.. "`at�'� fat l 91-' �� '�� �14 e�.�l �,; ,.a- "'•a!o

LOCATION MAP
N
CITY/ �F VIS p A
1 inch = 400 feet
Print Date: 0 130 260 520
July 7, 2022 1 1 1 t 1 1 1 ' 1 ft
Disclaimer:Map and parcel data are believed to be accurate,but accuracy is not guaranteed.This is not a legal document and should not be substituted for a title search,appraisal,survey,or for zoning verification. 08/23/2022 EXHIBIT 7 PH2 Page 164 of 165

EXHIBIT 8
Large Scale Plans
(limited distribution)
08/23/2022 PH2 Page 165 of 165

PH2, Camino Largo Residential Development (P21-0300)
Attachment A to Exhibit 1

CITY OF VISTA
C A L I F 0 R N I A

MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
P21-0300
PROJECT NAME: Camino Largo Residential Project
PROJECT LOCATION: Northeast of the intersection of North Santa Fe Avenue and Camino Largo north of Taylor Street and south of Osborne Street APN: 159-240-07
PROJECT APPLICANT: California West Communities
5927 Priestly Drive, Suite 110
Carlsbad, CA 92008
760-918-6768
LEAD AGENCY: City of Vista
Community Development Department
Planning Division
200 Civic Center Drive, Vista, California 92084
Patsy Chow, Deputy Director of Community Development/ City Planner
(760) 643-5390

PUBLIC REVIEW
PERIOD: May 11, 2022 to May 30, 2022
A Draft Initial Study Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND)for the Camino Largo Residential Project (project) was prepared and circulated for a 20-day public review beginning May 11, 2022 and closing on May 30, 2022.All written comments received on the Draft IS/MND during the public review period, responses to the comments, and any revisions to the Draft IS/MND have been incorporated into this Final IS/MND.

This Final IS/MND has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the CEQA guidelines. The purpose of the Final IS/MND is to provide the decision-making body, in this case the City of Vista (City), public and quasi-public agencies and groups, and the general public,environmental impact information relative to the proposed project.

The City will consider the information contained in this Final IS/MND prior to approving the project.

The Final IS/MND includes the Draft IS/MND, Technical Appendices, and copies of the public letters commenting on the Draft IS/MND and the City's response thereto. Five public comments and the City's responses are included in Appendix I, Responses to Comments, of the Final IS/MND. The comments

are assigned a comment letter and number that corresponds to a response letter and number.

Revisions have been made to this document when compared to the Draft IS/MND. More specifically, clarifications have been made to mitigation measure CR-1 in Section V, Cultural Resources, and language on page 2-2 in Section XI, Land Use on page 3-37, and in Section XIX, Utilities and Service Systems on page 3-57.

In accordance with the CEQA, Section 15073.5(c)(4), the addition of new information that clarifies, amplifies, or makes insignificant modifications does not require recirculation as there are no new impacts and no new mitigation identified.An environmental document need only be recirculated when there is the identification of new significant environmental impacts, or the addition of a new mitigation measure required to avoid a significant environmental impact. The text modifications within the final environmental document do not affect the environmental analysis or conclusions of the IS/MND.

Revisions to the IS/MND are reflected in a strikeout/underline format.

The Final IS/MND also includes the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, appended to this document as Appendix J.

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Topic Pale
Chapter 1 - Introduction ........................................................................ 1-1 CEQAOverview............................................................................................................................ 1-1 Authority....................................................................................................................................... 1-1 Scope........................................................................................................................................... 1-1 Chapter 2 - Environmental Setting and Project Description....................... 2-1 ProjectOverview.......................................................................................................................... 2-1 ExistingEnvironmental Setting.................................................................................................. 2-1 SurroundingLand Uses.............................................................................................................. 2-2 Proposed Project Description..................................................................................................... 2-2 Chapter 3 - Initial Study Environmental Checklist.................................... 3-1 ProjectInformation ..................................................................................................................... 3-1 Environmental Factors Potentially Affected .............................................................................. 3-2 Environmental Determination.................................................................................................... 3-2 Evaluation of Environmental Impacts........................................................................................ 3-3 I. Aesthetics.......................................................................................................... 3-4 II. Agriculture and Forestry Resources................................................................. 3-6 III. Air Quality.......................................................................................................... 3-8 IV. Biological Resources ......................................................................................3-14 V. Cultural Resources..........................................................................................3-17 VI. Energy..............................................................................................................3-20 VII. Geology and Soils............................................................................................3-22 VIII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions...........................................................................3-26 IX. Hazards and Hazardous Materials ................................................................3-28 X. Hydrology and Water Quality..........................................................................3-32 XI. Land Use and Planning...................................................................................3-36 XII. Mineral Resources..........................................................................................3-40 XIII. Noise................................................................................................................3-42 XIV. Population and Housing.................................................................................3-49 XV. Public Services................................................................................................3-50 XVI. Recreation.......................................................................................................3-52 XVI I. Transportation/Traffic ....................................................................................3-53 XVIII. Tribal Cultural Resources...............................................................................3-55 XIX. Utilities and Service Systems.........................................................................3-57 XX. Wildfire.............................................................................................................3-60 XXI. Mandatory Finding of Significance ................................................................3-62 Chapter 4 - References and List of Preparers.......................................... 4-1 References.................................................................................................................................. 4-1 Individuals and Organizations Consulted.................................................................................. 4-3 Preparers..................................................................................................................................... 4-3 Camino Largo Residential Project Final IS/MND
June 2022 i

Attachment A - Figures
Appendix A-Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Energy Technical Report Appendix B- Biological Resources Due Diligence
Appendix C - Addendum to the Cultural Resources Survey and Assessment Appendix D-Geotechnical Due Diligence
Appendix E- Environmental Site Assessments
Appendix F- Hydrology Reports
Appendix G - Noise Assessment Study
Appendix H - Local Transportation Study
Appendix I - Responses To Comments
Appendix J - Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Camino Largo Residential Project Final IS/MND
June 2022 ii

City of Vista Chapter 1- Introduction
Chapter 1 - Introduction
CEQA Overview
The City of Vista (City) Planning Division has prepared this IS/MND to evaluate the potential environmental consequences associated with the proposed Camino Largo Residential Project General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Tentative Subdivision Map, and Site Development Plan Project ("proposed project" or"project"). As part of the permitting process,the proposed project is required to undergo an environmental review pursuant to CEQA. One of the main objectives of CEQA is to disclose to the public and decision makers the potential environmental effects of proposed activities. CEQA requires that the lead agency prepare an IS to determine whether an Environmental Impact Report, Negative Declaration, or a Mitigated Negative Declaration is needed. The City's Planning Division is the lead agency for the proposed project under CEQA.

Authority
The preparation of this IS/MND is governed by two principal sets of documents: CEQA (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.)and the State CEQA Guidelines(California Code of Regulations Section 15000 et seq.). Specifically,the preparation of an IS and an MND is guided by the State CEQA Guidelines; Section 15063 describes the requirements for an IS, and Sections 15070-15073 describe the process and requirements for the preparation of an MND. Where appropriate and supportive to an understanding of the issues, reference will be made either to the CEQA statute or State CEQA Guidelines. This IS/MND contains all of the contents required by CEQA, which includes a project description, a description of the environmental setting, potential environmental impacts, mitigation measures for any significant effects, consistency with plans and policies, and names of preparers.

Scope
This IS/MND evaluates the proposed project's effects on the following resource topics:
• aesthetics mineral resources
• agriculture and forestry resources noise
• air quality population and housing
• biological resources 0 public services
• cultural resources 0 recreation
• energy 0 transportation
• geology and soils 0 tribal cultural resources • greenhouse gas emissions 0 utilities and service systems • hazards and hazardous materials 0 wildfire
• hydrology and water quality 0 mandatory findings of significance • land use and planning
Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 1-1

City of Vista Chapter 1-Introduction
This page intentionally left blank
Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 1-2

City of Vista Chapter 2-Environmental Setting and Project Description Chapter 2 - Environmental Setting
and Project Description
Project Overview
The proposed project involves removal of an existing nursery operation and the construction of 46 two-story detached single-family residential units on 46 separate lots. The project site is 9.3 acres in size and comprises one parcel (Assessor's Parcel Number [APN] 159-240-07).

The project site has a General Plan land use designation of Rural Residential (RR) and the project would require a General Plan Amendment to designate the site as Medium Density Residential (MD Residential) (10 dwelling units [du]/acre). The project would also require a zone change from Agricultural (A-1) to Residential (R-1-B, small lot subdivision, 3,600 square foot [sf] lots). The subject property is in the northwest portion of the City, within San Diego County (County) (see Figure 1, Regional Location, in Attachment A).

The property is located northeast of the intersection of North Santa Fe Avenue and Camino Largo, south of the City's boundary with the County of San Diego. Guajome Regional Park is located to the west across North Santa Fe Avenue and single-family residences land are to the south and east.

Current access to the site is via a gravel private drive that extends from North Santa Fe Avenue (Figure 2, Project Vicinity, in Attachment A).

Existing Environmental Setting
City of Vista
Vista is a largely built-out, predominantly low-density residential community located approximately seven miles inland from the Pacific Ocean in northern San Diego County. Clusters of urbanizing higher density areas are scattered throughout the central portion of the City and along arterial roads.Vista is located in the rolling topography of the western foothills of the San Marcos Mountains, with elevations ranging from approximately 200 feet to about 750 feet above mean sea level (amsl). Broad views are provided from various points throughout the City with some higher elevations offering vistas of the Pacific Ocean to the west. In addition to the topography of the mountains and hills,the City is vegetated from the low-level creek beds to the steep slopes of the foothills, which also provide some scenic attributes of the community. The City also has two major creeks that flow through its boundaries, Buena Vista Creek and Agua Hedionda Creek.

Project Site
The project site supports a non-operational commercial palm tree nursery. The nursery operations consisted of selling palm trees that were grown aboveground and maintained in box stock containers.

Remnants of the former nursery remain onsite including hoop frames of the former greenhouses, palm trees in box planters, and piles of green waste. There is a structure that is associated with the former nursery operations located in the south-central portion of the site and trucks and machinery scattered throughout the site. Physical improvements on the site consist of internal dirt access drives, chain link fencing and gates, and wooden electrical transmission poles and overhead wires.

Topographically,there is an east-west trending ridge situated in the north central portion of the project site. Elevations on the project site range from 361 feet amsl at the top of the ridge to 295 amsl in the southwestern corner of the property adjacent to Camino Largo.

Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 2-1

City of Vista Chapter 2-Environmental Setting and Project Description Surrounding Land Uses
The project site is located immediately south of the City's northwest boundary. Land uses surrounding the project site include Osborne Street, rural residential and nurseries to the north, North Coast Church to the north/northwest, rural residential, an unnamed drainage, and single-family homes in the Sandalwood neighborhood to the south, Rancho Guajome Adobe Museum and Rancho Guajome Regional Park (in the City of Oceanside)to the west(see Figure 2 in Attachment A). The closest school to the site is Guajome Park Academy located at 2000 North Santa Fe Avenue, approximately 0.25 mile southwest of the project site. The closest City fire station to the site is Vista Fire Department (VFD) Station No. 3 located at 1070 Old Taylor Road, approximately one mile to the east. The closest police station to the site is the San Diego County Sheriff's Department (SDCSD) located at 30 Main Street Unit G13O, approximately two miles southeast of the project site. The nearest public airports to the project site are McClellan Palomar Airport and Oceanside Municipal Airport, each located approximately five miles south and west of the project site, respectively.

Proposed Project Description
The project includes the conversion of the former nursery to residential land uses.To do so,the project would demolish 10,600 square feet (sf) of existing structures that include a greenhouse and a shed.

As shown in Figure 3,Site Plan(see Attachment A),the project involves the construction of 46 two-story single-family residences. The homes would range from 2,129 sf to 2,374 sf and extend to a height of no greater than 35 feet.

Architecturally, the project would provide three residential styles: Santa Barbara; Farmhouse; and Spanish Ranch, each constructed with stucco facades that are enhanced with wood and brick accents.

Flat planes would be disrupted with portions of the residences recessed further from the street front, covered front porches, and pitched roofs. Internally, the development would have commonality by using a neutral color palette while expressing individuality through a variation of architectural features such as shutters, arches, and porch and entryway size and placement. Retaining walls are planned for each lot with maximum heights of approximately five feet.

The project would provide 14,923 sf of common open space along the eastern perimeter of the project site. In addition,the project provides landscaped areas (including slopes)that would support a variety of groundcover and shrubs with mature trees within the eastern and northern perimeter of the project site as well as within buffers between individual rear yards.

Access would be provided by five private cul-de-sac streets that extend from Camino Largo. Resident parking would be provided via two-car garages and individual driveways with additional parking being provided along both sides of each cul-de-sac private street. Camino Largo would be improved from an unclassified gravel road to a two-way paved street with a curb and gutter system and sidewalks. The pavement along the southern half of Camino Largo would be improved to a minimum width of 28 feet.

In addition, the five private cul-de-sac streets would be 40 feet wide curb to curb to accommodate on-street parking on both sides of the streets, which would meet the proposed parking requirements set forth in the small lot subdivision/residential development ordinance being considered for adoption by the City Council on May 10, 2022. Camino Largo would be paved and extended to a minimum width of 28 feet. The project would also include the addition of a stop sign at the intersection of Camino Largo and North Santa Fe Avenue. In addition, to improve line of sight when turning south onto North Santa Fe Avenue from Camino Largo, two existing trees would be removed at the southeast corner of Camino Largo and North Santa Fe Avenue.

Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 2-2

City of Vista Chapter 2-Environmental Setting and Project Description To accommodate storm water flows and maintain water quality, a 6,572-sf biofiltration basin would be constructed in the southwest corner of the project site and a 4,675-sf underground storage vault/modular wetland system (MWS) would be constructed along the eastern perimeter of the site.

Additional storm drain facilities including a curb and gutter system would be part of the project design.

Other new and/or upgraded onsite infrastructure would connect locally to existing water, sewer and storm drain infrastructure that are within an existing easement that parallels Camino Largo.

An electrical transmission line and pole that currently traverse the site would be removed and electrical utilities would be undergrounded.A quitclaim of the current San Diego Gas and Electric(SDG&E) utility easement noted on the Tentative Subdivision Map would occur with a new easement created for the underground infrastructure.

Demolition is slated to commence in November 2022, with grading and trenching for underground infrastructure to begin in late winter/early spring 2023. Site paving and construction of the homes follow, with project completion anticipated in fall of 2023. In all, the project would include 40,950 cubic yards (cy) of export.

The project would require a General Plan Amendment from RR (1 du/ac)to MD Residential (10 du/ac) and a zone change from A-1 to R-1-13 (small lot subdivision), 3,600 sf lots (minimum size) to accommodate the proposed residences.

Construction Best Management Practices
The project would incorporate best management practices (BMPs) during construction to reduce emissions of fugitive dust. The San Diego Air Pollution Control District (SDAPCD) Rule 55 - Fugitive Dust Control states that no dust and/or dirt shall leave the property line.SDAPCD Rule 55 requires the following(SDAPCD 2009):
(1) Airborne Dust Beyond the Property Line: No person shall engage in construction or demolition activity subject to this rule in a manner that discharges visible dust emissions into the atmosphere beyond the property line for a period or periods aggregating more than three minutes in any 60-minute period.
(2) Track-Out/Carry-Out: Visible roadway dust as a result of active operations, spillage from transport trucks, erosion, or track-out/carry-out shall:
(i) be minimized by the use of any of the following or equally effective track-out/carry-out and erosion control measures that apply to the project or operation:
(a) track-out grates or gravel beds at each egress point; (b) wheel-washing at each egress during muddy conditions, soil binders, chemical soil stabilizers, geotextiles, mulching, or seeding; and for outbound transport trucks;
(c) using secured tarps or cargo covering, watering, or treating of transported material; and
(ii) be removed at the conclusion of each workday when active operations cease, or every 24 hours for continuous operations. If a street sweeper is used to remove any track-out/carry-out, only PMio-efficient (particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter) street sweepers certified to meet the most current South Coast Air Quality Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 2-3

City of Vista Chapter 2-Environmental Setting and Project Description Management District (SCAQMD) Rule 1186 requirements shall be used. The use of blowers for removal of track-out/carry-out is prohibited under any circumstances.

The control measures listed below are the BMPs that the project would incorporate for dust control and are included in the air emissions modeling:
• A minimum of two applications of water shall be applied during grading between dozer/grader passes;
• Paving, chip sealing, or chemical stabilization of internal roadways shall be applied after completion of grading;
• Grading shall be terminated if winds exceed 25 miles per hour(mph); • All exposed surfaces shall maintain a minimum soil moisture of 12 percent; • Dirt storage piles shall be stabilized by chemical binders, tarps, fencing, or other erosion control; and
• Vehicle speeds shall be limited to 15 mph on unpaved roads.

Additional Appro vats
Besides review under CEQA,the applicant and/or contractor of the proposed project would be required to obtain the following additional approvals and/or permits from the City: General Plan Amendment, Zone Change,Tentative Subdivision Map,Site Development Plan, Right-of-Way Permit, Grading Permit, Landscape Construction Plan, and (eventually) Building Permits. These approvals require meeting certain Conditions of Project Approval prior to obtaining the required permits. In addition, before the Final (Subdivision) Map is recorded, all Conditions of Project Approval (which include the mitigation measures identified in this document) must be satisfactorily completed.Other public agency approvals are identified in Chapter 3.

Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 2-4

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist Chapter 3 - Initial Study
Environmental Checklist
Project Information
Project Title: Camino Largo Residential Project
Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Vista
Community Development Department
Planning Division
200 Civic Center Drive
Vista, California 92084
CONTACT PERSON: Patsy Chow, Deputy Director of Community Development / City Planner
(760) 643-5390
PROJECT LOCATION: Northeast corner of North Santa Fe Avenue and Camino Largo PROJECT APPLICANT: California West Properties
5927 Priestly Drive, Suite 110
Carlsbad, CA 92008
760.918.6768
GENERAL PLAN DESIGNATION: RR (1 du/acre)
ZONING DESIGNATION: A-1
DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT: See Chapter 2, Proposed Project Description.

SURROUNDING LAND USES AND SETTING: See Chapter 2, Proposed Project Description.

OTHER PUBLIC AGENCY APPROVALS: The San Diego Regional Water Quality Control Board (SDRWQCB) is responsible for approving the Notice of Intent and a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) in accordance with the requirements of the most recent National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) General Construction Activities Permit.The project would also require a quitclaim of the current utility easement noted on the Tentative Subdivision Map from San Diego Gas and Electric(SDG&E)with approval from CPUC through the Advice Letter process.

Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-1

City of Vista Chapter 3-Initial Study Environmental Checklist Environmental Factors Potentially Affected
Based upon the initial evaluation presented in the following IS, it is concluded that the proposed project would not result in significant adverse environmental impacts.

Environmental Determination
On the basis of the initial evaluation of the attached Initial Study:
❑ I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
❑ I find that although the project could have a significant effect on the environment there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made or agreed to by the project proponent.A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. ❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
❑ I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required.

July 6, 2022
Signature Date
The signature below signifies that the applicant has read and accepts the mitigation measures detailed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration.

Applicant or Owner Date
Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-2

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist Evaluation of Environmental Impacts
The following IS checklist provides analysis of the proposed project's potential to result in significant adverse environmental impacts. Section 15063(c) of the Guidelines indicates that the purpose of an Initial Study is to:

1. Provide the Lead Agency("City of Vista") with information to use as the basis for deciding whether to prepare an Environmental Impact Report(EIR) or Negative Declaration;

2. Enable an applicant or Lead Agency to modify a project, mitigating adverse impacts before an EIR is prepared, thereby enabling the project to qualify for a Negative Declaration;

3. Assist the preparation of an EIR, if one is required, by:
a) Focusing the EIR on the effects determined to be significant; b) Identifying the effects determined not to be significant; c) Explaining the reasons why potentially significant effects would not be significant; and, d) Identifying whether a program EIR,tiering, or another appropriate process can be used for analysis of the project's environmental effects.

4. Facilitate environmental assessment early in the design of a project.

5. Provide documentation of the factual basis for the finding in a Negative Declaration that a project will not have a significant effect on the environment.

6. Eliminate unnecessary EIRs.

7. Determine whether a previously prepared EIR could be used with the project.

Impact Terminology
The following terminology is used to describe the level of significance of impacts:
• A finding of no impact is appropriate if the analysis concludes that the project would not affect the particular topic area in anyway.
• An impact is considered less than significant if the analysis concludes that it would not cause substantial adverse change to the environment and requires no mitigation. • An impact is considered less than significant with mitigation incorporated if the analysis concludes that it would not cause substantial adverse change to the environment with the inclusion of environmental commitments that have been agreed to by the applicant. • An impact is considered potentially significant if the analysis concludes that it could have a substantial adverse effect on the environment.

Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-3

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist PotentiallyLess than
Significant
I Aesthetics
MitigationSignificant
Would the project Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact a. Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic ❑ ❑ ❑ vista?
b. Substantially damage scenic resources,
including, but not limited to, trees, rock ❑ El Eloutcroppings,and historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
c. Substantially degrade the existing visual
character or quality of public views of the site and
its surroundings?(Public views are those that are
experienced from publicly accessible vantage ❑ ❑ ❑
point).If the project is in an urbanized area,would
the project conflict with applicable zoning and
other regulations governing scenic quality?
d. Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect day or nighttime ❑ ❑ ® ❑ views in the area?

AESTHETICS D/SCUSS/ON
a.No IMPACT.A scenic vista is generally defined as a public viewpoint that provides expansive or notable views of a highly valued landscape and is typically identified in planning documents, such as a community plan or general plan, but can also include locally known areas or locations where high- quality public views are available. According to the Vista General Plan Update 2030 Program EIR (General Plan EIR), based on general viewing areas, there are two main viewsheds in the City:the San Marcos Mountains to the east and northeast, and the canyons in the southwestern portion of the City.

In accordance with these two viewsheds,the City has identified six public vantage points, which are a combination of routes and specific locations from which these viewsheds are most prominent (City 2011).

The project site is not located within one of the six public vantage points identified in the General Plan EIR. The nearest public vantage point is Public Vantage Point 3: West Bobier Drive, located approximately a half mile southwest of the project site.Accordingto the General Plan EIR,West Bobier Drive offers views of the San Marcos Mountains to the east. At a distance of a half mile, project implementation would not have a substantial adverse effect on views from this designated public vantage point. Additionally, the project site itself is not in a location where prominent views are available. Thus, the project would not have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. No impacts would occur.
b. No IMPACT.There are no officially designated state scenic highways in the vicinity of the project site.

The nearest state scenic highway is State Route(SR)-52, which is approximately 20 miles south of the project site. The nearest eligible state scenic highway not officially designated is State Route (SR) 76, which is approximately 1.5 miles north of the project site.At this distance, project elements would not affect views from SR 76. Additionally, the City's General Plan does not identify any scenic roadways near the project site (City 2011). Therefore, the proposed project would not damage scenic resources within a state scenic highway. No impact would occur.

Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-4

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist c. No IMPACT. Public Resources Code 21071 defines the term "urbanized area"for the purpose of CEQA to mean an incorporated city that has a population of at least 100,000 persons or has a population of less than 100,000 persons if the population of that city and not more than two contiguous incorporated cities combined equals at least 100,000 persons. U.S. Department of Commerce Bureau of the Census(U.S. Census Bureau)data from 2021 indicates that the City has a population of 98,831 and the adjacent City of Oceanside has a population of 174,068 (U.S. Census Bureau 2021). The project site is within an urbanized area as defined by Public Resources Code 21071 and,therefore, is evaluated relative to applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality.

The site is zoned for agricultural uses, which is not indicative of a zoning to protect scenic resources.

According to the City of Vista Municipal Code (VMC), Chapter 18.10, a variety of uses in addition to raising crops could occur under this zoning, including packing or processing plants for crops, silos, accessory buildings (including workshops and barns), farm labor housing, and residential care/transition homes. The project involves the construction of 46 single-family residences. The project is designed to adhere to the General Plan land use and community design goal of sharing common development patterns among neighborhoods. The proposed residences are designed to complement the existing residential neighborhood to the south by mirroring similar architectural features such as materials and a neutral color palette. Moreover, the northern perimeter of the site would be sloped, supporting ornamental landscaping providing separation between the residences and the land uses to the north that are within the City's sphere-of-influence but outside of the City's jurisdictional boundaries. The project would require a zone change from A-1 to R-1-13, 3,600-sf lots (minimum size).

Currently the project site is a non-operational nursery that has structures that are in various states of disrepair. Visible remnants of the nursery include the hoop frames of former greenhouses, sheds, overgrown vegetation, stored equipment and vehicles, and boxed palm trees that were part of the former nursery's stock. The chain link fence that surrounds the site is also in a state of disrepair.

Conversely,the site would transform the site to the residential land uses, providing 14,923 sf of open space that would be landscaped with groundcover,shrubs,and mature trees that would be maintained by the project's homeowner's association, contributing to improved visual quality of the site. The project's frontage along Camino Largo would include landscaping, retaining walls, and sidewalks set back from the roadway to accommodate pedestrian usage. Collectively, these project features are considered to be a visual improvement in relation to the existing conditions. Further, since the current agricultural zoning nor the proposed zoning are not intended to protect scenic resources, the project would not conflict with applicable zoning and other regulations governing scenic quality. No impact would occur.
d. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. There are two primary sources of light: light emanating from building interiors that passes through windows and light from exterior sources (e.g., street lighting, parking lot lighting, building illumination, security lighting, and landscape lighting). The introduction of light can be a nuisance by affecting adjacent areas and diminishing the view of the clear sky depending on the location of the light sources and its proximity to nearby light-sensitive areas.

The project site is located in an area that is developed with rural residential land uses including nurseries, residential uses, a church, museum, and county park. The existing light sources in the project area include building lights, streetlights, and security lights, The project would introduce residential lighting that would be similar to the existing residential lighting in surrounding neighborhoods. Such lighting would include security or ambiance lighting as well as light casted from the interior of the homes. Additional new project-related light sources include street, entry way, common area lighting and light from traffic. Proposed lighting would be required to conform to the California Building Code(CBC),as well as the City's Development Code(VDC)Section 18.58.260 Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-5

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist that regulates lighting. Such adherence would require that the project equip outdoor lighting used for architectural or decorative purposes with automatic timing devices, fully shield or direct the lights towards the ground,and use lights that only emit the minimum amount of light necessary.Additionally, the proposed lighting would be similar to the existing project area lighting and would not introduce new and unique sources of light that would be substantial in relation to the existing lighting characteristics of the project area. Therefore, although the project would introduce new sources of light,since the sources are of similar nature to the surrounding land uses and the project would adhere to the applicable regulations, the project would not create a new source of substantial light which would adversely affect views in the area. Light impacts would be less than significant.

Glare impacts can occur because of artificial light or sunlight reflecting off a surface. Glare can create discomfort or present safety concerns. As discussed in the Project Description in Chapter 2 of this IS/MND, the project is to be constructed with primarily stucco facades with wood and brick accents.

Such architectural elements are not sources of glare. Glass would be limited to windows and doors, typical of residential construction and no other highly reflective surfaces would be provided.The extent and surface area of glass on the homes would not be at a scale to generate adverse glare effects. As such,the project would not create a new source of glare that would adversely affect views in the area.

Glare impacts would be less than significant.

Less than
Significant

11. Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Would the project Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuantto the Farmland ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California
Resources Agency,to non-agricultural use?
b. Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a El ❑ ® El Act contract?
c. Conflict with existing zoning for, or cause rezoning of, forest land (as defined in Public Resources Code
Section 12220(g)), timberland (as defined by Public El El ElResources Code Section 4526), or timberland zoned Timberland Production (as defined by Government
Code Section 51104(g))?
d. Result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest El El Elland to non-forest use? e. Involve other changes in the existing environment
which, due to their location or nature, could result in ❑ El El of Farmland, to non-agricultural use or
conversion of forest land to non-forest use?

AGR/CULTUREAND FORESTRYRESOURCES D/SCUSS/ON
a. No IMPACT.Accordingto the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Department of Conservation (California Department of Conservation [DOC] 2021), the project site is classified as Other Land (land not included in any other mapping category. Common examples include low density rural developments; brush, timber, wetland, and riparian areas not suitable for livestock grazing; confined livestock, poultry or aquaculture facilities; strip mines, borrow pits; and water bodies smaller Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-6

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist than forty acres) and does not contain Prime Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance. The project site formerly supported a nursery but while remnants of the nursery remain, the nursery is no longer operable. Implementation of the project would not convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance to non-agricultural use. No impact would occur. b. Less than Significant IMPACT. The Williamson Act is designed to prevent the premature and unnecessary conversion of open space lands and agricultural areas to urban uses.The Williamson Act enables local governments to enter into contracts with private landowners forthe purpose of restricting specific parcels of land for use as agricultural or related open space. As stated in item II.a,the project site is classified as Other Land where neither farmland nor agricultural resources are present. The Williamson Act is only applicable to parcels within an established agricultural preserve consisting of at least 20 acres of Prime Farmland, or at least 40 acres of land not designated as Prime Farmland.

Additionally, it is not within an established agricultural preserve consisting of at least 20 acres of Prime Farmland or at least 40 acres of land not designated as Prime Farmland, and there is no Williamson Act contract that directs land use at the site.

The project site is zoned for agricultural use(A-1); however, it is not currently being used for agricultural purposes. Furthermore, the A-1 zone allows for single-family residential development to occur on the site. The project's site ability to be used for agricultural land uses would be limited due to the existing surrounding development (residential neighborhoods, a church, museum, and county park) that are not compatible with agricultural production. In addition, as discussed further in Section XI, Land Use, as part of the City's General Plan Housing Element Update 2021-2029 the City has recognized the potential for the project site to accommodate residential land uses to help meet the City's housing targets (City 2021). Thus, while the project would conflict with the current agricultural zoning in terms of density being proposed, the City's intent is to allow for increased density through small lot subdivision at this location given similar residential neighborhoods to the south. Impacts are less than significant.
c. No IMPACT. Public Resources Code Section 1222O(g) defines "forest land" as land that can support ten percent native cover of any species, including hardwoods, under natural conditions, and that allows for management of one or more forest resources, including timber, aesthetics,fish and wildlife, biodiversity, water quality, recreation, and other public benefits. Based on this definition, no forest land occurs within or adjacent to the project site. Timberland is land, other than land owned by the Federal government and designated by the California Department of Forestry and Fire (CAL FIRE) Board of Forestry as experimental forest land, which is available for, and capable of, growing a crop of trees of a commercial species used to produce lumber and other forest products, including Christmas trees. The project site was a former nursery that sold palm trees that were grown aboveground and maintained in box stock containers. Thus, while the site was previously used to grow a crop of trees, the trees were grown aboveground in box containers, and palm trees are not used to produce lumber.

Moreover, there is no land zoned as forest land or timberland that exists within the project site or within its vicinity.Therefore,the proposed project would not conflict with existing zoning for forest land or timberland, No impact would occur.
d. No IMPACT.As stated in item Il.c,there is no land zoned as forest land or timberland that exists within the project site or its vicinity. The site has not been historically and is not currently used or planned to be used for forest land. As such, implementation of the proposed project would not result in the loss of forest land or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. No impact would occur. e. No IMPACT. As stated in item Il.a, the project site is in an area classified Other Land by the DOC.

According to the General Plan EIR, since no substantial areas of agricultural use occur within the majority of the General Plan planning area, the conversion of farmland to nonagricultural use would not occur (City 2011). The project site is surrounded by a church and residential land uses within the Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-7

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist City's sphere-of-influence but not within the City limits to the north/northwest as well as residential neighborhoods to the south and east, and a museum and county park to the west, Thus,there are no agricultural or forest land uses and the project would not result in conversion of farmland to non-agricultural use or conversion of forest land to non-forest use. No impact would occur.

Less than
Significant
111. Air Quality Potentially with Lessthan Significant Mitigation Significant No
Would -project
a. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan?
b. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is
non- attainment under an applicable federal or state El El H El ambient air quality standard?
c. Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations?
d. Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors) adversely affecting a substantial number of ❑ ❑ ® ❑ people?
The discussion below is summarized and based on the analysis and conclusions contained within the Camino Largo Residential Project Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Energy Technical Report (AQ, GHG, and Energy Report) (HELIX 2O21a) prepared for the proposed project.The report is included as Appendix A to this IS/MND.

AIR QUALITYD/SCUSS/ON
a. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The San Diego Air Pollution Control District (SDAPCD) and San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) are responsible for developing and implementing the clean air plan for the attainment and maintenance of the ambient air quality standards(AAQS) in the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB). In addition, the SDAPCD relies on the State Implementation Plan (SIP), which is a series of comprehensive plans that describe how an area will attain the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS), The SIP also includes the SDAPCD's plans and control measures for attaining the ozone NAAQS. The regional air quality plan for San Diego County is SDAPCD's 2020 Plan for Attaining the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone in San Diego County(Attainment Plan).

The two principal criteria for conformance to the Attainment Plan are (1) whether the project would result in an increase in the frequency or severity of existing air quality violations, cause or contribute to new violations,or delay timely attainment of air quality standards,and (2) whether the project would exceed the assumptions in the Attainment Plan.

The Attainment Plan relies on information from the California Air Resources Board (CARB) and SANDAG, including projected growth in the San Diego County, and mobile, area, and all other source emissions to project future emissions and determine from that the strategies necessary for the reduction of stationary source emissions through regulatory controls. CARB's mobile source emission projections and SANDAG's growth projections are based on population, employment and transportation trends, and land use plans developed by the local governments. Accordingly, projects that propose development that is consistent with the population and employment growth anticipated by these land use plans would be consistent with the Attainment Plan. If a project proposes Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-8

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist development that results in growth greater than that anticipated in the adopted land use plans and SANDAG's growth projections upon which the Attainment Plan is based, the project may conflict with the Attainment Plan and could have a potentially significant impact on air quality.This situation would warrant further analysis to determine if the project would exceed the growth projections used in the Attainment Plan for the specific subregional area.

The project site is designated as RR and would require a General Plan Amendment to MD Residential to accommodate the 46 single-family residences. The City has recognized the potential for the project site to accommodate denser residential land uses as is demonstrated in the parcel-specific analysis of potential housing sites that the City prepared to identify underutilized sites designated for residential or mixed-use development to meet the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA)targets for the 2021-2029 planning period. This analysis, which is also included as Appendix B to the City's General Plan Housing Element Update, did not allocate a residential density to the site, but did identify the parcel as suitable for residential development (City 2021). Specifically, the RHNA for the 2021- 2029 planning period assigned Vista a new housing need of 2,561 units.

By developing an underutilized site and helping the City meet its housing needs, the project would be consistent with the growth assumption used to develop the region's Attainment Plan. As such, residential growth in the City as a result of the project, and the related changes in regional emissions, are accounted for in the SIP, which is crafted to bring the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB) into attainment for all criteria pollutants. Additionally, as detailed in item III b., below, the project would not result in any construction or operational period emissions in exceedance of established thresholds. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the Attainment Plan.

Impacts would be less than significant.
b. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The project would generate criteria pollutants in the short-term during construction and the long-term during operation. To determine whether a project would result in a cumulatively considerable net increase in criteria pollutant emissions that would violate an air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation, the AQ, GHG, and Energy Report (HELIX 2021a) evaluate the project's anticipated emissions using the quantitative emission thresholds established by the SDAPCD.

Construction Emissions
The project's temporary construction emissions were estimated using CaIEEMod. The results of the modeling of the project's construction emissions of criteria pollutants and ozone precursors are shown in Table AQ-1, Maximum Daily Construction Emissions. The data are presented as the maximum anticipated daily emissions for comparison with the SDAPCD thresholds. The complete CalEEMod output and a thorough discussion on methodology is provided in the AQ, GHG, and Energy Report (HELIX 2021a).

Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-9

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist Table AQ-1

MAXIMUM DAILY CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS
Construction Phase VOC* NOx* CO* Sox* PMso* PM2.5* Demolition 2.6 25.7 20.6 <0.1 2.3 1.3
Site Preparation 3.2 33.1 19.7 <0.1 19.8 11.4 Grading 1.9 20.9 15.3 <0.1 8.2 4.3
Paving 1.1 11.1 14.6 <0.1 0.6 0.5
Utilities 1.4 14.1 15.4 <0.1 0.7 0.7
Building Construction-2022 1.7 15.6 16.4 <0.1 0.8 0.8 Building Construction-2023 1.6 14.4 16.2 <0.1 0.7 0.7 Architectural Coatings-2023 0.2 1.3 1.8 <0.1 0.1 0.1 Maximum Daily Emissions' 6.4 94.7 46.2 0.2 33.2 17.4 SDAPCD Thresholds 137 250 550 250 100 67
Exceed Thresholds? No No No No No No Source:CaIEEMod; USEPA AP-42(output data is provided in Appendices A and B) 1 CalEEMod automatically calculates the maximum daily emissions based on overlapping phases for each year. For this project,the maximum daily emissions would occur in 2022 during the demolition,site preparation,and some grading activities overlap.
* Pollutant Emissions(pounds per day)
VOC=volatile organic compound; NOx= nitrogen oxides;CO=carbon monoxide;SOx=sulfur oxides; PMso=particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter; PM2.5=particulate matter 2.5 microns or less in diameter; SDAPCD=San Diego County Air Pollution Control District
As shown in Table AQ-1, the project's temporary construction-related criteria pollutant and precursor emissions would be below the SDAPCD's significance thresholds.Therefore,the project's construction activities would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria pollutants that would violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. Impacts would be less than significant.

Operational Emissions
The project's long-term maximum daily and annual operational emissions were also estimated using CalEEMod.The results of the modeling of the project's operational emissions of criteria pollutants and precursors are shown in Table AQ-2, Operational Emissions. The data are presented as the maximum anticipated daily emissions and annual emissions for comparison with the SDAPCD thresholds. The complete CaIEEMod output and a thorough discussion on methodology is provided in the AQ, GHG, and Energy Report(HELIX 2021a).

Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-10

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist Table AQ-2

OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS
Source VOC* NOx* CO* SOx* PMso* PM2.5*
Daily Emissions(pounds per day)2
Area 1.9 <0.1 3.8 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Energy <0.1 0.3 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Mobile 1.5 1.8 15.1 <0.1 3.6 1.0
Total Project Emissions' 3.4 2.2 19.0 <0.1 3.7 1.0 SDAPCD Daily Thresholds 137 250 550 250 100 67 Exceed Daily Threshold? No No No No No No Annual Emissions(tons per year)
Area 0.3 <0.1 0.3 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Energy <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Mobile 0.3 0.3 2.7 <0.1 0.2 0.2
Total Project Emissions' 0.6 0.4 3.1 <0.1 0.2 0.2 SDAPCD Annual Thresholds 15 40 100 40 15 10 Exceed Annual Threshold? No No No No No No Source:CalEEMod (output data is provided in Appendix A) i Totals may not sum due to rounding.
2 Winter emissions are very slightly higher for most substances.

VOC=volatile organic compound; NOx= nitrogen oxides;CO=carbon monoxide;Sox=sulfur oxides; PMso=particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter; PM2.5=particulate matter 2.5 microns or less in diameter; SDAPCD=San Diego County Air Pollution Control District
As shown in Table AQ-2 the project's long-term emissions of criteria pollutants and precursors would not exceed the SDAPCD daily or annual screening thresholds. Therefore, the project's operational activities would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria pollutants that would violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. Impacts would be less than significant.
c. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. Impacts to sensitive receptors are typically analyzed for operational period carbon monoxide (CO) hotspots and exposure to toxic air contaminants (TACs). An analysis of the project's potential to expose sensitive receptors to these pollutants is provided below.

Construction Diesel Particulate Matter Emissions
Implementation of the project would result in the use of heavy-duty construction equipment, haul trucks, on-site generators, and construction worker vehicles. These vehicles and equipment could generate the TAC diesel particulate matter (DPM). Generation of DPM from construction projects typically occurs in a localized area (e.g., at the project site) for a short period of time. Because construction activities and subsequent emissions vary depending on the phase of construction (e.g., grading, building construction),the construction-related emissions to which nearby receptors are exposed to would also vary throughout the construction period. During some equipment-intensive phases such as grading, construction-related emissions would be higher than other less equipment- intensive phases such as building construction. Concentrations of mobile-source DPM emissions are typically reduced by 70 percent at approximately 500 feet.

The dose (of TAC)to which receptors are exposed is the primary factor used to determine health risk.

Dose is a function of the concentration of a substance in the environment and the extent of exposure a person has with the substance;a longer exposure period to a fixed number of emissions would result in higher health risks. Current models and methodologies for conducting cancer health risk assessments are associated with longer-term exposure periods (typically 30 years for individual Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-11

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist residents based on guidance from Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment [OEHHA]) and are best suited for evaluation of long duration TAC emissions with predictable schedules and locations.

These assessment models and methodologies do not correlate well with the temporary and highly variable nature of construction activities. Cancer potency factors are based on animal lifetime studies or worker studies where there is long-term exposure to the carcinogenic agent. There is considerable uncertainty in trying to evaluate the cancer risk from projects that will only last a small fraction of a lifetime. Considering this information, the highly dispersive nature of DPM, and the fact that construction activities would occur at various locations throughout the project site, it is not anticipated that construction of the project would expose sensitive receptors to substantial DPM concentrations.

Impacts would be less than significant.

Construction Asbestos and Lead Based Paint Emissions
Asbestos dust and lead are known carcinogens classified as TACs by CARB. Both may be found in buildings constructed prior to 1979 when lead was used in some paint and asbestos was used as a component of some building materials such as walls, ceilings, insulation, or fireproofing. Demolition of existing structures erected prior to 1979 could result in the disturbance of asbestos and lead building materials resulting in emissions.

Airborne asbestos is regulated in accordance with the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) asbestos regulations. Federal and state regulations prohibit emissions of asbestos from demolition or construction activities. Following identification of friable asbestos,federal and state Occupational and Safety Health Administration (OSHA) regulations require that asbestos trained, and certified abatement personnel perform asbestos abatement and that all asbestos- containing materials removed from on-site structures be hauled to a licensed receiving facility and disposed of under proper manifest by a transportation company certified to handle asbestos. In accordance with the SDAPCD Rule 1206, Asbestos Removal, Renovation, and Demolition, prior to commencement of demolition operations and prior to submitting the notifications required by Section (e)of Rule 1206, a facility survey shall be performed to determine the presence or absence of asbestos containing materials, regardless of the age of the facility (SDAPCD 2017). USEPA's Lead Renovation, Repair and Painting Rule (RRP Rule) requires that firms performing renovation, repair, and painting projects that disturb lead-based paint in structures built before 1978 have their firm certified by USEPA (or an authorized state), use certified renovators who are trained by USEPA- approved training providers, and follow lead-safe work practices. These regulations specify precautions and safe work practices that must be followed to minimize the potential for release of asbestos fibers or lead dust and require notice to federal and/or local government agencies prior to beginning demolition or renovation that could disturb asbestos containing materials. Therefore, compliance with established regulations would ensure that potential impacts associated with asbestos containing materials and lead-based paint during project demolition activities, Impacts would be less than significant.

Localized Carbon Monoxide Hotspots
A CO hotspot is an area of localized CO pollution caused by severe vehicle congestion on major roadways,typically near intersections.Vehicle exhaust is the primary source of CO. In an urban setting, the highest CO concentrations are generally found within close proximity to congested intersections.

Under typical meteorological conditions, CO concentrations tend to decrease as distance from the emissions source (i.e., congested intersection) increase. Project-generated traffic has the potential of contributing to localized "hot spots" of CO off site. Because CO is a byproduct of incomplete combustion, exhaust emissions are worse when fossil-fueled vehicles are operated inefficiently, such as in stop-and-go traffic or through heavily congested intersections, where the level of service (LOS) is severely degraded.

Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-12

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist The CARB also recommends evaluation of the potential for the formation of locally high concentrations of CO, known as CO hot spots. A CO hot spot is a localized concentration of CO that is above the state or national 1-hour or 8-hour CO ambient air standards. To verify that the project would not cause or contribute to a violation of the 1-hour and 8-hour CO standards, an evaluation of the potential for CO hot spots at nearby intersections was conducted.

The project's Local Transportation Study (Linscott, Law, and Greenspan, Engineers [LLG] 2021) evaluated whether there would be a change in the LOS at the intersections affected by the proposed project.The potential for CO hot spots was evaluated based on the results of the transportation study.

The Transportation Project-Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol (CO Protocol; California Department of Transportation [Caltrans] 1998)was followed to determine whether a CO hot spot is likely to form due to project-generated traffic. In accordance with the CO Protocol, CO hot spots are typically evaluated when: (a) the LOS of an intersection decreases to an LOS E or worse; (b) signalization and/or channelization is added to an intersection; and (c) sensitive receptors such as residences, schools, hospitals, etc., are located in the vicinity of the affected intersection or roadway segment.

According to the transportation study, three intersections would operate at LOS E or F in the horizon year and experience an increase in delay from the project:
• N Santa Fe Ave & Osborne Street - LOS E (AM)
• N Santa Fe Ave &Taylor Street - LOS E (AM)
• N Santa Fe Ave & Bobier Drive - LOS E/F (AM/PM)
Therefore, consistent with the CO Protocol, these findings indicate that further screening is required.

Although the SDAPCD does not, various air quality agencies in California have developed conservative screening methods. The screening methods of the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD) are used for this project because ambient CO concentrations within the SMAQMD jurisdiction are higher than forthe project area,as measured by CARB, resulting in a more conservative analysis. The SMAQMD guidance states that a project will not result in a significant impact to local CO concentrations if it meets all of the below criteria:
• The affected intersection carries less than 31,600 vehicles per hour; • The project does not contribute traffic to a tunnel, parking garage, bridge underpass, urban street canyon, below-grade roadway, or other location where horizontal or vertical mixing of air would be substantially limited; and
• The affected intersection, which includes a mix of vehicle types, is not anticipated to be substantially different from the County average, as identified by EMFAC or CaIEEMod models (SMAQMD 2009).

The highest traffic volume at the affected intersections is estimated to be 4,510 vehicles at the intersection of North Santa Fe Avenue and East Bobier Drive during the AM peak hour(LLG 2021).The intersection is not located in a tunnel, urban canyon, or similar area that would limit the mixing of air, nor is the vehicle mix anticipated to be substantially different than the County average. There would be no potential for a CO hotspot or exceedance of State or federal CO ambient air quality standard because the maximum traffic volume would be substantially less than the 31,600 vehicles per hour screening level; because the congested intersection is located where mixing of air would not be limited; and because the vehicle mix would not be uncommon. Impacts would be less than significant.

Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-13

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist d. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The State of California Health and Safety Code Sections 41700 and 41705, and SDAPCD Rule 51, prohibit emissions from any source whatsoever in such quantities of air contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to the public health or damage to property.

According to the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, land uses associated with odor complaints include agricultural uses, wastewater treatment plants, food processing plants, chemical plants, composting activities, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding operations(SCAQMD 1993).

The project, consisting of a residential development,would not include any of these uses nor are there any of these land uses in the project vicinity.

Emissions from construction equipment, such as diesel exhaust, and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from architectural coatings and paving activities may generate odors; however, these odors would be temporary, intermittent, and not expected to affect a substantial number of people.

Additionally, such odors would be confined to the immediate vicinity of construction equipment. By the time such emissions reach any sensitive receptor sites, they would be diluted to well below any level of air quality concern. Furthermore,short-term construction-related odors are expected to cease upon the drying or hardening of the odor-producing materials. Long-term operation of the project would not be a substantial source of objectionable odors. Therefore, the project would not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. Impacts would be less than significant.

SignificantLess than
Biological
•
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Would the project
a. Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status El ® ❑ El in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations,or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b. Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations,or by the ❑ ❑ ® ❑ California Department of Fish and Wildlife or US Fish
and Wildlife Service?
c. Have a substantial adverse effect on state or federally protected wetlands (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct ❑ ❑ ❑ removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
d. Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with
established native resident or migratory wildlife ❑ ❑ ❑ corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites?
e. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources,such as a tree preservation policy ❑ ❑ ❑ or ordinance?
Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-14

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist f. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, regional,or state habitat conservation plan?
The discussion below is summarized and based on the analysis and conclusions contained within the Biological Resources Due Diligence Assessment of the Camino Largo Property (HELIX 2021b) which was conducted for the project site. In addition, HELIX biologists conducted a vegetation survey at the site in January 2022. The report is included as Appendix B to this IS/MND.

BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES D/SCUSS/ON
a. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT WITH MITIGATION. Vegetation on the project site is limited to ornamental vegetation, including Eucalyptus, Mexican fan palm, Canary Island date palm, and Peruvian pepper tree as well as non-native species and non-native grass, which is mowed on an annual basis. During the due diligence for the project site and the vegetation surveying conducted in January 2022, no sensitive plant or any animal species were observed.

The project site contains trees and shrubs that could support nesting sites for bird species protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act(MBTA). Impacts to nesting birds could occur if vegetation clearing were to take place during the avian breeding season (generally February 1 to August 31). Mitigation Measure BR-1 reduces potential impacts to nesting birds to less than significant.

There is the potential for the project to have temporary indirect impacts to special-status wildlife from adverse "edge effects" on sensitive habitat within the adjacent parcel to the south. Edge effects typically include dust, construction-related soil erosion and runoff, lighting, and construction-related noise. Dust control, erosion control, and water quality protection measures are addressed in Section Chapter 2, Hydrology and Water Quality of this IS/MND and would be part of the conditions of approval.

Potential impacts from lighting would not be significant, as addressed in the Aesthetics section of this IS/MIND. However, construction-related noise could be significant within approximately 500 feet of a raptor nest or within 300 feet of a nesting bird. However, with the implementation of Mitigation Measure BR-1, this impact would be reduced to less than significant levels.

Mitigation Measure
BR-1 If avoidance of construction activities during the avian breeding season (typically February 1 through August 31, but as early as January 1 for some raptors as determined by a Qualified Biological Monitor) is not feasible, the Applicant and/or Owner shall hire a Qualified Biological Monitor with experience in conducting breeding bird surveys to conduct weekly on-site bird surveys beginning 30 days prior to initiation of any construction activities (including, but not limited to,staging,grubbing and clearing).The weekly bird surveys shall be conducted to detect the nests of protected native birds and raptors occurring in suitable nesting habitat that could be disturbed during construction activities, and (as access to adjacent areas allows) any other such habitat within 300 feet of the disturbance area (and/or within 500 feet for raptors). The surveys shall continue on a weekly basis with the last survey being conducted no more than three days priorto the initiation of construction activities.The Qualified Biological Monitor shall provide the City Planner with a summary report of the results of the recommended protective measures described above to document compliance with applicable State and federal laws pertaining to the protection of native birds.

Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-15

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist If an active nest is located, construction activities within 300 feet of the bird nest (or within 500 feet for raptor nests)or otherwise as determined by the Qualified Biological Monitor, must be postponed until the nest is vacated and juveniles have fledged, and there is no evidence of a second attempt at nesting. Flagging, stakes, and/or construction fencing shall be used to demarcate the inside boundary of the buffer of 300 feet (or 500 feet) between the construction activities and the nest. All contractors working on-site shall be instructed by the Qualified Biologist on the sensitivity of the area. The Qualified Biological Monitor shall immediately notify the City Planner if project activities damage active avian nests.

If the Qualified Biological Monitor determines that a narrower buffer between the project activities and observed active nests is warranted, he/she shall submit a written explanation to support this determination (e.g., species-specific information; ambient conditions and birds' habituation to them; etc.) to the City Planner, and upon request to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. Based on the submitted information,the City Planner, in consultation with the Qualified Biological Monitor, will determine whether to allow the narrower buffer. b. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT. Sensitive vegetation communities are considered either rare within the region or sensitive by California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW); are listed as sensitive under a regional planning program; or support sensitive plants or animals. They are considered sensitive because they have been depleted, are naturally uncommon, or support sensitive plants or animals.As discussed in item IV a, vegetation on the project site is limited to ornamental vegetation, including Eucalyptus, Mexican fan palm,Canary Island date palm,and Peruvian pepper tree.A vegetation survey conducted by HELIX biologists in January 2022 confirmed that there is no special status plant species or sensitive habitat on the project site. Thus, the project would not have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Wildlife or US Fish and Wildlife Service. Impacts are less than significant.
c. No IMPACT. The project site does not support any riparian habitat or wetlands identified by federal, state, regional, or local agencies, policies, or regulations. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in direct or indirect significant impacts to any riparian habitat or state or federally protected wetlands. No impact would occur.
d. No IMPACT. Wildlife corridors are areas that allow wildlife room to roam for access to food, territory, and mating. A broad range of habitat is necessary for the dispersal of plants and animals to ensure the viability of such corridors. The project site is a former nursery and is surrounded by a variety of developed uses,such as a church to the north/northwest and a residential neighborhood to the south.

North Santa Fe Avenue, along the project's western boundary is a two-lane road with a posted speed limit of 45 miles per hour,which would act as a barrier for a successful wildlife corridor. Native resident or migratory wildlife corridors do not exist on the project site, and the property does not contain any biological resources that are protected by local policies. No impact would occur e. No IMPACT.The project site does not support any riparian habitat or other natural communities, and does not support any wetlands identified by federal, state, regional, or local agencies, plans, policies, or regulations.The project site also is not located within any known or reported local or regional wildlife corridors, and it does not contain any biological resources that are protected by city or county policies, or approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plans (such as the North County MHCP. No impact would occur.
f. No IMPACT. The California Natural Communities Conservation Planning (NCCP) Act of 1991 (Section 2835) allows the CDFW to authorize take of species covered by plans in agreement with NCCP guidelines. A Natural Communities Conservation Program initiated by the State of California focuses Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-16

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist on conserving coastal sage scrub, and in concert with the USFWS and the federal ESA, is intended to avoid the need for future federal and state listing of coastal sage scrub dependent species.

The MHCP is a comprehensive, multiple jurisdictional planning program designed to develop an ecosystem preserve in northwestern San Diego County. Implementation of the regional preserve system is intended to protect viable populations of key sensitive plant and animal species and their habitats, while accommodating continued economic development and quality of life for residents of the north county region.

The MHCP Subregional Plan was adopted and certified bythe SANDAG Board of Directors on March 28, 2003 and encompasses the following seven cities within its planning boundary: Carlsbad, Encinitas, Escondido, Oceanside, San Marcos, Solana Beach, and Vista. With the exception of Solana Beach, each of these cities is required to develop a subarea plan in orderto obtain take authorization provided by the MHCP. The combination of the subregional MHCP plan and city subarea plans will serve as a multiple species Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) pursuant to Section 1O(a)(1)(B) of the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA), as well as an NCCP under the NCCP Act and the California ESA. The participating jurisdictions will submit these plans to the USFWS and CDFW in support of applications for permits and authorizations to incidentally "take" listed threatened or endangered species or other species of concern. "Take authorizations" thus issued by the wildlife agencies allow for otherwise lawful actions such as development that may incidentally take or harm individuals of a species or its habitat (generally outside of the preserve system) in exchange for conserving the species inside the preserve system.Ajurisdiction that is issued a take authorization, referred to as a "take authorization holder," may share the benefits of that authorization by using it to permit public or private projects that comply with the MHCP and the City's subarea plan. The conservation and management responsibilities, assurances of implementation, and corresponding authorizations for all parties will be contained in an implementing agreement between each take authorization holder (City) and the wildlife agencies.

The project site is not within the planning area boundary of the MHCP and is not adjacent to any focused planning areas of the MHCP. Furthermore, the City does not have a Subarea Plan although the guidance contained within the MHCP is used as a basis for assessing projects within a regional context. No impact would occur.

PotentiallyV. Cultural Resources Less than Significant
Would the project
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact
a. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to ❑ ❑ ❑ §15064.5?
b. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to ❑ ® ❑ ❑ §15064.5?
c. Disturb any human remains, including those interred El ® El ❑ outside of dedicated cemeteries?
The discussion below is summarized and based on the findings contained within the Addendum to the Cultural Resources Survey and Assessment (Addendum) (HELIX 2O21c) prepared for the proposed project and the Cultural Resources Survey and Assessment, Camino Largo Project prepared by HELIX Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-17

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist (HELIX 2015). The Addendum to the Cultural Resources Survey and Assessment is included as Appendix C of this IS/MND.

CULTURAL RESOURCES D/SCUSSm
a. No IMPACT. In October 2021, HELIX conducted an updated records search at the South Coastal Information Center (SCIC) for the project site and a one-mile radius surrounding the project site. In addition, HELIX staff and a Native American monitor performed a site survey in October 2021. These efforts were conducted to determine if the conditions as they related to cultural resources had changed since the preparation of the 2015 Cultural Resources Survey and Assessment.

As noted in the previous report and confirmed by the work performed to complete the Addendum, a single historic resource was identified (consisting of historic house foundations, a reservoir, and construction debris); however,the historic structural remains are not associated with historic persons or events, do not date to the pioneering phase of City's development,and are in a state of deterioration such that they lack integrity. No other historical resources were identified; thus, the project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to §15064.5.

No impact would occur.
b. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED. AS part Of the 2015 Cultural Resources Survey and Assessment, the record search identified one archeological resource (the prehistoric component of the historical resources discussed in item V a.). It was determined that the prehistoric resource contains little cultural material and has very limited research potential.As such,the site does not meet the criteria for nomination to the California Register and is not a significant resource.

Additionally, during the 2015 site survey, two manos and four pieces of debitage were recovered and a testing program consisting of shovel test pit (STP) excavations was undertaken. No further cultural materials, other than historic and modern debris was uncovered as a result of the STP excavations.

The 2021 records search yielded no additional resources, other than those that were recorded as a result of the 2015 field survey. However, the 2021 field survey identified two new isolated cultural items in the northern/central portion of the project; these included a quartz flake and a large Ostrea Shell. These items were recorded on a Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) site form.

Thus, given these results, there is the potential for unknown subsurface archaeological resources to be encountered during ground-disturbing activities, which may result in significant impacts. With implementation of Mitigation Measures CR-1 to CR-6 below, these impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels.

MITIGATION MEASURES
CR-1 Isolated cultural items, including the cultural materials previously collected from the project site for evaluation duringthe survey,.shall be returned to the site at a location determined prior to issuance of grading permit and further identified on the final grading plans as an environmentally sensitive area to be deed restricted in perpetuity, mutually agreed upon location (agreed upon by the Tribes and the Applicant/Owner).

CR-2 Cultural resource mitigation monitoring shall be conducted to provide for the identification, evaluation, treatment, and protection of any cultural resources that are affected by or may be discovered during the construction of the proposed project.The monitoring shall consist of the presence of a Qualified Archaeologist and a Native American Monitor for, but not limited to, any tree removal, demolition and/or removal of remnant foundations, pavements, Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-18

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist abandonment and/or installation of infrastructure; grading or any other ground disturbing or altering activities, includingthe placement of imported fill materials(note:all fill materials shall be absent of any and all cultural resources); and related off-site road improvements or utility installations in Camino Largo or North Santa Fe Avenue, private driveways and/or streets.

Other tasks of the monitoring program shall include the following:
• The requirement for cultural resource mitigation monitoring shall be noted on all applicable construction documents, including demolition plans, grading plans, etc. • The Qualified Archaeologist and Native American Monitor shall attend all applicable pre-construction meetings with the Contractor and/or associated Subcontractors. • The Qualified Archaeologist shall maintain ongoing collaborative consultation with the Native American monitor during all ground disturbing or altering activities,as identified above.
• The Qualified Archaeologist and/or Luiseno Native American monitor may halt ground disturbing activities if archaeological artifact deposits or cultural features are discovered. In general, ground disturbing activities shall be directed away from these deposits for a short time to allow a determination of potential significance,the subject of which shall be determined by the Qualified Archaeologist and the Native American monitor.Ground disturbing activities shall not resume until the Qualified Archaeologist, in consultation with the Native American monitor, deems the cultural resource or feature has been appropriately documented and/or protected. At the Qualified Archaeologist's discretion,the location of ground disturbing activities may be relocated elsewhere on the project site to avoid further disturbance of cultural resources. • The avoidance and protection of discovered unknown and significant cultural resources and/or unique archaeological resources is the preferable mitigation for the proposed project. If avoidance is not feasible a Data Recovery Plan may be authorized by the City as the Lead Agency under CEQA. If data recovery is required,then the Native American monitor shall be notified and consulted in drafting and finalizing any such recovery plan.

CR-3 Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit, the Applicant or Owner, and/or Contractor shall provide a written and signed letter to the City's Director of Community Development, stating that a Qualified Archaeologist and a Native American Monitor have been retained at the Applicant or Owner and/or Contractor's expense to implement the monitoring program, as described in the pre-excavation agreement.A copy of the letter shall be included in the Grading Plan Submittals for the Grading Permit.

CR-4 Prior to the release of the Grading Bond, a Monitoring Report and/or Evaluation Report, which describes the results, analysis and conclusions of the cultural resource mitigation monitoring efforts (such as, but not limited to, a Research Design, Data Recovery Program, etc.) shall be submitted by the Qualified Archaeologist, along with the Native American monitor's notes and comments, to the City's Director of Community Development for approval.

CR-5 The landowner shall relinquish ownership of all cultural resources collected during the cultural resource mitigation monitoring conducted during ground disturbing activities, and from any previous archaeological studies or excavations on the project site for respectful and dignified treatment and disposition in accordance with the consulting Tribe's cultural and spiritual Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-19

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist traditions. All cultural materials that are associated with burial and/or funerary goods will be repatriated to the Most Likely Descendant as determined by the Native American Heritage Commission per California Public Resources Code Section 5097.98.

CR-6 As specified by California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5, if human remains are found on the project site during construction or during archaeological work, the person responsible for the excavation, or his or her authorized representative, shall immediately notify the San Diego County Coroner's office by telephone. No further excavation or disturbance of the discovery or any nearby area reasonably suspected to overlie adjacent remains(as determined by the Qualified Archaeologist and/or the Native American monitor) shall occur until the Coroner has made the necessary findings as to origin and disposition pursuant to Public Resources Code 5097.98. If such a discovery occurs, a temporary construction exclusion zone shall be established surrounding the area of the discovery so that the area would be protected (as determined by the Qualified Archaeologist and/or the Native American monitor), and consultation and treatment could occur as prescribed by law. As further defined by State law, the Coroner would determine within two working days of being notified if the remains are subject to his or her authority. If the Coroner recognizes the remains to be Native American, he or she shall contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC)within 24 hours.The NAHC would decide as to the Most Likely Descendent. If Native American remains are discovered, the remains shall be kept in situ ("in place"), or in a secure location in close proximity to where they were found, and the analysis of the remains shall only occur on-site in the presence of a Luiseno Native American monitor.

C. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED. The project Site does not Ile near any dedicated cemeteries. Although disturbance of human remains is unlikely, it is possible that construction activity could unearth previously unknown vestiges.This would be considered a potentially significant impact.

However, implementation of Mitigation Measure CR-6(above)would ensure that human remains were treated with dignity and as specified by law and would reduce impacts to less than significant levels.

Lessthan
Significant
A. Energy Potentially with Lessthan
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Would -project .. Impact
a. Result in potentially significant environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary
consumption of energy resources, during project El H El construction or operation?
b. Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency?
The discussion below is summarized and based on the analysis and conclusions contained within the Camino Largo Residential Project AQ, GHG, and Energy Report (HELIX 2O21a) prepared for the proposed project. The report is included as Appendix A to this IS/MND.

ENERGYD/SCUSS/ON
a. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. Energy consumed for project construction would primarily consist of fuels in the form of diesel and gasoline. Fuel consumption would result from:the use of on-road trucks for the transportation of construction materials and water; and from the use of off-road construction equipment. The estimated fuel and total energy consumed during project construction are shown in Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-20

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist Table EN-1, Construction Energy Use.The full construction energy consumption calculation sheets are included in the AQ, GHG, and Energy Report(HELIX 2021a) in Appendix A of this IS/MND.

Table EN-1

CONSTRUCTION ENERGY USE
Source Gallons Diesel Gallons Gasoline MMBtu
Off-Road Construction Equipment 19,083 - 2,652 On-Road Construction Traffic 17,714 3,581 2,906 TOTAL' 36,798 3,581 5,559
Source:CalEEMod;OFFROAD2017; EMFAC2017
1 Totals may not sum due to rounding.

MMBtu = million British thermal units
While construction activities would consume petroleum-based fuels, consumption of such resources would be temporary and would cease upon the completion of construction. The petroleum consumed during project construction would be typical of similar residential projects and would not require the use of new petroleum resources beyond those typically consumed in California annually for construction activities. Based on these considerations, construction of the project would not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, and the impact would be less than significant.

During long-term operation of the project,energy would be consumed in the form of diesel and gasoline used by vehicles traveling to and from the project site; natural gas for heating and hot water; electricity required to source and treat water used by the project; and electricity used directly by the project. The 2019 Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards would require the project to provide a minimum of 115 kilowatts (kW) of on-site photovoltaic generation capacity producing approximately 202,245 kW/hour (kWhr) of electricity per year. The project's net electricity use calculation accounts for the on-site solar generation requirement. The project's operational energy use in gallons of fuel, electricity, and equivalent million British thermal unit (MMBtu) is shown in Table EN-2, Operational Energy Use. The energy calculation sheets are included in the AQ, GHG, and Energy Report (HELIX 2021a).

Table EN-2

OPERATIONAL ENERGY USE
Source Diesel (gallons) Gasoline(gallons) Electricity(kWh) Energy(MMBtu) Mobile 4,184 108,230 14,002
Natural Gas - - - 1,301
Water/Wastewater - - 57,900 198
Net Direct Electricity Use - - 169,061 576 TOTAL' 4,184 108,230 226,961 16,078 Source:CalEEMod;OFFROAD2017; EMFAC2017
1 Totals may not sum due to rounding.
kWh=kilowatt hours; MMBtu=million British thermal units As shown in Table EN-2, the project would result in an increase in annual energy consumption of approximately 16,078 MMBtu. While the project would increase the consumption of energy related to electricity, natural gas, water, and wastewater, because the project would be consistent with the growth projections the increase would be consistent with the energy projections for the state and the region since the project is consistent with the General Plan growth projections.Therefore, operation of the project would not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resource.

Impacts would be less than significant.

Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-21

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist b. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The 2019 Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards include provisions applicable to all buildings,which are mandatory requirements for efficiency and design.The project would be consistent with the requirements of Title 24 through implementation of energy- reduction measures, such as energy efficient lighting and appliances, water efficient appliances and plumbing fixture, water efficient landscaping and irrigation, and the onsite generation of renewable solar energy, as described above.Therefore,the project would not conflict with or obstruct with a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. Impacts would be less than significant. projectLess than
Significant
Al. Geology and Soils Potentially with Lessthan Significant Mitigation Significant No
Would tl7e a. Directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving:

1. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the
State Geologist for the area or based on other ❑ ❑ ❑ substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Mines and Geology Special
Publication 42.

2. Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ ❑ ® ❑

3. Seismic-related ground failure, including ❑ El Elliquefaction?

4. Landslides? ❑ ❑ ❑
b. Result in substantial soil erosion,or the loss of topsoil? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ c. Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable,or that would become unstable as a result of the project, ❑ ❑ ❑ and potentially result in on-or off-site landslide, lateral spreading,subsidence, liquefaction or collapse?
d. Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table
18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating ❑ ❑ ® ❑ substantial direct or indirect risks to life or property? e. Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal ❑ El Elsystems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater?
f. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological ❑ ❑ ❑ resource or site or unique geologic feature?
The discussion below is based on the Geotechnical Due Diligence Review prepared for the project by Geocon (2021), included as Appendix D of this IS/MND. The Geotechnical Due Diligence included a review of previous geotechnical investigations conducted at the site for a prior project to confirm past data and/or update as appropriate based upon the specifications of the proposed Camino Largo Residential Project. The previous geotechnical investigations, which are herein incorporated by reference include:

Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-22

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist • Lot Study for Camino Largo, California West, prepared by bHA, Inc., dated April 9, 2021. • Geotechnical Update Report, Proposed 8-Lot Subdivision, Tentative Subdivision Map PC No. 6-056/2-112, Camino Largo,Vista,California, prepared byVinje& Middleton Engineering, Inc., dated July 9, 2012 (Job #12-183-P)
• Geotechnical Update Report and Grading Plan Review, Proposed 8-Lot Subdivision North Santa Fe Avenue, Vista, California (APN 159-240-07), prepared by Vinje & Middleton Engineering, Inc., dated April 18, 2008 (Job #08-197-P) • Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation, Undeveloped Hillside Terrain, 2123 North Santa Fe Avenue, Vista California, prepared by Vinje& Middleton Engineering, Inc., dated July 29, 1997 (Job 97-190-P)
Geocon determined that the geotechnical reports are adequate for use for the proposed project.

However,the previous reports were prepared using the 2010 CBC and should be updated for seismic design using the 2019 CBC. In addition to the recommendations in the previously prepared reports referenced above, the Geotechnical Due Diligence also contains several recommendations that are designed to meet the criteria set forth in the CBC,which is adopted as Chapter 6,Article 1 of the VMC).

Accordingly, these recommendations as well as those in the previous reports are required by the CBC and are incorporated as project design features that would be included as conditions of approval.

GEOLOGYAND SO/Ls D/SCUSSm
al. No IMPACT. Seismically induced surface or ground rupture occurs when movement on a fault deep within the earth breaks through to the surface as a result of seismic activity. Fault rupture almost always follows preexisting faults, which are zones of weakness. Sudden displacements are more damaging to structures because they are accompanied by shaking. Under the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act(Act), which was passed in 1972,the California State Geologist identifies areas in the State that are at risk from surface fault rupture. The Act's main purpose is to prevent the construction of buildings used for human occupancy on the surface trace of active faults. The Act also requires the State Geologist to establish regulatory zones, known as Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zones around the surface traces of active faults and to issue appropriate maps that identify these zones.

According to the Geotechnical Due Diligence, there are no known active faults crossing the project site, and the site is not within an Alquist-Priolo Fault Zone (Geocon 2021). Therefore, project implementation would not expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects involving rupture of a known earthquake fault. No Impacts would occur. a2. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. There are no known active faults that cross the project site, but there are several active faults that run throughout San Diego County. The nearest known active faults are the Rose Canyon fault, part of the Newport-Inglewood-Rose Canyon Fault zone,approximately 10 miles west of the site and segments of the Elsinore Fault zone approximately 17 miles northeast of the site (Geocon 2021). Like most of southern California, the project site is within a seismically active area, and can therefore be subject to strong seismic ground motion. The project would comply with the seismic design parameters outlined in the CBC, which provides requirements for earthquake safety based on factors such as occupancy type,the types of soils onsite,and the probable strength of ground motion. Compliance with the CBC would include the incorporation of: (1) seismic safety features to minimize the potential for significant effects as a result of earthquakes; (2) proper building footings and foundations; and (3) construction of the building structure so that it would withstand the effects Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-23

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist of strong ground shaking. In addition, the City's Building Department would review the building plans through building plan checks, issuance of a building permit, and inspection of the residences during construction, which would ensure that all required CBC seismic safety measures are incorporated into all of the homes. Compliance with the CBC and the Building Department's review process, permit application, and inspection would reduce impacts related to strong seismic ground shaking. Impacts are less than significant.
a3. No IMPACT. Liquefaction is a phenomenon in which a saturated cohesionless soil causes a temporary transformation of the soil to a fluid mass, resulting in a loss of support. Liquefaction occurs when loose sand and silt that is saturated with water behaves like a liquid when shaken by an earthquake. Earthquake waves cause water pressures to increase in the sediment and the sand grains to lose contact with each other, causing the sediment to lose strength and behave like a liquid. The soil can lose its ability to support structures,flow down even very gentle slopes,and erupt to the ground surface to form sand boils. According to the City of Vista General Plan 2030 EIR, most of the City is situated on bedrock with a thin veneer of soil/sediment where there is little to no potential for liquefaction (City 2011). In addition, the following five conditions should be concurrently present for liquefaction to occur: (1) sediments must be relatively young in age and not have developed a large amount of cementation; (2) sediments must generally consist of medium- to fine-grained, relatively cohesionless sands; (3) the sediments must have low relative density; (4) free groundwater must be present in the sediment; and (5)the site must experience a seismic event of a sufficient duration and magnitude,to induce straining of soil particles.According to the City of Vista General Plan 2030 Figure PSFS-4 Soil Types and Locations,the project site has soils of the Vista Fallbrook Cieneba series, which are excessively to well drained soils (Natural Resource Conservation Service [NRCS] 2020).

Additionally, the Geotechnical Due Diligence concluded that the potential for liquefaction at the site is negligible due to the lack of permanent near surface groundwater and dense nature of underlying granitic rock. The project would not directly or indirectly cause potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction. No impact would occur.
a4. No IMPACT. Figure PSFS-3, Slope Analysis, of the City of Vista General Plan 2030 indicates that the majority of the project site does not have a slope exceeding 15 percent, minimizing the potential for landslides (City 2011). As such, the site is considered to have low susceptibility to landslide.

Specifically,the site is moderately sloping away from a north central high point. Elevations on the site range from a high of 361 feet amsl in the north central portion to 308 feet amsl at the southeastern portion and 295 feet amsl at the southwestern site boundary. According to the prior geotechnical investigations that examined the project site that were reviewed as part of the Geotechnical Due Diligence, there is no evidence of past landslides or conditions that would enable landslides onsite.

No impact would occur.
b. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The project would include the conversion of 9.3 acres of primarily vacant land that formerly supported a nursery to residential land uses. Construction of the proposed project would involve a variety of heavy equipment associated with intensive earthwork, structural, and paving phases. Soil exposed by construction activities, such as excavation, could be subject to erosion if exposed to heavy rain,winds, or other storm events.The project applicant would be required to submit a Notice of Intent to the SDRWQCB for the preparation a SWPPP. Generally, a SWPPP demonstrates how water quality during and post construction would be maintained in accordance with mandated objectives. Often this is achieved by employing BMPs (see Section X, Hydrology and Water Quality). Many BMPs designed to protect water quality also serve to reduce soil erosion and loss of topsoil.

Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-24

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist Specific BMPs may include the following:
• Preservation of existing vegetation within staging/parking areas where feasible. • Covering stockpiled, excavated, and/or fill materials to reduce potential off-site sediment transport.
• Use of erosion control devices, such as straw wattles, mulch, mats, and/or geotextiles. • Use of sediment controls to protect the site perimeter and prevent off-site sediment transport, including measures such as silt fencing, fiber rolls, gravel bags, temporary sediment basins, street sweeping, stabilized construction access points and sediment stockpiles, and use of properly fitted covers for sediment transport vehicles. • Compliance with local dust control measures.
• Daily backfill, compaction, and/or covering of excavated pipeline trenches to minimize erosion potential.
• Paving of disturbed roadway areas as soon as feasible after completion of trenching. • Regular inspection and maintenance of all erosion control and sediment catchment facilities to ensure proper function and effectiveness.

Further, required adherence to the City's Grading and Erosion Control Ordinance(VMC Chapter 17.56) ensures that certain measures or conditions, such as those that prevent erosion and siltation are included prior to the issuance of a grading permit.

Once operational, as shown in Figure 3, Site Plan, the project site would transition from primarily vacant or undeveloped land to impermeable surfaces and landscaped areas, eliminating large areas of exposed soils that may be subject to erosion and sedimentation.

With implementation of required standard erosion control measures and storm water construction BMPs, construction-related erosion and sedimentation impacts would be less than significant.

Additionally, once constructed,the project site would not include expansive areas of exposed soils that would contribute to erosion and sedimentation. Impacts would be less than significant. c. No IMPACT.As discussed in items IX a3 and IX a4 above,the project site would not be subject to risks associated with liquefaction and landslides(Geocon 2021). Lateral spreading refers to landslides that occur on gentle slopes. As shown on Figure PSFS-3, Slope Analysis of the City of Vista General Plan 2030, the project site is located in an area that primarily has slopes that range from 0 to 15 percent (City 2011). According to the previous geotechnical investigations, due to the project soils and underlying geologic formations coupled with the depth to groundwater, the project site is not located on an unstable geologic unit or at risk to experience lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse. No impact would occur.
d. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The Geotechnical Due Diligent identified that the on-site soils have a very low to low expansion potential and negligible corrosive potential and the risk of expansive soil affecting the proposed development is considered low due to the anticipated "very low" to "very low" expansion potential of the soils generated from excavations of onsite soils. The risk of corrosive soils Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-25

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist affecting the proposed development due to water-soluble sulfate is considered very low. Impacts would be less than significant.
e. No IMPACT.The proposed project would connectto the existing municipal wastewater system through local connections and does not involve the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. No impact would occur.
f. No IMPACT. The probability of discovering paleontological resources depends on the geologic formation being excavated, and the depth and volume of the excavation. Sedimentary rocks, such as those found in coastal areas, usually contain fossils. Granite rocks, such as those found in inland areas, generally will not contain fossils. According to the previous geotechnical investigations the project site is underlain by crystalline bedrock. The uncovered bedrock materials were typically dark- colored gabbroic rocks that were found in massive and weathered to deeply weathered conditions.

The bedrock is mantled by a thin layer of topsoil(ranging from one to four feet)that thickens to alluvium (ranging from three to eight feet) in the lower east and west portions of the property. The on-site topsoil/alluvial deposits included plastic expansive clayey soils. Granitic rock such as Tonalite has a low sensitivity rate for paleontological resources.As a result,the project would not directly or indirectly effect paleontological resources. No impact would occur.

GreenhouseLess than
Significant
• Potentially
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Would the project Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Generate greenhouse gas emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the
environment? El E El
b. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of ❑ ❑ ® ❑ greenhouse gases?
The discussion below is summarized and based on the analysis and conclusions contained within the AQ, GHG, and Energy Report (HELIX 2021a) prepared for the proposed project. The report is included as Appendix A to this IS/MND.

GREENHOUSE GAS EM/SS/ONS D/SCUSS/ON
a. LESsTHAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. Global climate change refers to changes In average climatic conditions on Earth including temperature, wind patterns, precipitation, and storms. Global temperatures are moderated by atmospheric gases. These gases are commonly referred to as GHGs because they function like a greenhouse by letting sunlight in but preventing heat from escaping, thus warming the Earth's atmosphere. The GHGs defined under California's Assembly Bill 32 include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CHn), nitrous oxide (N20), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6).

GHGs have long atmospheric lifetimes that range from one year to several thousand years. Long atmospheric lifetimes allow for GHG emissions to disperse around the globe. Because GHG emissions vary widely in the power of their climatic effects,climate scientists have established a unit called global warming potential (GWP). The GWP of a gas is a measure of both potency and lifespan in the atmosphere as compared to CO2. For example, because methane and N20 are approximately 25 and 298 times more powerful than CO2, respectively, in their ability to trap heat in the atmosphere, they Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-26

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist have GWPs of 25 and 298, respectively (CO2 has a GWP of 1). Carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) is a quantity that enables all GHG emissions to be considered as a group despite their varying GWP. The GWP of each GHG is multiplied by the prevalence of that gas to produce CO2e. The AQ, GHG, and Energy Report used CaIEEMod for this analysis, which uses GWP ratios to calculate project-related CO2e emissions (HELIX 2021a).

The City has developed an interim threshold to meet the statewide GHG emissions reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2020 and be on track to meet the 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 target in accordance with Senate Bill (SB)32 and EO S-3-05. However, the City has not adopted guidance or revised thresholds to account for GHG reduction target beyond 2020. Therefore, this analysis compares the project's emissions to a reduced threshold corresponding to the SB 32 reduction target of emissions 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030.Accordingly,a threshold reduced by 4.98 percent for each year between 2020 and 2030 would meet the mandates of SB 32. The first full year of operation for the project is anticipated to be 2024. Therefore, a threshold 18.5 percent (4.98 to the power of 4) below the City threshold of 1,185 MT CO2e per service population per year, or 966 MT, is used in this analysis.

The project would generate GHG emissions during construction and operation of the project.According to the AQ, GHG, and Energy Report (HELIX 2021a), construction of the project would generate a total of total of 699.8 MT of CO2e.Amortized (averaged)over the anticipated 30-year lifespan of the project, project construction GHG emissions would be 23.3 MT of CO2e per year. The anticipated operational GHG emissions of the project, in addition to the amortized construction emissions, are shown in Table GE-1, Operational Greenhouse Gas Emissions. The data are presented as the maximum anticipated operational GHG emissions for the first full year of operation (2024) and compared to the City threshold (adjusted for the year 2024).

Table GE-1

OPERATIONAL GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
Source Emissions
(MT CO2e/year)
Area 0.6
Energy 111.4
Vehicular(Mobile) 565.3
Solid Waste 34.0
Water and Wastewater 15.1
Total Annual Emissions' 726.4
Amortized Construction Emissions 23.3
Total Amortized Construction +Operational Emissions 749.7 2024 Adjusted Threshold 966.0
Exceed Threshold? No
Source:CalEEMod,output data is provided in Appendix A
1 Totals may not sum due to rounding.

MT=metric ton;CO2e=carbon dioxide equivalent
As shown in Table GE-1,the project's GHG emissions would be approximately 749.7 MT CO2e per year, which is below the 2024 adjusted City threshold of 966 MT CO2e per year.Therefore,the project would not generate GHG emissions that may have a significant impact on the environment, and the impact would be less than significant.
b. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. As discussed in item Vlll.a above, the project's GHG emissions would not exceed the City's threshold (adjusted for the year 2024) during construction and operation of the project. By achieving the City's threshold, the project would not conflict with the goals of the City's Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-27

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist Climate Action Plan (CAP) and may be seen to exceed its fair share in achieving the state's reduction target. Additionally, the project would be consistent with CAP measure E-1, Energy Efficient Building Standards, by being constructed in accordance with the energy-efficiency standards, water reduction goals, and other "green" standards contained in the 2019 Title 24 Part 6 and Part 11 (CALGreen) Building Standards, including the requirement for onsite solar electricity generation. Furthermore, through compliance with AB 341 and Chapter 13.17 of the City's Municipal Code, the project would be consistent with CAP measures S-1, Expanded Recycling, and S-2, Construction and Demolition Debris Diversion. As such, the project would be consistent with local plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions. Therefore, the project would not conflict with applicable plans, policies, and regulations related to GHG emission reductions, and the impact would be less than significant.

Hazards • Hazardous
Significant
Materials with Lessthan
Potentially Mitigation Significant No
Would tl7e project Significant Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through the routine transport, ❑ ❑ ® ❑ use, or disposal of hazardous materials?
b. Create a significant hazard to the public or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the ❑ ® ❑ ❑ release of hazardous materials into the
environment?
c. Emit hazardous emissions or handle
hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, ❑ El ® Elsubstances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school?
d. Be located on a site which is included on a list
of hazardous materials sites compiled
pursuant to Government Code Section ❑ ® ❑ ❑ 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a
significant hazard to the public or the
environment?
e. For a project located within an airport land use
plan or, where such a plan has not been
adopted,within two miles of a public airport or ❑ El El use airport,would the project result in a
safety hazard or excessive noise for people
residing or working in the project area?
f. Impair implementation of or physically
interfere with an adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuation plan? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ g. Expose people or structures, either directly or
indirectly, to a significant risk of loss, injury or ❑ ❑ ® ❑ death involving wildland fires?
Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-28

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist Geocon prepared a Phase I and II Environmental Site Assessment Report (ESA) for the proposed project in May 2021. As appropriate, the ESA is summarized below, and the ESA is included in its as Appendix E of this IS/MND.

HAZARDOUS MATERIALS D/SCUSS/ON
a. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. Materials and waste are generally considered hazardous if they are poisonous (toxicity), can be ignited by open flame (ignitability), corrode other materials (corrosivity), or react violently, explode, or generate vapors when mixed with water (reactivity). The term "hazardous material" is defined in the State Health and Safety Code (Chapter 6.95, Section 25501[o]) as any material that, because of quantity, concentration, or physical or chemical characteristics, poses a significant present or potential hazard to human health and safety or to the environment. Hazardous waste is defined as any hazardous material that is abandoned, discarded, or recycled, as defined in the State Health and Safety Code (Chapter 6.95, Section 25125). The transportation, use, and disposal of hazardous materials, as well as the potential releases of hazardous materials to the environment, are closely regulated through many state and federal laws.

During the project construction period, hazardous substances used to maintain and operate construction equipment(such as fuel, lubricants, adhesives, and solvents) would be present. The use of these materials could potentially result in significant impacts through accidental discharge associated with use and storage of hazardous materials.The transport, use,and disposal of hazardous materials and/or wastes would be conducted in accordance with applicable federal and state laws. In addition, implementation of the proposed project would require conformance with the NPDES Construction General Permit, as described in Section VI, Geology and Soils. Specifically, this would entail implementation of a SWPPP to address the use of hazardous materials and the potential discharge of contaminants including construction-related hazardous wastes through the installation of appropriate BMPs. While specific BMPs would be determined during the SWPPP process, the suite of BMPs would include standard industry measures and guidelines contained in the NPDES Construction Permit text and Stormwater Best Management Practices Construction Handbook (California Stormwater Quality Association [CASQA] 2019). Based on implementation of appropriate BMPs, hazardous material impacts related to construction activities would be less than significant.

Operation of the proposed facilities would include the storage and use of household hazardous materials and wastes. Typical household hazardous materials associated with the residential land uses could include cleaning products, paints, solvents, adhesives, other chemical materials used in building maintenance and interior improvements, automotive lubricants, small combustion engine fuels and lubricants, expired pharmaceuticals, mercury thermometers, sharp or used needles, and electronic wastes from household and car batteries. No special permits would be required for such limited use or disposal of common agents and products. Therefore, operation of the project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials. Impacts would be less than significant. b. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT WITH MITIGATION. As stated by the American Society for Testing Materials International (ASTM) Standard Practice for ESAs, the purpose of the ESA is to identify recognized environmental conditions (RECs), which are defined as "the presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at a property: (1) due to any release to the environment; (2) under conditions indicative of a release to the environment; or (3) under conditions that pose a material threat of a future release to the environment. De minimis conditions are not recognized environmental conditions." There are three categories of RECs: existing RECs (as defined above), Historical RECs (HRECs), or Controlled RECs (CRECs). An HREC is defined as "a past release of any hazardous substances or petroleum products that has occurred in connection with the property and has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority or meeting Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-29

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist unrestricted use criteria established by a regulatory authority, without subjecting the property to any required controls."An HREC is an environmental condition that was recognized in the past but may or may not still be recognized as a current environmental condition. A CREC is defined as a "recognized environmental condition resultingfrom a past release of hazardous substances or petroleum products that has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority, with hazardous substances or petroleum products allowed to remain in place subject to the implementation of required controls." A CREC is an active environmental concern because while the hazardous substances have been corrected to meet certain regulatory levels, the contaminants still remain and have the potential to be above regulatory levels for some types of development.

Due to the site's historical use as a nursery, the potential exists for residual pesticides, herbicides, heavy metals, and petroleum hydrocarbons to be present in shallow soils at the site; however, according to the ESA, previous testing of soils samples completed in 2012 determined that residual levels ranged from non-detectable to below thresholds. However, the Phase I ESA did identify stained soils in an area where equipment and vehicles are currently stored as a potential REC and recommended a Phase 11 ESA. As part of the Phase 11 ESA,the shallow soils present at the project site were analyzed to determine the presence of contaminants.The results from the soil samples indicated the presence of diesel, oil-range organics, and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs). Further the concentrations in the collected samples exceeded the applicable health risk-based screening levels for diesel and oil-range organics, which is a REC not for PCBs. The impacted soils are confined to the upper one foot of a 120-sf area (less than 5 cy). Mitigation measure HAZ-1 below would reduce risks associated with the impacted soils to less than significant.

As discussed above in item IX.a, limited quantities of hazardous materials such as gasoline, diesel, oils, and lubricants may be required to operate the construction equipment. Construction activities would be short-term, and the use of these materials would cease once construction is complete. The hazardous substances used during construction would be required to comply with existing federal, state, and local regulations regarding the use and disposal of these materials. In the event of an accidental release during construction containment and clean up would be in accordance with existing applicable regulatory requirements.

Project operation would include the use of household hazardous materials and wastes onsite. Typical household hazardous materials associated with the residential land uses could include cleaning products, paints, solvents, adhesives, other chemical materials used in building maintenance and interior improvements, automotive lubricants, small combustion engine fuels and lubricants, expired pharmaceuticals, mercury thermometers, sharp or used needles, and electronic wastes from household and car batteries. The limited use of such products does not require a special permit. In the event of an accidental release during project operation, containment and clean up would be conducted in accordance with existing applicable regulatory requirements.

Mitigation Measure
HAZ-1 Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the project applicant shall prepare a Soils Management Plan that shall be reviewed and approved by the County of San Diego Department of Environmental Health (DEH). Appropriate engineering controls shall be incorporated into the improvement plans, as may be required by DEH and SDRWQCB.

Evacuation, management and disposal of impacted soils shall be managed as approved/required by DEH, SDRWQCB, and local, state and federal requirements.

With implementation of HAZ-1, the project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset or accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. Impacts would be less than significant with mitigation.

Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-30

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist c. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. Guajome Park Academy is located less than one-quarter mile south of the site. As stated above, construction activities would adhere by appropriate regulations, minimizing impacts related to hazardous emissions or materials. Operation of the project may include use or disposal of hazardous materials typical of residential developments, including cleaning products, paints, solvents, adhesives, other chemical materials used in building maintenance and interior improvements, automotive lubricants, small combustion engine fuels and lubricants, expired pharmaceuticals, mercury thermometers, sharp or used needles, and electronic wastes from household and car batteries. No special permits would be required for such limited use or disposal of common agents and products. Therefore, the project would not result in potential hazards to nearby schools due to the use of hazardous materials during project construction or operation. Impacts would be less than significant.
d. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT WITH MITIGATION. A search of environmental databases, compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5, was conducted by Environmental Data Resources, Inc. (EDR)as part of the project ESAs. EDR identified three databases that have listings for the project site address orAPN:the California Environmental Reporting System (CERS)database,a site thattracks businesses or operations that use, store, or transport hazardous materials/wastes; the EnviroStor database maintained by the California Department of Toxic Substances Control, an online data management system for tracking our cleanup, permitting, enforcement, and investigation efforts at hazardous waste facilities and sites with known or suspected contamination issues; and the SCH, school site database. All three listings are related to a school site investigation that was initiated and rescinded by the Vista Unified School District(VUSD).A review of the EDR report indicate that the site's former agricultural land uses were a concern during this preliminary phase. As identified in item IX b., soil samples indicated that levels of pesticides, herbicides, heavy metals, and petroleum hydrocarbons, commonly associated with agriculture are below risk thresholds; however, levels of diesel and oil-range organics associated with equipment and vehicle storage area are elevated. With implementation of HAZ-1, the project would not create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. Impacts would be less than significant with mitigation. e. No IMPACT.The proposed project is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport or public use airport. The nearest public airports are McClellan Palomar Airport and Oceanside Municipal Airport, each located approximately five miles south and west of the project site, respectively. No impact would occur.
f. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The project could impact emergency access during both construction and operation. During construction,slow-moving construction vehicles could interfere with emergency response to the site or emergency evacuation procedures. The City requires traffic control plans for any construction activity that will disrupt traffic flow on city streets and project conditions of approval would require that emergency access be maintained during construction.

Once operational, site access would be via four cul-de-sacs accessible from Camino Largo that would provide access to the residences. The cul-de-sacs would be 40 feet wide curb to curb distance, with each one having adequate width/access for the Fire Department. The project would be required to adhere to the design requirements as established by VMC Title 19 (Streets/Sidewalks) and the Fire Department. These standards ensure that private streets are properly sized and located to facilitate emergency vehicle access and the positioning of emergency response crews during emergencies. In addition, Camino Largo will be paved and extended to a minimum width of 28 feet.

In relation to an emergency response plan, the City participates in the County's Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan. This plan is implemented on a regional level and outlines the jurisdictional concerns, resources, and action items to ensure community-wide safety from both natural and man-made threats. At a project level, through adhering to the required municipal codes, including Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-31

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist those that have been adopted to enact the CBC and the California Fire Code ensure that the project would not interfere with the implementation of emergency response plans. Impacts would be less than significant.
g. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. According to the Fire Hazard Severity Zone (FHSZ) maps prepared by the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE), the proposed project is not located within a very high fire hazard severity zone ((VHFHSZ) (City 2011). The project site is in a developed environment. There are no wildlands or open spaces immediately adjacent to the project site, which significantly reduces the risk of wildland fire damage to people and structures in the area; it is noted that Guajome Regional Park is identified as an area of wildland intermix. The proposed project would adhere to the CBC, along with the California Fire Code, and the County of San Diego Fire Code. Plans for the project would be approved by the City Fire Marshal prior to construction to ensure compliance with applicable codes.Therefore,the proposed project is not anticipated to expose people or structures to wildland fires, and impacts would be less than significant.

Lessthan
Significant
X. Hydrology and Water Quality Potentially
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Would the project Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade ❑ ❑ ® ❑ surface or ground water quality?
b. Substantially decrease groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such ❑ ❑ ® ❑ that the project may impede sustainable groundwater
management of the basin?
c. 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:

1. Result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off- El El ® Elsite?

2. Substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in ❑ ❑ ® ❑ flooding on-or off-site?

3. Create or contribute runoff water which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide ❑ ❑ ® ❑ substantial additional resources of polluted
runoff?

4. Impede or redirect flood flows? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ d. In flood hazard,tsunami, or seiche zones, risk release El El ® ❑ of pollutants due to project inundation?
e. Conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater ❑ ❑ ❑ management plan?
The discussion below is summarized and based on the analysis and conclusions contained within the Preliminary Hydrology and Hydraulic Report in August 2021 by bHA, Inc., Hydromodification Screening Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-32

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist prepared for the project by Chang Consultants in September 2021, and Storm Water Quality Management Plan (SWQMP) prepared by the bHA, Inc., in December 2021, The reports are included as Appendix F to this IS/MND.

HYDROLOGYAND WATER QUA LITYD/SCUSSm
a. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The proposed project includes the construction of 46 single-family residences and associated infrastructure.As such,the proposed project would change the site through site grading and by adding impervious surfaces, such as building roofs, paved drives, and access roads, that would alter the hydrological patterns of the site and could introduce new sources of water pollutants in site runoff. There is the potential for water pollutants to be generated in the short-term during construction activities and in the long term due to the permanent changes to the site.

Construction related pollutants might include loose soils, liquid and solid construction materials and wastes, and accidental spills of concrete, fuels, and other materials. As an urban development, the proposed project would add typical, non-point-source pollutants to stormwater runoff, primarily due to runoff from impervious surfaces where a variety of pollutants can collect over time,such as driveways, streets, roofs, patios,and other paved surfaces. Landscaped areas can also generate water pollutants such as fertilizers and weed control agents, as well as green waste from landscape maintenance cuttings. Several measures to protect water quality and limit discharges are directed and implemented, through both the preparation of various plans and adherence to established programs.

As discussed below, the project will be required to demonstrate compliance with such plans and programs.

Vista is within the jurisdiction of the SDRWQCB, which is tasked with protecting the region's water quality objectives that meet the standards set forth in the Section 303 of the federal Clean Water Act (CWA) as well as the state's Porter-Cologne Water Quality Act. The SDRWQCB designates beneficial uses of surface water and groundwater, sets qualitative and quantitative water quality objectives that must be met to protect designated beneficial uses, and develops implementation programs to protect the regional water resources through its Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (the Basin Plan).

Additionally, the NPDES program regulates point source and non-point source pollutant discharges to surface waters. Municipalities are required to obtain permits for the water pollution generated by stormwater in their jurisdictions. These permits are known as municipal separate storm sewer system (MS4) permits. Because the proposed project's stormwater runoff would be discharged into the local municipal storm drain system, the project is required to demonstrate that it would be consistent with the standards established in the MS4 permit as encoded in Chapter 13.18 of the VMC, Stormwater Management and Discharge Control Program.

The project would adhere to the NPDES Construction General Permit during construction, which includes BMPs that serve to protect groundwater quality. A SWPPP would also be prepared in compliance with the Construction General Permit, which would identify erosion control and sediment control BMPs that would be implemented to minimize the occurrence of soil erosion or loss of topsoil.

Once operational, a series of project design features, including a biofiltration basin would serve to capture and treat runoff. Therefore, impacts related to water quality would be less than significant.

Additionally, the project is a Priority Development Project (PDP) and, therefore, a SWQMP has been prepared. The PDP SWQMP includes construction and post-construction BMPs in compliance with the City and SDRWQCB regulations such as source control, bioretention basins, and hydromodification designs. Implementation of these BMPs under the PDP SWQMP would preclude any potential violations of applicable standards and discharge violations.

Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-33

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist Finally,to prevent water quality impacts due to construction-related stormwater pollutants,the project applicant is required to develop a SWPPP, as stated in the VMC (Section 12.16.112, Construction pollutant reduction). This plan would detail BMPs, including desilting basins or other temporary drainage or control measures, or both, as may be necessary to control construction-related pollutants.

The City will not issue a grading permit for the project until the SWPPP has been submitted to and approved by the City(Section 12.16.112[D]).

Based on the analysis above, the project would not violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements or otherwise substantially degrade surface or ground water quality. Impacts would be less than significant.
b. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The project would increase a demand for potable water and non-potable water for irrigation. The improvements associated with the proposed project would not deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge. The project site is within a developed area serviced by Vista Irrigation District(VID), and the project does not involve the use of groundwater during construction or operation. Therefore, the project would not substantially decrease groundwater supplies or impede sustainable groundwater management of the basin.

Impacts would be less than significant.
c1. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. Under current conditions, storm runoff within the project footprint generally sheet flows in a southerly direction towards Camino Largo. The runoff continues approximately 100 feet south and enters an unnamed natural drainage course that flows in a westerly direction that parallels the south side of Camino Largo.The unnamed natural drainage course crosses North Santa Fe Avenue in an arch culvert then continues northwest over 2.3 miles to a confluence with the San Luis Rey River.

The proposed project involves the construction of 46 single-family residences, which would increase the impervious surface area at the site. The project runoff would be treated by the proposed biofiltration basin and the underground stormwater vault/MWS. Runoff from the westerly half of the project would enter a biofiltration basin at the southwest corner of the site. A proposed storm drain would convey the treated runoff out of the biofiltration basin and to a culvert along North Santa Fe Avenue and eventually the unnamed drainage that parallels Camino Largo. A proposed storm drain would convey the treated runoff from an underground stormwater vault/ MWS situated in the eastern portion of the site and discharge towards the unnamed natural drainage course that parallels the south side of Camino Largo. Thus, similar to existing conditions, runoff from the project site would ultimately enter the unnamed drainage. A Hydromodification Screening was prepared for the project to quantify the project's erosion susceptibility rating (low, medium, or high). The analysis involved a channel screening analysis that established the limits of the study area and included a field survey in addition to archival research. The conclusion of the Hydromodification Screening is that the project has an overall low susceptibility to erosion both onsite and offsite within the unnamed channel and the limits of the study area. Therefore, analysis concluded that the project would not result in substantial erosion or siltation on-or off-site. Impacts would be less than significant. c2. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.The proposed project site would transition from a primarily vacant site to a fully developed site that would support a combination of impervious surfaces and landscaped conditions, which would increase the rate and amount of runoff. This increase in runoff would be handled by the stormwater control project design features.As stated above in item Ka, a PDP SWQMP has been prepared for the project, and a SWPPP would be prepared as required under the NPDES Construction General Permit. Both the required SWPPP and PDP SWQMP would establish BMPs that would minimize impacts to existing drainage patterns of the area in a manner which would substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff, which would result in flooding on- or off- site. The biofiltration basin and hydromodification designs would decrease surface runoff velocities, Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-34

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist reducing the chances of flooding on- or off-site. Project runoff would be treated for water quality through the installation of a biofiltration basin and the underground stormwater vault/MWS. Flows would then infiltrate through the bio-filtration layers of the basin to the low flow orifice or through proposed outlet pipes that would discharge offsite infrastructure. Peak flows would be safely discharged to the receiving storm drain system through of storm water infrastructure such as risers and spillways. With the project storm water/quality infrastructure, site flow would mimic existing drainage conditions,would discharge from the site at below historical flow rates.and would also satisfy the hydromodification management requirements of the City's BMP Design Manual. Therefore, the project would not substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on-or off-site. Impacts would be less than significant. c3. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. As Stated above In Item Ka, both a SWPPP and a PDP SWQMP would be implemented for the proposed project. Each would establish BMPs that would minimize impacts to existing drainage patterns of the area in a manner which would create or contribute runoff water exceeding the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional resources of polluted runoff. Additionally, as discussed in item X.c2, the Preliminary Hydrology and Hydraulic Report found that project implementation would not result in a substantial adverse change in the existing drainage pattern at the site, and with the project related storm water infrastructure, rates and velocity of stormwater discharges would be reduced to below existing levels.

Therefore, the project would not create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional resources of polluted runoff. Impacts would be less than significant. c4. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. According to the FEMA Flood Maps O6O73CO757G,the project site is located in an area of minimal flood hazard, so the site is not subject to substantial flooding (FEMA 2012).Additionally,although the project would result in an increase of impervious surfaces atthe site, project implementation would not result in a substantial adverse effect on the drainage pattern at the site (as discussed in item Xc2 above. According to the Preliminary Hydrology and Hydraulic Report flows would be lower with the project than existing conditions, due to the project's incorporation of biofiltration basins. Therefore, the project would not impede or redirect flood flows. Impacts would be less than significant.
d. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. As discussed in item X.c4, the project site is located in an area of minimal flood hazard and is not subject to substantial flooding (FEMA 2012). Tsunamis are usually caused by displacement of the ocean flood causing large waves and are typically generated by seismic activity. The proposed project is located approximately 7.6 miles from the Pacific Ocean; therefore, a tsunami hazard is not present for the project site. A seiche is a standing wave in an enclosed or partly enclosed body of water. Seiches are normally caused by earthquake activity, and can affect harbors, bays, lakes, rivers, and canals. The nearest body of water, Calavera Lake, is approximately 3.6 miles away, which is too far to present impacts by a seiche event. Impacts related to floods, tsunamis, or seiches would be less than significant.
e. No IMPACT. As stated above in item Ka, both a SWPPP and a PDP SWQMP would be implemented for the proposed project. Additionally, the project would comply with all storm water quality standards during construction and operation. Adhering to the BMPs and all storm water quality standards would minimize any potential negative impacts associated with hydrology and water quality. Additionally, according to the General Plan Update 2030 EIR, the buildout of the General Plan would not substantially interfere with groundwater recharge or groundwater supplies. Implementation of the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of a water quality control plan or sustainable groundwater management plan. There would be no impact.

Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-35

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist Lessthan
Significant
• Use and Planning Potentially
MitigationSignificant •
Would the project Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Physically divide an established community? ❑ ❑ ❑ b. Cause significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use plan, policy, or regulation ❑ ® El El for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an
environmental effect?

LAND USEAND PLANNING D/SCUSS/ON
a. NO IMPACT. The physical division of an established community typically refers to the construction of a linear feature, such as an interstate highway or railroad tracks, or removal of a means of access, such as a local road or bridge that would impact mobility within an existing community or between a community and outlying area. No new major supporting infrastructure facilities would need to be constructed and/or extended to the project site that could result in a physical disruption to an established land use or the local pattern of development The project site is within an urban area developed primarily with residential uses, in addition to a church, a museum, and county park nearby.

The proposed project includes the construction of 46 single-family homes on a lot that supports a non-operational nursery located within an area that has residential land uses to the south and east.

As stated in Section I of this IS/MND, the project is designed to adhere to the General Plan land use and community design goal of sharing common development patterns among neighborhoods. Thus, the project would be consistent with the surrounding land uses and would not divide an established community. Therefore,the proposed project would not physically divide an established community. No impact would occur.
b. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED. The proposed project's consistency with the City's General Plan (adopted 2012), the Municipal Code, and other land use plans and policies, and the surrounding land uses is discussed below.

General Plan 2030 Update
Land Use and Community Identity Element
The environmental goals and policies that apply to the proposed project are as follows:

LUCI Goal 2: Preserve and enhance the characteristics and features of neighborhoods that share common development patterns,topography, major streets, and zoning patterns.

LUCI Policy 2.4: Discourage subdivision design that disrupts the existing development pattern within established neighborhoods.

The design of the proposed project maintains the existing residential character of the surrounding area.The homes would be single-family similar to the neighborhood to the south and would not disrupt the existing pattern of development. Currently the site supports the remnants of a former nursery that is no longer operational. Conversely, the project would be a continuation of the denser residential development that is occurring south of the site, creating a cohesive development pattern. In addition, the proposed residences would have a maximum height of 35 feet. Therefore, the proposed Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-36

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist development would be compatible and consistent with the Land Use and Community Identity Element of the City's General Plan 2030 Update.

Circulation Element
As discussed in the Transportation/Traffic section of this IS/MND,the Circulation Element of the Vista General Plan 2030 Update (City 2012) states that the City has established LOS D as the threshold for acceptable operating conditions in designated areas. In addition, if a roadway or intersection is currently operating at a capacity less than LOS, additional traffic will have a substantial effect if it adds more than an average two seconds of delay.

Although the project would result in an increase in traffic near the site,the roadways and intersections within the study area would not conflict with the City's established LOS goals. Therefore, the project would not conflict with the Circulation Element of the City's General Plan.

Housing Element
The project site is designated as RR and would require a General Plan Amendment to MD Residential to accommodate the 46 single-family residences.

The City has recognized the potential for the project site to accommodate denser residential land uses as is demonstrated in the parcel specific analysis of potential housing sites that the City prepared to identify underutilized sites designated for residential or mixed-use development to meet the RHNA targets for the 2021-2029 planning period. This analysis, which is also included as Appendix B to the City's General Plan Housing Element Update, did not allocate a residential density to the site, but did identify the parcel as suitable for residential development (City 2021). Specifically, the RHNA for the 2021-2029 planning period assigned Vista a new housing need of 2,561 units.

The project would require a General Plan Amendment and zone change to accommodate the residential land uses; however, the transition of the site from previous agricultural land uses to residential is an extension of the existing land uses to the south. Therefore, these actions would not constitute a conflict with a land use plan adopted for the purposes of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect as the proposed residences would be compatible with the like land uses that already exist south of the site. Moreover, the current RR designation and A-1 zone indicate the site is suitable for residential development since single-family residences are allowed uses in the current A- 1 zone.

Resource Conservation and Sustainability Element
The applicable goals and policies that apply to the proposed project are as follows:

RCS Goal 2: Reduce GHG emissions from community activities and municipal facilities and operations within the City boundaries to support the State's efforts under Assembly Bill 32, Senate Bill 375, and other state and federal mandates, and to mitigate the community's contributions to global climate change.

RCS Policy 2.7:Through California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA)documents,evaluate and disclose the contribution new projects could have on climate change and require mitigation measures as appropriate.

RCS Goal 4: Preserve, protect, and enhance water quality in watersheds to which the City contributes storm water and urban runoff.

Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-37

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist RCS Policy 4.6: Require the incorporation of Low Impact Development(LID)techniques in accordance with current storm water regulations to manage storm water and urban runoff, reduce runoff and pollution, reduce the footprint of development on each parcel, and assist in maintaining or restoring the natural hydrology of the site.

RCS Goal 12: Acknowledge, preserve, and protect the City's Native American heritage.

RCS Policy 12.3: Ensure that the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians is notified of any proposed discretionary planning or grading applications affecting lands with potential archaeological resources.

RCS Policy 12.2: In collaboration with NAHC and the San Luis Rey Band of Mission Indians, adopt procedures for protecting significant archeological features, and apply to projects requiring discretionary City approval.

The proposed project meets RCS Policy 2.7 and Goal 2 through the GHG emissions analysis prepared in Section VII in this CEQA document. As previously described, the design of the proposed project incorporates a number of LID techniques and facilities that meets RCS Policy 4.6 and Goal 4. As discussed in Section V and in mitigation measures CR-1 through CR-6, procedures for protecting unknown significant archaeological features are appropriately described and included.As a result,the project would not conflict with the Resource Conservation and Sustainability Element of the City's General Plan.

Noise Element
The discussion below analyzes potential exterior/interior noise impacts after completion of the project as evaluated as part of the project Noise Assessment Study prepared by HELIX and included as Appendix G of this IS/MND.

Exterior Noise Levels
Future on-site residential land uses would be exposed to noise from vehicular traffic along North Santa Fe Avenue west of the project site. The noise levels associated with vehicular traffic were modeled at the project site using Horizon Year(2050)+ project average daily traffic (ADT)to conservatively assess future traffic noise conditions at the project site.The new residential land uses would not be compliant with the General Plan Noise Element limits if exterior use areas are exposed to noise exceeding 65 community noise equivalent level (CNEL).

Noise level contours were generated for North Santa Fe Avenue. The model provides the distances at which noise levels would exceed 65 CNEL. The 65 CNEL noise level contour would extend approximately 100 feet from the roadway centerline. The backyard exterior use areas of Lots 1 and 2 are located approximately 90 feet from the North Santa Fe Avenue (see Figure 3 in Attachment A).

Therefore, at this distance, these areas may not be compatible with the City General Plan noise level limits for residential developments. Mitigation measure LUI-1 would require the placement of permanent noise walls to reduce noise levels at these locations and reduce impacts to less than significant.

LU-1 On-Site Noise Barriers. Noise levels within the backyard areas of Lots 1 and 2 may be exposed to noise levels exceeding the City General Plan noise compatibility standards and shall be reduced to below 65 CNEL.

Noise reduction for these exterior use areas shall be accomplished through on-site noise barriers (walls). The wall shall be at least 6 feet in height and would break the line-of-sight Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-38

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist between the backyards and North Santa Fe Avenue. To appropriately reduce noise levels, the wall should be constructed at the pad elevation for each lot.

The sound attenuation barrier must be solid. It can be constructed of masonry, wood, plastic, fiberglass, steel, or a combination of those materials, as long as there are no cracks or gaps, through or below the wall. Any seams or cracks must be filled or caulked. If wood is used, it can be tongue and groove and must be at least one inch total thickness or have a density of at least 3.5 pounds per square foot. Where architectural or aesthetic factors allow, glass or clear plastic 3/8 of an inch thick or thicker may be used on the upper portion, if it is desirable to preserve a view.

Interior Noise Levels
Traditional architectural materials are conservatively estimated to attenuate noise levels by 15 CNEL; therefore, if exterior noise levels at a buildingfapade exceed 60 CNEL, interior noise levels may exceed the 45 CNEL limit set forth in the City General Plan Noise Element for residential uses. The 60 CNEL noise level contour generated by North Santa Fe Avenue would extend 170 feet from the roadway centerline. The residences on Lots 1 and 2 have fapades that are located within 110 feet of North Santa Fe Avenue and would therefore be exposed to noise levels exceeding 60 CNEL. To ensure that the project's habitable rooms do not exceed 45 CNEL, mitigation measure LU-2 would be required.

LU-2 On-site Interior Noise Level Reduction. Forthe project's Lot 1 and 2 habitable areas(both living rooms and bedrooms), the following measures shall be incorporated in the design of the project to reduce interior noise levels to 45 CNEL or less:
• Minimum exterior wall requirement of STC 46 with a construction of standard 3/8-inch exterior one coat stucco over 1.0-inch rigid R-4 insulation over 1/2-inch shearwall on 2x6 studs with 5/8-inch Type "X" Drywall.
• Minimum window requirement of STC 28 with a vinyl frame window construction of dual glazing window thickness 1/8-inch and 1/2-inch air gap. • Appropriate means of air circulation and provision of fresh air intake shall be incorporated in the project to allow windows to remain closed for extended intervals of time so that acceptable levels of noise can be maintained on the interior. • Buildings shall provide mechanical ventilation in accordance with the 2019 California Mechanical Code.

Other General Plan Elements
The proposed project would be adequately served by existing public services, and would require compliance with the City's building and fire codes and with the seismic regulations within the CBC.The

9.3-acre project site does not contain any designated open space. Consequently, no inconsistencies with the City's Public Safety Element and Healthy Vista Elements are anticipated as a result of project implementation.

Habitat Conservation Plan or Natural Community Preservation Plan As discussed in Section IV, Biological Resources, of this IS/MND, the MHCP is a comprehensive, multiple jurisdictional planning program designed to develop an ecosystem preserve in northwestern San Diego County. Implementation of the regional preserve system is intended to protect viable Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-39

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist populations of key sensitive plant and animal species and their habitats, while accommodating continued economic development and quality of life for residents of the north county region (AMEC 2003).

The project site is not within the planning area boundary of the MHCP and is not adjacent to any focused planning areas of the MHCP. (Furthermore, the City does not have a Subarea Plan although the guidance contained within the MHCP is used as a basis for assessing projects within a regional context. The project would not conflict with the MHCP and no impacts would occur.

Zoning Ordinance
The project would require a zone change from A-1 to R-1-13 (small lot subdivision), 3,600-sf lots (minimum size). The site's agricultural zoning is not an indication of a land use regulation enacted to protect scenic resources. According to the VMC Chapter 18.10, a variety of uses in addition to raising crops could occur under this zoning, including single-family residences, packing or processing plants for crops, silos, accessory buildings (including workshops and barns), farm labor housing, and residential care/transition homes. Comparatively, the residential land uses would result in a similar level of site disturbance in relation to what is allowed under the A-1 zone and would not involve the use of industrial chemicals associated with agricultural production.

Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines
Implementation of SB 743 resulted in a shift in evaluating transportation impacts from LOS and vehicular delay to vehicles miles traveled (VMT). In response to SB 743 the City prepared guidelines to assess VMT, Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines (City 2020). According to the City's Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines, projects that are not consistent with the applicable General Plan land use designation only require a VMT analysis if the anticipated ADT would be greater than 500 trips (City 2020).As discussed in Section XVII,Transportation/Traffic,the project is not consistent with the City's General Plan land use designation for the site and will require a General Plan Amendment. However, the project would generate a total of 460 ADT. The project would not exceed 500 trips per day, and therefore is below the threshold to require a VMT analysis.

Summary
With implementation of Mitigation Measures LU-1, and LU-2, the project would not conflict with any plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding an environmental impact.

PotentiallyX11. Mineral Resources Lessthan Significant
Would the project
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
a. Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the ❑ ❑ ❑ residents of the state?
b. Result in the loss of availability of a locally-important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local ❑ ❑ ❑ general plan,specific plan or other land use plan?
Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-40

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist

MINERAL RESOURCES DISCUSSION
a. No IMPACT. Mineral resources are commonly defined as a concentration or occurrence of natural, solid, inorganic, or fossilized organic material in or on the earth's crust in such form and quantity and of such a grade or quality that it has reasonable prospects for economic extraction. Mineral resources can be categorized into three classes: fuel, metallic, and non-metallic. Fuel resources comprise coal, oil, and natural gas. Metals include such resources as gold, silver, iron, and copper. Lastly, non-metal resources include industrial minerals and construction aggregate. Industrial minerals include boron compounds, rare-earth elements, clays, limestone, gypsum, salt, and dimension stone. Construction aggregate includes sand and gravel, and crushed stone.

The Surface Mining and Reclamation Act of 1975 (SMARA) is the primary regulator for surface mining in the state. The act requires the state geologist (California Geological Survey) to identify all mineral deposits in the state and to classifythem based on their significance.SMARA defines a mineral deposit as a naturally occurring concentration of minerals in amounts or arrangement that under certain conditions may constitute a mineral resource. The concentration may be of value for its chemical or physical characteristics. The classification of these mineral resources is a joint effort of the State and local governments. It is based on geologic factors and requires that the State Geologist classify the mineral resources area as one of the four Mineral Resource Zones (MRZs), Scientific Resource Zones (SZs), or Identified Resource Areas (IRAs), described below:
• MRZ-1: A Mineral Resource Zone where adequate information indicates that no significant mineral deposits are present or likely to be present.
• MRZ-2: A Mineral Resource Zone where adequate information indicates that significant mineral deposits are present, or a likelihood of their presence and development should be controlled.
• MRZ-3: A Mineral Resource Zone where mineral resource significance is undetermined. • MRZ-4: A Mineral Resource Zone where there is insufficient data to assign any other MRZ designation.
• SZ Areas: Containing unique or rare occurrences of rocks, minerals, or fossils that are of outstanding scientific significance shall be classified in this zone. • IRA Areas: County or State Division of Mines and Geology Identified Areas where adequate production and information indicate that significant minerals are present.

According to the Generalized Mineral Land Classification Map of Western San Diego County prepared by the California DOC Division of Mines and Geology, the project site is classified as MRZ-3 (DOC 1996). Therefore, the significance of mineral resources in the project region is undetermined.

The General Plan EIR states that the potential for viable extraction of mineral resources within the MRZ-3 is limited due to the city's urbanized character. In addition, the City's General Plan does not identify the project site as a locally important mineral resource recovery site. Regardless,there are no known mineral resources at the site and therefore there would be no loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state. No impact would occur
Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-41

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist b. No IMPACT.As stated above in item Xll.a, the project area is not used for mineral extraction and is not known as a locally important mineral resource recovery site. Further, the project area is not delineated on any plan for mineral resource recovery uses. No impacts would occur.

NoiseLess than
Significant
Potentially with Lessthan
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Would the project . .. .
a. 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 local ❑ ® ❑ ❑ general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
b. Generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
c. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip or an airport land use plan or, where such a
plan has not been adopted,within two miles of a public
airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to
excessive noise levels?
The discussion below is summarized and based on the analysis and conclusions contained in the Camino Largo Residential Project Noise Assessment Study(Noise Study) prepared by HELIX (2O21d) for the proposed project. The report is included as Appendix G to this IS/MND.

NOISE DISCUSSION
a. Less than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated. Implementation of the project would result in an increase of noise during project construction and operation. Noise sensitive receptors (i.e., land uses associated with indoor and/or outdoor activities that may be subject to stress and/or significant interference from noise) typically include residential dwellings, hotels, motels, hospitals, nursing homes, educational facilities and libraries. According to the Noise Study (HELIX 2021), sensitive receivers near the project site include single-family residences to the south and east, and a church to the northwest of the project site.

Noise Thresholds and Standards
Rapid variations in ambient air pressure are perceived as sound by the human ear when they occur within certain limits. A decibel (dB) is a unit used to express the intensity of a sound wave. Since the human ear is not equally sensitive to all sound frequencies within the entire auditory spectrum, the dBA descriptor (or A-weighted sound level) is used because it factors sounds more heavily within the range of maximum human sensitivity to sound frequencies. Although the A-weighted sound level may adequately indicate the level of environmental noise at any instant in time, community noise levels vary continuously. Most environmental noise includes a conglomeration of sounds from distant sources that create a relatively steady background noise in which no particular source is identifiable.

For this type of noise, a single descriptor called the LEQ (or equivalent sound level) is used. The minimum change in sound level that the human ear can detect is approximately three dBA. This increment is commonly accepted under CEQA as representing an impact threshold. This limit is also accepted by the City as the significance threshold to determine a proposed project's impact on the affected (existing) environment.

Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-42

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist Applicable Noise Standards
The City has adopted the County of San Diego Noise Ordinance for the purpose of controlling excessive noise levels, including noise from construction activities.

Table N-1, Applicable Exterior Property Line Noise Limits, lists the applicable exterior property line noise limits.

Table N-1

APPLICABLE EXTERIOR PROPERTY LINE NOISE LIMITS
Applicable Limit One-hour
Zone Time Average Sound Level
(Decibels)
A-1, E-1, 0, OSR 7:00 a.m. - 10:00 p. m. 50
R-113, MHP 10:00 p.m. - 7:00 a. m. 45
R-M 7:00 a.m. - 10:00 p.m. 55
10:00 p.m. - 7:00 a.m. 50
C-1, C-2, 0-3, C-T, OP, M-U and Downtown 7:00 a.m. - 10:00 p.m. 60 Specific Plan 10:00 p.m. - 7:00 a.m. 55
M-1, I-P, all areas of the Vista Business Any time 70 Park Specific Plan and Specific Plan 14
Source:City 2014
A-1=Agricultural;C-1 and C-3=Commercial;C-T=Commercial Transient; E-1= Estate; I-P= Industrial; M-1=Light Manufacturing; MHP=Mobile Home Park; M-U = Mixed Use;0=Open Space;0-3=Office Park; OP=Office Professional;OSR=Open Space Residential; R-1 and R-1B=Single-family Residential; R-M =Multi-family Residential
Construction activity would be considered significant for nearby residences if it exceeds an 8-hour average exterior noise level of 75 dBA, or a maximum impulsive noise level of 82 dBA on an occupied residential use. The ordinance prohibits construction and building work between the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. of the next day, on Sundays, or on a holiday.

For traffic-related noise, impacts are considered significant in areas where traffic noise at single-family residential uses exceeds 65 CNEL and implementation of the project would result in an increase of the noise level by three CNEL or more.

Existing Noise Levels
As discussed below, existing ambient noise levels were measured on-site, and existing traffic traveling on North Santa Fe Avenue was counted during the measurement period.

Ambient Noise Levels and Existing Traffic Levels
Two measurements were taken for the ambient noise survey, including one measurement at the project site and one along North Santa Fe Avenue to the west.The first measurement was taken along the southern boundary of the project site along Camino Largo, approximately 600 feet west of North Santa Fe Avenue. The second measurement was taken along North Santa Fe Avenue, at a location approximately 850 feet west of Osborne Street. A traffic count was conducted at this location to estimate the breakdown of heavy trucks(three or more axles), medium trucks(double tires/two axles), and automobiles along North Santa Fe Avenue. The measured noise levels are shown in Table N-2 Noise Measurement Results. Traffic counts for the timed measurement and the one-hour equivalent volume are shown in Table N-3.

Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-43

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist Table N-2

NOISE MEASUREMENT RESULTS
Measurement 1 -Traffic
Date: December 8, 2021
Conditions: Temperature: 55°F. Wind Speed: 1 mph. 77% humidity.Sunny.

Time: 8:24 a.m. - 8:34 a.m.

Location: Along the southern boundary of the project site 600 feet west of North Santa Fe Avenue
Measured Noise Level: 47.1 dBA LEQ
Notes: Ambient nature sounds. Noise primarily from traffic on Santa Fe Avenue, landscaping equipment, and distant aircraft.

Measurement 2 -Ambient
Date: December 8, 2021
Conditions: Temperature: 55°F.Wind Speed: 1 mph. 77% humidity.Sunny.

Time: 8:47 a.m. - 9:02 a.m.

Location: West of project site approximately 850 feet west of Osborne Street and 60 feet from the North Santa Fe Avenue centerline.

Adjacent to North Coast Church parking lot.

Measured Noise Level: 67.9 dBA LEQ
Notes: I Noise dominated by traffic along North Santa Fe Avenue.

Table N-3

RECORDED TRAFFIC VOLUME AND VEHICLE MIX
Measurement Roadway Traffic Autos MT1 HT2 1 North Santa Fe 15-minute count 196 7 1 Avenue One-hour equivalent 784 28 4
Percent 96.7% 0.9% 2.3%
1 Medium Trucks(double tires/two axles)
2 Heavy Trucks(three or more axles)
As noted in Table N-2, the highest ambient noise measurement was 67.9 dBA for Measurement 2, which was located adjacent to the North Coast Church parking lot.

Future Noise Prediction Modeling
As discussed in the Noise Study (HELIX 2O21d), modeling of the exterior noise environment was accomplished usingtwo computer noise models: CadnaA version 2019 and Traffic Noise Model (TNM) version 2.5. CadnaA is a model-based computer program for predicting noise impacts in a wide variety of conditions, including traffic noise predictions.

Input variables included road alignment, elevation, lane configuration, area topography, existing and planned noise control features, projected traffic volumes, estimated truck composition percentages, and vehicle speeds. Peak-hour traffic volumes are estimated based on the assumption that approximately 10 percent of the average daily traffic would occur during a peak hour. The model- calculated one-hour LEQ noise output is therefore approximately equal to the CNEL (Caltrans 2013).

Project construction noise was analyzed using the Roadway Construction Noise Model (RCNM; USDOT 2008), which utilizes estimates of sound levels from standard construction equipment.

Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-44

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist Operational On site Noise Generation
The project would include heating, ventilation, and air conditioning (HVAC) units at ground-level locations adjacent to each proposed residence. Specific locations and planning data for the future HVAC units is not available at this stage of project design; however,the project applicant has indicated that HVAC units would be located on the sides of the proposed residences. A typical single HVAC unit generally generates a noise level of 56 dBA at a distance of 7 feet.

The closest proposed lot to the nearest off-site residential property line would be Lot 3 (see Figure 3).

For the single-family homes, it is likely that the HVAC units would be installed adjacent to the house structure. The nearest off-site residential structure would be approximately 45 feet from the closest potential HVAC location. At this distance, the HVAC would generate a noise level of approximately

39.8 dBA, which would not exceed the City's nighttime allowable hourly limit of 45 dBA(refer to table N-1); therefore, impacts from the project's operational noise would be less than significant.

Operational Off-site Transportation Noise Generation
TNM software was used to calculate the noise contour distances for Existing and Existing + Project conditions along North Santa Fe Avenue. Existing and Existing + Project traffic noise levels presented in this analysis are based on traffic volumes provided by LLG (2021).

The off-site roadway modeling represents a conservative analysis that does not consider topography or attenuation provided by existing structures. The results of this analysis for the CNEL at the nearest NSLUs to the roadway centerline of North Santa Fe Avenue are shown below in Table N-4, Off-site Traffic Noise Levels.

Table N-4

OFF-SITE TRAFFIC NOISE LEVELS
CNEL at CNEL at CNEL at
Distance to Distance to Distance to Distance to Direct Roadway Segment Nearest Nearest Nearest NSLU Nearest NSLU Impact' NSLU NSLU (Existing+ Change from
(Existing) Project) Existing
North Santa Fe Avenue
North of Project 100 feet 62.6 62.7 0.1 No South of Project 50 feet 69.4 69.5 0.1 No 1 A direct impact to off-site uses would occur if existing noise levels exceed 65 CNEL at single-family residences and the project more than doubles(increases by more than 3 CNEL)the existing noise level.

NSLU=noise sensitive land use;CNEL=Community Noise Equivalent Level Impacts would be significant in areas where traffic noise at single-family residential uses exceeds the 65 CNEL maximum noise level specified in the City's General Plan Noise Element,and implementation of the project results in a significant increase in noise levels, which is considered greater than a perceptible change of 3 CNEL over existing conditions. As shown in Table N-4, noise levels would increase by 0.1 CNEL for nearby residences along North Santa Fe Avenue. This increase would not be a perceptible increase and noise impacts from project-generated traffic would be less than significant.

On site Construction Noise Generation
Construction of the project would require site clearing, demolition of existing structures, grading, installation of underground utilities/infrastructure, construction of new buildings, paving, and architectural coating. The magnitude of the noise impact would depend on the type of construction Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-45

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist activity, equipment, duration of each construction phase, distance between the noise source and receiver, and any intervening structures. Construction would generate elevated noise levels that may disrupt nearby residences north, south, and east of the project site. Construction equipment would be continuously moving across the site,and equipment is not anticipated to be located at a single location during a typical workday. Therefore, construction equipment is modeled at an average distance of 100 feet from the nearest NSLUs. Table N-5, Construction Equipment Noise Levels, provides the 100-foot distance noise levels for equipment anticipated to be used for general construction activities.

Table N-5

CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT NOISE LEVELS
Unit Percent LMAx dBA LEQ
Operating Time at 100 feet at 100 feet
Backhoe 40 71.5 67.6
Compactor 20 77.2 70.2
Compressor 40 71.6 67.7
Concrete Mixer Truck 40 72.8 68.8
Concrete Pump Truck 20 75.4 68.4
Dozer 40 75.6 71.7
Dump Truck 50 70.4 66.5
Excavator 40 74.7 70.7
Front End Loader 40 73.1 69.1
Paver 50 71.2 68.2
Roller 20 74.0 67.0
Excavator/Loader/Dump Truck 40 74.7 73.9 Source:RCNM; USDOT 2008
LMAx= maximum noise level;dBA=A-weighted decibel; LEQ=equivalent sound level Construction equipment would not all operate at the same time or location and would not be in constant use during the eight-hour operating day. Further, not all the pieces of equipment included in Table N-5 would be used within 100 feet off-site residences.A dozer and an excavator may be working on the site simultaneously but would not be working near one another at a given time due to the nature of their respective operations. An excavator, loader, and dump truck were analyzed together for construction noise impacts due to their likelihood of being used in conjunction with one another.

Based on these assumptions, grading operations using an excavator, loader, and dump truck at the nearest NSLU would be 73.9 dBA LEQ at 100 feet. Therefore, construction noise from this equipment was modeled to be below the noise ordinance limit of 75 dBA LEQ (8-hour), however noise levels may exceed the existing ambient noise levels by 10 dBA.

Ambient noise levels were conducted at the project site approximately 600 feet east of North Santa Fe Avenue. During this short-term measurement, noise levels of 47.1 dBA were taken. Furthermore, using the TNM modeling results for the existing conditions of North Santa Fe Avenue, noise levels 100 feet from the roadway would be approximately 62.7 dBA CNEL.1 By both measures, construction noise levels would likely exceed the existing ambient noise environment by 10 dBA. Mitigation measure N01-1 would incorporate a construction noise management plan including the use of temporary sound barriers to reduce noise levels at neighboring NSLUs.
1 CNEL metric includes evening and nighttime noise levels.Construction would not occur during those hours.

Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-46

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist Mitigation Measure
N01-1 Construction Noise Management Plan. Noise levels from project-related construction activities shall not exceed the noise limit specified in San Diego County Code Sections 36.408 and

36.409 (adopted as Subsection 8.32.020 through 8.32.060 of the City's Municipal Code) of 75 dBA-8-hour average, when measured at the boundary line of the property where the noise is located or any occupied property where noise is being received.A Construction Management Plan that describes the measures included on the construction plans to ensure compliance with the noise limit shall be prepared by the project applicant and submitted to the City of Vista Planning Division for approval prior to issuance of the grading permit. The following measures may be included to reduce construction noise:
• Construction equipment to be properly outfitted and maintained with manufacturer- recommended noise-reduction devices.
• Diesel equipment to be operated with closed engine doors and equipped with factory- recommended mufflers.
• Mobile or fixed "package" equipment (e.g., arc-welders and air compressors) to be equipped with shrouds and noise control features that are readily available for that type of equipment.
• Electrically powered equipment to be used instead of pneumatic or internal- combustion powered equipment, where feasible.
• Unnecessary idling of internal combustion engines (e.g., in excess of 5 minutes)to be prohibited.
• Material stockpiles and mobile equipment staging, parking, and maintenance areas to be located as far as practicable from noise sensitive receptors. • The use of noise-producing signals, including horns, whistles, alarms, and bells, shall be for safety warning purposes only.
• No project-related public address or music system shall be audible at any adjacent sensitive receptor.
• Temporary sound barriers or sound blankets may be installed between construction operations and adjacent noise-sensitive receptors. Due to equipment exhaust pipes being approximately 7-8 feet above ground, a sound wall at least 10 feet in height above grade, located along the western and southern property lines between the project and neighboring residences would mitigate noise levels to within acceptable levels. To effectively reduce noise levels,the sound barrier should be constructed of a material with a minimum weight of two pounds per square foot with no gaps or perforations and remain in place until the conclusion of demolition, grading, and construction activities.
• The project applicant shall notify residences within 100 feet of the project's property line in writing within one week of any construction activity such as demolition, hard rock handling, concrete sawing, asphalt removal, and/or heavy grading operations.

Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-47

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist The notification shall describe the activities anticipated, provide dates and hours, and provide contact information with a description of a complaint and response procedure. • The on-site construction supervisor shall have the responsibility and authority to receive and resolve noise complaints. A clear appeal process for the affected resident shall be established prior to construction commencement to allow for resolution of noise problems that cannot be immediately solved by the site supervisor.

Construction Traffic Noise
It is anticipated that 2,758 round trips, or 5,516 one-way haul truck trips would be required for soil export over the course of 20 workdays during the grading phase of construction, which would equate to 276 one-way haul truck trips, or passes, per day (HELIX 2O21d). Over the course of an eight-hour construction day, it is assumed 34 haul truck trips would occur per hour. This daily traffic level associated with soil export is anticipated to be the highest daily traffic level associated with project construction.

The additional 34 construction trips were added to the existing traffic volumes on North Santa Fe Avenue south of the project site. Using TNM, receivers were modeled at 50 feet from the roadway centerline (the approximate distance to the nearest The modeled existing traffic noise level along this segment of North Santa Fe Avenue is 69.4 CNEL. The addition of the project's haul truck trips during the grading phase of construction would increase noise levels to 70.1 CNEL, which represents a

0.7 CNEL increase. This would not be a perceptible increase and impacts from construction traffic noise to existing NSLUs would be less than significant. b. Less than Significant Impact. A possible source of vibration during general project construction activities would be a vibratory roller, which may be used for compaction of soil beneath building foundations and could be used within 50 feet of the off-site residence north of Lot 3. Most usage of a vibratory roller, however, would occur at distances greater than 50 feet from any single residence due to the mobile nature of its use across the project site. A vibratory roller would create approximately

0.210 inch per second PPV at a distance of 25 feet (Caltrans 2020). A 0.210 inch per second PPV vibration level would equal 0.098 inch per second PPV at a distance of 50 feet.2 This would be lower than the structural damage impact to older structures of 0.5 inch per second PPV and the "strongly perceptible" impact for humans of 0.1 inch per second PPV. Additionally, off-site exposure to such ground-borne vibration would be temporary as it would be limited to the short-term construction period.

Therefore, even though vibration may be perceptible at nearby residences, temporary impacts associated with the roller (and other potential equipment) would be less than significant. c. No Impact. The project is subject to some distant aircraft noise, though the site is not located near an airport. The nearest airports are Oceanside Municipal Airport, located approximately 5.7 miles to the west and McClellan-Palomar Airport, located approximately 7.4 miles to the south. At these distances, no effects related to airport noise would occur at the project site. No impact would occur. 2 Equipment PPV = Reference PPV * (25/D)n (inches per second), where Reference PPV is PPV at 25 feet, D is distance from equipment to the receiver in feet,and In=1.1(the value related to the attenuation rate through the ground);formula from Caltrans 2013b.

Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-48

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist MitigationLessthan
Significant
XIV. Population and Housing Potentially with Lessthan Significant •
Would the project Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Induce substantial unplanned population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new El El Elhomes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)?
b. Displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing,necessitating the construction of replacement ❑ ❑ ❑ housing elsewhere?

POPULATION AND HOUSING DISCUSS/ON
a. No IMPACT. Growth inducing impacts are caused by those characteristics of a project that foster or encourage population and/or economic growth, such as new housing(direct) or creation of a new job center or the expansion of infrastructure to increase capacity(indirect).

The proposed project would directly add to the City's population by introducing 46 new single-family residences. According to SANDAG's 2019 population and housing estimates, the average household size in Vista is 3.26 people (SANDAG 2020). Applying this rate, an additional 46 residences could result in a population increase of approximately 150 people. Conservatively, if all homes were occupied by new residents, the project would represent an increase in the City's population of less than one-tenth of a percent.

The City's General Plan designates the project site as RR and is zoned as A-1, and the project would require a General Plan Amendment and zone change to accommodate the proposed residential land uses. As discussed in Sections III and Xl, a RHNA was prepared for the City in accordance with California law that requires local governments to facilitate and encourage the production of housing to accommodate population and employment growth. The 2021-2029 RHNA target for the City is 2,561 homes distributed among various income levels. In an effort to achieve this goal, the City has recognized the potential for the project site to accommodate more dense residential land uses. Thus, it is recognized that there is a need for additional housing in the City and there is the potential that this project may provide housing. Therefore, while the project would directly induce population in the area through the construction of new homes, this development is consistent with the City's intent to provide additional residential development on what are deemed underutilized properties. Given that the project would provide a portion of the RHNA allocation, it would not represent a significant impact due to unanticipated or unplanned growth. Direct impacts are less than significant.

The project does not involve any activities or features that would indirectly induce growth.

Infrastructure would be extended to the site; however, this extension would be from the existing municipal facilities that serve the greater project area and would not involve the installation of any infrastructure that would expand capacity beyond the site. Improvements to the current site access would also occur through upgrades to Camino Largo. The project site, which is already surrounded by existing development including a museum and regional park to the west, a church to the north, and existing residential neighborhood to the south and would not provide any new or future potential to accommodate development beyond the site. Therefore, the project would not indirectly contribute to substantial growth. Indirect impacts are less than significant.

Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-49

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist b. No IMPACT. The project site does not support any housing. Thus, the project would not displace any people. Therefore, the project would not displace substantial numbers of existing people or housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. No impact would occur. provisionXV. Public Services
a. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the .
altered governmental facilities, or need for new or
physically altered go vernmen tal facilities, the construction Lessthan of which could cause significant enwrionmentalimpacts,In Significant order - service raflos, responsePotentially
objectives
• . Incorporated Impact Impact

1. Fire protection? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑

2. Police protection? ❑ ❑ ® ❑

3. Schools? ❑ ❑ ® ❑

4. Parks? ❑ ❑ ® ❑

5. Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ ® ❑

PUBLIC SERVICES DISCUSSION
al. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The proposed project would be served by the VFD. The closest City fire station to the site would be VFD Station No. 3 located at 1070 Old Taylor Road, approximately one mile away to the east. The project site is 9.3 acres in size and formerly was a nursery. There are remnants of the past nursery operations, hoop frames, sheds, vehicles and equipment, and boxed palm trees. The project involves the demolition of 10,600 sf of structures and the construction of 46 single-family residences. The project would introduce approximately 150 residents to the site; however, the VFD currently provides fires protection services to the site. Therefore, while the types of calls may differ from those that would occur with the existing and uses,the project would not be adding new land to the jurisdiction of Station No. 3 that was previously not serviced.

The project does not represent a unique land use or type of construction that would require additional VFD resources, would not have a significant impact involving fire response times, and would not otherwise create a substantially greater need for fire protection services than already exists. The project applicant is required to submit project plans to VFD for review and plan check approval with respect to applicable fire protection standards set forth in Chapter 16.04 of the City's Municipal Code approval is required prior to the issuance of building permits. Through this routine process, VFD confirms that the project meets all of the applicable fire codes set forth by the State Fire Marshal and the City's building code, including sufficient fire flow and emergency access for fire engines and crews.

Implementation of the proposed project may result in an increase in the demand for emergency services; however, the size and location of the project would not place an undue hardship on the fire department since they are presently servicing the areas surrounding the. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not exceed the capacity of the VFD to serve the site with existing fire protection services and resources. Impacts would be less than significant. a2. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.SDCSD provides police Services to the City of Vista. The Closest police station would be the SDCSD located at 30 Main Street Unit G130, approximately two miles southeast of the project site. The project involves the construction of 46 single-family residences and the Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-50

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist project's residents would generate a demand for police protection services. Typical of residential developments, such services would be in relation to property crimes or crimes against persons, however these types of crimes are not considered unique. The project would introduce approximately 150 residents to the site; however, the SDCSD currently provides fires protection services to the site.

Therefore, while the types of calls may differ from those that would occur with the existing and uses, the project would not be adding new land to the jurisdiction of SDCSD that was previously not serviced.

Further, as described in the General Plan Update 2030 EIR, it is reasonably foreseeable that new or physically altered facilities within the City would be required to serve the growth associated with the buildout of the General Plan.
a3. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The project includes the development of 46 single-family residences, some of which may house school-aged children. The project site is located within the boundaries of the Vista Unified School District(VUSD), which serves grades pre-school through 12.

California Code of Regulations Section 65995 and California Education Code Section 17620 allow school districts to levy fees on residential and/or commercial/industrial construction projects within a school district's boundaries. The State Allocation Board (SAB) sets the per-square-foot Level I school impact fees (developer fees) every two years.

As discussed in item XIV a., using approved planning forecasts, the project would result in 150 new persons in the project area, some of which may be school-age children.There would be an increase in the demand for VUSD school services if the homes are ultimately occupied by people from outside the City or County. The VUSD School Facilities Needs Analysis (VUSD 2020) states that while there is available permanent capacity at the middle school level,there is a shortage of permanent capacity at both the elementary school and high school levels (VUSD 2020). Using the generation rates provided by VUSD, the project is anticipated to have eight elementary students, four middle school students, and five high school students (VUSD 2020).

The project would be required to pay the current statutory developer fee of $4.08 per square foot of residential construction as a condition of building permit approval (as of 2018). In August 1998, the Governor signed into law SB 50, also known as the Leroy Greene School Facilities Act of 1998. This bill made major changes in the State Facilities Program as well as the rules and regulations surrounding the use of"developer fees" as mitigation for school districts in California. Education Code §17620 was amended to create the provisions of Government Code §65995. Developer fees may be used for multiple purposes, including to fund construction or reconstruction of school facilities, and to fund costs attributable to the increased demand for public facilities reasonably related to the development in order to refurbish existing facilities to maintain the existing level of service or achieve an adopted level of service that is consistent with a general plan (VUSD 2020). Therefore, with payment of the required developer fee, the project's impacts would be less than significant. a4. LESSTHAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.The project would add 46 new residences,which would introduce new residents to the area that would likely use parks. The residences would include a minimum of 200 sf of space within the private rear yards and the project provides 14,923 square feet of common open space.The closest public parks to the project site are Guajome Regional Park, a 394-acre county park that provides a variety of passive and active recreational opportunities (approximately 0.6 mile northwest)and Vista Sports Park,a 20-acre park that provides athletic fields and picnic areas(0.5 mile southwest).According to the City's Parks and Recreation Department, currently there are 19 City parks and recreational areas totaling 764.4 acres, and land allocated for a future park. No additional City parks are considered in the City's General Plan Update 2030 (City 2012). Using the City's reported 2020 population of 98,831,this equates to a ratio of approximately 7.70 acres of park land for every 1,000 residents (U.S. Census Bureau 2021). The General Plan Update 2030 identifies that the City's Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-51

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist goal is 4.49 acres of parkland per 1,000 persons. Thus, the City is currently exceeding the standard and the project would not obstruct the City from maintaining its established service ratio. Therefore, the construction of 46 dwelling units would not result in substantial adverse effects to the existing parks or require the construction of new parks. Impacts would be less than significant. a5. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. Future residents of the developed project may occasionally visit other public facilities such as senior centers, community centers, pools, and libraries. All of these facilities are intended to serve the general public. The added population from this project would have a less than significant impact on these types of facilities,as only a small percentage of the project's residents would visit a particular facility on a given day. The proposed project would not individually result in a need to construct new types of other public facilities.

SignificantLess than
Recreation
Potentially
Significant Mitigation Significant No
Would the project
a. 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?
b. Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational
facilities which might have an adverse physical effect
on the environment?

RECREATION D/SCUSS/ON
a. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. To be conservative, if the population of the project site is comprised entirely of new residents to the City,the project would increase the City's population by approximately 150 persons. New residents would likely have a demand for public parks. The closest public parks to the project site are Guajome Regional Park, a 394-acre county park and Vista Sports Park, a 20-acre City park, each located approximately 0.6-mile northwest and southwest respectively of the site. The City establishes a park service ratio, in part to determine when new parks are needed to adequately serve the City's residents, which allows for existing parks to not be overburdened and deteriorate. As discussed about in item XV a4, the City is currently exceeding the standard, providing over 7 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents (in comparison to the standard of 4.9 acres of parkland per 1,000 residents). Additionally, the project would be required to pay a development impact fee for parks of the adopted value at the time of project approval. This fee is collected by the City and used to provide park improvements and land acquisition for new parks. Therefore, the project would not 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. Impacts are less than significant. b. No Impact. Private recreational space would be provided amongthe individual rear yards that would be a minimum of 200 sf per residence. The project would also provide an additional 14,923 sf of common open space. The project does not include any formal recreational facilities (playgrounds, picnic areas, etc.) and would not require the construction of expansion of recreational facilities. As discussed in item XV a4, the City currently exceeds its established service ratio for parks by approximately two acres of parkland per 1,000 residents;therefore, no new parks are needed to serve project residents. The project does not include recreational facilities, nor does it require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. No impact would occur.

Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-52

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist XVIL Transportation/Traffic Lessthan
PotentiallySignificant
Would the project
MitigationSignificant •
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
a. Conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, ❑ ❑ ❑ roadway, bicycle and pedestrian facilities?
b. Would the project conflict or be inconsistent with CEQA ❑ ❑ ® El section 15064.3,subdivision (b)?
c. Substantially increase hazards due to a geometric
design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous El El ® ❑ intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
d. Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ LLG prepared a Local Transportation Study (LTS) for the proposed project in November 2021. The findings of the LTS are summarized herein and included as Appendix H of this IS/MND.

TRANSPORTAT/ONITRAFF/C D/SCUSSm
a. No IMPACT. LOS is the term used to denote the different operating conditions that occur under various traffic volume loads. Roadway segment capacity and LOS standards are generally used as long-range planning guidelines to determine the functional classification of roadways. The actual capacity of a roadway facility varies according to its physical attributes. Typically, however, the performance and LOS of a roadway segment is heavily influenced by the ability of an intersection to accommodate peak- hour volumes. LOS designations range from A to F, with LOS A representing the best operating conditions and LOS F representing the worst operating conditions.

Within Vista and the San Diego region, intersection performance rather than roadway segment performance is considered a better indicator of poor traffic operations. The Circulation Element of the Vista General Plan 2030 Update states that the City has established LOS D as the threshold for acceptable operating conditions in designated areas (City 2012). In addition, if a roadway or intersection is currently operating at a capacity less than LOS D, additional traffic will have a substantial effect if it adds more than an average two seconds of delay (City 2012). As identified in the LTS, implementation of the project would not result in an increase of traffic that would conflict with the City's thresholds of acceptable operating conditions and thereby the City's General Plan Update 2030 Circulation Element in relation to vehicular traffic.

In addition to LOS, the General Plan Update 2030 contains several Circulation Element alternative transportation policies that are a combination of policies that can be implemented individually on a project-by-project basis, and policies that are programmatic, The project is consistent with the Circulation Element policies by internally providing sidewalks, limiting drive access to main project roadways, and not providing pass through opportunities for vehicle traffic.

Transit service in Vista is provided by the North County Transit District(NCTD). Within the project area, NCTD operates two bus routes: Route 303 is a high frequency route that travels between the Oceanside Transit Center and the Vista Transit Center and travels along North Santa Fe Avenue in the project area; Route 318 also travels between the Oceanside Transit Center and the Vista Transit Center and travels along Bobier Drive, within one mile of the project site. Route 303 has a bus stop Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-53

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist approximately 0.10 mile south of the project site. The project would not affect these existing bus operations or facilities.

Sidewalks are provided intermittently along North Santa Fe Avenue. There is an existing sidewalk on the east side of the street 300 feet north of North Paseo Marguerita to about 330 feet south of Taylor Street.There is also an existing sidewalk on the west side of the street between Museum Way to Bobier Drive. According to the General Plan Circulation Element, a future pedestrian facility is planned on North Santa Fe Avenue from Bobier Drive to the northern City boundary.Taylor Street has a contiguous sidewalk on both the north and south sides of the street. Bobier Drive also has a contiguous sidewalk on both the north and south sides of the street. Camino Largo and Osborne Street have no sidewalks.

The project would not affect these existing pedestrian facilities and would not preclude the implementation of future planned facilities.

No bicycle facilities are provided on North Santa Fe Avenue in the project area between Osborne Street and Bobier Drive. A Class II bikeway does exist on North Santa Fe Avenue south of Bobier Drive for

1.5 miles. A future bike lane is proposed in the General Plan Circulation Element on North Santa Fe Avenue between Bobier Drive northward toward the City's northern boundary. No bicycle facilities are provided on Taylor Street in the project area. There is a planned bike lane on Taylor Street between North Santa Fe Avenue and East Vista Way. Bicycle lanes are provided on Bobier Drive in both the eastbound and westbound directions in vicinity of the project. The project would not affect these existing pedestrian facilities and would not preclude the implementation of future planned facilities.

Thus,the project would not conflict with a program plan, ordinance or policy addressing the circulation system, including transit, roadway, bicycle, and pedestrian facilities. No impact would occur. b. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The LTS included a VMT assessment for the project. The assessment utilized methodologies from the Governor's Office of Planning and Research (OPR) Technical Advisory developed to assist with implementation of SB 743, which resulted in a shift in the measure of effectiveness for determining transportation impacts from LOS and vehicular delay to VMT. According to the City's Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines, projects that are not consistent with the applicable General Plan land use designation only require a VMT analysis if the anticipated ADT would be greater than 500 trips (City 2020). The project is not consistent with the City's General Plan land use designation forthe site and will require a General Plan Amendment.As identified in the LTS,the project would generate a total of 460 ADT. The project would not exceed 500 trips per day, and therefore is below the threshold to require a VMT analysis. Impacts would be less than significant. c. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. There would be no hazardous design features or incompatible uses introduced because of the project. The project is a typical residential subdivision that is comparable to the surrounding land uses. No unique roadway features, traffic patterns, or incompatible vehicles would be introduced as part of the development.The project proposes to improve Camino Largo,which is currently an unclassified street and improved site access via four separate cul-de-sacs. The improvements to Camino Largo, as well as the cul-de-sacs would be conditioned to be designed in accordance with City standards. The project would also include the addition of a stop sign at the intersection of Camino Largo and North Santa Fe Avenue. In addition, to improve line of sight when turning south onto North Santa Fe Avenue from Camino Largo,two trees would be removed.As a result, the project would not substantially increase hazards due to a design feature. Development of the proposed project would not increase traffic hazards due to incompatible uses that could affect existing traffic or circulation in the project area. Impacts would be less than significant. d. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The proposed project would not result in significant impacts to emergency access. During construction of the project, heavy construction-related vehicles could interfere with emergency response to the site or emergency evacuation procedures in the event of an Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-54

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist emergency (e.g., vehicles traveling behind the slow-moving truck). However, such trips would be brief and infrequent. Furthermore, as discussed in item IX f., the City requires traffic control plans for any construction activity that will disrupt traffic flow on City streets and project conditions of approval would require that emergency access be maintained during construction. Once operational, as discussed above in item XVll.c, access to the project site would be through improvements to the unclassified private street Camino Largo as well as the cul-de-sacs, all of which would be conditioned to be designed in accordance with City standards, and would have sufficient storage for traffic exiting the site.The project has also been designed to incorporate all required VFD standards to ensure adequate emergency access to the site and surrounding areas.Therefore, impacts related to emergency access would be less than significant.

Tribal Cultural Resources
a. Would the project -a substantial adverse
the significance of a tribal cultural resource, defined in Public Resources ..- Section 21074
feature, place, cultural landscape that Is geographIcally Significant defined in terms of the size and scope of the landscape, Potentially with Less than sacred place, or object with cultural value to a California Significant Mitigation Significant No Native American tribe,and that is., Impact Incorporated Impact Impact

1. Listed or eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical Resources, or in a local register of historical resources as defined in Public Resources Code Section
5020.1(k), or

2. 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.

TRIBAL CUL TURAL RESOURCES DISCUSS/ON
a1 - a2. LESSTHAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED.As stated In Item V.b, an Addendum to the Cultural Resources Survey (HELIX 2021c) prepared for the project concluded that a single historic resource was identified (consisting of historic house foundations,a reservoir,and construction debris); however,the historic structural remains are not associated with historic persons or events, do not date to the pioneering phase of City's development, and are in a state of deterioration such that they lack integrity. No other historical resources were identified;thus,the project would not cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource pursuant to §15064.5.

HELIX contacted the NAHC for a Sacred Lands File search and a list of Native American contacts in October 2021.The Sacred Lands File search did not indicate the presence of Native American cultural resources in the immediate project area. Letters were sent to the contacts listed by the NAHC in November 2021. In addition, detailed project data was provided both to the San Luis Rey Band of Luiseno Indians (San Luis Rey) and the Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians (Rincon) based upon the results from both the previous and current studies. Responses were received from Rincon, San Luis Rey, the Pechanga Band of Indians, and the San Pasqual Band of Mission Indians (San Pasqual), as summarized below in Table TR-1, Native American Contact Program Responses.

Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-55

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist Table TR-1

NATIVE AMERICAN CONTACT PROGRAM RESPONSES
Contact/Tribe Response
San Luis Rey Band of Luiseno Responded on November 30, 2021, requesting to meet in person to Indians discuss the project and Tribal sensitivity thereof. Meeting was held on December 2. Based on the cultural sensitivity of the area and the results of monitoring of other projects in the area, monitoring is recommended.

Rincon Band of Luiseno Indians Responded on November 18, 2021 that the project is located within their specific area of historic interest. Requested a field visit,which was held on December 16, 2021.

Pechanga Band of Indians Responded on December 16, 2021,stating that the project is situated within the Band's ancestral territory and requesting consultation with the City,archaeological and Native American monitoring,and copies of any project documentation.

San Pasqual Band of Mission Responded on November 24, 2021, stating that while the project is Indians located outside reservation boundaries, it is located within San Pasqual's Traditional Use Area.

On November 18, 2021, Rincon responded that, "The identified location is within the Territory of the Luiseno people and is also within Rincon's specific Area of Historic Interest (AHI)" (letter from Cheryl Madrigal, The Rincon Band recommends conducting an archaeological/cultural resources study, to include an archeological record search and complete intensive survey of the property.Additionally, we ask that a professional Tribal monitor from the Rincon Band to accompany the archaeologist during the survey. If the field investigation already concluded, we ask to be provided the opportunity to visit the project site to assess impacts to Tribal Cultural Resources (TCRs), Tribal Cultural Landscapes (TCLs), or Traditional Cultural Properties (TCPs). The Rincon Band further requests to consult directly with the lead agency regarding project impacts to cultural resources.

San Luis Rey also responded in writing on November 30, 2021, requestingto meet in person to discuss the project and Tribal sensitivity thereof (letter from Carmen Mojado, Cultural Resources Manager, November 30, 2021).

San Luis Rey requested copies of any survey report prepared forthe project and that a Luiseno monitor be present during survey of the project.

Lastly, the Pechanga Band of Indians responded in writing on December 16, 2021, stating that the project is located within the Tribe's ancestral territory and requesting government-to-government consultation with the City, monitoring by a qualified archaeologist and Tribal monitor from Pechanga, and copies of project documentation including grading plans, project reports, and site records pertaining to the project area (letter from Paul Macarro, Cultural Coordinator, December 16, 2021).

San Pasqual responded in writing on November 24, 2021, stating that while the project is located outside reservation boundaries, it is located within San Pasqual's Traditional Use Area (TUA) (letter from Angelina Gutierrez on behalf of Desiree M. Whitman, Tribal Historic Preservation Officer, November 24, 2021).

Due to the cultural significance of the region and the geologic units present at the site, there is potential to discover previously unknown TCRs at the project site. However, implementation of mitigation measures CR-1 through CR-6 listed above in Section V, Cultural Resources of this IS/MND would reduce potential impacts to TCRs to less than significant levels. Impacts are less than significant with mitigation.

Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-56

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist Lessthan
Significant
XlX. Utilities and Service Systems Potentially with Lessthan Significant Mitigation Significant No
Would the project Impact Incorporated Impact Impact a. Require or result in the relocation or construction of ❑ ❑ ® ❑ new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or
storm water drainage, electric power, natural gas, or
telecommunications facilities, the construction or
relocation of which could cause significant
environmental effects?
b. Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the ❑ ❑ ® ❑ project and reasonably foreseeable future
development during normal, dry and multiple dry
years?
c. 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?
d. 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?
e. Comply with federal,state,and local management and ❑ ❑ ❑ reduction statutes and regulations related to solid
waste?
UTILITIES AND SER vIcE SYSTEMS D/SCUSS/ON
a. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The project would add new residents to the area that would generate a demand for utility services as well as introduce new impervious surfaces that would increase the amount and rate of stormwater runoff.

The project would include the installation of eight-inch water pipelines that would connect to the existing ten-inch pipeline owned and operated by VID within North Santa Fe Avenue. VID, as the water service provider for the site, reviewed the site plan in relation to VID's existing infrastructure and service obligations and determined that the proposed water infrastructure configuration is suitable for a single-family residential development of this size.VID will require full width (curb to curb)access and utility easements over all private roads within the development. This would be included as a project condition of approval. In addition, the project site would include local connections to the existing municipal sewer system. The project's proposed eight-inch private sewer pipe would connect to the Vista Sanitation District's existing 12-inch sewer mains in the surrounding area.A 6,572-sf biofiltration basin would be installed in the southwest corner of the project site and a 5,500-sf underground stormwater vault would be installed along the eastern boundary of the project site. Additional storm drain facilities would include a curb and gutter system.

Dry utilities that include electric, gas, and telecommunication infrastructure would also be extended to the site from existing infrastructure. The existing SDG&E electrical transmission line pole would be removed and the associated overhead electrical lines that traverse the site would be undergrounded across the site and reconnected to the existing infrastructure off-site and a quitclaim would be required Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-57

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist for the existing underground easement. The existing utility facilities would have adequate capacity to support the proposed project. The project would not result in the need for new or expanded water, wastewater treatment or storm drainage, electric power, natural gas, or telecommunication facilities.

Impacts would be less than significant.
b. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. Development of the project site, a former nursery, would increase the demand for water that is needed to serve the proposed 46 single-family residences. Water service for the project would be provided by the VID from existing infrastructure in North Santa Fe Avenue. VID is a member agency of the San Diego County Water Authority (SDCWA) and imports approximately 70 percent of its potable water from SDCWA,who in turn purchases waterfrom the Metropolitan Water District of Southern California (MWD).The remaining 30 percent of VID's supply is from Lake Henshaw, which is fed through precipitation from the San Luis Rey watershed. Usingthe demand factorfor single- family residential land use designation in VID's Potable Water Master Plan, the average daily demand of potable water for the proposed project would be approximately 10,230 gpd (9.3 acres x 1,100 gpd per acre; VID 2018).

Water supplies necessary to serve the demands of the proposed project, along with existing and other projected future users, and the actions necessary to develop these supplies (e.g., conservation via SB 7 of the Seventh Extraordinary Session [or SBX 7-7],efficiency standards, etc.) have been identified in the Urban Water Management Plans (UWMPs) of VID, the SDCWA, and MWD. California's urban water suppliers are required to prepare UWMPs in compliance with the Urban Water Management Planning Act (California Water Code §10610 et seq.) and the Water Conservation Bill of 2009 (SBX 7-7). UWMPs are prepared every five years by urban water suppliers to support their long-term resource planning and ensure adequate water supplies are available to meet existing and future water demands over a 20-year planning horizon, including the consideration of various drought scenarios and Demand Management Measures. The passage of SBX 7-7 in 2009 was enacted to require retail urban water agencies within California to achieve a 20-percent reduction in urban per capita water use by December 31, 2020 (Water Code Section 10608.20). As a result, SBX 7-7 also requires that UWMPs report base daily per capita water use (baseline), urban water use target, interim urban water use target, and compliance daily per capita water use. VID, SDCWA, and MWD calculate future demands within their respective service areas based on SANDAG's projected population and growth rate projections; SANDAG's projections are based on the land use policies in the general plans of the jurisdictions within San Diego County. These projections provide consistency between retail and wholesale agencies' water demand projections, thereby ensuring that adequate supplies are being planned for existing and future water users.

According to VID's 2015 Urban Water Management Plan (OD's UWMP) (June 2016),VID will use local water resources whenever possible; however, if there is a shortfall,they would rely on SDCWA supplies.

In the analysis of a normal water supply year, as described in VID's UWMP (June 2016), if SDCWA, MWD, and VID supplies are developed as planned and SBX 7-7 conservation targets are achieved, no shortages are anticipated within VID's service area in a normal year through 2040. That would mean that VID's entire projected potable water supply would meet the entire projected SBX 7-7 water demand of 25,411 acre feet in 2035. In the analysis of a single-dry year through 2040, VID's UWMP (June 2016) indicated that if SDCWA, MWD and VID supplies are developed as planned and SBX 7-7 conservation targets are achieved, no shortages are anticipated within VID's service area. However, for multiple-dry year reliability analyses, the conservative planning assumption used in VID's UWMP (June 2016)expects that MWD would be allocating supplies to its member agencies.As a result,some level of shortage could be potentially experienced. As stated above, when shortages occur in VID's resources,the SDCWA would use various measures to cover the shortfall, as described below.

The SDCWA was established pursuant to legislation adopted by the California State Legislature in 1943 for the primary purpose of supplying imported water to San Diego County for wholesale Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-58

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist distribution to its member agencies. These imported water supplies consist of water purchases from MWD, core water transfers from Imperial Irrigation District (IID) and canal lining projects that are wheeled through MWD's conveyance facilities to the SDCWA's pipelines(or aqueducts),and spot water transfers that are pursued on an as-needed basis to offset reductions in supplies from MWD. Following the major drought in California of 1987-1992,which led to severe water supply shortages throughout the state, the SDCWA and its member agencies vigorously developed plans to minimize the impact of potential shortages by diversifying its supplies and strengthening its conservation programs.SDCWA's UWMP(June 2016) identifies a diverse mix of water resources projected to be developed over future years to ensure long-term water supply reliability for the region. The SDCWA, as a wholesale supplier, is also required by law to support its retail member agencies' efforts to comply with SBX 7-7 through a combination of regionally and locally administered active and passive water conservation measures, programs, and policies, as well as the use of recycled water. Examples of active measures and programs include residential and commercial water use surveys and education programs. Examples of passive measures include programs that encourage long-term behavior change towards measurable reductions in outdoor water use; increase the landscape industry's basic knowledge regarding the interdependency between water efficiency design, irrigation design, and maintenance; and participation on statewide, national, and industrial committees to advance behavior-based conservation strategies. Additional passive programs and policies include outreach activities, plumbing code changes, legislation, and conservation-based rate structures.

According to the SDCWA's UWMP (June 2016) section on water supply reliability, under a single dry- year assessment it was assumed that MWD would have adequate supplies in storage and would not be allocating supplies. With the previous years leading up to the single dry year being wet or average hydrologic conditions, MWD should have adequate supplies in storage to cover potential shortfalls in core supplies and would not need to allocate. It is anticipated that the SDCWA would be able to meet VID's increased demands during a single-dry water year. During multiple-dry water years, there is a potential for shortages, if MWD allocates its supplies. If a shortage occurs, the SDCWA plans to utilize action measures in its Water Shortage and Drought Response Plan. These actions include dry-year supplies, carryover storage, and regional shortage management measures to fill the shortfall. The SDCWA's dry-year supplies and carryover storage are components of managing potential shortages within the region and for increasing supply reliability for the region. The dry-year supplies assist in minimizing or reducing potential supply shortages from MWD. In recent years, the SDCWA has developed a carryover storage program to manage supplies more effectively. This includes in-region surface storage currently in member agency reservoirs and increasing capacity through the raising of San Vicente Dam, which was completed in June 2014. The SDCWA also has an out-of-region groundwater banking program in the California central valley.Through these efforts, SDCWA can store water available during wet periods for use during times of shortage. In years where shortages may still occur, after utilization of carryover storage, additional regional shortage management measures,such as securing dry-year transfers and extraordinary conservation achieved through voluntary or mandatory water-use restrictions would also be undertaken. On the local level, additional water conservation for new developments in Vista is achieved through compliance with the Water Efficient Landscaping Ordinance in the City's Development Code, Chapter 18.56.

In addition to the noted UWMP's described above, other regional and/or State entities may also enact other measures during multiple-dry water years as well, including emergency regulations. For example, on April 1, 2015, Governor Jerry Brown issued the fourth in a series of Executive Orders on actions necessary to address California's current severe four-year drought conditions. The April 1 Executive Order requires,for the first time in the State's history, mandatory conservation of potable urban water use. In response to this order, the State Water Resources Control Board released draft emergency regulations to restrict overall potable urban water usage across the state by 25 percent. These regulations include such prohibitions as irrigating landscapes outside of newly constructed homes and buildings in a manner inconsistent with California Building Standards Code (e.g., CALGreen Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-59

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist requirements for automatic irrigation systems with weather or soil moisture-based controllers and sensors, etc.). Implementation of these prohibitions will be promulgated through VID's regulations. As part of the Conditions of Approval for this project, compliance with applicable VID emergency drought regulations regarding new development would be conducted by appropriate staff during review of project plans and various inspections prior to the approval of a Certificate of Occupancy. Therefore, the project would have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project and reasonably foreseeable future development during normal, dry and multiple dry years. Impacts would be less than significant.

C. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. Based on the Clty's Sewer Master Plan Update (August 2017), the proposed project would be expected to generate approximately 13,346 gpd of wastewater (9.3 acres x 1,435 gpd per acre) (City 2017). The project site would include local connections to the existing municipal sewer system. The project's proposed eight-inch private sewer pipe would connect to the Vista Sanitation District's existing 12-inch sewer mains in the surrounding area. Wastewater from the project would be treated bythe Encina Water Pollution Control Facility.Wastewater generation from the proposed project would not exceed the capacity of the Encina facility to treat it. Therefore, the project's contribution of wastewater would be sufficiently handled by the wastewater treatment provider. Impacts would be less than significant.
d. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. Development of the project may result in a slight increase in domestic municipal solid waste generation because of the proposed land use. The project would construct 46 single-family homes, which would result in a population increase of approximately 150 people.

However, the project would be conditioned to comply with AB 939, which requires cities to divert 50 percent of solid waste to recycling programs and away from landfills. Solid waste generated by the proposed project would either be hauled to Sycamore Landfill in San Diego, which has a permitted capacity of 2,500 tons per day (tpd) and an average daily intake of 900 tpd or disposed of at the Palomar Waste Transfer Station in Carlsbad, which has a permitted daily capacity of 2,250 tpd. Either of these solid waste facilities is capable of accommodating the solid waste generated by the proposed project. Because the project's contribution would be negligible in terms of the remaining capacity of these available landfills, impacts would be less than significant. No mitigation measures are required. e. No IMPACT.The proposed project would be conditioned to comply with all regulations related to solid waste such as the California Integrated Waste Management Act and city recycling programs;therefore, significant impacts would not occur.

Wildfire Less than
Significant
ff located in or near state responsibility areas or lands Potentially with Lessthan classifledyhIghfirehazardseventyzones, wouldthe Significant Mitigation Significant No projecta. Substantially impair an adopted emergency response El ❑ ® ❑ plan or emergency evacuation plan?
b. Due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, exacerbate wildfire risks, and thereby expose project ❑ El ® El to, pollutant concentrations from a wildfire
or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire?
c. Require the installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure (such as roads, fuel breaks, emergency
water sources, power lines or other utilities) that may ❑ ❑ ® ❑ exacerbate fire risk or that may result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment?
Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-60

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist d. Expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding or
landslides, as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes?
WILDFIRE DISCUSSm
a. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. As discussed in item IX.f of this IS/MND, the City participates in the County's Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan (County 2017). The proposed project would be included in this plan because the project site is located within the City limits. The project site is currently accessed via a gated entrance off of North Santa Fe Avenue near the intersection of Camino Largo. With project implementation, site access would be via improvements to Camino Largo with four cul-de-sacs streets and one private street serving only four lots that provide access to the residences.

To meet the requirements for emergency access, the private streets are 40 feet wide curb to curb distance to allow for parking on both sides of the streets as well as required emergency access.

As stated above in item IX.f, during construction, heavy construction-related vehicles could interfere with emergency response to the site or emergency evacuation procedures in the event of an emergency (e.g., vehicles traveling behind the slow-moving truck). However, such trips would be brief and infrequent, and access for emergency vehicles would always be maintained. As a result, the project's construction impacts would be less than significant. Operation of the proposed project would involve an increase in traffic in and out of the project site due to the anticipated population growth at the site. However, the project would improve Camino Largo, which is currently a gravel roadway.

Therefore, implementation of the project would not result in interference with emergency response access, and the impacts related to the operation of the project would be less than significant.

Implementation of the proposed project would not substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Associated wildfire impacts would be less than significant.
b. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. Please also see response to item IX.g, of this IS/MND. According to the FHSZ maps prepared by CAL FIRE, the proposed project is not located within a VHFHSZ (CAL FIRE 2009). The project site is located in an urbanized environment. There are no wildlands immediately adjacent to the project site, which significantly reduces the risk of wildland fire damage to people and structures in the area.Additionally, implementation of the proposed project would not heighten wildfire risks, as it would include structures that would install standard fire safety features and the site is almost entirely developed with and surrounded by urban uses. Further, the project would adhere to the CBC, California Fire Code, and County Fire Code. Therefore, the proposed project would not exacerbate wildfire risks due to slope, prevailing winds, and other factors, and any impacts related to exposing project occupants to pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire would be less than significant.
c. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The proposed project is located in an area developed with a combination of residential uses, a church, and a regional park. The project does not involve the installation of fuel breaks, emergency water sources, or power lines. The project would involve the construction of internal cul-de-sacs and the extension of existing utilities, such as sewer, water, electric, gas, and telecommunication facilities. Additionally, the existing overhead electrical lines that traverse the site would be relocated underground. However, such utility improvements would not exacerbate fire risk or result in temporary or ongoing impacts to the environment. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-61

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist d. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT. The proposed project would occur within an area developed with residential land uses,a church, and a regional park.As stated in item XX.b above,the proposed project would not exacerbate wildfire,and would not expose project occupants to significant levels of pollutant concentrations from a wildfire or the uncontrolled spread of a wildfire. As discussed in Section VII,the project is not subject to landslides or flooding thus, the risk of people and structures experiencing significant risks such as downslope or downstream flooding or landslides,as a result of runoff, post-fire slope instability, or drainage changes is negligible. As such, impacts would be less than significant.

Mandatory • • of •
PotentiallySignificant
Would the project
MitigationSignificant •
Impact Incorporated Impact Impact
a. Does the project have the potential to substantially ❑ ® ❑ ❑ degrade the quality of the environment, substantially
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community,substantially reduce the number or restrict
the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or
eliminate important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
b. Does the project have impacts that are individually ❑ ❑ ® ❑ limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable" means that the incremental effects of a
project are significant when viewed in connection with
the effects of past projects,the effects of other current projects, and the effects of past, present and probable future projects)?
c. Does the project have environmental effects which will ❑ ® ❑ ❑ cause substantial adverse effects on human beings,
either directly or indirectly?

MANDATORYF/ND/NGS OFS/GN/F/CANCE D/SCUSS/ON
a. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED. With the Incorporation of mitigation measures identified in this IS/MND, the proposed project would not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, reduce the habitat of any sensitive plant or animal species, or eliminate important examples of California history or prehistory.

As discussed in Section IV, Biological Resources of this IS/MND, the proposed project could result in significant temporary (direct) impacts to active bird nests on and off-site during the bird breeding season. However, if avoidance of the avian breeding season is not feasible, then Mitigation Measure BR-1 would be implemented, which would reduce these potentially significant impacts to biological resources to less than significant levels.

As described in Section V, Cultural Resources of this IS/MND, there a potential for unknown subsurface cultural resources/Tribal Cultural Resources, given the presence of alluvial and colluvial deposits. Such resources, if present, could provide material to address important research questions and may contain culturally sensitive material. Therefore, encountering unforeseen archaeological resources during ground-disturbing activities may result in significant impacts. With implementation of Mitigation Measures CR-1 to CR-6, these impacts would be reduced to less than significant levels.

Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-62

City of Vista Chapter 3- Initial Study Environmental Checklist b. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT.There are two projects considered in the cumulative analysis: (1) North Santa Fe Plaza Apartments, a 19-unit four-story apartment complex with a 760-sf coffee shop on

0.65 acre and Alliance North Santa Fe, a 60-unit, four-story apartment complex. Both projects are within a one-mile radius of the proposed project.

Implementation of the proposed project would not result in individually limited, but cumulatively considerable significant impacts. As discussed under item III b., the project's long-term emissions of criteria pollutants and precursors would not exceed the SDAPCD daily or annual screening thresholds.

Therefore, the project's operational activities would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria pollutants that would violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation. Similarly, the project would have a less than significant impact in relation to GHG, which is inherently discussed in terms of cumulative impacts.

All resource topics associated with the project have been analyzed in accordance with State CEQA Guidelines and found to pose no impact, less-than-significant impact, or less than significant with mitigation. In addition, taken in sum with other projects in the area the scale of the proposed project is small and impacts to any environmental resource or issue areas would not be cumulatively considerable. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant.

C. LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT IMPACT WITH MITIGATION INCORPORATED. The project would not consist of any uses or activities that would negatively affect any persons in the vicinity. In addition, all resource topics associated with the project have been analyzed in accordance with CEQA and the State CEQA Guidelines and found to pose no impact, less-than-significant impact, or less than significant with mitigation. As discussed in Section IX, Hazards and Hazardous Materials of this IS/MND, with the implementation of HAZ-1 there are no concerns from past nursery activities at the site. As discussed in Section IX,the project-related impacts are localized and confined to 5 cy of soil within a 120-sf area.

There is the potential for land use consistency conflicts in relation to noise impacts upon future residents of the project site; however, with implementation of mitigation measures LU-1 and LU-2 potential impacts are reduced to less than significant. Consequently, the project would not result in any environmental effects that would cause substantial adverse effects on human beings directly or indirectly.

Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-63

City of Vista Chapter 3-Initial Study Environmental Checklist This page intentionally left blank
Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 3-64

City of Vista Chapter 4-References and List of Preparers Chapter 4 - References
and List of Preparers
References
Section 15150 of the State CEQA Guidelines permits an environmental document to incorporate by reference other documents that provide relevant data. The documents listed below are hereby incorporated by reference. The pertinent material is summarized throughout this IS/MND where that information is relevant to the analysis of impacts of the proposed project. Referenced documents that are followed by a star(*)are on file and available for review at the City of Vista Planning Division office located at 200 Civic Center Drive,Vista. Referenced documents that are followed by a double star(**) are available on the City's web site at http://www.cityofvista.com/ . bHA. 2O21a. Preliminary Hydrology and Hydraulic Report. August 31. 2O21b. Storm Water Quality Management Plan. December 6.

California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). 2017. User's Guide for CaIEEMod Version 2016.3.2. Available at: http://www.caCAPCOAleemod.com/ .

California Department of Conservation. 2021. Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program. Available at: https:Z/maps.conservation.ca.gov/DLRP/CIFF/.
1996. Division of Mines and Geology. Update of Mineral Land Classification: Aggregate Materials in the Western San Diego County Production - Consumption Region. DMG Open - file Report 96-04.

California Department of Finance. 2020. E-1 Population Estimates for Cities, Counties, and the State —January 1, 2019 and 2020. Accessed October 27, 2020. Available at:
http://www.dof.ca.gov/Forecasti ng/Demogra ph ics/Esti mates/e-1/.

California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection (CAL FIRE). 2009. Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones in LRA, As Recommended by CAL FIRE. June 11.

California Department of Transportation (Caltrans). 2013. Transportation and Construction Vibration Guidance Manual. September. Available at: https://www.dtsc- ssfl.com/files/lib cega/ref draft peir/Chap4 10-
Noise/68395 Caltrans, 2O13b Vibration Guidance.pdf.

California Stormwater Quality Association (CASQA). 2019. Stormwater Best Management Practices Construction Handbook.

Federal Emergency Management Agency(FEMA). 2012. National Flood Hazard Layer FIRMette O6O73CO757G. Available at: FIRMETTE 3723dd97-1765-4ffa-8b6e-7ce73b35f94c.pdf (fema.gov).

Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 4-1

City of Vista Chapter 4-References and List of Preparers HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc. (HELIX). 2021a. Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions Technical Report. December.
2021b. Biological Resources Due Diligence Assessment of the Camino Largo Property.June 2021c. Addendum to Cultural Resources Survey and Assessment. December. 2021d. Noise Assessment. December.

San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG). 2020. Demographic and Socioeconomic Estimates, Jurisdiction, Vista. August 19.

San Diego, County of. 2017. Multi-Jurisdictional Hazard Mitigation Plan. October.

South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 1993. CEQA Air Quality Handbook.

Tan, S.S., and Giffen, D.G. 1995, Landslide hazards in the northern part of the San Diego Metropolitan area, San Diego County, California, Landslide hazard identification map no. 35, Plate 35A, Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology, DMG Open File Report 95-04.

United States Department of Commence Bureau of Census (U.S. Census Bureau). 2021. United States Census Bureau Quick Facts. Available at:
https:Z/ www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/table/oceansidecitycaIifornia,vistacitycaIifornis/PS T045221.

Vista, City of. 2021. Draft Housing element Update 2021-2029. Available at:
https:///www.cityofvista.com/home/showpublisheddocument/24161/6375816352233700

00. 2020. Parks and Facilities. Accessed October 27, 2020. Available at:
https://www.cityofvista.com/city-services/city-departments/recreation-comm- s e ry i ces/pa r ks-a n d-fa c i l i ti es.
2020. Traffic Impact Analysis Guidelines. December.
2017. Sewer Master Plan 2017 Update, City of Vista Comprehensive Sewer Management Plan. August.
2012. Vista General Plan Update 2030. February.
2011. Vista General Plan Update 2030. Draft Program Environmental Impact Report. May.

Vista Irrigation District(VID). 2018. Potable Water Master Plan. April 9. 2016. 2015 Urban Water Management Plan. June 22.

Vista Unified School District(VUSD). 2020. Vista Unified School District Developer Fee Justification Study. August 13. Available at:
https:Z/ www.vistausd.org/UserFiles/Servers/Server 3644895/File/Vista%2OUnified%20SD %20FI NAL%2ODeveloper%2OFee%2OJ ustification%2OStudy.%202020.pdf.

Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 4-2

City of Vista Chapter 4-References and List of Preparers Individuals and Organizations Consulted
John Conley, AICP - Director of Community Development and Engineering, City of Vista Patsy Chow - Deputy Director of Community Development/City Planner Preparers
Kara Palm - Project Manager, HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc.

Tim Belzman - Principal Environmental Planner, Quality Assurance/Quality Control Brendan Sullivan - Environmental Planner
Sean Bohac-Senior GIS Specialist
Ana Topete - Word Processor/Document Specialist
Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 4-3

City of Vista Chapter 4-References and List of Preparers This page intentionally left blank
Camino Largo Residential Project IS/MND
May 2022 4-4

ATTACH M ENT A

FIGURES

Camino Largo

RIVERSIDE
COUNTY
ORANGE SAN DIEGO ^-ftVail Lake
COUNTY COUNTY —
ry J.i ® m
r
FALLBROOK " -+� f 1?°•1i:.

CAMP PENDLETON
Ag
( F
(�O'Neill Lake
WARNER
1 SPRINGS
Lake Henshow
© OCEANSIDE
/ VISTA ! � ` Ir
m s ,yid
Lake Wohlford '
SAN ...X� •�'�; ".

MARCOS ESCOND�IDO '
CARLSBAD Sutherland
(Lake �..�'•L"�" Reservoir
.J
/'-Son Marcos
JULIAN
ENCINITAS`•_* Lake l
Q % Hodges ffy /
`^ j' �! 4LakeRamona RAMONA r/•
o /•"'`••.,.,•�•,— Lake Powayt j
SOLANA
BEACH / POWAY (—
�'
o DEL MAR m
S •�" San Vicente
•� � Reservoir
oMiramar Reservoir j El Capitan Reservoir
a Pacific
Santee SANTEE
Ocean Lakes Lake — m
LA ,,,,.ice" Jennings
JOLLA
ALPINE �.

Z Lake EL CAJON � ~
Murray ®. Jam. j .-..0
Loveland Reservoir `r'
� s
6 SAN LA MESAY­
si �.

DIEG\fO ►LEMON J j
Mi GROVE
8 CORONADO NATIONAL Sweetwater ake Barrett L
Reservoir m
m .r CITY
Otoy
Reservoir`• DULZURA I
U c CHULA©_
IMPERIAL —
1 B QOTAY
EACH ® UNITED STATES J �•.`
MEXICO.!
a TIJUANA
0 8 Miles Source: Base Map Layers(SanGIS,2016) HELIX Regional Location
Environmental Planning
Figure 1

Camino Largo
® Project Site �'• _ 4
40 ..
(jam�. � .'. i�� �-' �� � 4 �•:� St
Pao n�a. Osbo�
N
Fe
r?: s
onto f J '' y ` �•y :r .. t ►a. Camino Largo -
Wr
poseorDeAnz'a r
; 45 .. .
r 5eo Marg+y--
�
w '
A@ i c
P
Ap o,
oder
4S o
g eo
N pasep M ° � .:�. YWV "11
-
to � -J �- � - �_►' x. Y�.± R ._. .� ` �.

Waves - k
0 300 Feet Source: Aerial(NearMaps,2019) HELIX Project Vicinity
Environmental Planning
Figure 2

Camino Lar o
poLA ; -
LOTB
rnnvnas
419
. a
0 f � G � � •® I \ i'�
� P 16 __ •5 _ I . 0 N \ •o '
531
31 9 31
o
------------------
/
1�1
x 2 4.5 r .. - Qa '• 2-�,�z- i s 1• w 91 / ."�. CSC/� ;;':3g5=:;;;,' � ,;> ;�_„ _; ' - _ i
Lam$
3 x
_ 6 /
ER
a u;
06 \ , t
3 J
U
o /
Source:BHA,Inc.2021
HELIX Site Plan
Environmental Planning
Figure 3

IS/MND Appendix A
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas
Emissions, and Energy Technical
Report

HELIX
Environmental Planning
Camino Largo Residential
Project
Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions,
and Energy Technical Report
December 2021 1 02951 .00013.001
Submitted to:

City of Vista
Community Development Department
200 Civic Center Drive
Vista, CA 92084-6275
Prepared for:

California West Communities
5927 Priestly Drive, Suite 110
Carlsbad, CA 92008
Prepared by:

HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc.
7578 El Cajon Boulevard
La Mesa, CA 91942

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY............................................................................................................................. ES-1

1.0 INTRODUCTION................................................................................................................................1

1.1 Purpose of the Report.........................................................................................................1

1.2 Project Location.................................................................................................................. 1

1.3 Project Description ............................................................................................................. 1

1.4 Construction Activities and Phasing ................................................................................... 1

1.4.1 Construction Best Management Practices ............................................................2

2.0 AIR QUALITY.....................................................................................................................................3

2.1 Air Quality Regulatory Setting ............................................................................................3

2.1.1 Air Pollutant Descriptors and Terminology ...........................................................3

2.1.2 Federal Regulations...............................................................................................5

2.1.3 State Regulations...................................................................................................8

2.1.4 Local Regulations...................................................................................................9

2.1.5 SDAPCD Attainment Plan.......................................................................................9

2.1.6 San Diego Air Pollution Control District Rules and Regulations ............................9

2.2 Air Quality Existing Conditions..........................................................................................10

2.2.1 Climate/Meteorology ..........................................................................................11

2.2.2 Existing Air Quality...............................................................................................11

2.2.3 Sensitive Receptors.............................................................................................. 12

2.3 Air Quality Methodology .................................................................................................. 12

2.3.1 Construction Emissions........................................................................................ 13

2.3.2 Operational Emissions......................................................................................... 16

2.4 Air Quality Significance Criteria ........................................................................................ 16

2.5 Air Quality Impact Analysis............................................................................................... 17

2.5.1 Issue 1: Consistency with the Regional Air Quality Plan......................................17

2.5.2 Issue 2: Cumulatively Considerable Net Increase of Nonattainment Criteria Pollutants.............................................................................................................19

2.5.3 Issue 3: Impacts to Sensitive Receptors...............................................................20

2.5.4 Issue 4: Odors ......................................................................................................23

3.0 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS......................................................................................................24

3.1 GHG Setting.......................................................................................................................24

3.1.1 Climate Change Overview....................................................................................24

3.1.2 Greenhouse Gases...............................................................................................24

3.2 GHG Regulatory framework..............................................................................................26

3.2.1 Federal GHG Regulations.....................................................................................26

3.2.2 California GHG Regulations..................................................................................27

3.2.3 Regional GHG Policies and Plans .........................................................................31

3.2.4 Local Greenhouse Gas Plans................................................................................32

TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.)
Section Page

3.3 GHG Existing Conditions ...................................................................................................32

3.3.1 Worldwide and National GHG Inventory.............................................................32

3.3.2 State GHG Inventories .........................................................................................33

3.3.3 Regional GHG Inventory ......................................................................................33

3.4 GHG Methodology............................................................................................................34

3.4.1 Construction GHG Emissions...............................................................................34

3.4.2 Operational GHG Emissions.................................................................................35

3.5 GHG Significance Criteria..................................................................................................36

3.6 GHG Impact Analysis.........................................................................................................38

3.6.1 Issue 1: Generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment....................................................38

3.6.2 Issue 2: Conflict with an applicable GHG reduction plan, policy, or regulation.............................................................................................................38

4.0 ENERGY..........................................................................................................................................39

4.1 Energy Regulatory Framework .........................................................................................39

4.1.1 Federal Energy Regulations .................................................................................39

4.1.2 California Energy Regulations..............................................................................40

4.2 Energy Existing Conditions................................................................................................41

4.2.1 State Energy Supply.............................................................................................41

4.3 Energy Methodology.........................................................................................................41

4.4 Energy Significance Criteria ..............................................................................................41

4.5 Energy Impact Analysis.....................................................................................................42

4.5.1 Issue 1: Result in the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation..........................42

4.5.2 Issue 2: Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. ............................................................................................43

5.0 LIST OF PREPARERS........................................................................................................................43

6.0 REFERENCES...................................................................................................................................44

TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.)

LIST OF APPENDICES
A CalEEMod Output
B Energy Calculation Sheets

LIST OF FIGURES
No. Title Follows Page
1 Regional Location.............................................................................................................................2 2 Project Vicinity.................................................................................................................................2 3 Site Plan ...........................................................................................................................................2

LIST OF TABLES
No. Title Page
1 Summary of Common Sources and Human Health Effects of Criteria Air Pollutants......................4 2 Ambient Air Quality Standards........................................................................................................6 3 San Diego Air Basin Attainment Status............................................................................................7 4 Air Quality Monitoring Data...........................................................................................................12 5 Anticipated Construction Schedule ...............................................................................................14 6 Construction Equipment Assumptions..........................................................................................15 7 Screening-Level Thresholds for Air Quality Impact Analysis..........................................................17 8 Unmitigated Maximum Daily Construction Emissions...................................................................19 9 Operational Emissions ...................................................................................................................20 10 Global Warming Potentials and Atmospheric Lifetimes................................................................26 11 California Greenhouse Gas Emissions by Sector............................................................................33 12 San Diego County GHG Emissions by Sector..................................................................................34 13 Operational GHG Emissions...........................................................................................................38 14 Construction Energy Use................................................................................................................42 15 Operational Energy Use.................................................................................................................43 iii

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
AAM Annual Arithmetic Mean
AB Assembly Bill
ACM asbestos containing material
amsl above mean sea level
ANFO ammonium nitrate/fuel oil
APN Assessor's Parcel Number
Btu British thermal unit
C2F6 hexafluoroethane
CAA Clean Air Act
CAAQS California Ambient Air Quality Standards
CAFE Corporate Average Fuel Economy
CaIEEMod California Emissions Estimator Model
CaIEPA California Environmental Protection Agency CALGreen California Green Building Standards Code
Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CAP Climate Action Plan
CAPCOA California Air Pollution Control Officers Association CARB California Air Resources Board
CCR California Code of Regulations
CEC California Energy Commission
CEQA California Environmental Quality Act
CF4 tetrafluoromethane
CFC chlorofluorocarbon
CH4 methane
City City of Vista
CO carbon monoxide
COz carbon dioxide
COze carbon dioxide equivalent
DPM diesel particulate matter
EMFAC Mobile Source Emissions Inventory
EO Executive Order
GHG greenhouse gas
GWP global warming potential
HFC hydrofluorocarbon
HR House of Representatives
iv

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS (cont.)
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
kV kilovolt
kW kilowatt
kWhr kilowatt-hour
LBP lead-based paint
LCFS Low Carbon Fuel Standard
LOS Level of Service
LST localized significance threshold
mg/m3 milligrams per cubic meter
MMBtu million British thermal units
MMT million metric tons
Mpg miles per gallon
mph miles per hour
MPOs Metropolitan Planning Organizations
MT metric tons
MW megawatt
MWh megawatt hour
N20 nitrous oxide
NAAQS National Ambient Air Quality Standards
NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration
NHTSA National Highway Traffic Safety Administration NO nitrogen monoxide
NO2 nitrogen dioxide
NOAA National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration NOx nitrogen oxides
03 ozone
O&M operations and maintenance
OEHHA Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment Pb lead
PFC perfluorocarbon
PMlo particulate matter less than 10 microns
PM2.5 particulate matter less than 2.5 microns
ppm parts per million
PV photovoltaic
ROG reactive organic gas
RPS Renewables Portfolio Standard
RTP Regional Transportation Plan
v

ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS (cont.)
SANDAG San Diego Association of Governments
SB Senate Bill
SCS Sustainable Communities Strategy
SDAB San Diego Air Basin
SDAPCD San Diego Air Pollution Control District
SF6 hexafluoride
SIP State Implementation Plan
SOz sulfur dioxide
sox sulfur oxides
TAC toxic air contaminant
UNFCCC United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change USEPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
USGS U.S. Geologic Survey
VMT vehicle miles traveled
VOC volatile organic compound
WRCC Western Regional Climate Center
vi

Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This report presents an assessment of potential air quality, greenhouse gas (GHG), and energy impacts associated with the proposed Camino Largo Residential Project (project) located in the City of Vista (City), California.The report evaluates the potential for criteria air pollutant emissions, GHG emissions, and energy use impacts during the construction and operation of the project.

The proposed project involves removal of an existing nursery operation and the construction of 46 two-story detached residential units.Although the project requires a General Plan Amendment,the buildout of the project would not conflict with the San Diego Air Pollution Control District's (SDAPCD's) 2020 Plan for Attaining the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone in San Diego County.

Criteria pollutant and precursor pollutant emissions generated during project construction activities would not exceed the SDAPCD thresholds. Long-term operational emissions of criteria pollutants and precursors would not exceed the SDAPCD thresholds, and the impacts would be less than significant.

Construction and operation of the project would not expose sensitive receptors to substantial concentrations of toxic air contaminants (TACs), including diesel particulate matter(DPM) emissions from the use of construction equipment.The project's contribution to area traffic would not result in carbon monoxide (CO) hotspots. Impacts related to exposure of sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations would be less than significant.

Neither construction activities nor long-term operation of the project would be a source of objectionable odors that would adversely affect a significant number of persons, and odor impacts would be less than significant.

Implementation of the project would result in GHG emissions of 749.7 metric tons (MT) of carbon dioxide equivalents (CO2e) per year, including amortized construction and operational GHG emissions.

The project's GHG emissions would be below the adjusted threshold of 966 MT CO2e (the City project level screening threshold, adjusted for the Senate Bill (SB) 32 GHG reduction mandates for the year 2024), and the GHG emissions impact would be less than significant.The project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of GHG reduction plans, including the City's Climate Action Plan (CAP) and the California Air Resource Board's Climate Change Scoping Pan.

The project would comply with all applicable requirements of California's 2019 Title 24 Building energy Efficiency Standards and California Green Building Standards (CALGreen), including the requirement for on-site solar electricity generation.The project would not result in wasteful or inefficient consumption of energy resources and the project would not conflict with a State or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency. Impacts related to energy use would be less than significant.

HELIX
Environmental Planning
ES-1

Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021
This page intentionally left blank
HELIX
Environmental Planning
ES-2

Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021
1 .0 INTRODUCTION
1 .1 PURPOSE OF THE REPORT
This report analyzes potential air quality, greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, and energy usage impacts associated with the proposed Camino Largo Residential Project (project), which includes an evaluation of existing conditions in the project vicinity and an assessment of potential impacts associated with project construction and project operation.As appropriate,the analysis identifies measures that can be taken to avoid adverse air quality, GHG emissions, and energy usage impacts. 1 .2 PROJECT LOCATION
The 9.3-acre project site (Assessor's Parcel Number [APN] 159-240-07) is located northeast of the intersection of North Santa Fe Avenue and Camino Largo in the City of Vista (City), south of the City's boundary with the County of San Diego. Guajome Adobe Park is located to the west and rural single- family residences and undeveloped land are to the south and east. See Figure 1, Regional Location, and Figure 2, Project Vicinity.

The existing site contains remnants of the former nursery, including hoop frames of the former greenhouses, palm trees in box planters, and piles of green waste.There is a structure that is associated with the former nursery operations located in the south-central portion of the site and trucks and machinery scattered throughout the site.
1 .3 PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The proposed project involves the removal of the existing greenhouse and shed to construct 46 single- family residential units.The homes would range from 2,129 square feet to 2,374 square feet and extend to a height of no greater than 35 feet.Access would be provided by four private cul-de-sac drives that extend from Camino Largo. Resident parking would be provided via two-car garages and individual driveways with additional parking being provided along one side of each private drive.Two stormwater retention basins would be located onsite. One is located on the southwest corner of the site and another at the southeast edge of the site. See Figure 3,Site Plan.The project site's net density would be 46 units on 9.3 acres, which provides a gross density of 4.965 units per acre.

The project site has a General Plan land use designation of Rural Residential (RR) and would require a General Plan land use amendment to designate the site as Medium Low Density Residential (MDR) (10 dwelling units/acre).The project site would also require a zone change from Agricultural (A-1)to Residential (R-1-B 4,000-square foot lot).
1 .4 CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES AND PHASING
The project would be constructed in one phase. Project construction activities would consist of demolition, site preparation, grading, installation underground utilities, internal street and parking area paving, building construction, and architectural coatings. Construction of the project would commence in April 2022 and be completed in approximately March 2023 for a total construction duration of approximately one year. A net export of approximately 44,130 cubic yards of soil and rock is anticipated during grading.

HELIX
Environmental Planning
1 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021

1.4.1 Construction Best Management Practices
The project would incorporate best management practices (BMPs) during construction to reduce emissions of fugitive dust.The San Diego Air Pollution Control District (SDAPCD) Rule 55— Fugitive Dust Control states that no dust and/or dirt shall leave the property line. SDAPCD Rule 55 requires the following(SDAPCD 2009):
(1) Airborne Dust Beyond the Property Line: No person shall engage in construction or demolition activity subject to this rule in a manner that discharges visible dust emissions into the atmosphere beyond the property line for a period or periods aggregating more than 3 minutes in any 60-minute period.
(2) Track-Out/Carry-Out: Visible roadway dust as a result of active operations, spillage from transport trucks, erosion, or track-out/carry-out shall:
(i) be minimized by the use of any of the following or equally effective track-out/carry-out and erosion control measures that apply to the project or operation:
(a) track-out grates or gravel beds at each egress point; (b) wheel-washing at each egress during muddy conditions, soil binders, chemical soil stabilizers, geotextiles, mulching, or seeding; and for outbound transport trucks; (c) using secured tarps or cargo covering,watering, or treating of transported material; and (ii) be removed at the conclusion of each workday when active operations cease, or every 24 hours for continuous operations. If a street sweeper is used to remove any track-out/ carry-out, only PM10-efficient (particulate matter less than 10 microns) street sweepers certified to meet the most current South Coast Air Quality Management District(SCAQMD) Rule 1186 requirements shall be used.The use of blowers for removal of track-out/carry-out is prohibited under any circumstances.

The control measures listed below are the BMPs that the project would incorporate for dust control and are included in the modeling:
• A minimum of two applications of water shall be applied during grading between dozer/grader passes;
• Paving, chip sealing, or chemical stabilization of internal roadways shall be applied after completion of grading;
• Grading shall be terminated if winds exceed 25 miles per hour(mph); • All exposed surfaces shall maintain a minimum soil moisture of 12 percent; • Dirt storage piles shall be stabilized by chemical binders,tarps, fencing, or other erosion control; and
• Vehicle speeds shall be limited to 15 mph on unpaved roads.

HELIX
Environmental Planning
2 Camino Largo

RIVERSIDE
COUNTY
ORANGE SAN DIEGO ""'4.RvailLoke
COUNTY COUNTY _
1•�>i r
'�a��yj�.
.. .. i:a.�?--I'�.. •_T$" .j'l..i.f • 3!'�

FALLBROOK

CAMP PENDLETON
(3 O'Neill Lake
WARNER

SPRINGS
Lake Henshow
©
OCEANSIDE/- VISTA
m
Lake Wohlford
SAN X�
/ MARCOS ESCOND�IDO '
CARLSBAD Sutherland
Lake � L"r" Reservoir
.J
Marcos
JULIAN
m ENCINITAS"—* Lake °
i
Hodges ,(LokeRamona mRAMONA r/•
oJ' !•.�''`••.,.,•..• Lake Poway4 1
M SOLANA
i
BEACH /.._../ POWAY _ (H
o DEL MAR
M - ,
o •�" San Vicente
•� � Reservoir
m � r'J yIMG
o Miramar Reservoir
% El Capitan Reservoir
E Pacific
Santee SANTEE
Ocean Lakes Loke — m
S i
^^ ... V i���" Jennings
JOLLA� m �' ALPINE �.
/' J
l�
v
Lake EL CAJON
Murray
fIIMIA(Loveland Reservoir .

SAN LA MESA �.

DIEG\fO --LEMON
Mi GROVE
8 CORONADO NATIONAL Sweetwater ake Barrett L
Reservoir m
m v CITY mr'
poi %p j'^ Otoy
Reservoir`• DULZURA 1

IMPERIAL
BEACH QiOTAY� �l

UNITED STATES
MEXICO.!
0 7�..
a TIJUANA
0 8 Miles Source: Base Map Layers(SanGIS,2016) HELIX Regional Location
Environmental Planning
Figure 1

Camino Largo
® Project Site ��'• _ 4
..
(jam . .'- ��✓� F' �4 4 �•:�
olo� . . ... bone 5� �y �
-� t
Ah
NS r?: s
m q�e �t ►a. Camino Largo —
re if,
hp I
N •" _ 1 .•'
o f •::�.� .,.� i "o.. � 'paseorDeAnz'a r e r Mor9ruerito,
Po5eo
it
�ao'er
o e0 -.., -

9.e a 7/f•
N '1..+.1. argue
of i NIppS �M
Or
J Ot
y a f h
use W urn [• '�
0 300 Feet Source: Aerial(NearMaps,2019) HELIX Project Vicinity
Environmental Planning
Figure 2

Camino Lar o
x 309 4 �x
_tE N8820'SJ"W.59J B6•... - __ x _v
J20`..\
335
x 310T1 x �
- � ¢O -.340 —330 N L�2 3 s.• _.. � 0 x
o� 57 3 LOI n // 45 x LET F /
/ j59P2kpOV \ `\ p�Z1 _ _ P_ 5 \ `O'�..� P�314Y .lx .•\$,•\. x
� I
cS
I o —
i 0
o /
s
_ 5 _
ti
s
3n�gg
C 4 \
c � �� \\ ooF / 3,�I4?7 ': S• ��' ' sv� p vs9 -- -- - / - si/x3_. � �/ /'— �
30' is' a' sa' so' 90'

1.5 C �.
m
ry \\\\\ \\ \ 42/
110
V \
Source:BHA,Inc.2021
HELIX Site Plan
Environmental Planning
Figure 3

Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021

2.0 AIR QUALITY

2.1 AIR QUALITY REGULATORY SETTING
The project site is located within the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB). Air quality in the SDAB is regulated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency(USEPA) at the federal level, by the California Air Resources Board (CARB) at the state level, and by the SDAPCD at the regional level.

2.1.1 Air Pollutant Descriptors and Terminology

2.1.1.1 Criteria Air Pollutants
Criteria pollutants are defined by state and federal law as a risk to the health and welfare of the general public. In general, criteria air pollutants include the following compounds:
• Ozone (03)
• Carbon monoxide (CO)
• Nitrogen dioxide (NO2)
• Particulate matter(PM), which is further subdivided:
o Coarse PM, 10 microns or less in diameter(PM1o)
o Fine PM, 2.5 microns or less in diameter(PM2.5)
• Sulfur dioxide (S02)
• Lead (Pb)
Criteria pollutants can be emitted directly from sources (primary pollutants; e.g., CO, S02, PM10, PM2.5, and lead), or they may be formed through chemical and photochemical reactions of precursor pollutants in the atmosphere (secondary pollutants; e.g., ozone, NO2, PM1o, and PM2.5). PM10 and PM2.5 can be both primary and secondary pollutants.The principal precursor pollutants of concern are reactive organic gases ([ROGs] also known as volatile organic compounds [VOCs])'and nitrogen oxides (NOx).

The descriptions of sources and general health effects for each of the criteria air pollutants are shown in Table 1,Summary of Common Sources and Human Health Effects of Criteria Air Pollutants, based on information provided by the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association ([CAPCOA] 2021a).

Specific adverse health effects on individuals or population groups induced by criteria pollutant emissions are highly dependent on a multitude of interconnected variables such as cumulative concentrations, local meteorology and atmospheric conditions, and the number and characteristics of exposed individuals (e.g., age, gender). Criteria pollutant precursors (ROG and NOx) affect air quality on a regional scale,typically after significant delay and distance from the pollutant source emissions. Health effects related to ozone and NO2 are, therefore,the product of emissions generated by numerous sources throughout a region. Emissions of criteria pollutants from vehicles traveling to or from the project site (mobile emissions) are distributed nonuniformly in location and time throughout the region, 1 CARB defines and uses the term ROGs while the USEPA defines and uses the term VOCs.The compounds included in the lists of ROGs and VOCs and the methods of calculation are slightly different.However,for the purposes of estimating criteria pollutant precursor emissions,the two terms are often used interchangeably.

HELIX
Environmental Planning
3 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021
wherever the vehicles may travel. As such, specific health effects from these criteria pollutant emissions cannot be meaningfully correlated to the incremental contribution from the project.

Table 1

SUMMARY OF COMMON SOURCES AND HUMAN HEALTH EFFECTS OF CRITERIA AIR POLLUTANTS Pollutant Major Man-Made Sources Human Health Effects Carbon Monoxide An odorless,colorless gas formed when Reduces the ability of blood to deliver (CO) carbon in fuel is not burned completely; a oxygen to vital tissues, affecting the component of motor vehicle exhaust. cardiovascular and nervous system. Impairs vision,causes dizziness, and can lead to
unconsciousness or death.

Nitrogen Dioxide A reddish-brown gas formed during fuel Respiratory irritant;aggravates lung and (NO2) combustion for motor vehicles and heart problems. Precursor to ozone and industrial sources. Sources include motor acid rain. Contributes to climate change vehicles,electric utilities, and other sources and nutrient overloading,which that burn fuel. deteriorates water quality. Causes brown discoloration of the atmosphere.

Ozone(03) Formed by a chemical reaction between Irritates and causes inflammation of the reactive organic gases(ROGs)and nitrogen mucous membranes and lung airways; oxides(NOx) in the presence of sunlight. causes wheezing,coughing,and pain when Common sources of these precursor inhaling deeply; decreases lung capacity; pollutants include motor vehicle exhaust, aggravates lung and heart problems. industrial emissions,gasoline storage and Damages plants; reduces crop yield. transport,solvents, paints,and landfills. Damages rubber,some textiles and dyes.

Particulate Matter Produced by power plants,steel mills, Increased respiratory symptoms,such as (PM10 and PMz.$) chemical plants, unpaved roads and parking irritation of the airways,coughing,or lots,wood-burning stoves and fireplaces, difficulty breathing;aggravated asthma; automobiles,and other sources. development of chronic bronchitis; irregular heartbeat; nonfatal heart attacks;
and premature death in people with heart
or lung disease. Impairs visibility(haze).

A colorless, nonflammable gas formed when Respiratory irritant.Aggravates lung and fuel containing sulfur is burned,when heart problems. In the presence of Sulfur Dioxide gasoline is extracted from oil, or when moisture and oxygen,sulfur dioxide metal is extracted from ore. Examples are converts to sulfuric acid,which can damage (SOz) petroleum refineries,cement marble, iron and steel. Damages crops and manufacturing, metal processing facilities, natural vegetation. Impairs visibility. locomotives, and ships. Precursor to acid rain.

Lead Metallic element emitted from metal Anemia, high blood pressure, brain and refineries,smelters, battery manufacturers, kidney damage, neurological disorders, iron and steel producers, use of leaded fuels cancer, lowered IQ.Affects animals, plants, by racing and aircraft industries. and aquatic ecosystems.

Source:CAPCOA 2021a

2.1.1.2 Toxic Air Contaminants
Toxic air contaminants (TACs) are a diverse group of air pollutants that may cause or contribute to an increase in deaths or in serious illness, or that may pose a present or potential hazard to human health.

TACs can cause long-term health effects such as cancer, birth defects, neurological damage, asthma, bronchitis, or genetic damage, or short-term acute effects such as eye watering, respiratory irritation HELIX
Environmental Planning
4 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021
(a cough), runny nose,throat pain, and headaches.TACs may be carcinogenic or noncarcinogenic based on the nature of the health effects associated with exposure to the pollutant. For carcinogenic TACs, there is no level of exposure that is considered safe, and impacts are evaluated in terms of overall relative risk expressed as excess cancer cases per one million exposed individuals. Noncarcinogenic TACs differ in that there is generally assumed to be a safe level of exposure below which no negative health impact is believed to occur.These levels are determined on a pollutant-by-pollutant basis.

Diesel engines emit a complex mixture of air pollutants, including both gaseous and solid material.The solid material in diesel exhaust is referred to as diesel particulate matter(DPM).Almost all DPM is 10 microns or less in diameter, and 90 percent of DPM is less than 2.5 microns in diameter(CARB 2020a). Because of their extremely small size,these particles can be inhaled and eventually trapped in the bronchial and alveolar regions of the lung. In 1998, CARB identified DPM as a TAC based on published evidence of a relationship between diesel exhaust exposure and lung cancer and other adverse health effects. DPM has a notable effect on California's population—it is estimated that about 70 percent of total known cancer risk related to air toxics in California is attributable to DPM (CARB 2021a).

Asbestos is a mineral fiber that naturally occurs in some rock and soil. Long-term exposure to airborne asbestos fibers has been linked to major health effects including lung cancer; mesothelioma, a rare form of cancer that is found in the thin lining of the lung, chest, abdomen, and heart; and asbestosis, a serious progressive, long-term, non-cancer disease of the lungs (USEPA 2021a). Because of its fiber strength and heat resistance, asbestos has been used in a variety of building construction materials for insulation and as a fire retardant, primarily in buildings constructed before 1979.Asbestos fibers may be released into the air by the disturbance of asbestos containing material (ACM) during renovation and demolition activities; or during earth disturbing activities in areas where naturally occurring asbestos (NOA) is present in the rock or soil. NOA is not likely to be present in the soil and rock of San Diego County (California Department of Conservation 2000).

Lead is a naturally occurring metallic element that is found in small amounts in the earth's crust. In addition to its status as a criteria pollutant, lead is listed as a TAC because, depending on the level and duration of exposure, lead can adversely affect the nervous system, kidney function, immune system, reproductive and developmental systems and the cardiovascular system.There is also a probable link between lead exposure and kidney cancer, brain cancer(gliomas), and lung cancer(USEPA 2021b). Lead particulate matter can be emitted during demolition and renovation activities that disturb materials that contains lead-based paint (LBP), most typically found in structures built before 1978.

2.1.2 Federal Regulations

2.1.2.1 Clean Air Act
Air quality is defined by ambient air concentrations of specific pollutants identified by the USEPA to be of concern with respect to the health and welfare of the general public.The USEPA is responsible for enforcing the Federal Clean Air Act (CAA) of 1970 and its 1977 and 1990 Amendments.The CAA required the USEPA to establish National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), which identify concentrations of pollutants in the ambient air below which no adverse effects on the public health and welfare are anticipated. In response,the USEPA established both primary and secondary standards for several criteria pollutants, which are introduced above.Table 2,Ambient Air Quality Standards, shows the federal and state ambient air quality standards (AAQS)for these pollutants.

HELIX
Environmental Planning
5 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021
Table 2

AMBIENT AIR QUALITY STANDARDS
Pollutant Averaging California Federal Standards Federal Standards Time Standards Primary' Secondary'
03 1 Hour 0.09 ppm (180 µg/m3) — —
8 Hour 0.070 ppm (137 µg/m3) 0.070 ppm (137 11g/m3) Same as Primary PM10 24 Hour 50 µg/m3 150 µg/m3 Same as Primary AAM 20 µg/m3 — Same as Primary
PM2.5 24 Hour — 35 11g/m3 Same as Primary AAM 12 µg/m3 12.0 11g/m3 15.0 µg/m3
CO 1 Hour 20 ppm (23 mg/m3) 35 ppm (40 mg/m3) — 8 Hour 9.0 ppm (10 mg/m3) 9 ppm (10 mg/m3) —
8 Hour 6 ppm (7 mg/m3) — —
(Lake Tahoe)
NO2 1 Hour 0.18 ppm (339 11g/m3) 100 ppb(188 µg/m3) — AAM 0.030 ppm (57 11g/m3) 0.053 ppm (100 11g/m3) Same as Primary SO2 1 Hour 0.25 ppm (655 11g/m3) 75 ppb(196 11g/m3) — 3 Hour — — 0.5 ppm
(1,300 11g/m3)
24 Hour 0.04 ppm (105 11g/m3) — —
Lead 30-day Avg. 1.5 11g/m3 — —
Calendar Quarter — 1.5 µg/m3 Same as Primary
Rolling — 0.15 µg/m3
3-month Avg.

Visibility 8 Hour Extinction coefficient of No No Reducing 0.23 per km—visibility>_ Federal Federal Particles 10 miles Standards Standards
(0.07 per km—
>_30 miles for Lake
Tahoe)
Sulfates 24 Hour 25 µg/m3 No No
Federal Federal
Standards Standards
Hydrogen 1 Hour 0.03 ppm (42 11g/m3) No No Sulfide Federal Federal
Standards Standards
HELIX
Environmental Planning
6 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021
Pollutant Averaging California Federal Standards Federal Standards Time Standards Primary' Secondaryz
Vinyl Chloride 24 Hour 0.01 ppm (26 µg/m3) No No Federal Federal
Standards Standards
Source:CARB 2016
1 National Primary Standards:The levels of air quality necessary,within an adequate margin of safety,to protect the public health.
2 National Secondary Standards:The levels of air quality necessary to protect the public welfare from any known or anticipated adverse effects of a pollutant.

Os=ozone;ppm:parts per million;µg/m3=micrograms per cubic meter;PM10=large particulate matter; AAM=Annual Arithmetic Mean; PM2.5=fine particulate matter;CO=carbon monoxide;mg/m3=milligrams per cubic meter; NO2=nitrogen dioxide;S02=sulfur dioxide;km=kilometer;—=No Standard.

The CAA allows states to adopt ambient air quality standards and other regulations provided they are at least as stringent as federal standards. CARB has established the more stringent California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS)for the six criteria pollutants through the California Clean Air Act of 1988 (CCAA), and has established CAAQS for additional pollutants, including sulfates, hydrogen sulfide (H2S), vinyl chloride, and visibility-reducing particles.Areas that do not meet the NAAQS or the CAAQS for a particular pollutant are "nonattainment areas"for that pollutant. Effective July 2, 2021,the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB)was classified as a Severe 15 nonattainment area for the 2015 8-hour NAAQS for ozone (USEPA 2021c).The SDAB is an attainment area for the NAAQS for all other criteria pollutants including PM10 and PM2.5.The SDAB is currently classified as a nonattainment area under the CAAQS for ozone, PM1o, and PM2.5 (SDAPCD 2021a).Table 3,San Diego Air Basin Attainment Status, lists the federal and state attainment status of the SDAPCD for criteria pollutants.

Table 3

SAN DIEGO AIR BASIN ATTAINMENT STATUS
Pollutant State of California Federal
Attainment Status Attainment Status
Ozone(1-hour) (No federal standard) Nonattainment Ozone(8-hour) Nonattainment Nonattainment
Coarse Particulate Matter(PM1o) Unclassifiable' Nonattainment Fine Particulate Matter(PM2.$) Attainment Nonattainment Carbon Monoxide(CO) Attainment Attainment
Nitrogen Dioxide(NO2) Attainment Attainment
Lead Attainment Attainment
Sulfur Dioxide(S02) Attainment Attainment Sulfates Attainment No Federal Standard
Hydrogen Sulfide Unclassified No Federal Standard Visibility Reducing Particles Unclassified No Federal Standard Source:SDAPCD 2021a
1 At the time of designation,if the available data does not support a designation of attainment or nonattainment, the area is designated as unclassifiable.

HELIX
Environmental Planning
7 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021

2.1.3 State Regulations

2.1.3.1 California Clean Air Act
CARB has established the more stringent California Ambient Air Quality Standards (CAAQS)for the seven criteria air pollutants listed above through the California Clean Air Act of 1988 (CCAA), and has also established CAAQS for additional pollutants, including sulfates, hydrogen sulfide (1-12S),vinyl chloride and visibility-reducing particles(see Table 2). Areas that do not meet the CAAQS for a particular pollutant are considered to be "nonattainment areas"for that pollutant.The SDAB is currently classified as a nonattainment area under the CAAQS for ozone (1-hour and 8-hour), PMlo, and PM2.5 (SDAPCD 2020a).

The current state attainment status for the SDAB is provided in Table 3, above.

CARB is the state regulatory agency with the authority to enforce regulations to both achieve and maintain the NAAQS and CAAQS.The SDAPCD is responsible for developing and implementing the rules and regulations designed to attain the NAAQS and CAAQS, as well as the permitting of new or modified sources, developing of air quality management plans, and adopting and enforcing air pollution regulations for San Diego County.

2.1.3.2 State Implementation Plan
The CAA requires areas with unhealthy levels of ozone, inhalable particulate matter, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, and sulfur dioxide to develop plans, known as State Implementation Plans (SIPS). SIPS are comprehensive plans that describe how an area will attain the NAAQS.The 1990 amendments to the CAA set deadlines for attainment based on the severity of an area's air pollution problem.

SIPs are not single documents—they are a compilation of new and previously submitted plans, programs (e.g., monitoring, modeling, permitting), district rules, state regulations and federal controls. Many of California's SIPS rely on a core set of control strategies, including emission standards for cars and heavy trucks,fuel regulations and limits on emissions from consumer products. State law makes CARB the lead agency for all purposes related to the SIP. Local air districts and other agencies prepare SIP elements and submit them to CARB for review and approval. CARB forwards the SIP revisions to the USEPA for approval and publication in the Federal Register.The Code of Federal Regulations (CFR)Title 40, Chapter I, Part 52, Subpart F, Section 52.220 lists the items that are included in the California SIP (CARB 2009). At any one time, several California submittals are pending USEPA approval.

2.1.3.3 California Energy Code
California Code of Regulations (CCR)Title 24 Part 6, California's Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings, were first established in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California's energy consumption. Energy-efficient buildings require less electricity, natural gas, and other fuels. Electricity production from fossil fuels and on-site fuel combustion (typically for space and water heating) results primarily in GHG emissions.The California Energy Code is discussed in further detail in Section 3, below.

2.1.3.4 Toxic Air Contaminants
The Health and Safety Code (§39655, subd. (a)) defines a TAC as "an air pollutant which may cause or contribute to an increase in mortality or in serious illness, or which may pose a present or potential hazard to human health."A substance that is listed as a hazardous air pollutant pursuant to HELIX
Environmental Planning
8 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021
subsection (b) of Section 112 of the CAA(42 United States Code Sec. 7412[b]) is a TAC. Under State law, the California Environmental Protection Agency(CaIEPA), acting through CARB, is authorized to identify a substance as a TAC if it determines the substance is an air pollutant that may cause or contribute to an increase in mortality or an increase in serious illness, or that may pose a present or potential hazard to human health.

2.1.4 Local Regulations

2.1.5 SDAPCD Attainment Plan
The SDAPCD and San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) are responsible for developing and implementing the clean air plan for the attainment and maintenance of the AAQS in the SDAB.The regional air quality plan for San Diego County is SDAPCD's 2020 Plan for Attaining the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone in San Diego County(Attainment Plan; SDAPCD 2020b).The Attainment Plan, which would be a revision to the state implementation plan (SIP), outlines SDAPCD's plans and control measures designed to attain the national ambient air quality standard (NAAQS)for ozone.These plans accommodate emissions from all sources, including natural sources, through implementation of control measures, where feasible, on stationary sources to attain the standards. Mobile sources are regulated by the USEPA and CARB, and the emissions and reduction strategies related to mobile sources are considered in the Attainment Plan and SIP.

The Attainment Plan relies on information from CARB and SANDAG, including mobile and area source emissions, as well as information regarding projected growth in San Diego County,to estimate future emissions and then determine from that the strategies necessary for the reduction of emissions through regulatory controls.The CARB mobile source emission projections and SANDAG growth projections are based on population and vehicle trends and land use plans developed by the cities and by the County of San Diego. While SANDAG collaborates with the SDAPCD on the development of the portion of the SIP applicable to the SDAB,the SDAPCD is the lead agency.As such, the SDAPCD is responsible for projecting all future mobile source emissions (using CARB's mobile source emissions inventory EMFAC).

2.1.6 San Diego Air Pollution Control District Rules and Regulations Future development pursuant to the project would be required to comply with SDAPCD Rules and Regulations which require the incorporation of BMPs during construction to reduce emissions of fugitive dust.

2.1.6.1 Rule 50 (Visible Emissions)
Particulate matter pollution impacts the environment by decreasing visibility(haze).These particles vary greatly in shape, size and chemical composition, and come from a variety of natural and manmade sources. Some haze-causing particles are directly emitted to the air such as windblown dust and soot.

Others are formed in the air from the chemical transformation of gaseous pollutants (e.g., sulfates, nitrates, organic carbon particles) which are the major constituents of PM2.5.These fine particles, caused largely by combustion of fuel, can travel hundreds of miles causing visibility impairment.

Visibility reduction is probably the most apparent symptom of air pollution. Visibility degradation is caused by the absorption and scattering of light by particles and gases in the atmosphere before it reaches the observer.As the number of fine particles increases, more light is absorbed and scattered, HELIX
Environmental Planning
9 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021
resulting in less clarity, color, and visual range. Light absorption by gases and particles is sometimes the cause of discolorations in the atmosphere but usually does not contribute very significantly to visibility degradation. Scattering by particulates impairs visibility much more readily. SDAPCD Rule 50 (Visible Emissions) sets emission limits based on the apparent density or opacity of the emissions using the Ringelmann scale (SDAPCD 1997).

2.1.6.2 Rule 51 (Nuisance)
SDAPCD Rule 51 (Nuisance) states that a person shall not discharge from any source whatsoever such quantities of air contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance or annoyance to any considerable number of persons or to the public or which endanger the comfort, repose, health or safety of any such persons or the public or which cause or have a natural tendency to cause injury or damage to business or property.The provisions of the rule do not apply to odors emanating from agricultural operations in the growing of crops or raising of fowls or animals (SDAPCD 1976).

2.1.6.3 Rule 55 (Fugitive Dust Control)
SDAPCD Rule 55 (Fugitive Dust Control) requires action be taken to limit dust from construction and demolition activities from leaving the property line. Similar to Rule 50 (Visible Emissions), Rule 55 (Fugitive Dust Control) places limits on the amount of visible dust emissions in the atmosphere beyond the property line. It further stipulates that visible dust on roadways as a result of track-out/carry-out shall be minimized through implementation of control measures and removed at the conclusion of each workday using street sweepers (SDAPCD 2009).

2.1.6.4 Rule 67.0.1 (Architectural Coatings)
Construction of development within the Specific Plan is required to comply with SDAPCD Rule 67.0.1 (Architectural Coatings)which requires residential interior/exterior flat coatings to be less than or equal to 50 grams per liter VOC content and interior/exterior non-flat coatings to be less than or equal to 100 grams per liter VOC content (SDAPCD 2015).

2.1.6.5 Rule 1206 (Asbestos Removal, Renovation, and Demolition) Demolition activities for the removal of existing structures on the project site would be required to comply with SDAPCD Rule 1206 (Asbestos Removal, Renovation, and Demolition) which requires a facility survey to determine the presence or absence of ACM, regardless of the age of the facility (SDAPCD 2017).

2.2 AIR QUALITY EXISTING CONDITIONS
The project site is located in a generally suburban residential area 2.25 miles north of the City center.

Topographically,there is an east-west trending ridge situated in the north central portion of the project site. Elevations on the project site range from 362 feet above mean sea level (amsl) at the top of the ridge to 296 amsl in the southwestern corner of the property adjacent to Camino Largo.The project currently contains 10,600 square feet of greenhouses and sheds. Land uses surrounding the project site include the existing single-family homes to the south and east of the project.To the north is a nursery and one home and one trailer.To the west across N. Santa Fe Avenue is farmland and the Guajome Adobe (see Figure 2).

HELIX
Environmental Planning
10 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021

2.2.1 Climate/Meteorology
The climate in southern California, including the SDAB, is controlled largely by the large-scale meteorological condition that dominates the west coast of the United States: a seasonally semi- permanent high-pressure cell centered over the northeastern Pacific Ocean, called the Pacific high, which keeps most storms from affecting the California coast. Areas within 30 miles of the coast in the San Diego region, including the project site, experience moderate temperatures and comfortable humidity.

Temperature inversion layers (inversions; layers of warmer air over colder air) affect air quality conditions significantly because they influence the mixing depth (i.e.,the vertical depth in the atmosphere available for diluting air contaminants near the ground).The highest air pollutant concentrations in the SDAB generally occur during inversions. During the summer, air quality problems in the SDAB are created due to the interaction between the ocean surface and the lower layer of the atmosphere, creating a moist marine layer. An upper layer of warm air mass forms over the cool marine layer, preventing air pollutants from dispersing upward.Additionally, hydrocarbons (VOCs) and NOx react under the strong, abundant sunlight in the San Diego region, creating smog. Light, daytime winds, predominantly from the west, further aggravate the condition by driving the air pollutants inland, toward the foothills. During the fall and winter, air quality problems are created due to CO and NOx emissions. High NOx levels usually occur during autumn or winter, on days with summer-like conditions.

The predominant wind direction in the vicinity of the project site is from the southwest and the average wind speed is approximately six mph; Iowa Environmental Mesonet [IEM] 2021).The annual average maximum temperature in the project area is approximately 74 degrees Fahrenheit ff), and the annual average minimum temperature is approximately 52°F.Total precipitation in the project area averages approximately 13 inches annually. Precipitation occurs mostly during the winter and relatively infrequently during the summer(Western Regional Climate Center [WRCC] 2021).

2.2.2 Existing Air Quality
The SDAPCD operates a network of ambient air monitoring stations throughout the San Diego region.

The nearest air monitoring station closest to the project site is at Camp Pendleton/Oceanside, approximately 6 miles to the west.The closest air monitoring station with data for PM10 and PM2.5 is the San Diego-Kearny Villa Road monitoring station, approximately 28 miles south of the project site.The ambient pollutant concentrations collected at the stations during the last three available years (2018 through 2020) are shown in Table 4,Air Quality Monitoring Data.The data indicates exceedance of the state/federal 8-hour ozone standards on three days in 2020. No other air quality standards were determined to be exceeded from 2018 to 2020.

HELIX
Environmental Planning
11 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021
Table 4

AIR QUALITY MONITORING DATA
Pollutant Standard 2018 2019 2020
Ozone(03)—Camp Pendleton Station
Maximum concentration 1-hour period (ppm) 0.084 0.075 0.094 Maximum concentration 8-hour period (ppm) 0.58 0.064 0.074 Days above 1-hour state standard (>0.09 ppm) 0 0 0 Days above 8-hour state/federal standard (>0.070 ppm) 0 0 3 Coarse Particulate Matter(PMio)—San Diego-Kearney Villa Road Station
Maximum 24-hour concentration (µg/m3) 38.0
Measured Days above 24-hr state standard (>50 µg/m3) 0 Measured Days above 24-hr federal standard (>150 µg/m3) 0 Annual average (µg/m3) 18.4
Exceed state annual standard (20 µg/m3) No
Fine Particulate Matter(PM2.5)—San Diego-Kearney Villa Road Station
Maximum 24-hour concentration (µg/m3) 32.2 16.2 47.5 Measured Days above 24-hour federal standard (>35 µg/m3) 0 0 2 Annual average(µg/m3) 8.3 7.0 8.7
Exceed state and federal annual standard (12 µg/m3) No No No Nitrogen Dioxide(NO2)—Camp Pendleton Station
Maximum 1-hour concentration (ppm) 0.048 0.053 0.058 Days above state 1-hour standard (0.18 ppm) 0 0 0
Days above federal 1-hour standard (0.100 ppm) 0 0 0 Annual average(ppm) * 0.005 0.006
Exceed annual federal standard (0.053 ppm) No * No Exceed annual state standard (0.030 ppm) No * No Source:CARB 2021b
ppb=parts per billion; ppm=parts per million;µg/m3=micrograms per cubic meter,* =insufficient data available.

2.2.3 Sensitive Receptors
CARB and the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA) have identified the following groups of individuals as the most likely to be affected by air pollution: the elderly over 65, children under 14, infants (including in utero in the third trimester of pregnancy), and persons with cardiovascular and chronic respiratory diseases such as asthma, emphysema, and bronchitis (CARB 2005; OEHHA 2015). Some land uses are considered more sensitive to air pollution than others due to the types of population groups or activities involved and are referred to as sensitive receptors.

Examples of these sensitive receptors are residences, schools, hospitals, and daycare centers.

The closest existing sensitive receptors to the project site are single-family homes located adjacent to the project site to the south, north, and west. The closest existing school is the Guajome Park Academy, located at 2000 N Santa Fe Avenue, approximately 966 feet (0.18 mile) southwest of the project site.

2.3 AIR QUALITY METHODOLOGY
Air emissions from mobile, area, and energy sources were calculated using CaIEEMod, version 2020.4.0.

CalEEMod is a computer model used to estimate air emissions resulting from land development projects HELIX
Environmental Planning
12 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021
throughout the state of California. CalEEMod was developed by CAPCOA in collaboration with the California air quality management and pollution control districts, primarily the SCAQMD.The calculation methodology, source of emission factors used, and default data is described in the CalEEMod User's Guide, and Appendices A, D, and E (CAPCOA 2021b).

In brief, CalEEMod is a computer model that estimates criteria air pollutant and greenhouse gas emissions from mobile (i.e., vehicular) sources, area sources (fireplaces, woodstoves, and landscape maintenance equipment), energy use (electricity and natural gas used in space heating,ventilation, and cooling; lighting; and plug-in appliances),water use and wastewater generation, and solid waste disposal. Emissions are estimated based on land use information input to the model by the user.

In the first module,the user defines the specific land uses that will occur at the project site.The user also selects the appropriate land use setting(urban or rural), operational year, location, climate zone, and utility provider.The input land uses, size features, and population are used throughout CalEEMod in determining default parameters and calculations in each of the subsequent modules.The input land use information consists of land use subtypes (such as the residential subtypes of single-family residential and multi-family medium-rise residential) and their unit or square footage quantities.

Subsequent modules include construction (including off-road vehicle emissions), mobile (on-road vehicle emissions), area sources (architectural coatings [painting], consumer products [cleansers, aerosols, solvents]),water and wastewater, and solid waste. Each module comprises multiple components including an associated mitigation module to account for further reductions in the reported baseline calculations. Other inputs include trip generation rates,trip lengths,vehicle fleet mix(percentage autos, trucks, etc.),trip distribution (percent work to home, etc.), duration of construction phases, construction equipment usage, grading areas, season, and ambient temperature, as well as other parameters.

In various places the user can input additional information and/or override the default assumptions to account for project-or location-specific parameters. For this assessment,the default parameters were not changed unless otherwise noted.The CalEEMod output files are included in Appendix A to this report.

2.3.1 Construction Emissions

2.3.1.1 Construction Activities
Construction emissions were estimated based on the timeline provided by the project applicant, which assumes construction would begin in April 2022 and would be completed in March 2023,for a total construction period of approximately 12 months.The quantity, duration, and intensity of construction activity influence the amount of construction emissions and related pollutant concentrations that occur at any one time.As such,the emission forecasts provided herein reflect a specific set of conservative assumptions based on the expected construction scenario wherein a relatively large amount of construction activity is occurring in a relatively intensive manner. Because of this conservative assumption, actual emissions could be less than those forecasted. If construction is delayed or occurs over a longer time period, emissions could be reduced because of(1) a more modern and cleaner- burning construction equipment fleet mix than assumed in CaIEEMod, and/or(2) a less intensive buildout schedule (i.e.,fewer daily emissions occurring over a longer time interval).

Construction activities would include demolition, site preparation, grading, installation underground utilities, internal street and parking area paving, building construction, and architectural coatings.

HELIX
Environmental Planning
13 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021
Construction is assumed to occur five days per week with equipment operating up to eight hours per day.The construction schedule assumed in the modeling is shown in Table 5,Anticipated Construction Schedule.

Table 5

ANTICIPATED CONSTRUCTION SCHEDULE
Construction Period Construction Period Construction Period Construction Activity Start End Number of Working Days
Demolition 4/1/2022 4/14/2022 10
Site Preparation 4/1/2022 9/30/2022 131
Grading 5/1/2022 5/31/2022 22
Utilities 6/1/2022 7/31/2022 43
Paving 8/1/2022 8/14/2022 10
Building Construction 9/1/2022 2/28/2023 129 Architectural Coatings 3/1/2023 3/28/2023 20 Source:Camino Largo;CalEEMod
The modeling assumes that no VOC containing coatings will be used.This also complies with SDAPCD Rule 67, as described in Section 2.1.4, limiting the VOC content of architectural coatings to 50 g/L for flat coating and 100 g/L for non-flat coatings and pavement traffic marking. Interior paint was assumed to be flat coatings and exterior paint was assumed to be non-flat coatings.The modeling also assumes fugitive dust control in accordance with the SDAPCD Rule 55 and the BMPs, described in Section 1.4.1, specifically watering exposed areas twice per day, enforcing a 15-mph speed limit on unpaved surfaces, and maintaining a minimum moisture content of 12 percent for unpaved roads.

2.3.1.2 Construction Off-Road Equipment
Construction would require the use of heavy off-road equipment. Construction equipment estimates are based on default values in CalEEMod,Version 2020.4.0 with additional equipment added for excavation for underground utilities, based on assumptions used for similar projects.Table 6, Construction Equipment Assumptions, presents a summary of the assumed equipment that would be involved in each stage of construction.

HELIX
Environmental Planning
14 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021
Table 6

CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT ASSUMPTIONS
Equipment Horsepower Number Hours/Day
Demolition
Concrete/Industrial Saws 81 1 8
Excavators 158 3 8
Rubber Tired Dozers 247 2 8
Site Preparation
Rubber Tired Dozers 247 3 8
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 97 4 8
Grading
Excavators 158 1 8
Graders 187 1 8
Rubber Tired Dozers 247 1 8
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 97 3 8
Underground Utilities
Excavators 158 1 8
Plate Compactors 8 1 4
Rough Terrain Forklifts 100 1 4
Rubber Tired Loaders 203 1 8
Trenchers 78 1 8
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 97 3 8
Paving
Pavers 130 2 8
Paving Equipment 132 2 8
Rollers 80 2 8
Building Construction
Cranes 231 1 8
Forklifts 89 3 8
Generator Sets 84 1 7
Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes 97 3 8
Welders 46 1 8
Architectural Coating
Air Compressors 78 1 6
Source:CalEEMod

2.3.1.3 Construction On-Road Trips
Worker commute trips and vendor delivery trips were modeled based on CalEEMod defaults. Worker trips are anticipated to vary between 3 and 20 trips per day, depending on construction activity. Haul truck trips were based on the building area to be demolished,vegetation estimates from aerial images, and the grading plan cut/fill estimate. Approximately 48 total haul truck trips are anticipated during demolition, 5,516 total haul truck trips during grading.The CalEEMod default worker,vendor and haul trip distances were used in the model.

HELIX
Environmental Planning
15 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021

2.3.2 Operational Emissions

2.3.2.1 Area Source Emissions
Area sources include emissions from landscaping equipment,the use of consumer products,the reapplication of architectural coatings for maintenance, and hearths. Emissions associated with area sources were estimated using the CalEEMod default values with the exception of hearths—the project will not include wood burning stoves or fireplaces, or natural gas fireplaces.

2.3.2.2 Energy Emissions
Development within the project would use electricity for lighting, heating and cooling. Natural gas and electricity will be supplied by San Diego Gas and Electric.

The gas-fired devices that may be utilized for the project includer furnaces, hot water heaters, stoves, and ovens. As with all fossil fuel combustion,the substances emitted include greenhouse gases, criteria pollutants, and toxic substances.

Electricity generation typically entails the combustion of fossil fuels, including natural gas and coal, which is then transmitted to end users. A building's electricity use is thus associated with the off-site or indirect emission of GHGs at the source of electricity generation (power plant) and is included in the GHG analysis in Section 3, below.

2.3.2.3 Vehicular (Mobile) Sources
Operational emissions from mobile source emissions are associated with vehicle trip generation and trip length. Based on the project trip generation rate from the Local Mobility Analysis,the project would generate 460 average daily trips (Linscott, Law&Greenspan, Engineers [LLG) 2021).The CalEEMod default trip distances and purposes were used in the modeling.

2.4 AIR QUALITY SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA
Thresholds used to evaluate potential air quality and odor impacts are based on applicable criteria in the State's California Environmental Quality Act(CEQA) Guidelines Appendix G. A significant air quality and/or odor impact could occur if the implementation of the proposed project would:
• Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the San Diego Attainment Plan or applicable portions of the SIP; or
• Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the SDAB is non-attainment under an applicable NAAQS or CAAQS; or
• Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations; or • Result in other emissions (such as those leading to odors adversely affecting a substantial number of people.

To determine whether the project would result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of PMlo, PM2.5, or the ozone precursors NOx and VOCs, emissions were evaluated based on the quantitative HELIX
Environmental Planning
16 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021
emission thresholds established by the SDAPCD.As part of its air quality permitting process,the SDAPCD has established thresholds in Rule 20.2 for the preparation of Air Quality Impact Assessments (SDAPCD 2019).

For CEQA purposes, these screening criteria were used as numeric methods to determine if the project would result in a significant impact to air quality or an adverse effect on human health.The screening thresholds are shown in Table 7,Screening-level Thresholds for Air Quality Impact Analysis.

Table 7

SCREENING-LEVEL THRESHOLDS FOR AIR QUALITY IMPACT ANALYSIS Pollutant Total Emissions
Construction Emissions(Pounds/Day)
Respirable Particulate Matter(PM1o) 100
Fine Particulate Matter(PM2.5) 67
Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) 250
Oxides of Sulfur(SOx) 250
Carbon Monoxide(CO) 550
Volatile Organic Compounds(VOCs) 137
Operational Emissions
Pounds per Pounds per Tons per
Hour Day Year
Respirable Particulate Matter(PM1o) --- 100 15 Fine Particulate Matter(PM2.$) --- 67 10 Oxides of Nitrogen (NOx) 25 250 40
Oxides of Sulfur(SOx) 25 250 40
Carbon Monoxide(CO) 100 550 100
Lead and Lead Compounds --- 3.2 0.6
Volatile Organic Compounds(VOC) --- 137 15 Toxic Air Contaminant Emissions
Excess Cancer Risk 1 in 1 million
10 in 1 million with T-BACT
Non-Cancer Hazard 1.0
Source:SDAPCD 2019
T-BACT=Toxics-Best Available Control Technology
SDAPCD Rule 51 (Nuisance) prohibits emissions from any source whatsoever in such quantities of air contaminants or other material, which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to the public health or damage to property. It is generally accepted that the considerable number of persons requirement in Rule 51 is normally satisfied when 10 different individuals/households have made separate complaints within 90 days. Odor complaints from a "considerable" number of persons or businesses in the area would be a significant, adverse odor impact.

2.5 AIR QUALITY IMPACT ANALYSIS

2.5.1 Issue 1: Consistency with the Regional Air Quality Plan The Attainment Plan outlines SDAPCD's plans, and control measures designed to attain the NAAQS for ozone. In addition,the SDAPCD relies on the SIP, which includes the SDAPCD's plans and control measures for attaining the ozone NAAQS.These plans accommodate emissions from all sources, HELIX
Environmental Planning
17 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021
including natural sources,through implementation of control measures,where feasible, on stationary sources to attain the standards. Mobile sources are regulated by the CaIEPA and CARB, and the emissions and reduction strategies related to mobile sources are considered in the Attainment Plan and SIP.

The Attainment Plan relies on information from CARB and SANDAG, including projected growth in the San Diego County, and mobile, area, and all other source emissions to project future emissions and determine from that the strategies necessary for the reduction of stationary source emissions through regulatory controls. CARB's mobile source emission projections and SANDAG's growth projections are based on population, employment and transportation trends, and land use plans developed by the local governments. Accordingly, projects that propose development that is consistent with the population and employment growth anticipated by these land use plans would be consistent with the Attainment Plan. If a project proposes development that results in growth greater than that anticipated in the adopted land use plans and SANDAG's growth projections upon which the Attainment Plan is based,the project may conflict with the Attainment Plan and SIP and could have a potentially significant impact on air quality.This situation would warrant further analysis to determine if the project and the surrounding projects would exceed the growth projections used in the Attainment Plan for the specific subregional area.

The project site is designated as R-R and would require a General Plan Amendment to MDR to accommodate the 46 single family residences.The City has recognized the potential for the project site to accommodate denser residential land uses as is demonstrated in the parcel-specific analysis of potential housing sites that the City prepared to identify underutilized sites designated for residential or mixed-use development to meet the Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA)targets for the 2021- 2029 planning period.This analysis, which is also included as Appendix B to the City's General Plan Housing Element Update, did not allocate a residential density to the site, but did identify the parcel as suitable for residential development (City 2021).

Specifically,the RHNA for the 2021-2029 planning period assigned Vista a new housing need of 2,561 units. As stated in the Housing Element Update,to address the current shortfall in capacity for potential housing development the City will process zoning amendments for sufficient sites with appropriate densities during 2022-2024 to fully accommodate the City's remaining housing need. Rezoned sites will be selected from the candidate sites as identified in the parcel specific analysis and will comply with the requirements of Government Code §65583.2(h) and (i), that outlines the stipulations for suitable housing sites.

By developing an underutilized site and helping the City meet its housing needs, the project would be consistent with the growth assumption used to develop the region's Attainment Plan. As such, residential growth in the City as a result of the project, and the related changes in regional emissions, are accounted for in the SIP, which is crafted to bring the basin into attainment for all criteria pollutants.

Additionally, as detailed in Section 2.5.2, below,the project would not result in any construction or operational period emissions in exceedance of established thresholds.Therefore,the proposed project would not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the Attainment Plan and impacts would be less than significant.

HELIX
Environmental Planning
18 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021

2.5.2 Issue 2: Cumulatively Considerable Net Increase of Nonattainment Criteria Pollutants
The project would generate criteria pollutants in the short-term during construction and the long-term during operation.To determine whether a project would result in a cumulatively considerable net increase in criteria pollutant emissions that would violate an air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation, a project's emissions are evaluated based on the quantitative emission thresholds established by the SDAPCD (as shown in Table 7).

2.5.2.1 Construction Criteria Pollutant and Precursor Emissions The project's temporary construction emissions were estimated using CalEEMod as described in Section 2.3.The results of the modeling of the project's construction emissions of criteria pollutants and ozone precursors are shown in Table 8, Maximum Daily Construction Emissions.The data are presented as the maximum anticipated daily emissions for comparison with the SDAPCD thresholds.The complete CalEEMod output is provided in Appendix A to this report.

Table 8

MAXIMUM DAILY CONSTRUCTION EMISSIONS
Construction Phase Pollutant Emissions(pounds per day) VOC NOx CO Sox PM10 PM2.5
Demolition 2.6 25.7 20.6 <0.1 2.3 1.3 Site Preparation 3.2 33.1 19.7 <0.1 19.8 11.4 Grading 1.9 20.9 15.3 <0.1 8.2 4.3
Paving 1.1 11.1 14.6 <0.1 0.6 0.5
Utilities 1.4 14.1 15.4 <0.1 0.7 0.7
Building Construction-2022 1.7 15.6 16.4 <0.1 0.8 0.8 Building Construction-2023 1.6 14.4 16.2 <0.1 0.7 0.7 Architectural Coatings-2023 0.2 1.3 1.8 <0.1 0.1 0.1 Maximum Daily Emissions' 6.4 94.7 46.2 0.2 33.2 17.4 SDAPCD Thresholds 137 250 550 250 100 67 Exceed Thresholds? No No No No No No Source:CalEEMod; USEPA AP-42(output data is provided in Appendices A and B) 1 CalEEMod automatically calculates the maximum daily emissions based on overlapping phases for each year. For this project,the maximum daily emissions would occur in 2022 during the demolition,site preparation,and some grading activities overlap.

VOC=volatile organic compound;NOx=nitrogen oxides;CO=carbon monoxide;SOx=sulfur oxides; PMlo=particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter;PM2.5=particulate matter 2.5 microns or less in diameter; SDAPCD=San Diego County Air Pollution Control District
As shown in Table 8,the project's temporary construction-related criteria pollutant and precursor emissions would be below the SDAPCD's significance thresholds.Therefore,the project's construction activities would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria pollutants that would violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation.Therefore,the project's construction activities would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria pollutants that would violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation, and the impact would be less than significant.

HELIX
Environmental Planning
19 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021

2.5.2.2 Operation Criteria Pollutant and Precursor Emissions The project's long-term maximum daily and annual operational emissions were estimated using CaIEEMod as described in Section 2.3.The results of the modeling of the project's operational emissions of criteria pollutants and precursors are shown in Table 9, Operational Emissions.The data are presented as the maximum anticipated daily emissions and annual emissions for comparison with the SDAPCD thresholds.The complete CaIEEMod output is provided in Appendix A to this report.

Table 9

OPERATIONAL EMISSIONS
Pollutant Emissions
Source VOC NOx CO SOx PMio PM2.5
Daily Emissions(pounds per day)'
Area 1.9 <0.1 3.8 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Energy <0.1 0.3 0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Mobile 1.5 1.8 15.1 <0.1 3.6 1.0
Total Project Emissions' 3.4 2.2 19.0 <0.1 3.7 1.0 SDAPCD Daily Thresholds 137 250 550 250 100 67 Exceed Daily Threshold? No No No No No No Annual Emissions(tons per year)
Area 0.3 <0.1 0.3 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Energy <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1 <0.1
Mobile 0.3 0.3 2.7 <0.1 0.2 0.2
Total Project Emissions' 0.6 0.4 3.1 <0.1 0.2 0.2 SDAPCD Annual Thresholds 15 40 100 40 15 10 Exceed Annual Threshold? No No No No No No Source:CalEEMod(output data is provided in Appendix A)
1 Totals may not sum due to rounding.
z Winter emissions are very slightly higher for most substances.

VOC=volatile organic compound;NOX=nitrogen oxides;CO=carbon monoxide;SOX=sulfur oxides; PM10=particulate matter 10 microns or less in diameter;PMz.s=particulate matter 2.5 microns or less in diameter; SDAPCD=San Diego County Air Pollution Control District
As shown in Table 9 the project's long-term emissions of criteria pollutants and precursors would not exceed the SDAPCD daily or annual screening thresholds.Therefore,the project's operational activities would not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of criteria pollutants that would violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation, and the impact would be less than significant.

2.5.3 Issue 3: Impacts to Sensitive Receptors
Impacts to sensitive receptors are typically analyzed for operational period CO hotspots and exposure to TACs. An analysis of the project's potential to expose sensitive receptors to these pollutants is provided below.

2.5.3.1 Construction Diesel Particulate Matter Emissions Implementation of the project would result in the use of heavy-duty construction equipment, haul trucks, on-site generators, and construction worker vehicles.These vehicles and equipment could HELIX
Environmental Planning
20 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021
generate the TAC DPM. Generation of DPM from construction projects typically occurs in a localized area (e.g., at the project site)for a short period of time. Because construction activities and subsequent emissions vary depending on the phase of construction (e.g., grading, building construction),the construction-related emissions to which nearby receptors are exposed to would also vary throughout the construction period. During some equipment-intensive phases such as grading, construction-related emissions would be higher than other less equipment-intensive phases such as building construction.

Concentrations of mobile-source DPM emissions are typically reduced by 70 percent at approximately 500 feet (CARB 2005).

The dose (of TAC) to which receptors are exposed is the primary factor used to determine health risk.

Dose is a function of the concentration of a substance in the environment and the extent of exposure a person has with the substance; a longer exposure period to a fixed amount of emissions would result in higher health risks. Current models and methodologies for conducting cancer health risk assessments are associated with longer-term exposure periods (typically 30 years for individual residents based on guidance from OEHHA) and are best suited for evaluation of long duration TAC emissions with predictable schedules and locations.These assessment models and methodologies do not correlate well with the temporary and highly variable nature of construction activities. Cancer potency factors are based on animal lifetime studies or worker studies where there is long-term exposure to the carcinogenic agent.There is considerable uncertainty in trying to evaluate the cancer risk from projects that will only last a small fraction of a lifetime (OEHHA 2015). Considering this information,the highly dispersive nature of DPM, and the fact that construction activities would occur at various locations throughout the project site, it is not anticipated that construction of the project would expose sensitive receptors to substantial DPM concentrations.Therefore, this impact would be less than significant.

2.5.3.2 Construction Asbestos and Lead-Based Paint Emissions Asbestos dust and lead are known carcinogens classified as TACs by CARB. Both may be found in buildings constructed prior to 1979 when lead was used in some paint and asbestos was used as a component of some building materials such as walls, ceilings, insulation, or fireproofing. Demolition of existing structures erected prior to 1979 could result in the disturbance of asbestos and lead building materials resulting in emissions.

Airborne asbestos is regulated in accordance with the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP) asbestos regulations. Federal and state regulations prohibit emissions of asbestos from demolition or construction activities. Following identification of friable asbestos, federal and state Occupational and Safety Health Administration (OSHA) regulations require that asbestos trained, and certified abatement personnel perform asbestos abatement and that all asbestos-containing materials removed from on-site structures be hauled to a licensed receiving facility and disposed of under proper manifest by a transportation company certified to handle asbestos. In accordance with the SDAPCD Rule 1206,Asbestos Removal, Renovation, and Demolition, prior to commencement of demolition operations and prior to submitting the notifications required by Section (e) of Rule 1206, a facility survey shall be performed to determine the presence or absence of asbestos containing materials, regardless of the age of the facility(SDAPCD 2017). USEPA's Lead Renovation, Repair and Painting Rule (RRP Rule) requires that firms performing renovation, repair, and painting projects that disturb lead-based paint in structures built before 1978 have their firm certified by USEPA(or an authorized state), use certified renovators who are trained by USEPA-approved training providers, and follow lead-safe work practices.

These regulations specify precautions and safe work practices that must be followed to minimize the potential for release of asbestos fibers or lead dust and require notice to federal and/or local HELIX
Environmental Planning
21 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021
government agencies prior to beginning demolition or renovation that could disturb asbestos containing materials.Therefore, compliance with established regulations would ensure that potential impacts associated with asbestos containing materials and lead-based paint during project demolition activities would be less than significant.

2.5.3.3 Localized Carbon Monoxide Hotspots
A CO hotspot is an area of localized CO pollution caused by severe vehicle congestion on major roadways,typically near intersections.Vehicle exhaust is the primary source of CO. In an urban setting, the highest CO concentrations are generally found within close proximity to congested intersections.

Under typical meteorological conditions, CO concentrations tend to decrease as distance from the emissions source (i.e., congested intersection) increase. Project-generated traffic has the potential of contributing to localized "hot spots" of CO off site. Because CO is a byproduct of incomplete combustion, exhaust emissions are worse when fossil-fueled vehicles are operated inefficiently, such as in stop-and-go traffic or through heavily congested intersections, where the level of service (LOS) is severely degraded.

The CARB also recommends evaluation of the potential for the formation of locally high concentrations of CO, known as CO hot spots.A CO hot spot is a localized concentration of CO that is above the state or national 1-hour or 8-hour CO ambient air standards.To verify that the project would not cause or contribute to a violation of the 1-hour and 8-hour CO standards, an evaluation of the potential for CO hot spots at nearby intersections was conducted.

The project's Local Transportation Study (LLG 2021) evaluated whether there would be a change in the LOS at the intersections affected by the proposed Project.The potential for CO hot spots was evaluated based on the results of the transportation study.The Transportation Project-Level Carbon Monoxide Protocol (California Department of Transportation [Caltrans] 1998)was followed to determine whether a CO hot spot is likely to form due to project-generated traffic. In accordance with the Protocol, CO hot spots are typically evaluated when: (a)the LOS of an intersection decreases to an LOS E or worse; (b) signalization and/or channelization is added to an intersection; and (c) sensitive receptors such as residences, schools, hospitals, etc., are located in the vicinity of the affected intersection or roadway segment.

According to the transportation study, three intersections would operate at LOS E or F in the horizon year and experience an increase in delay from the Project:
• N Santa Fe Ave & Osborne Street—LOS E (AM)
• N Santa Fe Ave &Taylor Street— LOS E (AM)
• N Santa Fe Ave & Bobier Drive—LOS E/F (AM/PM)
Therefore, consistent with the CO Protocol, these findings indicate that further screening is required.

Although the SDAPCD does not,various air quality agencies in California have developed conservative screening methods. The screening methods of the Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD) are used for this Project because ambient CO concentrations within the SMAQMD jurisdiction are higher than for the Project area, as measured by CARB, resulting in a more conservative analysis.The SMAQMD guidance states that a project will not result in a significant impact to local CO concentrations if it meets all of the below criteria:

HELIX
Environmental Planning
22 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021
• The affected intersection carries less than 31,600 vehicles per hour; • The project does not contribute traffic to a tunnel, parking garage, bridge underpass, urban street canyon, below-grade roadway, or other location where horizontal or vertical mixing of air would be substantially limited; and
• The affected intersection, which includes a mix of vehicle types, is not anticipated to be substantially different from the County average, as identified by EMFAC or CalEEMod models (SMAQMD 2009).

The highest traffic volume at the affect intersections is estimated to be 4,510 vehicles at the intersection of North Santa Fe Avenue and East Bobier Drive during the AM peak hour(LLG 2021).The intersection is not located in a tunnel, urban canyon, or similar area that would limit the mixing of air, nor is the vehicle mix anticipated to be substantially different than the County average.There would be no potential for a CO hotspot or exceedance of State or federal CO ambient air quality standard because the maximum traffic volume would be substantially less than the 31,600 vehicles per hour screening level; because the congested intersection is located where mixing of air would not be limited; and because the vehicle mix would not be uncommon.The impact would be less than significant, and no mitigation measures are required.

2.5.4 Issue 4: Odors
As discussed above,the State of California Health and Safety Code Sections 41700 and 41705, and SDAPCD Rule 51, prohibit emissions from any source whatsoever in such quantities of air contaminants or other material which cause injury, detriment, nuisance, or annoyance to the public health or damage to property. Any unreasonable odor discernible at the property line of the project site will be considered a significant odor impact.

According to the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook, land uses associated with odor complaints include agricultural uses, wastewater treatment plants, food processing plants, chemical plants, composting activities, refineries, landfills, dairies, and fiberglass molding operations (SCAQMD 1993).

The project, involving a residential development, would not include any of these uses nor are there any of these land uses in the project vicinity.

Emissions from construction equipment, such as diesel exhaust, and VOCs from architectural coatings and paving activities may generate odors; however,these odors would be temporary, intermittent, and not expected to affect a substantial number of people. Additionally, noxious odors would be confined to the immediate vicinity of construction equipment. By the time such emissions reach any sensitive receptor sites,they would be diluted to well below any level of air quality concern. Furthermore, short-term construction-related odors are expected to cease upon the drying or hardening of the odor- producing materials. Long-term operation of the project would not be a substantial source of objectionable odors.Therefore,the project would not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people, and the impact would be less than significant.

HELIX
Environmental Planning
23 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021

3.0 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS

3.1 GHG SETTING

3.1.1 Climate Change Overview
Global climate change refers to changes in average climatic conditions on Earth including temperature, wind patterns, precipitation, and storms. Global temperatures are moderated by atmospheric gases.

These gases are commonly referred to as GHGs because they function like a greenhouse by letting sunlight in but preventing heat from escaping,thus warming the Earth's atmosphere.

GHGs are emitted by natural processes and human (anthropogenic) activities.Anthropogenic GHG emissions are primarily associated with: (1)the burning of fossil fuels during motorized transport, electricity generation, natural gas consumption, industrial activity, manufacturing, and other activities; (2) deforestation; (3) agricultural activity; and (4) solid waste decomposition.

The temperature record shows a decades-long trend of warming,with 2020 ranked as the warmest year on record with an increase of 1.84 degrees Fahrenheit compared to the 1951-1980 average (National Aeronautics and Space Administration [NASA] 2021). GHG emissions from human activities are the most significant driver of observed climate change since the mid-201h century(United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [IPCC] 2021).The IPCC constructed several emission trajectories of GHGs needed to stabilize global temperatures and climate change impacts.The statistical models show a "high confidence"that temperature increase caused by anthropogenic GHG emissions could be kept to less than two degrees Celsius relative to preindustrial levels if atmospheric concentrations are stabilized at about 450 parts per million (ppm) carbon dioxide equivalent (CO2e) by the year 2100 (IPCC 2021).

3.1.2 Greenhouse Gases
The GHGs defined under California's Assembly Bill (AB) 32 include carbon dioxide (CO2), methane (CH4), nitrous oxide (N20), hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), perfluorocarbons (PFCs), and sulfur hexafluoride (SF6).

Carbon Dioxide. CO2 is the most important and common anthropogenic GHG. CO2 is an odorless, colorless GHG. Natural sources include the decomposition of dead organic matter; respiration of bacteria, plants, animals, and fungi; evaporation from oceans; and volcanic outgassing. Anthropogenic sources of CO2 include burning fuels, such as coal, oil, natural gas, and wood. Data from ice cores indicate that CO2 concentrations remained steady prior to the current period for approximately 10,000 years.The atmospheric CO2 concentration in 2010 was 390 ppm, 39 percent above the concentration at the start of the Industrial Revolution (about 280 ppm in 1750).As of November 2021, the CO2 concentration exceeded 415 ppm (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [NOAA] 2021).

Methane. CH4 is the main component of natural gas used in homes. A natural source of methane is from the decay of organic matter. Geological deposits known as natural gas fields contain methane, which is extracted for fuel. Other sources are from decay of organic material in landfills, fermentation of manure, and cattle digestion.

HELIX
Environmental Planning
24 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021
Nitrous Oxide. N20 is produced by both natural and human-related sources. N20 is emitted during agricultural and industrial activities, as well as during the combustion of fossil fuels and solid waste.

Primary human-related sources of N20 are agricultural soil management, animal manure management, sewage treatment, mobile and stationary combustion of fossil fuel, adipic (fatty) acid production, and nitric acid production.

Hydrofluorocarbons. Fluorocarbons are gases formed synthetically by replacing all hydrogen atoms in methane or ethane with chlorine and/or fluorine atoms. Chlorofluorocarbons are nontoxic, nonflammable, insoluble, and chemically nonreactive in the troposphere (the level of air at Earth's surface). Chlorofluorocarbons were first synthesized in 1928 for use as refrigerants, aerosol propellants, and cleaning solvents. Because hydrofluorocarbons destroy stratospheric ozone, their production was stopped as required by the 1989 Montreal Protocol.

Sulfur Hexafluoride. SF6 is an inorganic, odorless, colorless, nontoxic, nonflammable gas. SF6 is used for insulation in electric power transmission and distribution equipment, in the magnesium industry, in semi-conductor manufacturing, and as a tracer gas for leak detection.

GHGs have long atmospheric lifetimes that range from one year to several thousand years. Long atmospheric lifetimes allow for GHG emissions to disperse around the globe. Because GHG emissions vary widely in the power of their climatic effects, climate scientists have established a unit called global warming potential (GWP).The GWP of a gas is a measure of both potency and lifespan in the atmosphere as compared to CO2. For example, because methane and N20 are approximately 29 and 273 times more powerful than CO2, respectively, in their ability to trap heat in the atmosphere,they have GWPs of 29 and 771, respectively(CO2 has a GWP of 1). CO2e is a quantity that enables all GHG emissions to be considered as a group despite their varying GWP.The GWP of each GHG is multiplied by the prevalence of that gas to produce CO2e.

Historically, GHG emission inventories have been calculated using the GWPs from the IPCC's Second Assessment Report (SAR). In 2007, IPCC updated the GWP values based on the latest science at the time in its Fourth Assessment Report(AR4). In 2021, IPCC again updated the GWP values based on the latest science in its Sixth Assessment Report(AR6) (IPCC 2021).

By applying the GWP ratios, project related CO2e emissions can be tabulated in metric tons per year.

Typically,the GWP ratio corresponding to the warming potential of CO2 over a 100-year period is used as a baseline.The atmospheric lifetime and GWP of selected GHGs are summarized in Table 10, Global Warming Potentials and Atmospheric Lifetimes.

HELIX
Environmental Planning
25 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021
Table 10

GLOBAL WARMING POTENTIALS AND ATMOSPHERIC LIFETIMES
Greenhouse Gas Atmospheric Lifetime Global Warming Potential (years) (100-year time horizon)
Carbon Dioxide(CO2) 50-200 1
Methane(CH4) 12 27.2-29.8
Nitrous Oxide(N20) 109 273
HFC-32 5.4 771
HFC-324a 14 1,526
CFC-11 52 8,321
PFC-14 50,000 7,380
Sulfur Hexafluoride(SF6) 3,200 22,800
Source:IPCC 2021
HFC:hydrofluorocarbon; PFC:perfluorocarbon

3.2 GHG REGULATORY FRAMEWORK
All levels of government have some responsibility for the protection of air quality, and each level (federal, State, and regional/local) has specific responsibilities relating to air quality regulation. GHG emissions and the regulation of GHGs is a relatively new component of air quality management.

3.2.1 Federal GHG Regulations

3.2.1.1 Federal Clean Air Act
The U.S. Supreme Court ruled on April 2, 2007, in Massachusetts v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency that CO2 is an air pollutant, as defined under the CAA, and that the USEPA has the authority to regulate emissions of GHGs.The USEPA announced that GHGs (including CO2, CH4, N20, HFC, PFC, and SF6)threaten the public health and welfare of the American people.This action was a prerequisite to finalizing the USEPA's GHG emissions standards for light-duty vehicles, which were jointly proposed by the USEPA and the United States Department of Transportation's National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).The standards were established on April 1, 2010 for 2012 through 2016 model year vehicles and on October 15, 2012 for 2017 through 2025 model year vehicles (USEPA and NHTSA 2012).

3.2.1.2 Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standards and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards
The USEPA and the NHTSA worked together on developing a national program of regulations to reduce GHG emissions and to improve fuel economy of light-duty vehicles.The USEPA established the first-ever national GHG emissions standards under the CAA, and the NHTSA established CAFE standards under the Energy Policy and Conservation Act. On April 1, 2010,the USEPA and NHTSA announced a joint Final Rulemaking that established standards for 2012 through 2016 model year vehicles.This was followed up on October 15, 2012, when the agencies issued a Final Rulemaking with standards for model years 2017 through 2025. On March 3, 2020, the agencies released the final Safer Affordable Fuel-Efficient Vehicles Rule for Model Years 2021-2026 Passenger Cars and Light Trucks (SAFE Vehicles Rule).The purpose of the SAFE Vehicles Rule is "to correct the national automobile fuel economy and GHG emissions standards to give the American people greater access to safer, more affordable vehicles that are cleaner HELIX
Environmental Planning
26 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021
for the environment."The direct effect of the rule is to eliminate the standards that were put in place to gradually raise average fuel economy for passenger cars and light trucks under test conditions from 37 miles per gallon (mpg) in 2020 to 50 mpg in 2025.The new SAFE Vehicles Rule freezes the average fuel economy level standards indefinitely at the 2020 levels.The new SAFE Vehicles Rule also results in the withdraw of the waiver previously provided to California for that State's GHG and zero emissions vehicle (ZEV) programs under Section 209 of the CAA(USEPA and NHTSA 2020).The combined USEPA GHG standards and NHTSA CAFE standards resolve previously conflicting requirements under both federal programs and the standards of the State of California and other states that have adopted the California standards.The SAFE Vehicles Rule Part I (SAFE-1), which withdraws the waiver, was published in September 2019 and Part II (SAFE-2), which finalizes the regulation, was published in April 2020. On April 26, 2021, the USEPA published the Notice of Reconsideration of Previous Withdrawal of a Waiver for California's Advanced Clean Car Program.The purpose of this Notice of Reconsideration is to seek comment on a number of issues in the SAFE-1 action including:
• Whether it was proper for the USEPA to reconsider a previously issued CAA waiver; • Whether USEPA's actions to withdraw California's waiver was appropriate; • Whether the SAFE-1 interpretation of the CAA that enabled USEPA to withdraw California's waiver was appropriate; and/or
• Whether the SAFE-1 interpretation of CAA Section 177 that could disallow other states' ability to adopt California GHG emission standards was appropriate.

3.2.2 California GHG Regulations
There are numerous State plans, policies, regulations, and laws related to GHG emissions and global climate change. Following is a discussion of some of these plans, policies, and regulations that (1) establish overall State policies and GHG emission reduction targets; (2) require State or local actions that result in direct or indirect GHG emission reductions for the proposed project; and (3) require CEQA analysis of GHG emissions.

3.2.2.1 California Energy Code
CCR Title 24 Part 6: California's Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings were first established in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California's energy consumption. Energy-efficient buildings require less electricity, natural gas, and other fuels. Electricity production from fossil fuels and on-site fuel combustion (typically for space and water heating) results in GHG emissions.

The Title 24 standards are updated approximately every three years to allow consideration and possible incorporation of new energy efficiency technologies and methods.The 2019 Title 24 standards went into effect on January 1, 2020.The 2019 update to the Building Energy Efficiency Standards focuses on several key areas to improve the energy efficiency of newly constructed buildings and additions and alterations to existing buildings.The most significant efficiency improvements to the residential standards are a requirement for onsite photovoltaic electricity generation (e.g., solar panels)for most new or modified residential building up to three stories high (California Energy Commission [CEC] 2019).

HELIX
Environmental Planning
27 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021
The standards are divided into three basic sets. First,there is a basic set of mandatory requirements that apply to all buildings. Second, there is a set of performance standards—the energy budgets—that vary by climate zone (of which there are 16 in California) and building type; thus,the standards are tailored to local conditions. Finally,the third set constitutes an alternative to the performance standards, which is a set of prescriptive packages that are basically a recipe or a checklist compliance approach.

3.2.2.2 California Green Building Standards Code
The California Green Building Standards Code (CALGreen; CCR Title 24, Part 11) is a code with mandatory requirements for all nonresidential buildings (including industrial buildings) and residential buildings for which no other state agency has authority to adopt green building standards.The current 2019 Standards for new construction of, and additions and alterations to, residential and nonresidential buildings went into effect on January 1, 2020 (California Building Standards Commission [CBSC] 2019).

The development of CALGreen is intended to (1) cause a reduction in GHG emissions from buildings; (2) promote environmentally responsible, cost-effective, healthier places to live and work; (3) reduce energy and water consumption; and (4) respond to the directives by the Governor. In short,the code is established to reduce construction waste; make buildings more efficient in the use of materials and energy; and reduce environmental impact during and after construction.

CALGreen contains requirements for storm water control during construction; construction waste reduction; indoor water use reduction; material selection; natural resource conservation; site irrigation conservation; and more.The code provides for design options allowing the designer to determine how best to achieve compliance for a given site or building condition.The code also requires building commissioning, which is a process for the verification that all building systems, like heating and cooling equipment and lighting systems, are functioning at their maximum efficiency.

3.2.2.3 Executive Order S-3-05
On June 1, 2005, Executive Order(EO) S-3-05 proclaimed that California is vulnerable to climate change impacts. It declared that increased temperatures could reduce snowpack in the Sierra Nevada,further exacerbate California's air quality problems, and potentially cause a rise in sea levels.To avoid or reduce climate change impacts, EO S-3-05 calls for a reduction in GHG emissions to the year 2000 level by 2010, to year 1990 levels by 2020, and to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.

3.2.2.4 Assembly Bill 32 — Global Warming Solution Act of 2006 The California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006,widely known as AB 32, requires that the CARB develop and enforce regulations for the reporting and verification of statewide GHG emissions. CARB is directed to set a GHG emission limit, based on 1990 levels,to be achieved by 2020.The bill requires CARB to adopt rules and regulations in an open public process to achieve the maximum technologically feasible and cost-effective GHG emission reductions.

3.2.2.5 Senate Bill 375
Senate Bill (SB) 375, the Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008,supports the State's climate action goals to reduce GHG emissions through coordinated transportation and land use planning with the goal of more sustainable communities.

HELIX
Environmental Planning
28 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021
Under the Sustainable Communities Act, CARB sets regional targets for GHG emissions reductions from passenger vehicle use. In 2010, CARB established these targets for 2020 and 2035 for each region covered by one of the State's metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs). CARB periodically reviews and updates the targets, as needed.

Each of California's MPOs must prepare a Sustainable Communities Strategy (SCS) as an integral part of its regional transportation plan (RTP).The SCS contains land use, housing, and transportation strategies that, if implemented, would allow the region to meet its GHG emission reduction targets. Once adopted by the MPO,the RTP/SCS guides the transportation policies and investments for the region. CARB must review the adopted SCS to confirm and accept the MPO's determination that the SCS, if implemented, would meet the regional GHG targets. If the combination of measures in the SCS would not meet the regional targets,the MPO must prepare a separate alternative planning strategy(APS)to meet the targets.The APS is not a part of the RTP. Qualified projects consistent with an approved SCS or Alternative Planning Strategy categorized as "transit priority projects"would receive incentives to streamline CEQA processing.

The SANDAG is San Diego's local MPO and has responded to the requirements of SB 375 with the preparation of a regional transportation plan/sustainable communities strategy.San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan (SANDAG 2015) is discussed in greater detail in Section 3.2.3, below.

3.2.2.6 Senate Bill 743
On September 27, 2013, California Governor Jerry Brown signed SB 743 into law and started a process that changes transportation impact analysis as part of CEQA compliance.These 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 for land use projects and plans in California. Further, parking impacts will not be considered significant impacts on the environment for select development projects within infill areas with nearby frequent transit service.According to the legislative intent contained in SB 743,these changes to current practice were necessary to balance the needs of congestion management more appropriately with statewide goals related to infill development, promotion of public health through active transportation, and reduction of GHG emissions.

3.2.2.7 Senate Bill 97
SB 97 required the Governor's Office of Planning and Research to develop recommended amendments to the State CEQA Guidelines for addressing GHG emissions, including the effects associated with transportation and energy consumption.The amendments became effective on March 18, 2010.

3.2.2.8 Executive Order B-30-15
On April 29, 2015, EO B-30-15 established a California GHG emission reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030.The EO aligns California's GHG emission reduction targets with those of leading international governments, including the 28 nation European Union. California is on track to meet or exceed the target of reducing GHG emissions to 1990 levels by 2020, as established in AB 32.

California's new emission reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 will make it possible to reach the goal established by EO S-3-05 of reducing emissions 80 percent under 1990 levels by 2050.

HELIX
Environmental Planning
29 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021

3.2.2.9 Senate Bill 32 and Assembly Bill 197
As a follow-up to AB 32 and in response to EO-B-30-15, SIB 32 was passed by the California legislature in August 2016 to codify the EO's California GHG emission reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030 and requires the State to invest in the communities most affected by climate change.AB 197 establishes a legislative committee on climate change policies to help continue the State's activities to reduce GHG emissions.

3.2.2.10 Assembly Bill 1493 —Vehicular Emissions of Greenhouse Gases AB 1493 (Pavley) requires that CARB develop and adopt regulations that achieve "the maximum feasible reduction of GHGs emitted by passenger vehicles and light-duty truck and other vehicles determined by CARB to be vehicles whose primary use is noncommercial personal transportation in the State." On September 24, 2009, CARB adopted amendments to the Pavley regulations that intend to reduce GHG emissions in new passenger vehicles from 2009 through 2016.The amendments bind California's enforcement of AB 1493 (starting in 2009),while providing vehicle manufacturers with new compliance flexibility.The amendments also prepare California to merge its rules with the federal CAFE rules for passenger vehicles (CARB 2021d). In January 2012, CARB approved a new emissions-control program for model years 2017 through 2025.The program combines the control of smog, soot, and global warming gases and requirements for greater numbers of zero-emission vehicles into a single packet of standards called Advanced Clean Cars(CARB 2021d).

3.2.2.11 Assembly Bill 341
The State legislature enacted AB 341 (California Public Resource Code Section 42649.2), increasing the solid waste diversion target to 75 percent statewide.AB 341 requires all businesses and public entities that generate 4 cubic yards or more of waste per week to have a recycling program in place.The final regulation was approved by the Office of Administrative Law on May 7, 2012 and went into effect on July 1, 2012.

3.2.2.12 Executive Order S-01-07 — Low Carbon Fuel Standard This EO, signed by Governor Schwarzenegger on January 18, 2007, directs that a statewide goal be established to reduce the carbon intensity of California's transportation fuels by at least 10 percent by the year 2020. It orders that a Low Carbon Fuel Standard (LCFS)for transportation fuels be established for California and directs CARB to determine whether a LCFS can be adopted as a discrete early action measure pursuant to AB 32. CARB approved the LCFS as a discrete early action item with a regulation adopted and implemented in April 2010. Although challenged in 2011, the Ninth Circuit reversed the District Court's opinion and rejected arguments that implementing LCFS violates the interstate commerce clause in September 2013.As a result, CARB continues to implement the LCFS statewide.

3.2.2.13 California Air Resources Board: Climate Change Scoping Plan On December 11, 2008, CARB adopted the Scoping Plan (CARB 2008) as directed by AB 32.The Scoping Plan proposes a set of actions designed to reduce overall GHG emissions in California to the levels required by AB 32. Measures applicable to development projects include those related to energy- efficiency building and appliance standards,the use of renewable sources for electricity generation, regional transportation targets, and green building strategy. Relative to transportation,the 2008 Scoping Plan includes nine measures or recommended actions related to reducing VMT and vehicle GHG HELIX
Environmental Planning
30 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021
emissions through fuel and efficiency measures.These measures would be implemented statewide rather than on a project-by-project basis.

In response to EO B-30-15 and SB 32, all state agencies with jurisdiction over sources of GHG emissions were directed to implement measures to achieve reductions of GHG emissions to meet the 2030 and 2050 targets. CARB was directed to update the Scoping Plan to reflect the 2030 target (CARB 2014).The mid-term target is critical to help frame the suite of policy measures, regulations, planning efforts, and investments in clean technologies and infrastructure needed to continue driving down emissions. In December 2017, CARB adopted the 2017 Climate Change Scaping Plan Update, the Strategy for Achieving California's 2030 Greenhouse Gas Target, to reflect the 2030 target set by EO B-30-15 and codified by SB 32 (CARB 2017). Currently, CARB is gathering information to prepare an updated Scoping Plan for 2022, which will be designed to achieving carbon neutrality by 2045 (CARB 2021c).

3.2.3 Regional GHG Policies and Plans

3.2.3.1 San Diego Association of Government's Regional Plan San Diego Forward: The Regional Plan (Regional Plan; SANDAG 2015) is the long-range planning document developed to address the region's housing, economic,transportation, environmental, and overall quality-of-life needs.The purpose is to provide direction and guidance on future regional growth (i.e., the location of new residential and non-residential land uses) and transportation patterns throughout the region as stipulated under SB 375.The Regional Plan establishes a planning framework and implementation actions that increase the region's sustainability and encourage "smart growth while preserving natural resources and limiting urban sprawl."The Regional Plan encourages local jurisdictions including the County of San Diego to increase residential and employment concentrations in areas with the best existing and future transit connections, and to preserve important open spaces.The focus is on implementation of basic smart growth principles designed to strengthen the integration of land use and transportation. General urban form goals, policies, and objectives are summarized as follows:
• Mix compatible uses.
• Take advantage of compact building design.
• Create a range of housing opportunities and choices. • Create walkable neighborhoods.
• Foster distinctive, attractive communities with a strong sense of place. • Preserve open space, natural beauty, and critical environmental areas. • Strengthen and direct development towards existing communities. • Provide a variety of transportation choices.
• Make development decisions predictable,fair, and cost-effective. • Encourage community and stakeholder collaboration in development decisions.

The Regional Plan also addresses border issues, providing an important guideline for communities that have borders with Mexico. In this case,the goal is to create a regional community where San Diego, its neighboring counties,tribal governments, and northern Baja California mutually benefit from San Diego's varied resources and international location.

HELIX
Environmental Planning
31 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021

3.2.4 Local Greenhouse Gas Plans

3.2.4.1 City of Vista Climate Action Plan
The City of Vista (City) has developed the Climate Action Plan (CAP)to address the issues of climate change as it relates to growth in the City, and to protect the environment for visitors and residents alike (City 2012).The CAP was adopted in December of 2013.The intent of the plan is to reduce traffic congestion and solid waste generation, improve air quality, increase safety for pedestrians and cyclists, and encourage more efficient use of energy and water. Additionally,this CAP requires meaningful GHG reductions, in accordance with the guidelines of AB 32, the Governor's EO S-3-05, and CEQA guidelines, which will help improve the quality of life in the City.The implementation of the CAP will also help lead agencies to assess cumulative impacts of a project and provide a means for future projects to address GHG impacts under CEQA.A lead agency may conclude that a project's GHG impact is not cumulatively significant if the project demonstrates consistency with the City's CAP (CEQA Guidelines Section 15183.5[h][3]), thereby reducing overall project costs.

Through the CAP,the City has established goals and policies that incorporate environmental responsibility into its daily management of residential, commercial and industrial growth, education, energy and water use, air quality,transportation,waste reduction, economic development and open space and natural habitats to further their commitment.The development of the CAP coincides with City's General Plan Update.The CAP includes a community-wide emissions inventory calculated using the socioeconomic growth rates from the General Plan Update.

Various state policies have enacted programs that will also contribute to reduced GHG emissions in the City by the year 2020. Some of these policies include updated building codes for energy efficiency,the low carbon fuel standard, Pavley vehicle emissions standards and the Renewables Portfolio Standard for utility companies. By supporting the state in the implementation of these measures,the City will experience substantial GHG emissions reductions. In order to reach the 2020 reduction target,the City has included additional local reduction measures in the CAP which encourage energy efficiency and renewable energy in buildings,transit-oriented planning, water conservation and increase waste diversion.

3.2.4.2 City of Vista Municipal Code
The City Municipal Code, Chapter 13.17, Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling, requires all construction, demolition, and remolded projects within the City,with a total project value equal to or greater than $75,000 to divert at least 50 percent of the total construction and demolition debris generated by the project via reuse or recycling (City 2011).

3.3 GHG EXISTING CONDITIONS

3.3.1 Worldwide and National GHG Inventory
In 2018,total GHG emissions worldwide were estimated at 48,900 million metric tons (MMT) of CO2e emissions (Climate Watch 2021).The U.S. contributed the second largest portion (12 percent) of global GHG emissions in 2018 with 5,790 MMT CO2e, of which 82 percent was CO2 emission (Climate Watch 2021). On a national level, 91 percent of GHG emissions were associated with transportation and electricity generation (Climate Watch 2021).

HELIX
Environmental Planning
32 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021

3.3.2 State GHG Inventories
CARB performed statewide inventories for the years 1990 to 2019, as shown in Table 11, California State Greenhouse Gas Emissions by Sector.The inventory is divided into six broad sectors of economic activity:
agriculture, commercial, electricity generation, industrial, residential, and transportation. Emissions are quantified in MMT CO2e.

As shown in Table 11, statewide GHG source emissions totaled 431 MMT CO2e in 1990,471 MMT CO2e in 2000,449 MMT CO2e in 2010, and 418 MMT CO2e in 2019.Transportation-related emissions consistently contribute the most GHG emissions,followed by electricity generation and industrial emissions.

Table 11

CALIFORNIA GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS BY SECTOR
1990 2000 2010 2019
Sector Emissions Emissions Emissions Emissions
(MMT CO2e) (MMT CO2e) (MMT CO2e) (MMT CO2e) Agriculture and Forestry 18.9(4%) 31.0(7%) 33.7(8%) 31.8(8%) Commercial 14.4(3%) 14.1 (3%) 20.1 (4%) 24.2(6%) Electricity Generation 110.5(26%) 105.4(22%) 90.6(20%) 59.0(14%) Industrial 105.3(24%) 105.8(22%) 101.8(23%) 99.9(24%) Residential 29.7(7%) 31.7(7%) 32.1 (7%) 33.0(8%) Transportation 150.E(35%) 183.2 (39%) 170.2 (38%) 170.3(41%) Unspecified Remaining 1.3 (<1%) 0.0(0%) 0.0(0%) 0.0(0%) TOTAL 430.7 471.1 448.5 418.1
Source:CARB 2007 and CARB 2021e
MMT=million metric tons;CO2e=carbon dioxide equivalent

3.3.3 Regional GHG Inventory
A San Diego regional emissions inventory that was prepared for the San Diego County Climate Action Plan accounted for the unique characteristics of the region (San Diego County 2018).The 2014 emissions inventory for San Diego is presented in Table 12,San Diego County GHG Emissions by Sector.The sectors included in this inventory are somewhat different from those in the statewide inventory. Similar to the statewide emissions,transportation related GHG emissions contributed the most countywide, followed by emissions associated with energy use.

HELIX
Environmental Planning
33 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021
Table 12

SAN DIEGO COUNTY GHG EMISSIONS BY SECTOR
Sector 2014 Emissions
MMT CO2e(%total)'
On-Road Transportation 1.46(45%)
Electricity 0.76(24%)
Solid Waste 0.34(11%)
Natural Gas Consumption 0.29(9%)
Agriculture 0.16(5%)
Water 0.13(4%)
Off-Road Transportation 0.04(1%)
Wastewater 0.02(1%)
Propane 0.01(<0.5%)
TOTAL 3.21
Source:San Diego County 2018 Climate Action Plan.2014 emissions data ' Percentages may not total 100 due to rounding.

MMT=million metric tons;CO2e=carbon dioxide equivalent
A Climate Action Plan (CAP) was prepared for the City of Vista in 2012.The CAP includes the GHG emissions by sector for 2005 and the percent change from 2005 to 2020, as shown in Table 13, City of Vista Emissions by Sector.

Table 13

CITY OF VISTA GHG EMISSIONS BY SECTOR
Sector 2005 Emissions Percent change from
MMT CO2e(%total)' 2005 to 2020
On-Road Transportation 0.31 (57%) 22%
Commercial Electricity and Natural Gas Consumption 0.11 (20%) 5% Residential Electricity and Natural Gas Consumption 0.09(16%) 2% Solid Waste 0.03(6%) 6%
Wastewater 0.01(1%) 6%
TOTAL 0.55 14%
Source:City of Vista 2012 Climate Action Plan
i Percentages may not total 100 due to rounding.

MMT=million metric tons;CO2e=carbon dioxide equivalent

3.4 GHG METHODOLOGY
The project's GHG emissions were calculated using CalEEMod, as described in Section 2.3.

3.4.1 Construction GHG Emissions
Construction of the project would result in emissions of GHGs from the use of diesel-powered equipment,from worker vehicles traveling to and from the project site, and from trucks hauling material to and from the project site.The anticipated construction equipment and vehicle trips required for project construction are described in Section 2.3.

HELIX
Environmental Planning
34 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021

3.4.2 Operational GHG Emissions

3.4.2.1 Area Sources
This CalEEMod module estimates the GHG emissions that would occur from the use of hearths (e.g., wood or gas fireplaces and wood stoves), and landscaping equipment.This module also estimates emissions due to use of consumer products and architectural coatings that have volatile organic compounds (VOCs); however, these sources do not emit GHGs.The project will not include wood burning or natural gas fireplaces or woodstoves.

The use of landscape equipment emits GHGs associated with the equipment's fuel combustion.

CalEEMod estimates the number and type of equipment needed based on the number of summer days given the project's location as entered in the project characteristics module.The model defaults for landscaping equipment were assumed.

3.4.2.2 Vehicular (Mobile) Sources
Operational emissions from mobile source emissions are associated with project-related vehicle trip generation and trip length. Based on the trip generation rate from the Local Transportation Study prepared for the project,the project would generate 460 average daily trips (LLG 2021). All CalEEMod default trip purposes and distances were used in the modeling.

3.4.2.3 Energy Sources
GHGs are emitted as a result of activities in buildings for which electricity and natural gas are used as energy sources. GHGs are generated during the generation of electricity from fossil fuels off-site in power plants.These emissions are considered indirect and are calculated in CalEEMod as associated with a building's operation.

CalEEMod default energy values are based on the CEC-sponsored California Commercial End Use Survey (CEUS) and Residential Appliance Saturation Survey(RASS) studies, which identify energy use by building type and climate zone. Each land use type input to the land use module is mapped in the energy module to the appropriate CEUS and RASS building type.

Energy source emissions were estimated assuming implementation of energy-reducing project design features to comply with the 2019 Title 24 standards which include a requirement for new residential buildings with three or fewer residential floors to have on-site generation of electricity through photovoltaic(solar) panels.The project's residential buildings (46 dwelling units)total approximately 104,408 square feet of conditioned space and would require solar panels producing a minimum of 112.6 kilowatts (kW).2 The annual electricity generated by a rooftop mounted solar power system varies by the climate, amount of sunlight available per day,the pitch and orientation of the roof, and the efficiency of the electrical transmission. Assuming a capacity factor(CF) of 20%,which accounts for climate, daylight hours, roof pitch and orientation, and transmission loss,the power produced by the 2 Per the 2019 Title 24 residential building energy efficiency requirements,the minimum solar electrical generation required is calculated by kW=(CFA x A)/1000+(DU * B),where CFA is the conditioned floor area,A is 0.572(climate zone 13[Western San Diego County]adjustment factor), DU is the total number of dwelling units,and B is 1.15(climate zone 13 dwelling unit factor).

HELIX
Environmental Planning
35 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021
project's solar panels would be approximately 197,313 kilowatt-hours(kWhr) per year.3 The complete solar power requirement calculations are included with in Appendix B to this report.

3.4.2.4 Solid Waste Sources
The disposal of solid waste produces GHG emissions from anaerobic decomposition in landfills, incineration, and transportation of waste. CalEEMod determines the GHG emissions associated with disposal of solid waste into landfills. Portions of these emissions are biogenic. CalEEMod methods for quantifying GHG emissions from solid waste are based on the IPCC method using the degradable organic content of waste. A conservative 25 percent solid waste diversion rate was applied in CalEEMod to the new construction and redevelopment that would occur to account for mandatory compliance with AB 341.

3.4.2.5 Water and Wastewater Sources
The amount of water used, and wastewater generated, by a project has indirect GHG emissions associated with it.These emissions are a result of the energy used to supply, distribute, and treat the water and wastewater. In addition to the indirect GHG emissions associated with energy use, wastewater treatment can directly emit both methane and nitrous oxide.

CalEEMod uses default electricity intensity values for various phases of supplying and treating water from CEC's Refining Estimates of Water-Related Energy Use in California.The model estimates water/wastewater emissions by multiplying the total projected water/wastewater demand by the applicable water electricity intensities and by the utility intensity GHG factors.

The default CalEEMod water use assumptions were used for the GHG emissions estimates. For the project's water and wastewater GHG emissions, an overall 20 percent reduction in water use was applied in the CalEEMod mitigation section to account for recent requirements of CALGreen.

3.5 GHG SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA
Given the relatively small levels of emissions generated by a typical project in relationship to the total amount of GHG emissions generated on a national or global basis, individual development projects are not expected to result in significant, direct impacts with respect to climate change. However, considering the magnitude of the impact of GHG emissions on the global climate, GHG emissions from new development could result in significant, cumulative impacts with respect to climate change.Thus, the potential for a significant GHG impact is limited to cumulative impacts.

According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a project would have a significant environmental impact if it would:

1. Generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly,that may have a significant impact on the environment?
3 Solar kWhr per year can be calculated by:kWhr/year=Power Output(kW)x 24 hours/day x 365 days/year x CF,where CF is a capacity factor which accounts for climate,daylight hours,roof pitch and orientation,and transmission loss. For typical California residential systems,the CF can range between 17%and 22.5%.A CF of 20%was used in the project calculations.

HELIX
Environmental Planning
36 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021

2. Conflict with an applicable plan, policy, or regulation adopted for the purpose of reducing the emissions of GHGs?
The determination of significance is governed by CEQA Guidelines 15064.4, entitled "Determining the Significance of Impacts from Greenhouse Gas Emissions." CEQA Guidelines 15064.4(a) states, "[t]he determination of the significance of greenhouse gas emissions calls for a careful judgment by the lead agency consistent with the provisions in section 15064. A lead agency should make a good-faith effort, based to the extent possible on scientific and factual data,to describe, calculate or estimate the amount of greenhouse gas emissions resulting from a project.A lead agency shall have discretion to determine, in the context of a particular project,whether to ... [use a quantitative model or qualitative model]" (emphasis added). In turn, CEQA Guidelines 15064.4(b) clarifies that a lead agency should consider "Whether the project emissions exceed a threshold of significance that the lead agency determines applies to the project."Therefore, consistent with CEQA Guidelines 15064.4,the GHG analysis for the project appropriately relies upon a threshold based on the exercise of careful judgement and believed to be appropriate in the context of this particular project.

Following the methods described by the California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) in their report entitled "CEQA&Climate Change," dated January 2008,the City conducted a review of projects within the City to determine a 90 percent capture rate.As identified in the City's Interim Guidance Memorandum on Assessing GHG Emissions from Projects Subject to CEQA, it was determined that a level of 1,185 MT CO2e would capture 90 percent of the City's emissions that are attributable to development projects (City 2016).To determine whether the project is making a fair share contribution, and therefore substantial progress,towards meeting 2020 GHG emission targets set forth in the City's CAP,the project's emissions were evaluated based on this level.The City has determined that a fair share is provided if the project does not interfere with the State's implementation of GHG reduction programs identified for residential and commercial development. Provided the project is consistent with applicable plans, policies, and regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions, it would not result in a significant impact.

The interim threshold was developed to meet the statewide GHG emissions reduction target of 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2020 and be on track to meet the 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050 target in accordance with SB 32 and EO S-3-05.The City has not adopted guidance or revised thresholds to account for GHG reduction target beyond 2020.Therefore,this analysis compares the project's emissions to a reduced threshold corresponding to the SB 32 reduction target of emissions 40 percent below 1990 levels by 2030.Accordingly, a threshold reduced by 4.98 percent for each year between 2020 and 2030 would meet the mandates of SB 32.The first full year of operation for the project is anticipated to be 2024.Therefore, a threshold 18.5 percent below the City threshold of 1,185 MT CO2e per service population per year, or 966 MT, is used in this analysis.

Neither the SDAPCD nor the City have adopted thresholds for determining the significance of a project's temporary construction GHG emissions.To be conservative in accounting for all the project's GHG emissions,the construction period emissions were amortized (i.e., averaged) over the anticipated 30-year lifespan of the project buildings and added to the project's operational emissions.

HELIX
Environmental Planning
37 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021

3.6 GHG IMPACT ANALYSIS

3.6.1 Issue 1: Generate GHG emissions, either directly or indirectly, that may have a significant impact on the environment.

3.6.1.1 Construction GHG Emissions
The project's temporary construction emissions were estimated using CalEEMod as described in Section 2.3.The results of the modeling of the project's GHG emissions shows that construction of the project would generate a total of 699.8 MT of CO2e. Amortized (averaged) over the anticipated 30-year lifespan of the project, project construction GHG emissions would be 23.3 MT of CO2e per year.The CalEEMod output is included as Appendix A to this report.

3.6.1.2 Operational GHG Emissions
The GHG emissions associated with long-term operation of the project were estimated using CalEEMod as described in Section 2.3 and Section 3.4.The results of the modeling of the project's operational GHG emissions are shown in Table 13, Operational GHG Emissions.The data are presented as the maximum anticipated operational GHG emissions for the first full year of operation (2024) and compared to the City threshold (adjusted for the year 2024). As shown in Table 13,the project's GHG emissions would be approximately 749.7 MT CO2e per year, which is below the 2024 adjusted City threshold of 966 MT CO2e per year.Therefore,the project would not generate GHG emissions that may have a significant impact on the environment, and the impact would be less than significant.

Table 13

OPERATIONAL GHG EMISSIONS
Source Emissions
(MT CO2e/year)
Area 0.6
Energy 111.4
Vehicular(Mobile) 565.3
Solid Waste 34.0
Water and Wastewater 15.1
Total Annual Emissions' 726.4
Amortized Construction Emissions 23.3
Total Amortized Construction+Operational Emissions 749.7 2024 Adjusted Threshold 966.0
Exceed Threshold? No
Source:CalEEMod,output data is provided in Appendix A
1 Totals may not sum due to rounding.

MT=metric ton;CO2e=carbon dioxide equivalent

3.6.2 Issue 2: Conflict with an applicable GHG reduction plan, policy, or regulation.

The project, by achieving the City's threshold,would not conflict with the goals of the City's CAP and may be seen to exceed its fair share in achieving the state's reduction target.Additionally,the project would be consistent with CAP measure E-1, Energy Efficient Building Standards, by being constructed in HELIX
Environmental Planning
38 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021
accordance with the energy-efficiency standards, water reduction goals, and other"green" standards contained in the 2019 Title 24 Part 6 and Part 11 (CALGreen) Building Standards, including the requirement for onsite solar electricity generation. Furthermore, through compliance with AB 341 and Chapter 13.17 of the City's Municipal Code, the project would be consistent with CAP measures S-1, Expanded Recycling, and S-2, Construction and Demolition Debris Diversion.As such,the project would be consistent with local plans, policies, or regulations adopted for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions.Therefore,the project would not conflict with applicable plans, policies, and regulations related to GHG emission reductions, and the impact would be less than significant.

4.0 ENERGY
This section provides an evaluation of existing energy production/consumption conditions and potential energy use and related impacts from the project.The units of energy used in this section are the British thermal units (Btu), megawatt hours (MWh)4, therms, and gallons. A Btu is the quantity of heat required to raise the temperature of one pound of water one °F at sea level. Because the other units of energy can all be converted into equivalent Btu,the Btu is used as the basis for comparing energy consumption associated with different resources.A MWh is a unit of electrical energy, and one MWh is equivalent to approximately 3.413 million Btu (MMBtu), considering initial conversion losses (i.e., from one type of energy, such as chemical, to another type of energy, such as mechanical) and transmission losses.

Natural gas consumption is described typically in terms of cubic feet or therms; one cubic foot of natural gas is equivalent to approximately 1.05 MMBtu, and one therm represents 0.1 MMBtu. One gallon of gasoline/diesel is equivalent to approximately 0.125/0.139 MMBtu, respectively, considering energy consumed in the refining process.

4.1 ENERGY REGULATORY FRAMEWORK

4.1.1 Federal Energy Regulations

4.1.1.1 Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007 House of Representatives Bill 6 (HR 6),the federal Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, established new standards for a few energy-consuming equipment types not already subject to a standard, and updated some existing standards.The most substantial new standard that HR 6 established is for general service lighting that is being deployed in two phases. First, phased in between 2012 through 2014, common light bulbs were required to use about 20 to 30 percent less energy than previous incandescent bulbs. Second, by 2020, light bulbs were required to consume 60 percent less energy than previous incandescent bulbs; this requirement will effectively phase out the incandescent light bulb.
4 MWh is the most common measure or electrical energy when discussing utility-scale electrical generation.Other common measures include kilowatt hours(kWh; 1,000 kWh=1 MWh)and gigawatt hours(GWh;1,000 MWh=1 GWh).

HELIX
Environmental Planning
39 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021

4.1.2 California Energy Regulations

4.1.2.1 Renewable Energy Programs and Mandates (SB 1078, SB 107, SB 2 X1, SB 350 and SB 100)
A series of substantive and far-reaching legislative initiatives have been advanced at the State level in the last two decades.These initiatives focused on increasing the generation of electricity via renewable energy sources and promoting a shift from fossil-or carbon-based fuels as a key strategy to reduce GHG emissions, air pollution, and water use associated with the energy sector.

In 2002, California established the Renewables Portfolio Standard (RPS)with SB 1078, requiring electric utilities in the State to increase procurement of eligible renewable energy resources to achieve a target of 20 percent of their annual retail sales by the year 2010. In 2011, Governor Jerry Brown approved the California Renewable Energy Resources Act, SB 2 X1. SB 2 X1 legislatively broadens the scope of the State RPS to include retail electricity sellers; investor-and publicly owned utilities; municipal utilities; and community choice aggregators under the mandate to obtain 33 percent of their retail electrical energy sales from renewable sources by 2020.

Approved by Governor Brown on October 7, 2015, SB 350 increases California's renewable electricity procurement goal from 33 percent by 2020 to 50 percent by 2030.This will increase the use of Renewables Portfolio Standard eligible resources, including solar, wind, biomass, and geothermal. In addition, large utilities are required to develop and submit Integrated Resource Plans to detail how each entity will meet their customers' resource needs, reduce GHG emissions, and increase the use of clean energy.

Approved by Governor Brown on September 10, 2018, SB 100 extends the renewable electricity procurement goals and requirements of SB 350. SB 100 requires that all retail sale of electricity to California end-use customers be procured from 100 percent eligible renewable energy resources and/or zero-carbon resources by the end of 2045.

4.1.2.2 California Energy Plan
The CEC is responsible for preparing the State Energy Plan, which identifies emerging trends related to energy supply, demand, conservation, public health and safety, and the maintenance of a healthy economy.The plan calls for the state to assist in the transformation of the transportation system to improve air quality, reduce congestion, and increase the efficient use of fuel supplies with the fewest environmental and energy costs.To further this policy,the plan identifies a number of strategies, including aiding public agencies and fleet operators.

4.1.2.3 California Energy Code
As described in Section 3.2,the 2019 CCR Title 24 Part 6: California's Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings contains reequipments for improving the energy efficiency of new or renovated buildings, including a requirement for onsite photovoltaic electricity generation (e.g., solar panels) for most new or modified residential building up to three stories high (CEC 2019).

HELIX
Environmental Planning
40 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021

4.2 ENERGY EXISTING CONDITIONS

4.2.1 State Energy Supply

4.2.1.1 Electricity
California's electricity needs are satisfied by a variety of entities, including investor-owned utilities, publicly owned utilities, and electric service providers.As of 2019, California electricity demand totaled 272,576 gigawatt hours (GWh). In-state generating facilities accounted for about 190,913 GWh, or 70 percent of the total electric power used in the state, with the remaining electricity coming from out- of-state imports (CEC 2021b).

4.2.1.2 Natural Gas
Natural gas continues to play an important and varied role in California. In 2021,48 percent of the natural gas burned in California was used for electricity generation, and much of the remainder was consumed in the residential (21 percent), industrial (25 percent), and commercial (9 percent) sectors (CEC 2021a). Natural gas supplies are currently plentiful and relatively inexpensive as a result of technological advances that allow recovery of natural gas from formations such as shale reservoirs that were previously inaccessible. However, potential environmental concerns are causing decision makers to reexamine the development of shale resources and consider tighter regulations, which could affect future natural gas supplies and prices.

4.2.1.3 Transportation Fuels
Automobiles and trucks consume gasoline and diesel fuel, which are nonrenewable energy products derived from crude oil,which in turn is derived from petroleum. In addition to energy consumption associated with on-road vehicle use, energy is consumed in connection with construction and maintenance of transportation infrastructure. Passenger cars and light-duty trucks are by far the largest consumers of transportation fuel. Retail sales of transportation fuel in California totaled 11.2 billion gallons of gasoline and 1.6 billion gallons of diesel in 2021 (CEC 2021c).

4.3 ENERGY METHODOLOGY
Construction and operational energy used were calculated based on the off-road equipment use and on- road vehicle trips and distances described in Section 2.3. Fuel consumption factors in terms of gallons per hour of diesel for off-road equipment were calculated using data from the CARB Mobile Source Emissions Inventory online database—OFFROAD2017 version 1.0.1 (CARB 2020a). Fuel consumption factors in terms of gallon of diesel and gasoline per mile travel were calculated from the CARB Mobile Source Emissions Inventory online data base—EMFAC2017 version 1.0.2 (CARB 2020b).The energy calculation sheets are included as Appendix B to this report.

4.4 ENERGY SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA
According to Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines, a project would have a significant environmental impact if it would:

HELIX
Environmental Planning
41 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021
• Result in the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation; and/or.
• Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency.

4.5 ENERGY IMPACT ANALYSIS

4.5.1 Issue 1: Result in the wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources, during project construction or operation.

4.5.1.1 Construction Energy
Energy consumed for project construction would primarily consist of fuels in the form of diesel and gasoline. Fuel consumption would result from:the use of on-road trucks for the transportation of construction materials and water; construction worker vehicles traveling to and from the project site; and from the use of off-road construction equipment.The estimated fuel and total energy consumed during project construction is shown in Table 14, Construction Energy Use.The full construction energy consumption calculation sheets are included as Appendix B to this report.

Table 14

CONSTRUCTION ENERGY USE
Source Gallons Diesel Gallons Gasoline MMBtu
Off-Road Construction Equipment 19,083 - 2,652 On-Road Construction Traffic 17,714 3,581 2,906 TOTAL" 36,798 3,581 5,559
Source:CalEEMod;OFFROAD2017; EMFAC2017
" Totals may not sum due to rounding.

MMBtu=million British thermal units
While construction activities would consume petroleum-based fuels, consumption of such resources would be temporary and would cease upon the completion of construction.The petroleum consumed during project construction would be typical of similar residential projects and would not require the use of new petroleum resources beyond those typically consumed in California annually for construction activities. Based on these considerations, construction of the project would not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources and the impact would be less than significant.

4.5.1.2 Operational Energy
During long-term operation of the project, energy would be consumed in the form of diesel and gasoline used by vehicles traveling to and from the project site; natural gas for heating and hot water; electricity required to source and treat water used by the project; and electricity used directly by the project. As discussed in Section 3.4,the 2019 Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards would require the project to provide a minimum of 112.6 kW of on-site photovoltaic generation capacity producing approximately 197,313 kWhr of electricity per year.The project's net electricity use calculation accounts for the on-site solar generation requirement.The project's operational energy use in gallons of fuel, electricity, and equivalent MMBtu is shown in Table 15, Operational Energy Use.The energy calculation sheets are included in Appendix C to this report.

HELIX
Environmental Planning
42 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021
Table 15

OPERATIONAL ENERGY USE
Source Diesel(gallons) Gasoline(gallons) Electricity(kWh) Energy(MMBtu) Mobile 4,184 108,230 - 14,002
Natural Gas - - - 1,301
Water/Wastewater - - 57,900 198
Net Direct Electricity Use - - 169,061 576
TOTAL' 1 4,184 108,230 226,961 16,078
Source:CalEEMod;OFFROAD2017; EMFAC2017
1 Totals may not sum due to rounding.
kWh=kilowatt hours; MMBtu=million British thermal units As shown in Table 15,the project would result in an increase in annual energy consumption of approximately 16,078 MMBtu. While the project would increase the consumption of energy related to electricity, natural gas, water, and wastewater, because the project would be consistent with the City General Plan land use designation and zoning,the increase would be consistent with the energy projections for the state and the region based on the General Plan growth projections.Therefore, operation of the project would not result in wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy resources and the impact would be less than significant.

4.5.2 Issue 2: Conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency.

The 2019 Title 24 Building Energy Efficiency Standards include provisions applicable to all buildings, which are mandatory requirements for efficiency and design.The project would be consistent with the requirements of Title 24 through implementation of energy-reduction measures, such as energy efficient lighting and appliances, water efficient appliances and plumbing fixture,water efficient landscaping and irrigation, and the onsite generation of renewable solar energy, as described above.

Therefore,the project would not conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy efficiency and the impact would be less than significant.

5.0 LIST OF PREPARERS
David Craft Air Quality Specialist
Victor Ortiz Senior Air Quality Specialist
Joanne M. Dramko, AICP Principal Air Quality Specialist, QA/QC Kara Palm Project Manager
Ana Topete Word Processing
HELIX
Environmental Planning
43 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021

6.0 REFERENCES
California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA). 2021a. Health Effects.Available at:
http://www.capcoa.org/health-effects/ . Accessed: December 8, 2021. 2021b. User's Guide for CaIEEMod Version 2020.4.0. Available at:
http://www.agmd.gov/docs/default-source/caleemod/user-guide-2021/01 user-39-s- guide2020-4-O.pdf. Accessed: November 17, 2021.

California Air Resources Board (CARE). 2021a. Overview: Diesel Exhaust and Health. October 18. 2020.

Available at: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/resources/overview-diesel-exhaust-and-health . Accessed:

December 9, 2021.
2021b. iADAM Air Quality Data Statistics:Top 4 Summary.Available at:
https://www.arb.ca.gov/adam/topfour/topfourl.php.Accessed: December 8, 2021. 2021c. 2022 Scoping Plan Update-Achieving Carbon Neutrality by 2045. Accessed December 10, 2021. Available at: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/ab-32-climate-change- scoping-plan. Accessed: December 9, 2021.
2021d. Clean Car Standards-Pavley,Assembly Bill 1493.Accessed December.Available at:
http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/ccros/ccros.htm.Accessed: December 9, 2021. 2021e. California Greenhouse Gas Inventory for 2000-2019-By Sector and Activity.July 28.

Available at: https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/data/tables/ ghg inventory sector sum 2000-19.pdf.Accessed: December 10, 2021. 2020a. OFFROAD2017-ORION Version 1.0.1.Available at: https://www.arb.ca.gov/orion/ .

Accessed: December 2021.
2020b. EMFAC2017 Web Database Version 1.0.2. Available at: https://arb.ca.gov/emfac/2017/ .

Accessed: December 2021.
2017. California's 2017 Climate Change Scoping Plan.Available at:
https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/scoping plan 2017.pdf.Accessed: December 9, 2021. 2016. Ambient Air Quality Standards. Accessed December 9, 2021.Available at:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/2020-03/aags2 O.pdf. Accessed: December 9, 2021. 2014. First Update to the Climate Change Scoping Plan: Building on the Framework.Available at:
http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/scopingplan/2013 update/first update climate change scoping pla n.pdf. Accessed: December 9, 2021.
2009. State Implementation Plan Background. Available at: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our- work/programs/california-state-implementation-plans.Accessed: December 1, 2021. 2008. Climate Change Scoping Plan-A Framework for Change. December.Available at:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic//cc/scopingplan/document/adopted scoping plan.pdf.Accessed: December 9, 2021.

HELIX
Environmental Planning
44 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021
California Air Resources Board (CARB) (cont.)
2007. California Greenhouse Gas Inventory—By Sector and Activity. Available at:
https://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/inventory/pubs/reports/2000 2008/ghg inventory sector 00- 08 all 2010-05-12.pdf.Accessed: December 9, 2021
2005. Air Quality and Land Use Handbook: A Community Health Perspective.April.Available at:
https://ww3.arb.ca.gov/ch/handbook.pdf.Accessed: December 8, 2021.

California Building Standards Commission (CBSC). 2019. CALGreen (CCR Title 24, Part 11).Available at:
https://www.dgs.ca.gov/BSC/CALGreen.Accessed: December 9, 2021.

California Department of Conservation. 2000.A General Location Guide for Ultramafic Rocks in California -Areas More Likely to Contain Naturally Occurring Asbestos. Available at:
https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/sites/default/files/classic/toxics/asbestos/ofr 2000-019.0 .Accessed:

December 8, 2021.

California Energy Commission (CEC). 2021a. Supply and Demand of Natural Gas in California.Available at: https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/californias-natural-gas- market/supply-and-demand-natural-gas-california. Accessed: December 9, 2021. 2021b. 2020 Total System Electric Generation.Available at: https://www.energy.ca.gov/data- reports/energy-almanac/california-electricity-data/2020-total-system-electric-generation.

Accessed: December 9, 2021
2021c. 2021 California Annual Retail Fuel Outlet Report Results (CEC-A15). Available at:
https://www.energy.ca.gov/data-reports/energy-almanac/transportation-energy/california- retail-fuel-outlet-annual-reporting. Accessed: December 9, 2021. 2019. CCR Title 24 Part 6, 2019 Residential Compliance Manual, Chapter 7—Photovoltaic, Community Shared Solar, Battery Storage, and Solar Ready Buildings. Available at:
https://codes.iccsafe.org/content/CACEC2019JAN20E/subchapter-7-low-rise-residential- buildings-mandatory-features-and-devices.Accessed: December 9, 2021.

Climate Watch. 2021. Global Historical GHG Emissions. Available at:
https://www.climatewatchdata.org/ghg-
emissions?chartTvpe=area&end year=2018&start year=1990. Accessed: December 10, 2021.

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). 2021. Working Group I contribution to the Sixth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.August 2021. Climate Change 2021:The Physical Science Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.Table 7.15. Emission metrics for selected species: Global Warming Potential (GWP), Global Temperature-change Potential (GTP) p. 7-125. Available at: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/report/ IPCC AR6 WGI Full Report.pdf. Accessed: December 9, 2021. 2007. Climate Change 2007:The Physical Science Basis. Summary for Policymakers. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. February.Available at: https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar4/wg1/ . Accessed: December 9, 2021.

HELIX
Environmental Planning
45 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021
Iowa Environmental Mesonet (IEM). 2021. Carlsbad/Palomar Windrose Plot. Available at:
https://mesonet.agron.iastate.edu/sites/windrose.phtmI?station=CRQ&network=CA ASOS.

Accessed: December 9, 2021.

Linscott, Law&Greenspan, Engineers (LLG). 2021. Local Transportation Study, Camino Largo.

November 1.

National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA), Goddard Institute for Space Studies. 2020. NASA News& Features Releases. 2020 Tied for Warmest Year on Record, NASA Analysis Shows— Climate Change: Vital Signs of the Planet. Available at:
https://cIimate.nasa.gov/news/3061/2020-tied-for-warmest-year-on-record-nasa-analysis- shows .Accessed: December 9, 2021.

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA). 2020. Global Monitoring Laboratory,Trend in CO2. Available at: https://www.esrl.noaa.gov/gmd/ccgg/trends/.Accessed: December 8, 2021.

Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment (OEHHA). 2015.Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments. February. Available at:
https://oehha.ca.gov/media/downloads/crnr/20lSguidancemanual.pdf.Accessed: December 1, 2021.

Sacramento Metropolitan Air Quality Management District (SMAQMD). 2009. CEQA Guide. December. http://www.airguality.org/Businesses/CEQA-Land-Use-Planning/CEQA-Guidance-Tools .

Accessed: December 1, 2021.

San Diego Air Pollution Control District (SDAPCD). 2021a. Attainment Status. Available at:
https://www.sdapcd.org/content/sdapcd/planning/attainment-status.htmi . Accessed:

December 10, 2021.
2020b. 2020 Plan for Attaining the National Ambient Air Quality Standards for Ozone in San Diego County. October.Available at: https://ww2.arb.ca.gov/our-work/programs/california- state-implementation-plans/nonattainment-area-plans/san-diego-county-0. Accessed:

December 10, 2021.
2019. RULE 20.2 New Source Review Non-Major Stationary Sources. Revised June 26.Available at: https://www.sdapcd.org/content/dam/sdapcd/documents/rules/current-rules/Rule-

20.2.pdf. Accessed: December 9, 2021.
2017. Rule 1206-Asbestos Removal, Renovation, and Demolition. November.Available at:
https://www.sdapcd.org/content/dam/sdapcd/documents/rules/current-rules/Rule-1206.pdf .

Accessed: December 8, 2021.
2015. Rule 67.01.1 Architectural Coatings.June 24.Available at:
https://www.sdapcd.org/content/dam/sdapcd/documents/rules/current-rules/Rule-67.0.1- eff010122.pdf.Accessed: December 2, 2021.

HELIX
Environmental Planning
46 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021
San Diego Air Pollution Control District (SDAPCD) (cont.) 2009. Rule 55 Fugitive Dust Control.June 24.Available at:
https://www.sdapcd.org/content/dam/sdapcd/documents/rules/current-rules/Rule-55.pdf .

Accessed: December 2, 2021.
1997. Rule 50 Visible Emissions. August 13.Available at:
https://www.sdapcd.org/content/dam/sdapcd/documents/rules/current-rules/Rule-50.pdf .

Accessed: December 2, 2021.
1976. Rule 51 Nuisance. November 8. Available at:
https://www.sdapcd.org/content/dam/sdapcd/documents/rules/current-rules/Rule-51.pdf .

Accessed: December 2, 2021.

San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG). 2015. San Diego Forward—The Regional Plan.

October. Available at: http://www.sdforward.com/pdfs/RP final/The%20PIan%20- %20combined.pdf.Accessed: December 8, 2021.

San Diego, County of. 2018. Climate Action Plan, Chapter 2 Greenhouse Gas emissions Inventory, Projections, and Reduction Targets. Available at:
https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/content/dam/sdc/pds/advance/cap/publicreviewdocuments/ CAPfilespublicreview/Chapter%202%20Greenhouse%20Gas%20Emissions%201nventory%2C%20 Protections%20and%20Reduction%20Target.pdf. Accessed: December 8, 2021.

South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). 1993. CEQA Air Quality Handbook. Available at:
http://www.agmd.gov/home/rules-compliance/cega/air-quality-analysis-handbook/cega-air- quality-handbook-(1993).Accessed: December 8, 2021.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency(USEPA). 2021a. Learn About Asbestos.Available at:
https://www.epa.gov/asbestos/learn-about-asbestos.Accessed: December 9,2021. 2021b. Learn about Lead.Available at: https://www.epa.gov/lead/learn-about-lead . Accessed:

December 9,2021.
2021c. Designation of Areas for Air Quality Planning Purposes; California; San Diego County Ozone Nonattainment Area; Reclassification to Severe.June 2021. Available at:
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2021/06/02/2021-11524/designation-of-areas-for- air-quality-planning-purposes-california-san-diego-county-ozone. Accessed: December 9, 2021.

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and U.S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (USEPA and NHTSA). 2012. 2017 and Later Model Year Light-Duty Vehicle Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Corporate Average Fuel Economy Standards. Available at:
https://www.nhtsa.gov/corporate-average-fuel-economy/documents-associated-mys-2012- 2016-rulemaking. Accessed: December 9, 2021.

HELIX
Environmental Planning
47 Air Quality,Greenhouse Gas Emissions,and Energy Technical Report for the Camino Largo Residential Project I December 2021
Vista, City of. 2021. City of Vista 2021-2029 Housing Element. May. 2016. Interim Guidance Memorandum on Assessing GHG Emissions from Projects Subject to CEQA. April 6.
2012. Climate Action Plan. November.Available at:
http://www.cityofvista.com/home/showdocument?id=84.Accessed: December 9, 2021. 2011. Vista Municipal Code Chapter 13.17, Construction and Demolition Debris Recycling.

Available at: https://records.cityofvista.com/WebLink/0/doc/1044632/Pagel.aspx.Accessed:

December 5, 2021.

Western Regional Climate Center(WRCC). 2021. Western U.S. Climate Summaries, California,Vista 2 NNE (049378). Available at: https://wrcc.dri.edu/cgi-bin/cliMAIN.pl?ca9378 . Accessed:

November 27, 2021.

HELIX
Environmental Planning
48 Appendix A
CaIEEMod Output

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 1 of 38 Date: 11/22/2021 3:27 PM Camino Largo Residential Development-San Diego County APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Camino Largo Residential Development
San Diego County APCD Air District, Annual

1.0 Project Characteristics

1.1 Land Usage
Land Uses Size Metric Lot Acreage Floor Surface Area Population Single Family Housing 46.00 Dwelling Unit 9.28 82,800.00 220

1.2 Other Project Characteristics
Urbanization Rural Wind Speed(m/s) 2.6 Precipitation Freq(Days) 40 Climate Zone 15 Operational Year 2024
Utility Company San Diego Gas&Electric
CO2Intensity 539.98 CH4Intensity 0.033 N20Intensity 0.004 (lb/MWhr) (lb/MWhr) (lb/MWhr)

1.3 User Entered Comments & Non-Default Data
Project Characteristics -
Land Use- Site is 9.28 acres. 220 residents (Applicant) Construction Phase- Demo=2 wks (5 working days), Site Prep=6 mo (22wkd/mo*6--131 d), Grading=1 mo (22 d), Utilities=2 mo (43 d), Building Construction=6 mo (-129 d), Paving=2 wks (10 d), Arch Coatings=default 20 d.

Demolition - 10,600 sq ft of demolished greenhouses and sheds.

Grading -44,130 cu yds exported.

Vehicle Trips - From Local Transportation Study (LLG 2021) Woodstoves- No fireplaces and no hearths
Area Coating -Applicant stated no VOC constining products will be applied.

Sequestration - 153 new trees will be planted.

Construction Off-road Equipment Mitigation -Watering is required 2 times per day.

Mobile Land Use Mitigation -

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 2 of 38 Date: 11/22/2021 3:27 PM Camino Largo Residential Development-San Diego County APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied Area Mitigation - Going beyond to zero conpared to SDAPCD Rule 67, as described in Section 2.1.4 Energy Mitigation - From solar spreadsheet
Water Mitigation -
Waste Mitigation -
Off-road Equipment- Based on similar project.

Off-road Equipment-
Off-road Equipment-
Off-road Equipment-
Trips and VMT-
Architectural Coating -Applicant stated that no VOC containing coatings will be applied.

Table Name Column Name Default Value New Value tblArchitectu ral Coating EF—Nonresidential—Exterior i 250.00 0.00 g ------------r-----------------------------t-------------------------- tblArchitecturalCoatin EF—Nonresidential—Interior i 250.00 0.00 ----------------------------_------------------------------r-----------------------------t-------------------------- tblArchitecturalCoating EF Parking i 250.00 0.00 ---------------------g------_------------------------------r-----------------------------t------------------------- tblArchitecturalCoatin EF_Residential_Exterior 1 250.00 0.00 ----------------------g------_------------------------------r-----------------------------t-------------------------- tblArchitecturalCoatin EF_Residential_Interior 1 250.00 0.00 -------------------g--------- ------------------------------ ----------------------------- -------------------------- tblAreaCoating Area EF Nonresidential Exterior r 250 0 ------------------- --------- ------------------------------ ------------t-------------------------- tblAreaCoating Area EF Nonresidential Interior r 250 0 ----------------------------- ------ --------------------- ------------t-------------------------- tblAreaCoating Area EF Parking r 250 0 ------------------- --------- ------------------------------ ------------t-------------------------- tblAreaCoating Area EF Residential Exterior r 250 0 ------------------- --------- ------------------------------ ------------t-------------------------- tblAreaCoating Area EF Residential Interior r 250 0 ----------------------------- ------------------------------ ------------t-------------------------- tblAreaMitigation UseLowVOCPaintParkingCheck r False True -----------------------------_------------------------------r-----------------------------t-------------------------- tblConstDustMitigation WaterUn paved Road MoistureContent i 0 12 -----------------------------_------------------------------r-----------------------------t-------------------------- tblConstDustMitigation WaterU n paved RoadVehicleSpeed 1 0 15 -----------------------------_----------------Y----------- -----------t-------------------------- tblConstruction Phase NumDa s i 230.00 129.00 -----------------------------_----------------Y----------- ------------t-------------------------- tblConstruction Phase NumDa s i 20.00 10.00 -----------------------------_----------------Y----------- ------------t-------------------------- tblConstruction Phase NumDa s i 20.00 22.00 ----------------------------- ------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------- tblConstruction Phase NumDays 20.00 10.00

CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 3 of 38 Date: 11/22/2021 3:27 PM Camino Largo Residential Development-San Diego County APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied tblConstruction Phase NumDays 10.00 131.00 ----------------------------Y----------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------- tblFireplaces FireplaceDayYear } 82.00 0.00 tblFireplaces FireplaceHourDay } 3.00 0.00 tblFireplaces FireplaceWoodMass } 3,078.40 0.00 tblFireplaces NumberGas } 25.30 0.00 tblFireplaces NumberNoFireplace } 4.60 0.00 tblFireplaces NumberWood } 16.10 0.00 tblGrading AcresOfGrading } 22.00 20.00 tblGrading AcresOfGrading } 196.50 15.00 tblGrading Material Exported } 0.00 44,130.00 tblLandUse LotAcreage } 14.94 9.28
-----------------------------4------------------------------r---------------------------------------------------'''-- tblLandUse Population } 132.00 220.00
tblOffRoadEquipment LoadFactor } 0.38 0.38 tblOffRoadEquipment LoadFactor } 0.40 0.40 tblOffRoadEquipment LoadFactor } 0.36 0.36 tblOffRoadEquipment Off Road Eq ui pmentType } Trenchers tblOffRoadEquipment Off Road Eq ui pmentType } Tractors/Loaders/Backhoes tblOffRoadEquipment Off Road Eq ui pmentType } Excavators tblOffRoadEquipment Off Road Eq ui pmentType } Plate Compactors tblOffRoadEquipment Off Road Eq ui pmentType } Rough Terrain Forklifts tblOffRoadEquipment Off Road Eq ui pmentType } Rubber Tired Loaders tblProjectCharacteristics Urbanization Level } Urban Rural tblSequestration NumberOfNewTrees } 0.00 153.00 tblVehicleTrips ST_TR } 9.54 10.00
tblVehicleTrips SU_TR } 8.55 10.00
tblVehicleTrips WD_TR } 9.44 10.00
tblWoodstoves NumberCatalytic } 2.30 0.00 tblWoodstoves NumberNoncatalytic } 2.30 0.00 ---------------------------- ------------------------------ ------------------------------ -------------------------- tblWoodstoves WoodstoveDayYear 82.00 0.00

CalEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 4 of 38 Date: 11/22/2021 3:27 PM Camino Largo Residential Development- San Diego County APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied tbIWoodstoves Wood stoveWoodMass 3,019.20 0.00

2.0 Emissions Summary

CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 5 of 38 Date: 11/22/2021 3:27 PM Camino Largo Residential Development-San Diego County APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.1 Overall Construction
Unmitigated Construction
ROG NOx I CO I S02 I Fugitive Exhaust PM10 I Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio-CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 I N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Year tons/yr MT/yr
1 I I I I 1 I I I I 1
2022 •I 0.3756 I 4.0505 I 2.8846 16.9400e- I 1.3587 I 0.1806 I 1.5392 I 0.7124 I 0.1671 0.8795 0.0000 I 630.3499 1630.3499 I 0.1373 I 0.0290 i 642.4263 003 I I 1 I I • I I I I
'I I I I I I 1 I I • I I I I 1 I I I I 1 I I I- I I 1
2023 •I 0.0364 I 0.3205 I 0.3735 16.6000e- 15.4600e- I 0.0155 I 0.0209 11.4600e- I 0.0146 0.0161 0.0000 I 56.9817 I 56.9817 I 0.0119 13.7000e- I 57.3898 004 I 003 I 1 1 003 I : I I I 1 004 I 'I 1 I I 1 I 1 I I • I I I I I Maximum 0.3756 4.0505 2.8846 6.9400e- 1.3587 0.1806 1.5392 0.7124 0.1671 0.8795 0.0000 630.3499 630.3499 0.1373 0.0290 642.4263 003
Mitigated Construction
ROG I NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio-CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Year tons/yr MT/yr
1 I I 1 I 1 I I I I 1
2022 •I 0.3756 1 4.0505 I 2.8846 1 6.9400e- 1 1.3587 1 0.1806 1 1.5392 I 0.7124 1 0.1671 0.8795 � 0.0000 1630.3494 1630.3494 1 0.1373 I 0.0290 i 842.4258 003 1 I I I I • I I I I
;� 1 I I 1 I 1 I I • I I I 1 I I I I 1 I I I I I
2023 •I 0.0364 1 0.3205 I 0.3735 16.6000e- 15.4600e- I 0.0155 1 0.0209 11.4600e- 1 0.0146 0.0161 � 0.0000 I 56.9816 I 56.9816 1 0.0119 13.7000e- i 57.3898 004 I 003 I I 1 003 I . I I I I 004 I '1 1 I I I I 1 I I • I I I I I Maximum 0.3756 4.0505 2.8846 6.9400e- 1.3587 0.1806 1.5392 0.7124 0.1671 0.8795 0.0000 630.3494 630.3494 0.1373 0.0290 642.4258 003

CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 6 of 38 Date: 11/22/2021 3:27 PM Camino Largo Residential Development-San Diego County APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied ROG NOx c0 S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio-CO2 NBio-0O2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Percent 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Reduction
Quarter Start Date End Date Maximum Unmitigated ROG+NOX(tons/quarter) Maximum Mitigated ROG+NOX(tons/quarter) 1 4-1-2022 6-30-2022 2.2129 2.2129
2 7-1-2022 9-30-2022 1.6196 1.6196 3 10-1-2022 12-31-2022 0.5819 0.5819 4 1-1-2023 3-31-2023 0.3583 0.3583
Highest 2.2129 2.2129

2.2 Overall Operational
Unmitigated Operational
ROG I NOx CO I S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio-CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category tons/yr MT/yr
Area •i 0.3336 i 3.9300e- 0.3414 i 2.000Oe- 1.8900e- i 1.8900e- 1.8900e- 1.8900e- 0.0000 i 0.5579 0.5579 i 5.4000e- 0.0000 i 0.5713 003 005 003 003 003 003 . 004 i Energy •1 7.0200e- i 0.0600 0.0255 i 3.8000e- i � 4.8500e- i 4.8500e- � i 4.8500e- 4.8500e- 0.0000 i 159.1733 159.1733 i 6.8100e- 1.9400e- i 159.9211 003 004 003 003 003 003 . 003 003 i Mobile �� 0.2671 i 0.3253 2.6952 i 5.9300e- i 0.6368 4.5700e- i 0.6414 0.1700 i 4.2600e- 0.1742 0.0000 i 557.2990 557.2990 i 0.0367 0.0238 i 565.3127 003 003 003
Waste •i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 18.3098 i 0.0000 18.3098 i 1.0821 0.0000 45.3617 Water •i i i i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.9508 i 14.7000 15.6509 i 0.0986 2.4100e- i 18.8344 003 i
Total 0.6078 0.3892 3.0621 6.3300e- 0.6368 0.0113 0.6481 0.1700 0.0110 0.1810 19.2606 731.7303 750.9909 1.2247 0.0282 790.0014 003

CaIEEMod Version: CalEEMod.2020.4.0 Page 7 of 38 Date: 11/22/2021 3:27 PM Camino Largo Residential Development-San Diego County APCD Air District, Annual EMFAC Off-Model Adjustment Factors for Gasoline Light Duty Vehicle to Account for the SAFE Vehicle Rule Applied

2.2 Overall Operational
Mitigated Operational
ROG I NOx I CO I S02 I Fugitive Exhaust I PM10 I Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio-CO2 NBio-CO2 Total CO2 CH4 I N20 I CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Category tons/yr MT/yr
Area •i 0.3336 i 3.9300e- 0.3414 i 2.0000e- 1.8900e- i 1.8900e- 1.8900e- 1.8900e- 0.0000 i 0.5579 0.5579 i 5.4000e- 0.0000 i 0.5713 •� 003 005 003 003 003 003 004 i Energy •i 7.0200e- i 0.0600 0.0255 i 3.8000e- 4.8500e- i 4.8500e- 4.8500e- 4.8500e- 0.0000 i 110.8453 110.8453 i 3.8600e- 1.5800e- 111.4126 •� 003 004 003 003 003 003 . 003 003 i Mobile •i 0.2671 i 0.3253 � 2.6952 i 5.9300e- i 0.6368 � 4.5700e- i 0.6414 � 0.1700 i 4.2600e- 0.1742 � 0.0000 i 557.2990 557.2990 i 0.0367 0.0238 i 565.3127 •� 003 003 003 i
Waste •i i i i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 13.7323 i 0.0000 13.7323 i 0.8116 0.0000 34.0213 Water •i i i i 0.0000 i 0.0000 i 0.0000 0.0000 0.7607 i 11.7600 12.5207 i 0.0789 1.9300e- 15.0676 003 i
Total 0.6078 0.3892 3.0621 6.3300e- 0.6368 0.0113 0.6481 0.1700 0.0110 0.1810 14.4930 680.4622 694.9552 0.9315 0.0273 726.3855 003
ROG NOx CO S02 Fugitive Exhaust PM10 Fugitive Exhaust PM2.5 Bio-CO2 NBio-0O2 Total CO2 CH4 N20 CO2e PM10 PM10 Total PM2.5 PM2.5 Total Percent 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 24.75 7.01 7.46 23.94 2.98 8.05 Reduction